Final Report: Racial Bias Assessment of the North Charleston, South

NOVEMBER 2021

RACIAL BIAS ASSESSMENT OF

THE NORTH CHARLESTON,

SOUTH CAROLINA, POLICE DEPARTMENT

Zoë Thorkildsen, Bridgette Bryson, Emma Wohl, Kalani Johnson, Rodney Monroe, and Steve Rickman

Final Report

This document contains the best opinion of CNA at the time of issue.

Suggested citation:

Thorkildsen, Z., Bryson, B., Wohl, E., Johnson, K., Monroe, R., & Rickman, S. (2021) Final Report: Racial

Bias Assessment of the North Charleston, South Carolina, Police Department. Arlington, VA: CNA.

CNA document number:

IRM-2021-U-029576

Distribution:

Distribution unlimited.

November 2021

Acknowledgements

CNA acknowledges the support and assistance we received from the City of North Charleston, the

North Charleston Police Department, and North Charleston community members and organizations

in completing this report. The input, experiences, data, and resources we received were invaluable in

compiling our findings and recommendations. In particular, we would like to thank the following:

Chief of Police Reggie Burgess, Deputy Chief Karen Cordray, North Charleston Director of Purchasing

Denise Badillo, members of the Charleston Immigrant Coalition, Charleston Area Justice Ministries,

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Lowcountry Action Committee, Legal

Defense Fund, Charleston Black Lives Matter, and the American Society for Civil Liberties of South

Carolina, community members who participated in interviews, community listening sessions, or sent

input, and North Charleston Police Department personnel who participated in interviews.

This page intentionally left blank.

Executive Summary

In late 2020, the City of North Charleston hired CNA to conduct a racial bias assessment of the North

Charleston Police Department (NCPD). Beginning in March 2021, CNA undertook a comprehensive

assessment of NCPD’s policies and practices, focusing on assessing racially biased practices and

procedures. Assessments such as these, which touch on more than racial and social justice matters,

help police departments gauge the status of their community relationships, especially amongst

minority and disenfranchised communities. In addition, the assessment can help identify policies and

practices that may unintentionally negatively affect the community, especially those who feel they

have been marginalized. Through this assessment, the CNA team developed a strong objective

understanding of NCPD’s operations in various areas including law enforcement operations,

community-oriented policing practices, complaints, training, oversight and accountability, and

recruitment, hiring, and promotions.

We developed this report by reviewing community engagement programming documents, strategic

plans, training lesson plans, training curriculum, general orders, department data, and sentiments

from interviews with community members and NCPD personnel and community listening sessions.

This report includes findings and associated actionable recommendations for the department. In

developing our recommendations, we assessed the NCPD’s policy manual against emerging best

practices.

CNA’s comprehensive assessment of NCPD included an examination of the following:

• Law enforcement operations

• Community-oriented policing practices

• Complaints

• Recruitment, hiring, and promotions

• Training

• Oversight and accountability

This assessment includes 67 findings and 139 recommendations. Our key findings include:

• Racial disparities are present in many of NCPD’s interactions with the community, indicative

of potential systemic, organizational, or individual bias, and these disparities are deeply felt

by the community.

• Community members have substantial concerns regarding NCPD’s police presence and

perceived over-enforcement of certain individuals, community groups, and neighborhoods.

• NCPD’s School Resource Officer Program has room to improve to better serve the youth of

the North Charleston community.

• NCPD lacks proper translation services and information for Spanish-speaking residents in the

community.

• Although NCPD emphasizes community-oriented policing practices, not all officers in the

department have embraced the importance of community policing.

• Members of the North Charleston community have expressed a desire to better understand

the roles, responsibilities, policies, practices, and operations of the department.

• Many community members have not filed complaints even after negative experiences with

NCPD personnel, and the complaint process is confusing to most.

• NCPD has a strong commitment to hiring and retaining personnel that reflect the ethnic,

racial, and gender composition of the North Charleston community. They have an established

plan to specifically recruit women and people of color.

• NCPD’s officers have not been consistently trained in topics of critical importance for 21st

century policing.

• Community members expressed high confidence in Chief Burgess and his abilities to

meaningfully engage with the community.

Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 1

Goals and objectives ........................................................................................................................................................ 2

Assessment areas of focus ............................................................................................................................................ 3

Methodology and approach .......................................................................................................................................... 3

Document review ...................................................................................................................................................... 4

Listening sessions ..................................................................................................................................................... 4

Interviews .................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Quantitative data ...................................................................................................................................................... 5

Overview of the report ................................................................................................................................................... 6

Community Input Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 7

Community listening sessions ..................................................................................................................................... 7

Community involvement ....................................................................................................................................... 7

Accountability ............................................................................................................................................................ 7

Enforcement practices ............................................................................................................................................ 8

Training ........................................................................................................................................................................ 8

Interactions with Spanish-speaking populations ........................................................................................ 8

Demographics of attendees .................................................................................................................................. 9

Poll results ................................................................................................................................................................ 11

Community interviews ................................................................................................................................................ 14

Community involvement .................................................................................................................................... 15

Community immersion ........................................................................................................................................ 15

Disparate enforcement practices .................................................................................................................... 16

Personnel concerns ............................................................................................................................................... 16

Law Enforcement Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 17

Personnel interviews ................................................................................................................................................... 17

Community interactions ..................................................................................................................................... 17

Promotion and performance review process concerns ......................................................................... 18

Complaint process ................................................................................................................................................. 19

Training gaps ........................................................................................................................................................... 19

Departmental data analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 20

Arrests ........................................................................................................................................................................ 21

Traffic stops ............................................................................................................................................................. 26

Field interviews ...................................................................................................................................................... 30

Use of force ............................................................................................................................................................... 31

Complaints ................................................................................................................................................................ 35

Personnel demographics .................................................................................................................................... 39

Findings and Recommendations .................................................................................................................... 43

Law enforcement operations .................................................................................................................................... 43

Community-oriented policing practices............................................................................................................... 50

Complaints ........................................................................................................................................................................ 57

Recruitment, hiring, and promotions .................................................................................................................... 61

Training ............................................................................................................................................................................. 64

Oversight and accountability .................................................................................................................................... 69

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................. 75

Appendix A: Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................... 77

Appendix B: Resources ...................................................................................................................................... 79

Appendix C: Data Reviewed by Audit Team ............................................................................................... 89

Appendix D: Table of Findings and Recommendations ......................................................................... 93

Introduction

North Charleston, South Carolina, is a city of more than 110,000 residents and is South Carolina’s

third largest city.

The North Charleston Police Department (NCPD) was founded in 1972 and today

serves the North Charleston community with nearly 400 employees, including over 300 sworn

officers. The term community refers not just to North Charleston residents; anyone the department

interacts with is considered part of its community. For example, the city welcomes a substantial

number of workers, visitors, tourists, and shoppers to North Charleston daily. North Charleston is a

racially diverse community, with 47 percent of residents identifying as Black, 45 percent identifying

as white, 10 percent identifying as Hispanic or Latino, and 8 percent identifying as other races or two

or more races.

2,3

In 2015, NCPD experienced a high-profile officer-involved shooting, during which Officer Michael

Slager fatally shot North Charleston community member Walter Scott after a traffic stop. This

incident ignited the North Charleston community to re-emphasize significant concerns relating to

racial tensions and disparities in NCPD operations and activities. NCPD recognized the need to

address these concerns and began to respond to them. These efforts included building stronger

relationships within the community to heal past traumas. Standing ready to accept this challenge was

Reginald Burgess, promoted to Chief of Police in 2018 after his tenure as Assistant Chief of Police.

Chief Burgess has spent his entire life in North Charleston, having joined NCPD in 1989, and having

developed strong relationships in the department and the community. Chief Burgess now leads NCPD

as it aims to promote public safety in North Charleston and address community concerns. As chief,

he leads the efforts in ensuring officers understand the importance of balancing community

relationship building and crime reduction. Many North Charleston residents and police officers

expressed trust in Chief Burgess during interviews and listening sessions. Organizational change and

reform requires strong leadership, but also buy-in and commitment from all levels of the agency.

North Charleston’s perceived history of systemic racism continues to result in racial tension between

NCPD and the Black community. In addition, the national outcry in the summer of 2020 demanding

racial and social justice within law enforcement and their engagements with communities of color

led the City of North Charleston to initiate an evaluation of NCPD’s policies, procedures, and practices.

In late 2020, the City of North Charleston hired CNA to conduct a racial bias assessment of NCPD.

Beginning in March 2021, CNA undertook a comprehensive assessment of NCPD’s policies and

practices, focusing on assessing racially biased practices. Assessments such as these, which touch on

https://www.northcharleston.org/residents/community/primenorthcharleston/the-data/population-

demographics/#:~:text=Current%20Population%20Snapshot,themselves%20as%20Hispanic%20or%20Latino

https://www.northcharleston.org/residents/community/primenorthcharleston/the-data/population-

demographics/#:~:text=Current%20Population%20Snapshot,themselves%20as%20Hispanic%20or%20Latino

https://www.northcharleston.org/residents/community/primenorthcharleston/the-data/population-

demographics/#:~:text=Current%20Population%20Snapshot,themselves%20as%20Hispanic%20or%20Latino

more than racial matters, help police departments gauge the status of community relationships and

identify policies and practices that may unintentionally negatively affect the community, especially

those who feel they have been marginalized.

We conducted numerous interviews with community stakeholders and department members from

all ranks and assignments and held community listening sessions. In total, we conducted interviews

with 49 individuals and conducted listening sessions with 149 community members. The assessment

team also participated in a community-led listening session organized and facilitated by local

advocacy organizations, including the Charleston Immigrant Coalition, Charleston Area Justice

Ministries (CAJM), National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP),

Lowcountry Action Committee, Legal Defense Fund, Charleston Black Lives Matter, and the American

Society for Civil Liberties of South Carolina. In addition, we reviewed NCPD policies, including those

regarding use of force, code of conduct, citizen complaints, performance evaluations, and community

policing. We also analyzed administrative datasets including the department’s demographics, field

interviews, traffic stops ending in citations, complaints, arrests, and use of force data.

We identified findings and recommendations in the related areas, which we present later in this

report. Our goal was to ensure NCPD policies and practices align with promising and best practices

in the field and community expectations. We will work alongside NCPD to implement these

recommendations within the department and the North Charleston community.

Goals and objectives

The City of North Charleston established the following goals and objectives for this assessment:

• Review and understand general data relating to North Charleston demographics,

communities, and community needs and goals.

• Review and understand general data and demographics relating to North Charleston crime

statistics overall and within various communities within the City. This data should include

information relating to crime victims, subjects/suspects, and calls for service.

• Assess and support the efforts of the NCPD, in concert with the community, to uncover and

address aspects of implicit bias, including systemic and individual racial bias.

• Assess the impact of enforcement operations on historically marginalized and discriminated-

against populations, particularly the Black and Hispanic communities.

• Provide recommendations to improve community-oriented policing practices, transparency,

professionalism, accountability, community inclusion, fairness, effectiveness, training

(including the FTO program), and public trust. Such recommendations should take into

account national best practices and community expectations.

• Engage the community to understand the experiences and expectations of interactions with

the NCPD.

Assessment areas of focus

The City of North Charleston identified four focus areas for the NCPD assessment. These areas

included enforcement operations, with specific consideration of the needs and impact on Black and

Hispanic communities, community-oriented policing practices, the internal and external complaint

process, and recruitment, hiring, promotions, and personnel practices. During data collection, we

developed additional themes. The report includes the following sections:

1. Law enforcement operations

2. Community-oriented policing practices

3. Complaints

4. Recruitment, hiring, and promotions

5. Training

6. Oversight and accountability

Although the assessment team covered a wide range of topics within the areas above, some aspects

of criminal justice practice remained outside our scope of inquiry. Specifically, we did not examine

other aspects of the justice system in North Charleston, nor did we investigate or make

recommendations on topics handled at the state or federal level (such as qualified immunity of police

officers). Some topics that we examined within our areas of focus also warrant more inquiry and

analysis, such as the implementation of School Resource Officers. Some of these subjects will be areas

of focus during the implementation phase, some we recommend that NCPD explore further, and some

are matters for additional assessments or legislative bodies to determine.

Methodology and approach

The CNA assessment team based its approach on a number of guiding principles, including the

following:

1. Evidence-based assistance with emphasis on research, including both academic research and

documented lessons learned and best practices in the field

2. Multi-method assessment design, including interviews, listening sessions, policy and

document review, and data analysis

3. A commitment to conducting comprehensive reviews and applying best practices in police

settings

Our methodology included the four major components below.

Document review

NCPD provided a number of documents and policies for our review, including their full policy manual

that included 88 General Orders (GOs). The orders were separated into Administrative and

Operational Orders. We reviewed 31 Administrative Orders, with 19 of those being reviewed by two

team members and 12 being reviewed by one team member. Additionally, we reviewed 28

Operational Orders, with 12 of those being reviewed by two team members and 16 being reviewed

by one team member. In addition to reviewing GOs, we reviewed NCPD’s training lesson plans,

strategic plans, and community engagement programing documents.

Listening sessions

We hosted three virtual and two in-person community listening sessions. We also attended one

community meeting hosted by the Charleston Immigrant Coalition, Charleston Area Justice

Ministries, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Lowcountry Action

Committee, Legal Defense Fund, Charleston Black Lives Matter, and the American Society for Civil

Liberties of South Carolina. This meeting included 40 attendees who spoke about their experiences,

thoughts, concerns, and recommendations for the department. One virtual and one in-person

listening session focused on North Charleston’s Spanish-speaking community and were conducted in

Spanish. During the other five listening sessions, community members conveyed their opinions,

experiences, perspectives, and concerns about the NCPD. They provided suggestions and

recommendations regarding how the NCPD could improve in such areas as community relations,

accountability, transparency, recruitment, and training.

We recruited attendees for the listening sessions through the City of North Charleston’s social media

channels, including NCPD’s website, Facebook page, and YouTube account. Additionally, we asked

community members we had previously interviewed through this assessment to share the

invitations within their community networks. We also reached out to organizations, primarily CAJM,

and requested that they encourage members and others to join the virtual and in-person sessions.

During the listening sessions, we led a semi-structured discussion revolving around three

overarching questions:

1. What do you view as the roles and responsibilities of the North Charleston Police

Department?

2. Do you believe the North Charleston Police Department effectively engages with and seeks

input from the community?

3. Right now, what can and should be done to improve policing services in North Charleston and

improve police-community trust and engagement?

Community members were encouraged to share their thoughts and experiences with NCPD

throughout the session. Community input prompted follow-up questions on topics such as NCPD use

of force, the complaint process, traffic/pedestrian stops, and police-community engagement

activities. Community members could express input verbally during the in-person and virtual

listening sessions, as well as in written form via the Zoom chat feature during virtual sessions.

Community members could also send feedback to the assessment team before and after the listening

sessions via email.

Additionally, during the two general virtual listening sessions, we conducted a series of poll

questions, which attendees responded to in the Zoom software. We shared the results of these polls

with attendees before leading a discussion of community members’ experiences with NCPD. The poll

questions were as follows:

1. Have you had direct interactions with the NCPD?

2. Overall, how were your interactions with the NCPD?

3. Have you filed a complaint against NCPD personnel?

4. Do you know how to file a complaint against NCPD personnel?

5. Have you attended any police/community meetings in the past?

6. Have you ever filed any type of police report with NCPD?

Interviews

We conducted 49 semi-structured interviews—25 with NCPD personnel and 24 with community

leaders and members. The community members we interviewed represented many organizations,

including but not limited to the following: Coastal Crisis Chaplaincy, NCPD Rebuilding Every

Community Around Peace (RECAP) program, Union Heights, Charleston Farms, the Chicora

Cherokee, We Are Their Voices, CAJM, the Waylyn Community, the Chicora Association Neighborhood

Association, the Solicitor’s Office, Project Street Outreach, Art Pot Multicultural Group, Resurrected

Life Ministry in Jesus Christ, Carolina Youth Development Center, 100 Black Men, My Community’s

Keeper, Charleston County Democrats, Palmetto Hope Network, Project Unity, and Cano Law, LLC.

We interviewed NCPD personnel representing the following areas of the department: line-level

officers, supervisors, command staff, and civilian personnel. Within each area, we interviewed

individuals recently hired or promoted, as well as veterans. Personnel interviews included patrol

officers, neighborhood resource officers, training officers, victim advocates, detectives, professional

standards, school resource officers (SROs), police explorers, sergeants, and several command

officials. The tenure of the NCPD personnel we interviewed ranged from individuals who had been

with the department less than one year, between two and five years, and more than five years.

Quantitative data

Our data analysis focused on six areas: arrests, traffic stops, field interviews, use of force, complaints,

and discipline. We analyzed data from 2016 to 2020 for most datasets. We conducted descriptive

analysis of all datasets and supplemented that analysis with statistical comparison analysis when

appropriate. The findings from our data analysis complemented our reviews of the documents

provided and the sentiments heard from community members.

Overview of the report

This report contains five sections, including this introduction. The next section summarizes the

community input from listening sessions and interviews. We then summarize the input from

interviews with NCPD personnel and our analysis of the data sources provided by NCPD. Finally, we

include 67 findings and 139 associated recommendations for the NCPD and the City of North

Charleston.

In addition, the report includes four appendices. Appendix A is a list of abbreviations we use

throughout the report. Appendix B contains a list of resources and peer agencies specific to

recommendations throughout the report. Appendix C lists the documents, policies, and data sources

reviewed by CNA. Appendix D lists all findings and associated recommendations, along with our

recommendation for the priority of implementation and the resources the NCPD and City of North

Charleston will need for successful implementation.

Community Input Analysis

This section of the report provides our assessment of qualitative themes from the listening sessions

and our interviews with community members. We detail findings and recommendations related to

this section in the last section of the report.

Community listening sessions

During the listening sessions, it became clear that North Charleston community members are looking

for more transparency, accountability, and community engagement from NCPD. In this section, we

highlight five core themes from the listening sessions: community involvement, accountability,

enforcement practices, training, and interaction with Spanish-speaking populations. Across all of

these themes, we highlight community concerns about racial equity in police interactions with the

community, particularly among Black and Hispanic populations. We also provide the demographics

of attendees and the poll results from the sessions. In addition, in later sections we discuss our

findings from the listening sessions in more detail along with recommendations.

Community involvement

Many community members expressed a desire to be more involved with NCPD operations. Some

suggested that NCPD should include the community in hiring and officer evaluations. Others

suggested ways that NCPD could better engage with the community, including holding monthly

community meetings during which community members could voice concerns, ask questions,

provide input about how problems are addressed, and engage in dialogue with the department,

rather than just receiving crime statistics for their area. Listening session attendees also wanted a

better understanding of NCPD policies and the effects upon the community and to have the ability to

formally comment on critical policies. Another area of focus was SROs and interest in having SROs

hold sessions with children and their parents to understand the SROs’ roles and responsibilities in

the schools.

Accountability

Although several community members shared experiences in which they felt they were treated

inappropriately by NCPD, most listening session attendees reported never filing a complaint against

NCPD personnel. The reasons for this varied, including being confused by the complaint process,

being uncomfortable sharing their personal information during the complaint process, fearing

intimidation and retribution by NCPD personnel, and being concerned that the complaint may not

actually be recorded or resolved. Community members expressed a perception that NCPD conceals

officer misconduct and does not hold officers accountable. Regarding the Citizens Police Advisory

Committee that used to exist, community members expressed a sense that the committee had no

“teeth” and lacked the ability to hold officers accountable. Community members expressed a desire

to form a new citizen’s advisory committee with the power to hold NCPD officers accountable

through the complaint or disciplinary process. In many examples, citizens spoke about taking their

concerns or complaints directly to the chief or other ranking members with whom they have a

relationship in order to have their concerns addressed.

Enforcement practices

Community members expressed that NCPD officers seem to overly police certain areas, particularly

neighborhoods with many residents living under the poverty level or residents of color. Listening

session attendees reported feeling as though NCPD officers pulled them over every time they drove

through their neighborhood, and that officers were profiling residents and regularly looking for

minor infractions to justify traffic stops. Attendees also noted that officers often patrolled in their

neighborhoods, but rarely spoke with residents or walked through the neighborhood. In some cases,

attendees reported officers driving too fast through their neighborhoods, which they found

disrespectful to residents. Listening session attendees shared experiences in which NCPD officers

responded to a call for service or conducted an investigation but did not listen to witnesses who had

information about suspects. In those cases, NCPD officers were quick to blame community members

who were not at fault, particularly people of color. Community members were also concerned about

poor investigative practices, a lack of or insufficient follow-up, and a lack of trauma-informed care

for victims of crime, especially in domestic violence and sexual assault cases.

Training

Listening session attendees expressed repeatedly that they believe NCPD officers should be trained

on the communities they serve, as well as topics such as implicit bias, the history of race in America

and North Charleston, leadership, and communication. Community members are willing and eager

to participate in NCPD training to ensure that officers understand the community and are ready to

serve the residents. Additionally, community members want officers to be trained in North

Charleston, rather than at the state police academy, which they believe will help recruit more officers

of color.

Community members would also like to learn more about the training that NCPD officers receive

from NCPD and to participate in trainings themselves. Community members want information from

NCPD on their roles and responsibilities, how NCPD conducts traffic stops, and why officers ask

certain things during stops.

Interactions with Spanish-speaking populations

During the Spanish-speaking listening sessions, North Charleston community members noted that

they have had difficulty interacting with NCPD due to language barriers and misunderstandings.

NCPD has few Spanish-speaking officers. When NCPD officers encounter Spanish-speaking

community members, some use Google Translate to communicate, which does not consistently

provide accurate translations or retain nuance of phrasing. Sometimes officers rely upon other

community members to translate, including victims, minors, or uninvolved third parties. Listening

session attendees expressed dissatisfaction with the way NCPD officers handle translation. Attendees

also stated that immigrant populations need more information from NCPD about topics such as traffic

laws, how to obtain a driver’s license and other documents, and the services that NCPD provides.

Experiences with police in their home countries can make immigrant populations wary of working

with NCPD, and the laws in their countries of origin may be quite different than US laws. Additionally,

listening session attendees stated that there is a lack of transparency around U nonimmigrant visas

(U visas). In some cases, victims are denied a U visa but are not told why.

Demographics of attendees

A total of 149 North Charleston community members ranging in age, location, and relationship with

NCPD participated in the five listening sessions. In the next subsection, we summarize participant

interactions with NCPD, such as whether an attendee had interacted directly with NCPD, filed a

complaint against NCPD personnel, or filed a police report with NCPD.

• We solicited information on attendee race,

gender, and zip code. The racial demographics of

the community listening session attendees was as follows (Figure 1)75 attendees (50

percent) did not self-identify their race, or self-identified in a way that could not be sorted

into the race categories

• 41 respondents (28 percent of attendees, 55 percent of attendees who indicated their race)

identified as Black or African American

• 31 respondents (21 percent of attendees, 42 percent of attendees who indicated their race)

identified as white

• 1 respondent (0.7 percent of attendees, 1.4 percent of attendees who indicated their race)

identified as Asian

• 1 respondent (0.7 percent of attendees, 1.4 percent of attendees who indicated their race)

identified as Native American

During registration and sign-in for the listening sessions, the assessment team also gave attendees the option to self-

identify their ethnicity. The provided answers could not be sorted into ethnicity categories and are not presented in this

report.

Figure 1. Self-reported race of community listening session attendees

For gender demographics (Figure 2), 63 listening session attendees (42 percent) did not self-identify

their gender, 54 respondents (36 percent) identified as female, and 32 (22 percent) respondents

identified as male.

Figure 2. Self-reported gender of community listening session attendees

For zip code information (Figure 3), 36 listening session attendees (24 percent) did not identify their

zip code. The remaining attendees represented 21 zip codes across North Charleston and Charleston,

with one zip code in the Greenville-Spartanburg-Asheville metro area. The chart below depicts the

frequency of the seven zip codes that were in North Charleston, as well as the frequency of the zip

codes outside of the North Charleston area or no response.

White

21%

Black

27%

Asian

Native American

response/unclear

50%

Female

36%

Male

22%

No response

42%

Figure 3. Zip codes of community listening session attendees

Poll results

A total of 132 North Charleston community members attended the general virtual listening sessions,

during which we deployed the poll questions (Figure 4 through Figure 9).

Have you had direct interactions with the NCPD?

• 78 listening session attendees (59 percent) responded to this poll question

• 62 percent of respondents indicated that they have directly interacted with NCPD

Figure 4. Community listening session poll question on NCPD interactions

Overall, how were your interactions with the NCPD?

29405

11%

29406

12%

29418

29419

29420

29456

29485

Other zip codes

36%

No response

24%

Yes

62%

38%

• 78 listening session attendees (59 percent) responded to this poll question

• 31 percent of respondents characterized their previous interactions with NCPD as negative,

while 26 percent of respondents characterized the interactions as positive

• 22 percent of respondents were undecided on their characterization of their previous

interactions with NCPD (in most cases, respondents from April 6 who indicated that they had

never had direct interaction with NCPD selected “undecided” regarding their

characterization of interactions with NCPD)

• 22 percent of respondents selected “N/A” regarding their interactions with NCPD, indicating

that they did not have a characterization of their interactions with NCPD because they have

never interacted with NCPD

(“N/A” was not a response option during the first general

listening session on April 6; therefore, all the “N/A” responses were from the general listening

session on April 7)

Figure 5. Community listening session poll question on NCPD interactions

Have you filed a complaint against NCPD personnel?

• 75 listening session attendees (57 percent) responded to this poll question

• 8 percent of respondents indicated that they have filed a complaint against NCPD personnel

The reported percentages are rounded to the nearest decimal. Therefore, these results do not total to 100 percent.

Positive

25%

Negative

31%

Undecided

22%

N/A

22%

Figure 6. Community listening session poll question on NCPD complaints

Do you know how to file a complaint against NCPD personnel?

• 75 listening session attendees (57 percent) responded to this poll question

• 29 percent of respondents indicated that they know how to file a complaint against NCPD

personnel

Figure 7. Community listening session poll question on NCPD complaint process

Have you attended any police/community meetings in the past?

• 75 listening session attendees (57 percent) responded to this poll question

• 55 percent of respondents indicated that they have attended any police/community meeting

in the past

Yes

92%

Yes

29%

71%

Figure 8. Community listening session poll question on past session participation

Have you ever filed any type of police report with NCPD?

• 76 listening session attendees (58 percent) responded to this poll question

• 34 percent of respondents indicated that they have filed any type of police report with NCPD

Figure 9. Community listening session poll question on report filing

Community interviews

We hosted 24 virtual one-on-one community member interviews. In each interview, many of the

questions were similar from person to person. However, we customized questions for some

individuals to reflect their affiliation with community organizations or any noteworthy experiences

Yes

55%

45%

Yes

34%

66%

we knew about prior. We gave each community member the opportunity to provide suggestions and

recommendations on how the NCPD could improve in such areas as community relations,

accountability, recruitment, and training.

We recruited one-on-one interviewees using a modified version of the snowball method, in which

interviewers ask interviewees to recommend potential participants. The City of North Charleston and

the NCPD recommended interview participants as a starting point, and we also received input from

local advocacy organizations.

As interviews progressed, the tremendous amount of respect that community members have for

Chief of Police Reggie Burgess became clear; however, community members are concerned about the

officers they encounter on a day-to-day basis. Particularly, there is lingering mistrust from NCPD

actions taken prior to the Chief Burgess’s tenure. As in the listening sessions, North Charleston

individual community members expressed that they are looking for more transparency,

accountability and community engagement from NCPD. In this section, we highlight four core themes

that emerged from the community interviews: community involvement, community immersion,

disparate enforcement practices, and personnel concerns.

Community involvement

Many community members stated a desire to be more involved in the oversight process of NCPD

specifically. Due to mistrust in the current accountability infrastructure, many community leaders

reported directly contacting members of NCPD or Chief Burgess if they have a complaint or concerns.

In a similar vein, many community members reported contacting trusted community leaders instead

of filing a formal complaint because their trust is with them, not with the police, especially Hispanic

and Black community members. Multiple interviewees suggested that community members forgo the

complaints process because they do not trust NCPD to properly document, investigate, or resolve the

issue in a timely manner. As a result, when asked how to address this particular concern, some

community members suggested forming a Community Oversight board or involving the community

have a role in officer hiring and evaluations.

Community immersion

Many community members stated that police-community relationships have improved under Chief

Burgess, especially when compared to previous chiefs. Several interviewees noted that Chief Burgess

is frequently out in the community holding Peace Walks, speaking to residents, and coordinating with

neighborhood leaders. Despite their fondness for Chief Burgess, interviewees did not express the

same level of trust and respect for the entire NCPD. Many members cited historical mistrust as a

reason, while others suggested that recent negative encounters have shaped their perceptions. In one

interview, a community member said their mistrust of NCPD is so pronounced that they assume any

NCPD officer speaking to them wants something or is suspicious. Others talked about being pulled

over because of the neighborhood they live in or the type of car they drive.

When members were asked what could be done to address their concerns with NCPD as a whole,

some suggested that officers do more foot patrol. Specifically, they want officers to get out of cars and

talk to people “as human beings,” especially in areas with heavy enforcement activities. They felt that

doing so would help officers understand cultural nuances and the history of NCPD policing. Some

recommended increased casual interaction between officers and youth, or expansion of the Police

Athletic League program. Another suggestion was that Neighborhood Resource Officers (NROs)

should be responsive to community concerns when they report out at community meetings.

Disparate enforcement practices

As mentioned in the Community immersion section of the report, some community members

reported being pulled over because of their neighborhood, their vehicle type, or driving an

“unknown” vehicle. Community members expressed that these instances are disproportionately

targeted at areas where many residents earn below the poverty level or are people of color.

Community members recommended that NCPD consult with community stakeholders about how to

expand the roles of community engagement officers to help problem solve with community members

and meet the needs of marginalized communities.

Parallel to differential enforcement based on race and income, several victim advocates noted

concerns about how domestic violence, intimate homicide, and sexual assault cases are handled. A

few residents detailed experiences in which victims were left with little to no support from NCPD,

poor recordkeeping, a lack of sensitivity to their trauma, and sometimes a sense of disdain. As

mentioned in the Community immersion section, community members would like to see report-outs

on these types of cases.

Personnel concerns

Community members reported a wide range of NCPD personnel concerns including the needs to hire

more racially and linguistically diverse (i.e., Spanish-speaking) officers, address the “good ol’ boy”

system, and perform in-depth background checks. Although the first two suggestions are

straightforward, the last speaks to multiple concerns. For instance, some members would like officers

receive more psychological evaluations. Others would like background checks to cover previous law

enforcement employment, disciplinary actions, and reasons for leaving (termination or resignation).

Law Enforcement Data Analysis

This section of the report discusses our assessment of qualitative themes from interviews with NCPD

personnel and results from data analysis provided by NCPD. First, we discuss the themes from NCPD

interviews. We then discuss the data we reviewed and the subsequent analysis. We detail findings

and recommendations related to this section in the following section of the report.

Personnel interviews

We interviewed 25 NCPD personnel over a two-month period. Interviewees represented various

levels of the department, including officers, detectives, school resource officers, supervisors,

executive staff, and civilian staff. The experience of those interviewed ranged from one year of service

up to decades of service in the department.

During these interviews, we asked individuals various questions about policies and procedures,

community policing, operations, and their roles and responsibilities. Depending on the interviewee’s

areas of responsibility, they shared their thoughts on what they believe the department is doing well,

as well as areas that could be improved. During the interviews, several members stated that Chief

Burgess is the driving factor behind the department’s community policing efforts. They said that

areas such as citizen complaints, follow-up investigations, training, promotions, and time to engage

citizens required a more focused strategy.

In this section, we highlight four core themes that emerged from the personnel interviews:

community interactions, promotion and performance review process concerns, the complaint

process, and training gaps. In the next section, we detail specific findings and recommendations that

include more detail from the interviews with NCPD personnel.

Community interactions

Many NCPD personnel, both sworn and civilian, expressed their beliefs that a strong relationship

exists between the North Charleston community and NCPD, especially with communities of color and

communities that feel disenfranchised. NCPD personnel did acknowledge that tensions still exist

between the department and marginalized communities, but believe there is room to resolve these

tensions through community engagement. Many members recognized the continuing need to balance

addressing crime problems with creating opportunities for more positive community

engagements. They believe this relationship is being built through many activities they engage in,

including but not limited to regular community meetings and events, neighborhood roll calls, Coffee

with a Cop, and trash pickup days. NCPD personnel also described developing improved relationships

with the youth in North Charleston through the Cops Athletic Program (CAP). Outside of the events,

many officers pointed to the NROs as having the primary responsibility for community policing

within communities. However, the NROs are stretched very thin having to cover so many districts,

meetings, and events. As a result of the many events and programs NCPD uses to interact with the

community, personnel believe their police-community relations are the strongest they have been in

years, but they also believe more can be done. Due to COVID-19, personnel interactions with the

community have lessened; however, personnel are excited and ready to begin in-person events to

interact with their community again.

Although personnel believe their relations with the community are improved, there is a lack of

understanding of what a comprehensive department wide community policing strategy means and

involves. While several officers stated that there is a community policing strategy for the department,

they were not able to provide details of what it entailed. Many personnel equate hosting events as

the community policing strategy. Additionally, when asked to describe the departments overall

community policing strategy, the answers are dependent on the members current assignment. When

asking if officers are receiving training in community policing, trainings not related were named. This

solidified the need for personnel to better understand their department’s community policing

strategy and plans moving forward. Additionally, officers noted that there are very few Spanish-

speaking officers in NCPD, which is in line with the concerns of the North Charleston Hispanic

community. Services and resources which could better support NCPD efforts within the Hispanic

communities are lacking. Services such as; more Spanish speaking officers and modern translation

services could improve their interactions with the Spanish-speaking community.

Personnel involved with the School Resource Officer Program noted that their responsibilities are

primarily to be involved with enforcement and to maintain the security of the schools they serve.

Even though the SROs believe they have the opportunity to meet and engage with students, they

seemed not to have direct guidance about how to provide more educational or engagement programs

with students on a regular basis. One SRO mentioned that they are trained to provide education to

students; however, some school leadership may prefer to limit their involvement, which prevents

them from educating students in the classroom. A common sentiment SROs expressed is that they

are present to enforce laws, not school rules. They want to develop stronger relationships with

students, faculty, parents, and administrators within schools.

Promotion and performance review process concerns

Some NCPD personnel expressed their concerns with the promotion process, as well as the

performance review process. Many officers believe the interview and selection process for

promotions is unfair. Several believe the composition of the interview panel should be more diverse

and inclusive of internal and external members. Community members felt that supervisors, citizens,

and managers from other agencies should be part of the panels. Officers were dissatisfied that the

process only involves interviewing internally; they believe the interviewers have already formed

opinions of the interviewees, turning the process into a popularity contest. Some officers expressed

concerns that if their supervisor did not like them, they would not receive a promotion, regardless of

the quality of their work. One NCPD officer even mentioned instances in which promotion policies

were changed midway through the process, even after testing occurred, to make more applicants

eligible for promotion. As a result, individuals who would not have made the testing cutoff under the

previous rules were then promoted. Although many officers shared their concerns regarding the

interview process, some still felt that NCPD had a strong and credible process for promotions.

Some NCPD personnel expressed concerns with the performance review process, while others felt

the process was comprehensive. Personnel who did not share concerns noted that they frequently

communicate with their supervisor, ensuring that feedback received during their performance

review was not a surprise. Some personnel felt that the process is unfair, noting unfair practices in

ratings by supervisors. For example, NCPD supervisors reported being encouraged to reduce the

rating on a performance evaluation to ensure the officer did not receive a high raise that would strain

the department’s budget.

Complaint process

The community has concerns about the complaint process, which is in line with the concerns of a few

NCPD officers. For example, some NCPD officers noted that they might only learn of a citizen

complaint against them if that complaint is sustained. If personnel are unaware of complaints, it is

hard to know whether these complaints are being appropriately investigated. Officers also shared

concerns that the Office of Professional Standards (OPS) does not necessarily receive all complaints

that are lodged. For example, sergeants who receive low-level complaints have been known to handle

these complaints without ever referring them to OPS. This process does not serve the officer or the

citizen very well. Many citizens expressed concern that NCPD does not follow up on their complaints.

In addition, officers want to be informed when a citizen believes they have acted inappropriately or

inconsistently with policy.

Training gaps

During interviews, we asked NCPD officers whether they had received training on implicit bias, racial

bias in policing, cultural sensitivity, constitutional policing, and procedural justice. The answers were

very mixed. Some officers noted receiving training on racial bias in policing; however, the training

did not seem to have made a lasting impression on them in their daily duties at NCPD. Some

supervisors did note that prior to COVID-19, the department had sent some officers to a racial bias

in policing training conducted by an outside vendor, which many perceived as meaningful. The

department is hoping to put every officer through that training. Although supervisors felt that the

training was outstanding, they noted that some officers struggled with the dialog and exercises,

causing some to walk out of the training. Additionally, officers noted that these trainings were not

specific to the North Charleston community and were instead very general. Citizens also expressed a

desire for officers to have a better and more in-depth understanding of the communities they

serve. When we asked NROs whether they receive training on crime prevention through

environmental design (CPTED), it was clear they have not been trained in that area. CPTED training

can better equip NROs to make positive changes in the community and to provide information to

community members. In addition to training, NCPD officers must have ongoing guidance and training

reinforcement from supervisors. Officers reported that they have received training on conducting

pedestrian and vehicle stops, but their supervisors do not provide much guidance on making stops,

such as whether to focus on speeders or on drivers running stop signs in a neighborhood.

Departmental data analysis

Understanding racial disparities in law enforcement activity is difficult given the complexity of

developing a baseline against which to compare law enforcement activity. Using Census Bureau

population numbers will typically result in overestimates of disparity, since these numbers do not

account for differential rates of contact with police among different demographic groups. Using other

law enforcement data sources as a baseline will typically underestimate disparity, since these data

include known disparities by race due to systemic racism and bias in the criminal justice system as a

whole. Whenever possible, as allowed by data availability, we present comparisons to both

population figures and other law enforcement data. Note that neither method provides the single

correct estimation of the level of disparity, which probably falls somewhere between the two.

The use of population figures from the Census Bureau can have particular drawbacks in cities like

North Charleston where racial and ethnic demographics vary considerably by neighborhood and

geographic area. Based on discussions with both NCPD and the community, it is apparent that North

Charleston neighborhoods follow this pattern, with some areas being historically and predominantly

Black, some areas having higher proportions of Hispanic residents, and some areas being primarily

made up of white community members. Thus, when police contacts vary geographically based on

calls for service (which NCPD’s internal deployment analysis indicates), this can result in

considerably different rates of police contact for different communities. Thus, whenever possible

throughout the report, we present comparisons using both population and also other measures of

police contact.

One method for understanding disparities in arrests is a disproportionality index. This index is

expressed as a compound ratio: the ratio of the percentage of police interactions with Black

individuals that result in an arrest compared with the corresponding percentage for white

individuals. This can be expressed with the following formula:





 



�





 



�

This compound ratio provides a clear and compelling interpretation: it measures how much more

likely police interactions with Black individuals are to result in arrests versus interactions with white

individuals. The difficulty in calculating a disproportionality index for arrests is in selecting an

appropriate baseline for “total interactions.” As noted above, using population data tends to

overestimate disparity while using law enforcement data tends to underestimate disparity. Thus,

throughout this report, we present multiple baseline measures whenever possible.

Finally, disparities can be examined using a quasi-experimental approach called propensity score

matching. Propensity score matching compares incidents that are otherwise extremely similar but

differ in terms of the race of the involved community member. To use this method, analysts must

capture sufficient incident characteristics to identify those incidents that are more or less similar to

each other. For example, in reviewing use of force incidents, we would use the propensity score

matching method to match two incidents: one involving a white community member and one

involving a Black community member. We would then compare these matched incidents (e.g.,

incidents that had similar underlying reasons for use of force, occurred at a similar time of day and

in a similar location, involved community members of the same gender, and had a similar officer

assessment of community member’s mental status). Since the two incidents are otherwise similar,

absent disparate treatment or bias, we would expect to see both incidents result in the same outcome

(e.g., level of force used, count of force used). Although propensity score matching cannot establish

that racial bias exists with certainty, it provides stronger evidence than past techniques, such as

correlational analysis or compound ratios, alone. Unfortunately, NCPD’s current data collection

practices did not allow for the use of propensity score matching in any of the provided data sets. We

provide recommendations to the department to improve their systems to allow for this type of

analysis in the future.

Arrests

Between 2016 and 2020, NCPD made 24,759 arrests with 37,578 associated charges. As seen in

Figure 10, the number of arrests per month, which averages 417, has remained fairly stable for the

past five years, with some decrease seen in 2020. This is likely attributable to the general decrease

in law enforcement activity associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Figure 10. Arrests over time

Arrests by the NCPD take place most commonly in the late afternoon and early evening, as seen in

Figure 11. They decrease steadily in the early morning hours after midnight.

100

200

300

400

500

600

Jan

Apr

Jul

Oct

Jan

Apr

Jul

Oct

Jan

Apr

Jul

Oct

Jan

Apr

Jul

Oct

Jan

Apr

Jul

Oct

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Figure 11. Arrests by time of day

The majority (70 percent) of arrests involve a single charge, as seen in Figure 12. Just over 2 percent

involve five or more charges, with the most charges in a single arrest being 43.

Figure 12. Charges per arrest

Across the 37,578 charges during the five-year analysis period, NCPD coded 8,458 violation types.

Of these, 6,408 were used only once in that period. Determining the most frequent charges was

difficult because of data input irregularities and because many charges were coded using multiple

options based on offense severity or the specific statutes associated with the charge. Charges for

Note that, based on a brief review of the data, some of the unique violation types likely represent data entry errors (e.g.,

“/Public Intoxication” instead of “Public Intoxication”).

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

12AM

1AM

2AM

3AM

4AM

5AM

6AM

7AM

8AM

9AM

10AM

11AM

12PM

1PM

2PM

3PM

4PM

5PM

6PM

7PM

8PM

9PM

10PM

11PM

17,226

4,925

1,483

595

530

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

1 2 3 4 5 or more

shoplifting, driving with a suspended license or registration, and possession of marijuana are among

the more common in the data.

In examining arrestee demographics, the majority (63 percent) of arrestees in the analysis period are

Black community members, as shown in Figure 13. White community members make up 36 percent

of arrestees. In comparison, North Charleston’s population is 45 percent Black and 46 percent white,

per 2019 Census Bureau population estimates.

Black community members do comprise the majority

of individuals with outstanding warrants in North Charleston (61 percent as of July 2021), though

warrant data itself is subject to systemic biases in the justice system. In addition, we calculated the

disproportionality index for arrests by using both contacts with suspects and contacts with victims

as possible baseline measures. For arrests of Black community members, the disproportionality

index is 0.78 when using suspects as the baseline and 1.35 when using victims as the baseline. In

other words, Black community members are somewhat underrepresented in arrests compared with

their involvement as suspects of crimes, and somewhat overrepresented in arrests compared with

their involvement as victims of crimes. As noted above, using population numbers as a baseline can

overstate disparity levels, but the noted difference is striking—with Black community members

represented in arrests 1.4 times more frequently than their share of the population.

Figure 13. Arrestee race

NCPD captures ethnicity data separately from race data, in keeping with federal guidance on race and

ethnicity data collection. As shown in Figure 14, 7.5 percent of arrestees are Hispanic. Per Census

Bureau estimates, North Charleston’s population is 11.4 percent Hispanic or Latino. We also consider

the disproportionality index here, as above, noting that race and ethnicity are also collected

separately in the suspect and victimization data, allowing for this analysis. For arrests of Hispanic

community members, the disproportionality index is 1.33 when using suspects as the baseline and

1.05 when using victims as the baseline. In other words, Hispanic community members are more

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/northcharlestoncitysouthcarolina.

White

36.1%

Black

62.8%

Asian

0.3%

Native American

0.2%

Unknown/blank

0.6%

overrepresented in arrests compared with their involvement as suspects of crimes, and slightly

overrepresented in arrests compared with their involvement as victims of crimes.

Figure 14. Arrestee ethnicity

Most arrestees are male, as shown in Figure 15.

Figure 15. Arrestee gender

Figure 16 shows the age of individuals at the time of the arrest.

Thirty-five percent of arrests involve

individuals who were 25 to 34 years old at the time of arrest, while 22 percent and 20 percent involve

individuals who were 18 to 24 years old and 35 to 44 years old, respectively.

We removed two arrests from this analysis because the date of birth and date of arrest result in a calculated age of under

one year, most likely representing data entry errors.

Hispanic

7.5%

Non-Hispanic

89.8%

Unknown/blank

2.7%

Female

26.1%

Male

73.7%

Unknown/blank

0.2%

Figure 16. Arrestee age

We also review juvenile arrests, which are captured separately by NCPD. From 2016 through 2020,

there were 2,661 arrests of juveniles, of which 1,428 (54 percent) were school-based arrests. Figure

17 shows the racial and ethnic breakdown of juvenile arrests overall; the percentages are similar

when considering only school-based arrests, in which 92 percent of arrestees are Black, 7 percent

are white, and 1 percent are Hispanic. For comparison purposes, the North Charleston High School

in the 2020-2021 school year has a student population that is 81 percent Black, 6 percent white, 12

percent Hispanic, and less than 1 percent other.

Figure 17. Juvenile arrests by race

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

16-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 or older

White

10%

Black

88%

Hispanic

Asian

0.2%

Traffic stops

NCPD does not collect detailed information about all traffic stops in a single data system, instead

reporting on stops that result in a citation separately from those that end in a warning. For this

reason, understanding disparities in traffic stop activity by NCPD is difficult, since the two different

databases can’t be readily combined to provide the full picture of traffic stop activity by NCPD

personnel. In this section, we present our analysis of traffic stops ending in citations and warning

separately, and we recommend that NCPD implement a robust traffic stop data collection system to

allow for more detailed analysis in the future. Throughout this section, traffic stops refers to traffic

stops ending in citations, except where specifically noted as stops resulting in warnings.

From 2018 through 2020, NCPD issued 28,356 citations during 21,841 traffic stops.

NCPD also

issued 23,501 warnings during this period, though the relationship between these warnings and the

traffic stops ending in citations cannot be discerned due to data limitations described above.

However, considering all stop outcomes taken together, 55 percent of these outcomes are citations.

This rate is relatively low compared with other agencies the assessment team is familiar with; a

recent large-scale study of traffic stops in North Carolina found that 65 percent of stops end in

citations, and work with the Maricopa County, Arizona, Sheriff’s Office found that 52 percent of stops

end in citations; work under the COPS Office Collaborative Reform Initiative found rates of 62, 65,

and 73 percent in Fayetteville, North Carolina; St. Louis County, Missouri; and San Francisco,

California, respectively.

High citation rates can be detrimental to police relationships with the

community because they erode trust, lead to feelings of persecution, and have immediate and

lingering financial impacts; NCPD’s relatively lower citation rate is a positive sign.

As shown in Figure 18, the number of stops and citations has maintained a steady average (609 stops

and 788 citations per month) though the month-to-month volatility increased in 2020. There is no

overall upward or downward trend in stops or citations, and the ratio between citations and stops

has remained similar over the three-year period. Stops averaged 1.3 citations per stop, ranging from

Note that the CNA assessment team manually corrected 205 missing incident identification codes, using the time and

other circumstances of the stop to identify an existing identification code to enter (for a stop with multiple citations) or

assigning a new identification code to uniquely identify the stop.

Baumgartner, F. R., Epp, D. A., & Shoub, K. (2018). Suspect citizens: What 20 million traffic stops tell us about policing

and race. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Rodriguez, D., Kunard, L., Johnson, W., LaRochelle, J., & Thorkildsen, Z. (2015). Assessment report on the Fayetteville

(North Carolina) Police Department. Collaborative Reform Initiative. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services.

Norton, B., Hamilton, E. E., Braziel, R., Linskey, D., & Zeunik, J. (2015). An assessment of the St. Louis County Police

Department. Collaborative Reform Initiative. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

COPS Office. (2016). An assessment of the San Francisco Police Department. Collaborative Reform Initiative. Washington,

DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

Thorkildsen, Z., Bryson, B., Wohl, E., Carleton, B., & Lafferty, J. (2020). Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Traffic Stops

Analysis Report: January 2019–December 2019. Phoenix, AZ: Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.

1.2 to 1.5. Warnings trended downward in 2020; NCPD issued 5,953 warnings in 2020 compared

with 8,766 and 8,782 in 2019 and 2019 respectively.

Figure 18. Citations and stops over time

Figure 19 displays citations and stops by the time of day the stop took place. As with other NCPD

activity, stop rates are relatively higher in the afternoon and evening, decreasing considerably during

the early morning hours.

Figure 19. Citations and stops by time of day

Considering the total citations and warnings issued by NCPD between 2018 and 2020, Figure 20 and

Figure 21 provides the breakdown by the race of the individual cited. We present just citation and

warning counts here because sometimes more than one individual is cited or warned during the

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov

2018 2019 2020

Citations Stops

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

12AM

1AM

2AM

3AM

4AM

5AM

6AM

7AM

8AM

9AM

10AM

11AM

12PM

1PM

2PM

3PM

4PM

5PM

6PM

7PM

8PM

9PM

10PM

11PM

Citations Stops

course of a single traffic stop. Black community members received over 51 percent of the citations

(14,569 citations) issued during the three-year analysis period, white community members received

nearly 36 percent (10,136), and Hispanic community members received 10.5 percent (2,979). The

pattern is similar for warnings, with Black community members receiving nearly 56 percent of

warnings (13,114 warnings), white community members 38 percent (8,946), and Hispanic

community members 4 percent (1,017). Note that in this data system, NCPD collects race and

ethnicity data in a single data field.

Figure 20. Citations by race

Figure 21. Warnings by race

Considering the 22,567 combinations of a stop and an individual involved in that stop (as noted

above, some stops resulted in citations for multiple individuals), Table 1 provides a breakdown of

the average number of citations based on the race of the involved individual, and also the average

White

35.7%

Black

51.4%

Hispanic

10.5%

Asian

0.9%

Native American

0.2%

Other/unknown

1.3%

White

38.1%

Black

55.8%

Hispanic

4.3%

Asian

0.6%

Native American

0.0%

Other/unknown

1.2%

number of citations with citations for driving under a suspended license or without a license removed

from the data, since these citations are less discretionary on the part of the officer. The average

citation count for white community members is statistically significantly lower than that for Black

community members and Hispanic community members in both cases (pairwise comparison of

means, p=0.05 using Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing). Although this difference might be

partly explained by differences in traffic stop circumstances that cannot be readily uncovered with

the available data, it is a potential indicator of bias in traffic stop enforcement decisions.

Table 1. Citations per stop by race

Race

Average citation count

Average citation count (not inc.

citation for driving under

suspension or without a license)

White

1.18

1.17

Black

1.28

1.25

Hispanic

1.47

1.27

Asian

1.12

Native American

1.10

1.08

Unknown/other

1.28

1.22

Grand Total

1.26

1.22

We also considered the violations associated with the citations by the race of the involved community

member. In Table 2, we present the five most common violations cited for white, Black, and Hispanic

community members. These are largely similar, with the majority of citations being issued for

speeding, driving with a suspended license, or careless operation of the vehicle. Notably, the most

common citation issued to Hispanic community members is for driving without a license (first

offense), which is not among the top five most common for white or Black community members. It is

also the case that none of these most common citation types are those typically associated with

pretextual stops.

Table 2. Most commonly cited violations, by race of community member

White community members

Black community members

Hispanic community members

Violation

Count

Violation

Count

Violation

Count

Speeding (15–25 mph

over limit)

2,569

Speeding (15–25 mph

over limit)

2,495

Driving Without a License:

First Offense

993

Speeding (10–15 mph

over limit)

989

Driving Under

Suspension: First Offense

(non-DUI suspension)

1,739

Speeding (15–25 mph over

limit)

320

Speeding (25+ mph over

limit)

563

Speeding (10–15 mph

over limit)

824

Speeding (10–15 mph over

limit)

115

Driving Under

Suspension: First

Offense (non-DUI

suspension)

508

Speeding (25+ mph over

limit)

794

Speeding (25+ mph over

limit)

Careless Operation 472 Careless Operation 534

Driving Under Suspension:

First Offense (non-DUI

suspension)

Field interviews

Between 2016 and 2020, NCPD documented 3,482 field interviews. As seen in Figure 22, the number

of field interviews has varied considerably during that period, ranging from just 4 completed in

December of 2020 to as many as 125 a month in 2018.

Figure 22. Field interviews over time

As seen in Figure 23, Black community members are involved in field interviews the most frequently,

representing 64.4 percent of involved individuals, while white community members are involved in

31.5 percent of field interviews. Note that NCPD does not collect data about ethnicity for field

interviews. Field interviews involve male community members 75.8 percent of the time, and the

average age of the involved community member is almost 33 years old. Unfortunately, NCPD does

not collect additional information about field interviews (such as the reason or outcome), so further

analysis to understand disparities in this activity is not possible.

100

120

140

160

Jan

Apr

Jul

Oct

Jan

Apr

Jul

Oct

Jan

Apr

Jul

Oct

Jan

Apr

Jul

Oct

Jan

Apr

Jul

Oct

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Figure 23. Field interviews by race

Use of force

NCPD documented 314 use of force incidents between 2016 and 2020.

Of these incidents, all but

one incident involved a single community member, and the number of officers involved ranged from

one to eight.

As seen in Figure 24, use of force incidents have remained steady over the five-year period, averaging

just over five incidents a month. The number of incidents has varied from as few as 1 incident in a

month to over 20 incidents in a month.

The assessment team removed 15 incidents from the use of force database representing accidental Taser discharges,

animal incidents, and incidents not involving any community members (e.g., patrol rifle deployment during a search

operation).

White

31.5%

Black

64.4%

Asian

0.3%

Other/unknown

3.8%

Figure 24. Use of force incidents over time

In Figure 25, the race of the involved community members in use of force incidents is displayed. As

seen in this chart, Black community members are substantially overrepresented in use of force

incidents compared to the demographics of the North Charleston community.

Figure 25. Use of force incidents by race

Because differential rates of contact with law enforcement can play a role in explaining disparities in

use of force incidents, we also considered the disproportionality index approach to examine

disparities in use of force incidents by race. As described in the introduction to this section, the

disproportionality index is calculated using the following formula:

Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Feb MayAug Nov Feb May Aug Nov

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Unknown

Black

67%

Hispanic

White

21%

  



 



�

  



 



�

We considered two possible baseline measures for total interactions: arrests and field interviews.

When using arrests as the baseline, the disproportionality index is 1.82. In other words, Black

community members are involved in use of force incidents 1.82 times more frequently than would

be expected based on their involvement in arrests. When using field interviews as the baseline, the

disproportionality index is 1.55. In other words, Black community members are involved in use of

force incidents 1.55 times more frequently than would be expected based on their involvement in

field interviews. As stated before, using law enforcement data as a baseline typically underestimates

disparities while using Census Bureau data typically overestimates disparities, and neither method

accounts for the circumstances of the incident (which we explore further in the remainder of this

section). Therefore, neither method provides the single correct estimation of the level of disparity,

which probably falls somewhere between the two. Nonetheless, all of these methods indicate

substantial disparities in use of force experienced by Black community members.

NCPD includes 46 possible reasons for force to be used, which we collapsed into 9 categories, shown

in Figure 26. Incidents in which force is used to address assaults or fighting (including assaults on

and fighting with officers) are the most common, followed by incidents in which the involved

individual was behaving aggressively, armed, or resisting officers. Notably, force was used in 37

incidents to prevent individuals from fleeing. Note that only one reason for use of force is coded per

incident.

Figure 26. Reason for use of force

In Figure 27, we present the most commonly cited reasons for use of force broken out by the race of

the involved community member. As shown in this table, Black community members are more

commonly involved in use of force incidents involving fighting or assault as the reason for use of force

and the least frequently involved in instances with armed community members. This, along with the

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Search/perimeter

Shooting

Containment/detention

Other

Fleeing

Armed

Fighting/assault

Aggression

Non-compliance

substantial overrepresentation of Black community members in use of force incidents highlighted

above, is suggestive of possible bias in the decision to use force.

Figure 27. Reason for use of force by race

We grouped the types of force used into 12 categories, including an other category. There were 473

distinct uses of force represented in the 314 use of force incidents between 2016 and 2020. Figure

28 presents the types of force used, sorted from the most severe use of force (use of a firearm/rifle)

to the least severe (restraints), with the other category listed at the bottom of the chart. As shown in

the figure, empty hand techniques and taser use are the most common types of force used by NCPD.

Figure 28. Type of force used

We considered the highest level of force used in the incident by community member race. Table 3

displays this analysis. The overall average highest level of force used is 7.13, which is equivalent to

deploying a canine and is one step below displaying a Taser (see Figure 28, above). Although the

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Non-compliance Aggression Fighting/assault Armed Fleeing

Black Hispanic White

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Firearm/rifle used

Firearm/rifle displayed

Taser used

Taser displayed

Canine

Baton

Chemical spray

Less lethal impact

Takedown

Empty hand

Restraint

Other

average highest level of force used is greater for Black community members compared with white

community members, this difference is not statistically significant (pairwise comparison of means,

p=0.05 using Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing). The difference between the average highest

level of force used for Hispanic compared with white community members, however, is statistically

significant.

Table 3. Highest level of force used by race

Race

Average highest force used

Black

7.12

Hispanic

8.93

White

6.39

Overall

7.13

Complaints

NCPD received 393 complaints from 2016 to 2020, of which 75 (19 percent) were from community

members and the remaining 317 were internally generated (one complaint was not coded as either

internal or external). In this section, we focus on complaints generated by community members. We

do note that NCPD’s number of internal complaints reflects strong accountability practices; for

example, complaints are automatically filed for certain policy offenses, and officers are comfortable

holding each other accountable. The number of complaints received per year was at its highest in

2012 at 23 complaints and its lowest in 2020 with just 9 complaints, as shown in Figure 29.

Figure 29. Complaints over time

The majority of community complaints—64 percent—came from Black community members, while

29 percent were from white complainants, as shown in Figure 30.

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Figure 30. Complaints by race of community member complainant

Figure 31 shows the time from complaint intake until the completion of the complaint process. The

majority (81.7 percent) of complaints from community members are completed within 90 days. The

longest time to complaint resolution is 399 days.

Figure 31. Time from complaint intake to completion

NCPD codes multiple allegations within one complaint when appropriate. The 75 community

member complaints are associated with 107 allegations. Allegations are broken down by the policy

category the allegation is associated with (Figure 32) as well as the specific violation. The majority of

allegations are for code of conduct complaints. Within the code of conduct policy, most violations are

for conduct toward community members or coworkers (11 allegations) followed by complaints

about searches and seizures (5 allegations).

White

29%

Black

64%

Hispanic

Native American

Unknown

0 to 30

days

30 to 59

days

60 to 89

days

90 to 119

days

120 to 149

days

150 to 179

days

180 to 359

days

Over 360

days

Figure 32. Complaints by policy violated for community complaints

We also consider the internally generated complaints by the policy violated, as seen in Figure 33. The

307 internal complaints were associated with 406 allegations. As with community generated

complaints, code of conduct violations are the most common, and use of force complaints and

complaints about video and audio recording equipment are also among the most common

complaints. Typical of internal complaints in police departments, violations related to vehicle

operations are common, as are complaints about policies related to appearance and equipment

unkeep.

Figure 33. Complaints by policy violated for internal complaints

Considering the outcomes from community complaints, as seen in Figure 34, most complaints are

sustained (42.7 percent).

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Code of conduct

Use of force

Video/audio recording equipment

Other

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Code of conduct

Vehicle pursuits and operations

Use of force

Uniforms, equipment, and appearance

Property and evidence

Video and audio recording equipment

Prisoner transport

Other

Figure 34. Complaint outcomes

Figure 35 presents analysis considering complaint outcomes by the race of the complainant. Here we

limit the analysis to complaints filed by only Black and white community members, since only two

complaints were filed during this time period by individuals with a known race. In reviewing the

relative proportions, white community members are more likely to have their complaint sustained

compared with Black community members, though this difference is not statistically significant

(p=0.566, Fisher’s exact test). It is also difficult to determine whether the difference is specifically due

to the race of the complainant as opposed to other factors about the complaint, and, unfortunately,

the data do not support more detailed quantitative analysis.

Figure 35. Complaint outcomes by the race of the complainant

Sustained Not sustained Unfounded Exonerated Other

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Sustained Not sustained Unfounded Exonerated Other

White Black

Personnel demographics

At the time of this assessment, NCPD employed 390 personnel, of which 332 are sworn officers and

59 are civilian personnel. Based on the 2019 Census Bureau population estimates for North

Charleston, this represents a ratio of 2.9 sworn officers per 1,000 community members, which is

above the national average of 2.4 sworn officers per 1,000 community members as of 2019.

As seen in Figure 36, department personnel do not closely represent community demographics in

North Charleston, particularly when considering sworn personnel only. While civilian personnel are

53 percent Black, only 20 percent of sworn personnel are Black. When considering Hispanic

personnel, only 5 percent of sworn personnel are Hispanic and there is just one Hispanic civilian

personnel.

Figure 36. Personnel by race

Among sworn personnel, we also consider the racial breakdown of supervisory personnel compared

with patrol officers. As seen in Figure 37, higher ranks in the department reflect less diversity, with

80 percent of sergeants and higher being white while white personnel make up 71 percent of officers.

Federal Bureau of Investigation Crime in the United States 2019, Police Employee Data, available online:

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/police-employee-data

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Sworn Civilian Overall

White Black

Hispanic Asian

Native American/Alaska Native Two or more races

Figure 37. Personnel race by rank

NCPD does include diversity of experience among its personnel. NCPD employs officers ranging from

half a year with the department to as many as 33.7 years with the department, shown in Figure 38.

Figure 38. Personnel by tenure with NCPD

NCPD is similarly diverse in age, with sworn personnel ranging from 22 years to 64 years old. Figure

39 displays the distribution of ages in the sworn personnel.

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Sergeant and above Officers

White Black

Hispanic Asian

Native American/Alaska Native Two or more races

100

120

0 to 4.9 5 to 9.9 10 to 14.9 15 to 19.9 20 to 24.9 25 to 29.9 30 to 35

Figure 39. Personnel by age

20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 65

This page intentionally left blank.

Findings and Recommendations

We analyzed and reviewed data and information collected from listening sessions, interviews, NCPD

policies and documents, and administrative data from the NCPD. The data collection helped to inform

findings and their associated recommendations. In this section of the report, we detail our findings

and recommendations in each area of the assessment:

1. Law enforcement operations

2. Community-oriented policing practices

3. Complaints

4. Recruitment, hiring, and promotions

5. Training

6. Oversight and accountability

Law enforcement operations

Finding 1: Racial disparities are present in many of NCPD’s interactions with the community,

indicative of potential systemic, organizational, or individual bias, and these disparities are

deeply felt by the community.

In our analysis of NCPD administrative data, disparities emerged in arrests, traffic stops, field

interviews, and use of force, particularly for Black community members in North Charleston. In each

of these datasets, Black community members are represented at substantially higher rates than their

presence in the North Charleston population, and these disparities persist even when considering

other baseline measures.

These quantitative findings echo the lived experiences shared by community members with the

assessment team through community listening sessions and interviews. Community members

expressed serious concerns about disparities in law enforcement activity in North Charleston,

particularly in the form of overpolicing and overly enforcement-focused policing of Black

neighborhoods.

Taken together, these findings are suggestive of a pattern of bias in NCPD activity, which may affect

systemic, organizational, or individual behavior.

Recommendation 1.1: NCPD should conduct further analyses of their arrests, traffic stops,

field interviews, and use of force to understand any specific policies, procedures, and

practices that contribute to disparate outcomes and mitigate those impacts.

Recommendation 1.2: NCPD should proactively and pragmatically address bias as a possible

underlying cause of the observed disparities by implementing anti-bias training, policy, and

practice.

Recommendation 1.3: NCPD should ensure that anti-bias and related training topics are

incorporated regularly into in-service training and academy curriculum as well as updated

regularly with emerging and best practices, ensuring that all personnel can recognize and

mitigate their individual biases in their work.

Recommendation 1.4: NCPD should instruct and empower supervisors to actively monitor the

behavior of their supervisees for evidence of implicit or explicit bias through reviewing body-

worn camera footage and other reports, and should provide supervisors with tools to address

potential bias in NCPD employees.

Finding 2: NCPD does not collect information about traffic stops that end in citations and

warnings in the same data system and collects relatively little information about traffic stop

circumstances and characteristics.

NCPD currently documents details about traffic stops that end in citations and those that end in

warnings in two separate data systems. Without a comprehensive traffic stop data system, assessing

the degree to which disparities exist in traffic stop activity is difficult. In our analysis, we found that

Black community members are overrepresented in traffic stops that end in citations and warnings.

However, we cannot combine the two databases to produce a comprehensive understanding of traffic

stop activity in North Charleston. By collecting information about all traffic stops, NCPD will better

understand potential patterns of disparity.

In addition, NCPD collects relatively little information about traffic stops, limited primarily to the

information required by the South Carolina universal traffic ticket. By collecting additional data,

NCPD will gain a more comprehensive understanding of the entirety of officer interactions with the

public. For example, disparities can occur in traffic stops in terms of stop length, the decision to

search a person or vehicle, and arrests. NCPD is currently unable to analyze these factors. In addition,

understanding characteristics of stops such as the reason a stop took place can help NCPD

understand possible reasons for disparities, such as differential enforcement decisions (e.g., stopping

different populations more frequently for equipment or regulatory violations). By developing this

understanding, NCPD can craft policy changes and training interventions to address these disparities.

Recommendation 2.1: NCPD should implement a traffic stop data system that tracks

information about all traffic stops, regardless of outcome.

Recommendation 2.2: NCPD should collect comprehensive information about all traffic stops,

including at a minimum:

• Stop start and end time

• Stop latitude and longitude

• Reason for the stop in a closed response (dropdown menu) format

• Reason for the citation or the arrest, as applicable, in a closed response (dropdown or

checkbox menu) format

• Whether a search was performed during the stop, the type of search (e.g., consent

search, search incident to arrest, search under plain view doctrine, inventory search

during vehicle impoundment), and whether a seizure resulted from the search

Finding 3: NCPD collects relatively little information about field interviews.

NCPD’s field interview data do not include the reason the field interview was initiated nor the

outcome of the contact. This information can help NCPD understand why disparities in public contact

through field interviews might exist and to target responses appropriately to mitigate these

disparities.

Recommendation 3.1: NCPD should expand their field interview data form to collect the

reason the contact took place and the outcome of the contact, including whether a search was

conducted.

Finding 4: Community members have substantial concerns regarding NCPD’s police presence

and perceived over-enforcement of certain individuals, community groups, and

neighborhoods.

Many community members expressed fear and concern over the presence of NCPD officers. Many felt

that certain types of individuals, community groups, and neighborhoods are being over-enforced.

Some community members perceived discrepancies in enforcement tactics in some neighborhoods

and speculated that this could be causing higher crime rates in those areas due to increased reporting

and awareness, as opposed to actual differences in criminal activity. Community members also

expressed concerns about seeing increased police presence in their neighborhoods at certain times

without explanation.

Community members also expressed their concerns about pretextual traffic stops and reports of

officers pulling individuals over based on race-related matters and circumstances. Some community

members shared stories of being pulled over by NCPD officers simply because of the neighborhood

they were in, the type of car they were driving, using low-level offenses as the reason for the stop.

One community member even noted that once they bought a newer car, they no longer experienced

being pulled over by NCPD officers. Another community member noted being pulled over every time

they entered or exited their neighborhood. Community members find these stops disparaging, and

NCPD personnel should investigate why they occur in detail. NCPD’s practices should contribute to a

positive image of public safety and not be intimidating to community members or create an

unwelcoming environment.

Recommendation 4.1: NCPD should review in detail all traffic stops initiated because of minor

traffic violations to ensure that these stops are not being conducted in a manner that is

disparaging for certain members of the North Charleston community.

Recommendation 4.2: NCPD should ensure that the community understands deployment

decisions and the purpose of certain patrol activities, particularly the use of increased patrols

in neighborhoods after particular incidents or crimes.

Finding 5: Policy O-10: Patrol Procedure addresses the goals of patrol deployment, but does

not provide specific strategies to respond to community concerns.

This policy states that NCPD must “ensure officers are deployed to repress and prevent crime,

apprehend offenders, and investigate offenses.” This policy also states that officers are assigned

based on minimum staffing requirements, daily crime statistics, and daily “Plans for the Day.”

Although these functions are critical parts of an officer’s duties and responsibilities, the policy does

not reference community concerns such as the desire to better know their officers and to problem-

solve with their officers. NCPD may benefit from adding beat integrity to their policy—a problem

analysis approach to addressing crime and disorder.

Recommendation 5.1: This policy should focus more on how to address the above duties and

responsibilities, such as engaging all community members as active participants in identifying

solutions to problems and better sharing information.

Recommendation 5.2: Officers should be assigned to specific geographic areas for a sustained

period of time in order to become familiar with residents, businesses, and other community

stakeholders.

Recommendation 5.3: This policy should emphasize the importance of building relationships

between police and community groups such as faith-based organizations, tenant councils,

business groups, local government agencies, social service providers, schools, and local

businesses.

Recommendation 5.4: This policy should make the police more accountable to the community

and tackle the root causes of neighborhood crime in a manner that builds trust in law

enforcement.

Finding 6: Policy O-42: Domestic Violence instructs NCPD officers to use a Domestic Violence

Risk assessment when handling domestic violence cases.

A Domestic Violence Risk assessment helps identify victims of domestic violence who are at the

highest risk of being seriously injured or killed by their intimate partners. Although not all agencies

are using this specific tool, use of this assessment is in line with emerging best practices across the

country.

Recommendation 6.1: NCPD should continue to use the Domestic Violence Risk assessment

tool.

Finding 7: Community members have concerns about the processes NCPD uses when

responding to and investigating domestic violence calls for service.

Community members expressed concerns that NCPD officers show little regard and care for victims

of domestic violence crimes. They even suggest that there are poor investigative practices and follow-

up, along with a lack of sensitivity and trauma-informed care for the victims. They questioned

whether NCPD officers are trained to best handle these often challenging situations. Individuals in

the community felt that responding officers often have not recognized the trauma experienced by the

parties involved, known how to properly de-escalate the situation, taken appropriate assessments of

the environment, or taken appropriate remedial steps.

Community members also expressed in interviews, listening sessions, and the meeting held by

various organizations in the North Charleston community that they would like to see mental health

professionals responding to domestic violence calls for service. Community members feel that an

officer is not always the appropriate individual to respond to calls (though an officer should be the

primary respondent for some calls).

Recommendation 7.1: NCPD should conduct a review of their protocols and training regarding

officer response to domestic violence calls for service and other domestic triggered calls, and

identify what improvements are needed.

Recommendation 7.2: After NCPD conducts their review of protocols and training, the

department should create a plan to make improvements and address issues uncovered during

the review regarding these calls for service.

Recommendation 7.3: NCPD should consider having mental health professionals respond to

domestic violence calls for service alongside NCPD personnel, as appropriate.

Finding 8: Community members expressed concerns about NCPD officers’ adherence to policy

for investigations of crimes.

Community members voiced concerns that officers do not properly investigate crimes and blatantly

dismiss protocol. For all criminal investigations, NCPD officers are operating under Policy O-11:

Criminal Investigations and should adhere to all protocols in that policy.

Recommendation 8.1: NCPD should review Policy O-11: Criminal Investigations to ensure that

all officers are properly investigating crimes and abiding by protocols established by the Chief

of Police.

Finding 9: Policy O-27: Canine Unit is a detailed policy covering all required elements, but it

lacks detail for special situations.

The policy covers canine use for searches, tracking, crowd control, apprehensions, public relations

demonstrations, and other duties as assigned, as well as canine handler responsibilities and

procedures. Based on best practices, NCPD could consider more restrictions on canine use for crowd

control purposes.

Recommendation 9.1: NCPD should establish more restrictions on canine use for crowd

control purposes.

Finding 10: Policy A-14: Allocation & Distribution of Personnel ensures that NCPD completes

workload assessments and specialized unit reports on a regular basis.

The Human Resource Analysis Committee completes and submits to the Chief of Police workload

assessments triennially. NCPD also completes yearly reports for each specialized unit that includes

statistics regarding the productivity of the function and justification for the continuation of the

specialized unit. These reports are essential to understanding NCPD’s workload and staffing needs to

improve the department’s efficiency.

Recommendation 10.1: NCPD should continue creating yearly reports for each specialized

unit.

Finding 11: NCPD provides explicit guidance on the use of body-worn cameras (BWCs) in the

specific video and audio recording policy, but does not always specify their use in other

related policies.

In Policy O-14: Traffic Enforcement, Section G, there is no mention of officers turning on their BWCs.

Capturing stops in their entirety is crucial; therefore, we suggest having officers engage their BWCs

as soon as they initiate a traffic stop. Additionally, Policy O-29: Community Service Officers does not

note whether or not community service officers (CSOs) wear BWCs. When the CSOs are interacting

with the community, it would be beneficial for them to wear BWCs to capture footage that can protect

both the community and the officers.

Recommendation 11.1: Policy O-14: Traffic Enforcement should state in Section G when

officers are to turn on their BWCs.

Recommendation 11.2: Policy O-29: Community Service Officers should note whether or not

CSOs should wear BWCs. If CSOs wear BWCs, NCPD should detail the circumstances under

which officers should activate and deactivate their cameras, along with guidelines on the use

of the technology.

Finding 12: Policy does not currently stipulate that the Chief will use his/her discretion to

make BWC footage public after a critical incident.

Policy O-41: Video and Audio Recording Equipment is explicit in allowing Professional Standards

access to all videos, requiring that BWCs be worn by officers working off-duty employment, and

requiring that lieutenants and below wear BWCs. However, it does not address the Chief’s discretion

to release BWC footage, as the only department member authorized to do so. Additionally, although

Policy A-39: Public Information reflects state law relative to releasing information regarding an

investigation to the public, the policy does not explicitly address the frequent issue of the extent of a

Chief’s discretion and limitations in decision-making regarding the release of information concerning

a critical incident. Although Chief Burgess is willing and has released video after incidents in the past,

these actions should be stipulated explicitly in policy.

Recommendation 12.1: Policy O-41: Video and Audio Recording Equipment should stipulate in

policy that for critical incidents involving use of force by officers, the Chief will exercise

his/her discretion to provide BWC footage of the incident to the general public as soon as

allowed within state law.

Recommendation 12.2: Policy A-39: Public Information should state that the Chief and district

attorney will collaborate on guidelines regarding the release of BWC footage and other

information after a critical incident involving the death or life-threatening injury of a resident

resulting from a police encounter, and will make this guidance public.

Finding 13: NCPD’s School Resource Officer Program has room to improve to better serve the

youth of the North Charleston community.

As mentioned above in our review of the law enforcement personnel interviews, NCPD SROs are not

always given many opportunities by the school districts to meaningfully engage with the youth in the

school districts they serve. They do not frequently provide educational or engagement programs and

opportunities to students. SROs did express their desire to more meaningfully engage with youth;

however, community members must also know what engagements these officers are having with

their children. SROs should not be acting in an enforcement manner with youth, but rather in a

mentorship role to provide youth with a clear perspective on policing, expectations about interacting

with police, and opportunities to ask questions and inquire about policing practices. It is important

to note that NCPD is involved with diversion programs in the Schools called Blue Print and Audacity.

These programs have been in practice with NCPD for many years. However, the community is not

fully aware of these programs and interactions with their youth in the school districts and how SROs

can help, educate, and benefit youth of North Charleston. Additionally, some SROs are coaches for the

COPS Athletic League, where they are given opportunities to engage with youth in a different

capacity. The community also expressed their desire for SROs to have opportunities to engage youth

while the SROs are not in uniform to help make law enforcement seem less intimidating.

Recommendation 13.1: NCPD should review Policy O-13: School Resource Officer Section to

ensure that the program results in meaningful engagement with youth. Parents in the

community should also receive details about this program if their children will be engaging

with an officer.

Recommendation 13.2: SROs should hold sessions with youth and their parents to ensure they

understand SRO roles and responsibilities in the schools and have the opportunity to ask

questions.

Recommendation 13.3: NCPD should create opportunities for youth to engage with SROs while

the SROs are not in uniform.

Finding 14: NCPD lacks proper translation services and information for Spanish-speaking

residents in the community.

Throughout the assessment, we found that NCPD officers have insufficient resources for speaking

with Spanish-speaking community members. Hispanic community members have called for better

communication about law enforcement processes and want NCPD to understand how the lack of

resources affects Spanish-speaking immigrants or undocumented community members in particular.

A community member expressed that when officers cannot communicate with them, details are lost

in translation. As a result, officers may struggle to identify victims and collect proper information

about the incident. These types of data collection are crucial to the integrity of NCPD’s investigations

and should be analyzed further. Community members also expressed that if an NCPD officer does not

speak Spanish, bystanders and victims—including minors—have sometimes served as translators.

Additionally, certain members of the community are called upon any hour of the day by officers

requesting translation assistance.

NCPD has taken notable strides in this area already, including its current collaboration with the

University of Puerto Rico, through which NCPD is working to hire and train at least 10 individuals to

serve as bilingual officers. These officers will go through the Academy and be hired by NCPD to fulfill

the community’s needs in this area.

Recommendation 14.1: NCPD should hire bilingual professionals and ASL interpreters to

cover each shift to ensure that officers in the field always have translation support. Although

NCPD uses language translation services that are delivered by phone, they should ensure that

all officers know how to use the services until it can hire individuals to report in the field with

NCPD officers.

Community-oriented policing practices

Finding 15: Although NCPD emphasizes community-oriented policing practices, not all

officers in the department have embraced the importance of community policing.

Chief Burgess has a strong commitment to community policing; however, not all officers have shared

the same sentiment. Many community policing duties seem to fall on SROs, CSOs, and NROs.

Community policing should be widespread across the department and should be meaningful with the

community. Although the department’s strategic plan does include components of community

policing, most officers we interviewed were unaware of the plan or of the elements of community

policing.

Many community members have noted their desire for NCPD to more meaningfully engage; however,

some have also noted that NCPD is currently involved in many non-enforcement activities. Some

activities include participation in community events, mentorship opportunities with youth, as well

as youth sports coaching. NCPD must move beyond typical community engagement events like Coffee

with a Cop and general community events and begin developing a strategic plan regarding how they

will interact with each segment of the community. When community concerns are brought to the

attention of NCPD personnel, they must also be responsive to those concerns. Community members

expressed that when their specific community is concerned about an issue (e.g., domestic violence),

NROs should focus on recent incidents related to that issue, as well as the NCPD response, during

report-outs at community meetings.

Recommendation 15.1: NCPD should ensure that all officers are fully embrace and understand

the principles of community policing.

Recommendation 15.2: NCPD should ensure that all officers are aware of NCPD’s strategic

plan’s components and can verbally discuss those components with community members

when asked.

Recommendation 15.3: Although NCPD attends many community events, they should move

beyond typical community engagement events and work to respond to the community’s

specific needs and concerns.

Finding 16: NCPD has an evolving community outreach and engagement strategy.

NCPD sponsors or serves as a partner in several significant programs such as community roll calls,

RECAP, a coalition of faith-based programs, walking groups that enable community stakeholders to

provide assistance to community members, the CAPS program, the Citizens Public Safety Academy,

and NCPD Kids and Cops through which 100 youth are treated to breakfast and holiday shopping.

NCPD supports a range of other events including food distribution, after-school programming, cadet

post, and Toys for Tots. Although these programs were not as active during COVID-19, the programs

were very active in 2019.

Additionally, NCPD attempts to enhance police-community connections through the Immersion

Program. This program meets three times a year to provide diversity training, inform participants

about their heritage, and perform community service work. Community members are familiar with

the Immersion Program, and it has been a great addition to NCPD’s community policing practices.

NCPD has offered offers training scholarships to a limited number of officers to attend the Racial

Equity Institute.

To build trust and enhance relations in marginalized communities, NCPD must expand their reach

through the wide array of community programming they currently have. Currently, NCPD has few

mechanisms for ongoing and substantive community input. For example, there is no advisory body

that routinely consults with NCPD leadership concerning policing policies, strategies, and tactics.

Recommendation 16.1: NCPD should analyze their current community policing strategy and

determine what programming is beneficial to building trust and enhancing relations with the

North Charleston community.

Recommendation 16.2: NCPD should hold community meetings to understand what

programming the community would like to see expanded and what programming they would

like added to NCPD’s strategic plan.

Recommendation 16.3: NCPD should consider whether hiring a Hispanic and Latinx

Community Liaison and an African American Community Liaison would benefit their

community. If the department determines it will, they should hire liaisons who will directly

serve those historically marginalized communities.

Finding 17: NCPD operates community engagement teams through which officers are assigned

to each of NCPD’s three Bureaus.

The community engagement officers are expected to attend community meetings (including

meetings hosted by various neighborhood associations), provide information about NCPD initiatives

and activities, report out on crime data, and field community concerns about crime in their

neighborhoods. The role of these officers is to forward concerns to the various Bureaus for follow-up

and response from the department. Community stakeholders seemed to be generally appreciative of

the role of these officers and their engagement efforts. However, NCPD personnel expressed that

these teams are generally not fully staffed. The community engagement teams must be fully staffed

to ensure that all of the department’s community policing goals are met each year. Additionally, the

teams report to one of the three Bureau Chiefs and do not directly report to the Chief of Police or his

designee. The Bureau Chiefs should therefore communicate all information to the Chief or his

designee because addressing community concerns is crucial to building trust in the community.

Recommendation 17.1: NCPD should ensure that all community engagement teams are fully

staffed and have the appropriate number of personnel in each Bureau.

Recommendation 17.2: All Bureau Chiefs must report out to the Chief or his designee on

community concerns brought to their attention by the community engagement team. These

concerns should be addressed in a timely manner.

Recommendation 17.3: NROs should be made aware of community concerns through the

community engagement team and should be responsive to community concerns when they

report out at community meetings.

Recommendation 17.4: NCPD should consult with community stakeholders to discuss ways to

expand the roles of community engagement officers, such as problem-solving with community

members about community safety issues and paying closer attention to the challenges and

needs of marginalized communities.

Recommendation 17.5: NROs and CSOs should develop specific written problem solving

strategies and plans to address community concerns based on short and long term goals for

various communities. These plans should be inclusive of various elements and units within

the department.

Finding 18: Some community members expressed their belief that NCPD officers lack respect

for them and the North Charleston community.

Although some NCPD personnel expressed that they feel the department has a good relationship with

the community, some community members felt that officers have shown a lack of respect for them

and their community. Community members cited seeing officers driving above speed limits,

refraining from leaving their cars to interact with community members, and blaming certain

individuals for crimes based on disparaging factors. The community seems to have lingering mistrust

of NCPD based on behaviors in the past; therefore, NCPD should work to improve these relations and

build trust with the community members they serve.

Recommendation 18.1: NCPD should ensure that all officers show respect for the community

and do not violate policy by driving over speed limits. Officers should also take opportunities

to engage with community members.

Recommendation 18.2: NCPD should identify situations for which foot patrol is appropriate

so that officers can leave their vehicles and engage the community in a less intimidating way.

Recommendation 18.3: NCPD should strongly encourage officers to spend more time looking

for non-engagement opportunities with community residents when they are not responding

to calls for service. The department should seek ways to track and measure such encounters.

Recommendation 18.4: All NCPD personnel should be trained on the elements of procedural

justice.

Finding 19: NCPD should pursue opportunities to involve the North Charleston community in

developing policies and procedures, which the North Charleston community expressed a

strong desire for.

NCPD has developed policy that is tailored to the needs of the North Charleston community and that

details NCPD’s goals, roles, and responsibilities. However, NCPD policy currently does not call for

involving the community in department operations, such as seeking community advisement and

input on policy development. Currently, policy language regarding community engagement or

involvement is vague and fails to mandate any ongoing advisory bodies or mechanisms to solicit

ongoing community input. NCPD could also involve the community in drafting policy revisions, since

policy development is currently conducted by certain departmental members who have expertise in

the specific area, such as the accreditation manager, executive staff, and Chief of Police.

To help the community become more involved in these conversations, NCPD would benefit from

interacting with the community in more frequent community meetings. Community meetings allow

members to bring concerns and questions to Chief Burgess and his officers and to develop a dialogue

with them. Beginning to involve the community in more conversations with the department is crucial.

Recommendation 19.1: NCPD should create a separate policy for community involvement that

establishes Advisory Groups in each of the three Bureau Command areas. The policy should

clearly stipulate the Advisory Group role, including how members are selected and given a

voice in each Bureau regarding police policy and practices.

Recommendation 19.2: NCPD should include the community in drafting or commenting on

certain draft policies and policy revisions.

Recommendation 19.3: NCPD should hold monthly community meetings that allow

community members to bring concerns, ask questions, and have a dialogue with the

department.

Finding 20: Members of the North Charleston community have expressed a desire to better

understand the roles, responsibilities, policies, practices, and operations of the department.

In listening sessions and interviews, many community members expressed their desire to better

understand the department’s daily activities. This sentiment was especially prominent among

Hispanic and Latinx community members, who expressed a desire to understand policing practices

that result in traffic stops. They want to understand why NCPD asks for identification and asks certain

questions. Having answers to these questions would help to alleviate some fear that community

members are experiencing with NCPD. It is evident that the community would benefit from education

on NCPD’s policies, practices, and operations, which would increase community understanding of the

department and enhance community trust. NCPD currently holds their CompStat meetings in a forum

that is open to the public. These meetings are a great opportunity to help community members

understand what is currently happening in their neighborhoods and to explain the rationale for

increased police presence when needed.

Recommendation 20.1: NCPD should hold community sessions that allow community

members to listen to the department discuss various policing practices (e.g., traffic stops,

criminal investigations, the complaint process, driving laws, wellness checks, and the

importance of licenses, insurance, and registration).

Recommendation 20.2: NCPD should develop a webpage on their department’s website that

includes their policies, details state driving laws, and includes basic information about what

a community member can expect when being pulled over or investigated for a crime.

Recommendation 20.3: NCPD should consider live streaming the CompStat meetings for

community members who are unable to attend.

Finding 21: Some members of the Hispanic and Latinx communities feel that communication

is lacking and that their sentiments and concerns are not considered important.

Although some areas of the Hispanic and Latinx communities experience good communication and

outreach from NCPD, many community members outside of those specific groups feel that the

department lacks concern for their communities. If NCPD documents and information are not

available in Spanish, many community members will not be able to interpret NCPD’s messaging.

Some feel that certain community leaders have taken on roles that the police are supposed to have;

therefore, they trust their leaders rather than NCPD. Additionally, community members reported

varying experiences based on their supposed immigration status. Some community members believe

that many officers simply choose not to interact with individuals in the community who are

undocumented. All of these issues lead to mistrust of NCPD within the Hispanic and Latinx

communities, which NCPD should address immediately.

Recommendation 21.1: NCPD should hold community sessions that allow community

members to listen to the department discuss various policing practices (e.g., traffic stops,

criminal investigations, the complaint process, and driving laws).

Recommendation 21.2: NCPD should diversify and expand the number of Hispanic and Latinx

community leaders they rely on in the community.

Recommendation 21.3: NCPD should publish more materials for the public in Spanish.

Recommendation 21.4: NCPD should develop community engagement strategies specific to

the Hispanic and Latinx communities, and consider establishing a Hispanic Liaison officer

position.

Finding 22: Officers who are familiar with certain neighborhoods in North Charleston are not

always the officers working in and interacting with those communities.

Community members expressed that officers who are familiar with areas in the community are not

currently the officers working in and interacting with those communities. For example, officers who

are bilingual should be interacting with communities that need their bilingual skills. In addition,

officers who are familiar with the economic situations of these areas and the types of behaviors that

commonly occur there should be interacting with those neighborhoods. Community members would

also prefer that the officers who attend community events are actually the officers interacting with

their neighborhoods. By assessing the locations that officers are currently working in, NCPD could

help build the community’s trust by demonstrating that the department is responsive to their desire

for familiar faces who are aware of their circumstances.

Recommendation 22.1: NCPD should ensure that officers are placed in neighborhoods where

they can promote safety, increase efficiency, and build trust.

Finding 23: NCPD’s current programs for youth are positive and garner high participation in

the community.

Many community stakeholders feel that the current programs for youth in their community are

positive attributes of the NCPD. Many provided positive feedback regarding the COPS Athletic

League. NCPD personnel also expressed their admiration for this program and desires to continue

expanding its programming. Many stakeholders suggested that it would be helpful to expand the

program beyond just athletic programming. They would like to see the program targeting at-risk

youth. These expansions could help redirect lives in the community and build community trust.

Recommendation 23.1: NCPD should continue the COPS Athletic League, while exploring

various expansion options. These expansion options should include pursuing non-athletic

programming and specific programming for at-risk youth.

Recommendation 23.2: NCPD should add components to its current COPS Athletic League,

such as more counseling, tutoring, and other services, through partnerships with other city

agencies and community nonprofit organizations.

Finding 24: Policy O-01: Crime Prevention and Community Involvement currently calls for

NCPD to survey citizens' attitudes and opinions every three years.

The policy calls for community involvement to be factored into officers’ yearly evaluations. However,

NCPD gathers information on community sentiment only every three years. Gathering this

information annually would allow NCPD to better understand their community’s attitudes and

opinions and make operational changes as necessary.

Recommendation 24.1: NCPD should survey citizens' attitudes and opinions annually rather

than every three years. This change should be reflected in Policy O-01: Crime Prevention and

Community Involvement.

Finding 25: Policy O-29: Community Service Officers does not sufficiently address CSO efforts

to engage with the community.

This policy provides a standard approach to the use of civilian CSOs, but does not sufficiently

emphasize engaging communities and neighborhoods and supporting programing for at-risk youth

and young adults. NCPD must detail efforts to meaningfully engage with the youth community in this

policy and ensure that these efforts are occurring in practice.

Recommendation 25.1: NCPD should expand and more clearly define the role of CSOs in efforts

to enhance community engagement.

Finding 26: Policy O-13: School Resource Officers does not comprehensively detail training that

would benefit SROs and does not describes community involvement in selecting and

monitoring SROs.

The policy reflects National Association of School Resource Officers (NASRO) standards and details

the roles and responsibilities of SROs; however, it does not cover qualifications adequately. The

selection process is up to NCPD command staff, with no school consultation, and the policy does not

require that NCPD regularly report SRO enforcement and non-enforcement activity. The policy also

currently states in Section C that officers assigned to this section will receive training as a SRO within

the first year of their assignment. It is important that these officers receive that training early in their

assignment rather than waiting the entire year before receiving it.

Recommendation 26.1: NCPD should expand the SRO policy and include greater community

and school consultation in the selection process, detail more extensive training requirements,

specify program reporting requirements, and detail expectations for interfacing with school

staff including school security.

Recommendation 26.2: NCPD should revise this policy so that the selected officers receive SRO

training as soon as possible, earlier than one year into the assignment.

Finding 27: Policy A-08: Diversion Programs describes each diversion program, but does not

detail the role that NCPD plays.

This policy describes the NCPD diversion programs, but does not indicate how officers make referrals

to these programs, nor any specialized training that officers might receive. This policy is vague and

should be detailed so that each officer knows their role within each program. Additionally, this policy

states that officers are assigned to youth involved in the Youth Court program as mentors and

advisors. This policy does not state whether these officers are trained on juvenile justice issues or on

engagement with youth.

Recommendation 27.1: NCPD should clearly detail what the officer’s role is in referrals to each

of the programs listed in the policy.

Recommendation 27.2: NCPD’s diversion policies and programs should be publicized widely

so community members are aware of the programs, particularly those available for youth.

Recommendation 27.3: NCPD should ensure that all officers appointed as mentors/advisors

to the students involved in the Youth Court program receive specialized training aimed at

juvenile justice issues.

Finding 28: Policy O-25: Bicycle Patrols details the purpose, duties, and responsibilities of the

bicycle patrols, but does not indicate possible community engagement uses.

NCPD policy does not cover the possibility of officers using bicycle patrols to engage their community.

Bicycle patrols provide a unique opportunity for officers to engage with community members outside

of vehicle patrols and enforcement activities. NCPD would benefit from looking into the possibility of

using bicycle patrols in certain areas of the community, which may lessen the fear that some

community members have expressed.

Recommendation 28.1: NCPD should expand its bicycle patrols as part of its community

outreach efforts and provide more specific guidance and training on how best to use the

patrols to expand community contacts and outreach.

Complaints

Finding 29: Many community members have not filed complaints even after negative

experiences with NCPD personnel, and the complaint process is confusing to most.

The complaints process is confusing to community members and needs to be more accessible. Once

a complaint is filed, community members expressed not receiving follow-up regarding the status of

their case. Some community members even expressed instances in which the BWC recordings and

reports of an incident could not be found when the complaints investigation was initiated. Although

several community members have stories of negative interactions with NCPD, many of them have

never filed formal complaints. Some expressed not knowing how to file a complaint, while others

expressed that the process is not worth the trouble. Some community members noted that resolving

their complaints took an extremely long time, and some were not resolved at all. They also expressed

concerns about having to provide their name and address when making a complaint. Some

community members reported feeling intimidated by officers after filing a complaint, such as officers

driving by their houses multiple times after filing.

Additionally, many community members make complaints by directly contacting either Chief

Burgess or members of NCPD whom they know. To address this, NCPD should provide multiple

avenues to receive complaints. These avenues should include but not be limited to a hotline, a central

point of contact for physical complaints, and an avenue independent of the City and police

department for anonymous complaints. Community leaders who have made complaints directly to

the department expressed concern that their complaints are only addressed because of their status

within the community. They expressed their desire for all community members to receive the same

treatment and assistance that they have been receiving.

Recommendation 29.1: NCPD should make the complaints process accessible to all

community members. Community members should have multiple avenues to make a

complaint, and the community should receive education on the complaints process. If an

informal complaint is made to an officer or any member of the department, including the Chief

of Police, that complaint must be entered into the formal complaint system.

Recommendation 29.2: NCPD should modify the current complaint process to ensure that

residents are updated on the status of their complaints, and should consider involving citizens

in the review of complaints.

Recommendation 29.3: NCPD should better publicize an anonymous complaint option to

allow community members to give genuine feedback without fearing retaliation or

intimidation. Recommendation 29.4: NCPD should provide a reference number for all

anonymous complaints to ensure there is an avenue for the community member to follow up

on the status of their complaint.

Recommendation 29.5: NCPD should revise their current complaint form on the department’s

website to separate the complaint and compliment forms that are currently combined.

Finding 30: NCPD officers are not always notified if a complaint is lodged against them.

An officer could have a complaint lodged against them and never be informed that the complaint was

filed. If complaints are not sustained, some officers are never informed. Additionally, officers noted

that not all complaints are directly referred to OPS. Having all complaints referred to OPS is important

to ensure the integrity and accountability of the complaints process.

Recommendation 30.1: NCPD should notify all officers if a complaint is lodged against them.

These updates should be given at each step in the investigation process.

Recommendation 30.2: NCPD should ensure that all complaints are directly referred to OPS

rather than having supervisors handle complaints without the assistance of those who are

trained specifically in that area.

Finding 31: Some community members lack confidence that NCPD holds officers accountable

for complaints against them.

In many instances, community members feel that NCPD officers have not been held accountable. As

a result, community leaders expressed that many residents do not file complaints formally, preferring

to take their concerns to community members who they feel have more access to the NCPD

leadership. All community members should feel that they can make a complaint and that they do not

require a certain foothold in society for their complaint to be investigated and the officer held

accountable. It is important for NCPD to understand how they can improve their complaint process

through community feedback.

Recommendation 31.1: NCPD should ensure community members are aware of the outcome

of complaints and that there is a procedure in place for appeal if complainants are concerned

about the complaint adjudication or outcome for the officer.

Recommendation 31.2: NCPD should publicly publish an annual analysis of all citizen

complaints for transparency and use this analysis to identify patterns and trends, policy

changes, or training opportunities.

Recommendation 31.3: NCPD should develop a feedback mechanism for community members

to provide their satisfaction regarding the complaints process. This could be done through a

brief survey that they can fill out online, over the phone, or in person. These results should be

analyzed and publicized every six months to ensure the process is meeting the needs of the

community.

Finding 32: Policy A-25: Performance Improvement/Disciplinary Procedures lacks specificity

on where complaints are sent for investigation.

This policy does not designate which types of complaints are handled by Professional Standards or

by an officer’s unit. Instead, the Chief decides who will handle the complaint. Without clear

designation of responsibility to handle different types of complaints, investigations may be delayed,

and not all received complaints may be documented. Community members shared their concerns

about a lack of follow-up on complaints, a lack of information given to them, and lengthy delays in

the investigations process. NCPD should ensure that when a complaint is received, the process begins

immediately in the correct division of the department, and should continuously keep the community

member informed of the status.

Recommendation 32.1: NCPD should designate the group or person responsible for

investigating all types of complaints.

Recommendation 32.2: NCPD should ensure that those responsible for the investigation of a

complaint are continuously updating the community member throughout the process.

Recommendation 32.3: NCPD should conduct an in-depth analysis of their complaints

investigations process and determine areas in which improvements and changes need to be

made. This should include analysis on both quantitative and qualitative outcomes of the

complaints.

Finding 33: Policy A-25: Performance Improvement/Disciplinary Procedures discusses how a

complaint moves through the chain of command but never mentions notifying the officer.

In interviews, we learned that an officer may never know about a complaint unless it is sustained and

their supervisor has to talk with them. Whether the complaint is justified or not, the employee should

be notified immediately. As stated before, this policy does not designate which types of complaints

are handled by Professional Standards or by an officer’s unit; instead, the Chief decides who will

handle it. Confusion regarding who should handle a complaint may be the reason that some officers

are not notified of a complaint lodged against them. This practice should be clearly detailed for

officers in this policy.

Recommendation 33.1: NCPD policy should state that officers must be notified when a

complaint is filed against them, using appropriate mechanisms to ensure the privacy of the

complainant.

Finding 34: Policy A-25: Performance Improvement/Disciplinary Procedures details possible

disciplinary actions, but does not require that discipline be “progressive” in steps.

NCPD ensures that supervisors capture both positive and negative aspects of officer performance

each month, which is a good practice for performance management. However, any infraction can lead

to discipline up to and including discharge if management deems it appropriate. There appears to be

no centralized process for tracking lower levels of discipline, and supervisors and division

commanders appear to house documentation.

To outline the disciplinary outcomes, NCPD should develop and use a disciplinary matrix. This matrix

outlines types of misconduct that require disciplinary measures and the default action that should be

taken for that misconduct, with allowances for adjustments based on previous incidents requiring

discipline. This type of resource would help the department ensure that all officers are treated

equitably, preventing disparities across races, ethnicities, and genders. This type of resource would

also assure the community that the department is holding all officers accountable for their actions

equitably.

Recommendation 34.1: NCPD should consider developing a disciplinary matrix to be detailed

in Policy A-25: Performance Improvement/Disciplinary Procedures.

Finding 35: Policy A-31: Early Warning Systems does not fully cover the elements to trigger an

intervention nor the range of options for intervention.

The policy clearly states its criteria thresholds for prompting some review or action by NCPD

personnel; however, these thresholds are not based in empirical best practices. The policy does not

cover the range of options available, such as coaching, peer counseling, or referral for outside

assistance.

In addition, the early intervention system policy would be an appropriate place to include monitoring

for inappropriate behavior on social media and other non-workplace settings. The community

expressed specific concern about the employment of individuals who participate in social media

groups that espouse white supremacist viewpoints. Although these affiliations would likely be

uncovered during the hiring process background checks, a mechanism for monitoring and reporting

such affiliations for current employees is currently lacking.

In addition, though a minor change, most agencies now use the term “early intervention system” to

emphasize that these systems must do more than warn—they must be used to proactively intervene

with officers before misconduct or other negative outcomes occur.

Recommendation 35.1: NCPD should overhaul its early intervention system program and

adapt industry standards, including a more complete set of actions triggering interventions

and a broader range of options available to officers including coaching, peer counseling, and

outside assistance.

Recommendation 35.2: NCPD should develop a process to uncover any white supremacist or

other extremist affiliations of department members and develop appropriate disciplinary

responses.

Recommendation 35.3: NCPD should revise their policy to use “early intervention system,” the

current preferred terminology for these systems.

Recruitment, hiring, and promotions

Finding 36: NCPD has a strong commitment to hiring and retaining personnel that reflect the

ethnic, racial, and gender composition of the North Charleston community. They have an

established plan to specifically recruit women and people of color.

NCPD has a very strong policy statement that articulates recruitment objectives including lowering

turnover rates, increasing diversity, reducing disciplinary problems, improving community relations,

and sustaining higher morale. This policy covers the staffing of and training for the recruitment

section as well as recruitment plan requirements, the handling of potential applicants, application

errors, reporting requirements, and candidate file retention. This policy also states that the Training

Division is in charge of hiring, which is not aligned to national best practices. It is important for those

specifically trained in personnel and recruiting functions to perform these tasks, which would be

beneficial to NCPD.

Additionally, community members and officers expressed how important it is for officers to be

reflective of their community in racial and ethnic demographics. Community members want to see

officers in their areas who are familiar with their community, understand the cultural nuances, and

understand the community’s history with NCPD.

Recommendation 36.1: NCPD should assess the most appropriate location administratively

for recruitment responsibilities and ensure that they are housed within a unit that can

appropriately handle them. This unit should be titled accordingly.

Recommendation 36.2: NCPD should consider expanding its Cadet Program to emphasize

increasing participation from the Black and Latinx communities and should make better use

of this program for recruiting future officers. Seek to establish partnerships within high

schools to recruit cadets and possibility of SROs developing a Public Safety Academy course.

Recommendation 36.3: NCPD should ensure they are reaching all areas of the community in

their recruitment practices.

Finding 37: NCPD has a process to ensure it does not hire individuals who have potential

department affiliations with white nationalist or terrorist groups.

Some individuals who participated in the insurrection at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, were

affiliated with various police departments across the country. Now more than ever, NCPD must

ensure that it does not hire individuals who have potential affiliations with various groups that have

exhibited behaviors that work against the security of our nation, including white nationalist or

terrorist groups. The NCPD interview process for new recruits includes questions to understand

whether individuals are partaking in events affiliated with these groups. Chief Burgess made his

intentions clear that no individuals affiliated with groups of this nature will be hired at NCPD.

Recommendation 37.1: NCPD should continue vetting new recruits for possible affiliations

with white nationalist or terrorist groups during the interview process.

Finding 38: NCPD’s hiring requirements currently do not include a mandatory residency

requirement for sworn or civilian personnel.

An important component of an officer’s job is to understand the community that they serve.

Community members expressed their desire for NCPD officers to reside in their community. Many

community members expressed that officers are sometimes unaware of certain economic conditions

and behaviors that are common within each individual community in North Charleston. By exploring

the possibility of creating a residency requirement or an incentive to reside in the community, NCPD

could help officers to create a stronger bond with the community they serve every day.

Recommendation 38.1: NCPD should review their hiring requirements and consider the

possibility of a residency requirement for civilian and sworn officers to reside in the City of

North Charleston.

Recommendation 38.2: NCPD should determine whether a residency incentive is feasible in

their department and consider creating this incentive to reside in the City of North Charleston.

Finding 39: NCPD’s interview portion of the promotion process is lacking internal support,

and community members would like to be more involved in the process.

NCPD’s interview process for promotions currently includes a panel comprised of captains through

command staff. As expressed above, NCPD officers feel the interview panel could benefit from outside

individuals. Some officers would like to see NCPD revamp the interview panel to include community

leaders and members, as well as supervisors from similar policing agencies. Adding outside, un-

biased individuals would help to alleviate the concerns of bias and favoritism that some officers

believe has occurred. Others also suggested that promotion process rules have been changed

specifically to benefit certain individuals.

Although the interview panel is specifically for promotions, NCPD should consider how community

members can also be involved in the hiring process.

Recommendation 39.1: NCPD should revamp the promotion panel to include the following

individuals:

• Community leaders

• Community members

• Supervisors from similar policing agencies

Recommendation 39.2: NCPD should explore how they can similarly include community

members and leaders in the officer hiring process.

Finding 40: Policy A-28: Selection Process describes the qualities that NCPD uses to hire

officers, but could be expanded to include qualities that better describe the ideal NCPD officer.

The policy covers most aspects of the selection process, including the typical selection elements of a

background investigation, a physical fitness evaluation, aptitude tests, psychological tests, and

interviews. However, the described process may not place sufficient weight on the skill sets or

personal characteristics needed in policing today, such as communication skills, empathy, open-

mindedness, and community-mindedness. The policy does not refer to diversity within the

department, which is a concern of the North Charleston community and many officers at NCPD.

Additionally, there is a lack of flexibility in the re-application process, which may particularly affect

applicants of color. The policy does not depict providing help and support to applicants, and there is

no citizen involvement in the selection process.

Recommendation 40.1: NCPD should revise its selection process by placing greater emphasis

on the skill sets or personal characteristics needed in policing today, such as communication

skills, empathy, and open-mindedness.

Recommendation 40.2: NCPD should consider incorporating community members into the

officer selection process.

Finding 41: NCPD’s performance review process policy does not mandate that officers are

rated on their community policing practices.

Although personnel expressed that they are rated on their community engagement during

performance reviews, that topic area is not included in the 11 factors they are rated on according to

Policy A-30: Performance Evaluation. It is crucial to the mission of NCPD that all officers be evaluated

on their interactions with the community and be provided with concrete steps to improve their

interactions.

Recommendation 41.1: NCPD should revise the 11 factors officers are rated on in Policy A-30:

Performance Evaluation to include “community engagement.”

Finding 42: NCPD supervisors are occasionally told by leadership to change their ratings for

their supervisees.

Some NCPD supervisors said they are not always allowed to give supervisees the ratings they feel the

officers deserve. Some supervisors noted that they have been encouraged in the past to reduce

ratings on evaluations to ensure that the officers would not receive too high of a raise, which would

strain the department’s budget. Officers should be rated on the basis of the policy in A-30:

Performance Evaluation and should not be given lower scores only to reduce their raises and keep

the budget from being strained.

Recommendation 42.1: NCPD should examine how often supervisors have been told to lower

ratings and keep individuals from receiving earned raises. If some officers have been held

back because of unwarranted low scores, NCPD should create a plan of action to rectify these

situations.

Recommendation 42.2: NCPD should ensure that no supervisors are forced to change ratings

unless it is warranted by evidence in the officer’s work.

Training

Finding 43: NCPD’s current lesson plans have strong attributes but are not sufficiently specific

to the North Charleston community.

The assessment team reviewed the following lesson plans: Active Shooter, Biased Policing, BWC, The

Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA), Critical Incident Stress

Management (CISM), Community Oriented Policing (COP), Ethics, Handling the Mentally Ill,

Negotiation, and Problem-Oriented Policing (POP). Many of these lesson plans can be improved by

customizing the training and materials to better reflect NCPD and the North Charleston community.

NCPD’s training should emphasize to personnel what the Chief of Police believes, what their

community expects, and the importance of understanding and embracing these views.

Recommendation 43.1: NCPD should review their lesson plans for the following training

topics to ensure they are specific to NCPD and the North Charleston community: Active

Shooter, Biased Policing, BWC, CALEA, CISM, COP, Ethics, Handling the Mentally Ill,

Negotiation, and Problem-Oriented Policing.

Recommendation 43.2: NCPD should customize the Community Oriented Policing lesson plans

to reflect what community policing should look like for the North Charleston community, and

to include the importance of understanding cultural issues and the diversity with their

various communities.

Recommendation 43.3: In the Ethics lesson plans, NCPD should consider revising the

“Definition of Ethics” section to be more aligned with ethical policing generally and what the

North Charleston community views as ethical policing. These lesson plans should align with

the community’s expectations regarding the ethics of their officers.

Recommendation 43.4: In the Ethics PowerPoint, NCPD should consider adding a direct

statement from Chief Burgess describing what he believes ethical policing is. This

presentation should be customized to the NCPD rather than rely on boilerplate language.

Finding 44: NCPD has a large number of lesson plans used to train officers.

Because the nature of policing is constantly evolving, NCPD’s lesson plans must remain up to date

and aligned with emerging best practices. The assessment team reviewed 10 of the 21 lesson plans

provided by NCPD and found certain areas in which NCPD could improve and ensure their trainings

are professional. Language and content in three of the training plans could be updated to make sure

the language is sensitive and factually correct.

Recommendation 44.1: NCPD should review their lesson plans on a regular basis to ensure

they remain professional in their language and content.

Recommendation 44.2: NCPD should immediately review the following training plans to

ensure the language and content is professional: Ethics, Handling the Mentally Ill, and

Problem-Oriented Policing.

Finding 45: The lesson plans on Negotiation Skills could include further detail regarding crisis

negotiations.

While reviewing the lesson plans on Negotiation Skills, the assessment team noticed a lack of

information and instruction on the importance of crisis negotiations. For example, officers must be

aware of cultural influences on communication because some cultures view police differently than

how officers may expect to be perceived. Knowing and understanding these differences is critical in

effective de-escalation techniques.

Recommendation 45.1: NCPD should revise their Negotiation Skills lesson plans to include

information and instruction on the importance of crisis negotiations. It should specifically

detail the importance of understanding and being aware of different cultural influences on

communication.

Finding 46: NCPD’s new recruits attend the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy (SCCJA)

curriculum; however, this curriculum lacks several topic areas that new recruits should

receive training in.

The SCCJA curriculum does not address several emerging and critical topics for 21st century policing

and lacks sufficient hours in certain topical areas. Currently, community policing is taught for only

two hours and use of force for six hours. Many other areas also lack sufficient hours within the eight-

week period.

Recommendation 46.1: NCPD should push for change within the SCCJA curriculum by

advocating to include more training on critical areas within 21st Century Policing.

Recommendation 46.2: NCPD should not rely solely on the SCCJA and instead should

supplement their new recruits’ training by holding their own trainings that are specific to

their community. These supplemental trainings should include more hours on the following

topics: Community policing, use of force, implicit bias and racial bias in policing, cultural

sensitivity, constitutional policing, and procedural justice.

Finding 47: NCPD’s officers have not been consistently trained in topics of critical importance

for 21

century policing.

As noted above in the report, we asked officers whether they had received training in implicit bias,

racial bias in policing, cultural sensitivity, constitutional policing, and procedural justice. The

answers from officers were not consistent, and some described trainings that they believed to be in

those topical areas but were not. The racial bias in policing training that some officers had received

did not seem to make the same impact upon everyone or be specific to the North Charleston

community, although they do receive a specific training on the history of race in North Charleston.

Additionally, NCPD is ensuring that all officers are receiving training in racial equity.

Additionally, NCPD serves a large portion of the Charleston-area Hispanic and Latinx community.

Officers lack training on basic issues specific to immigrants that are noted throughout this report.

Officers should receive training to help them better understand the issues that immigrants in their

community are facing.

Recommendation 47.1: NCPD should ensure that all officers receive new hire training and

annual refresher training on the following topic areas:

• Implicit bias

• Racial bias in policing

• Cultural sensitivity

• Constitutional policing

• Procedural justice

• History of race in America

• Immersion into the community and communities of color

• Communication skills

• Civil rights

Recommendation 47.2: NCPD should train all personnel on issues specific to the immigrants

they are serving in their community. This training should include NCPD officers and victim

advocates.

Finding 48: NCPD does not currently cover all procedural justice principles in their training

plans.

NCPD should incorporate procedural justice principles in their training that address the importance

of treating members of the community with dignity and respect, even during enforcement actions.

NCPD must also express to officers that they will be held accountable for deviations from this

practice.

Recommendation 48.1: NCPD should revise training plans to include procedural justice

principles in all aspects of their practices and operations.

Finding 49: NCPD currently brings in members of the Hispanic and Latinx communities to

speak with new police recruits.

NCPD utilizes community members from the Hispanic and Latinx communities in the training of their

new police recruits. During this training, community members explain to the officers who they are,

participate in exercises, and teach them about their culture. Unfortunately, this training is only

conducted for new recruits. Community members have called upon NCPD to expand this training to

a wider sector of the department. Additionally, this training should be expanded beyond the Hispanic

and Latinx communities. Officers must also be taught and understand the history of racism in their

community along with the experiences that Black community members have had in North

Charleston.

Recommendation 49.1: NCPD should expand their training with Hispanic and Latinx

community members to individuals in the department who have been there for more than a

year, rather than just for new police recruits.

Recommendation 49.2: NCPD should develop a training in which members of the Black

community teach police recruits and all other officers in the department about their culture,

experience, and history with racism.

Finding 50: NROs currently do not receive specialized training on crime prevention through

environmental design.

NROs could benefit from additional training that details crime prevention through environmental

design (CPTED). This additional training could help improve the ability of NROs to promote positive

change in the community and to provide valuable information to community members. CPTED

training is popular among agencies across the country to aide in improving crime prevention efforts.

Recommendation 50.1: NCPD should send all NROs to the Basic and Advanced CPTED courses.

Finding 51: Bilingual NCPD officers are not currently trained on interviewing and transcribing

statements.

Although NCPD currently has few staff who are bilingual, these staff should still be trained in

interviewing and transcribing statements from Spanish-speaking residents. Some community

members were concerned that context is sometimes missing from interviews and statements due to

improper translation.

Recommendation 51.1: NCPD should train all bilingual officers on interviewing Spanish-

speaking residents and transcribing statements.

Finding 52: Policy A-29: Biased-Based Policing could be expanded and lacks a plan to measure

the effects of implicit bias training.

NCPD’s policy A-29: Bias-Based Policing re-states the probable cause requirements to initiate

enforcement actions, emphasizing that race and other considerations should not come into play.

However, the policy does not specify how it is to be enforced, what data beyond complaints should

be used to determine whether outcomes are biased, or how to address biased outcomes when they

are uncovered. Additionally, North Charleston community members expressed interest in

participating in NCPD training so they could understand it.

Throughout interviews, it was clear that not all NCPD officers had received various trainings related

to implicit bias and cultural sensitivity. All personnel should receive these trainings, and it would be

helpful for North Charleston community members to be involved. Additionally, NCPD should conduct

analysis to understand whether its practices may be biased against races and ethnicities.

Recommendation 52.1: NCPD should expand its implicit bias training and consider co-training

NCPD officers with community stakeholders.

Recommendation 52.2: NCPD should expand cultural sensitivity training and include

community stakeholders who represent the cultural and ethnic groups comprising North

Charleston.

Recommendation 52.3: NCPD should expand the capabilities of its crime analysis unit to

conduct regular studies of policing tactics and practices to identify racially/ethnic disparate

outcomes and address them.

Finding 53: Policy O-29: Community Service Officers mandates various types of training for

CSOs, but does not include cultural sensitivity or racial bias in policing training.

NCPD policy mandates various types of tactical, legal, and operational training for CSOs, including

training on diverse communities. However, the policy does not mandate that NCPD CSOs receive

training on cultural sensitivity or racial bias, which North Charleston community members advocated

for.

Recommendation 53.1: NCPD should add cultural sensitivity and racial bias in policing

training to the list of trainings in Section D.

Oversight and accountability

Finding 54: NCPD’s officer safety and wellness programs are robust, and officers are aware of

them.

NCPD personnel expressed satisfaction with the current officer safety and wellness programs,

including health insurance, peer support, and professional counseling. NCPD personnel did not

express any concerns over their safety with respect to equipment or patrol responsibilities. NCPD

personnel noted that the department has increasingly emphasized officer safety and wellness over

recent years, and that personnel are willing to confide in and support each other.

Recommendation 54.1: NCPD should continue to support existing officer safety and wellness

programs, and explore programs that may address future needs.

Finding 55: Community members expressed high confidence in Chief Burgess and his abilities

to meaningfully engage with the community.

Throughout interviews and listening sessions, it was clear that the community has a high level of

confidence in Chief Burgess and the mission he has spearheaded in NCPD. Community members

frequently mentioned Chief Burgess as their primary contact when they need information on events,

complaints, and much more. The community sees him as a transparent, honest, and relatable person

who has worked diligently to improve the policies, practices, and operations of NCPD; however, they

have expressed many concerns with other officers in the department. Despite the great strides the

department has taken under Chief Burgess’ prevue, many are concerned that there is little awareness

of what officers are actually doing out in the field. Additionally, Chief Burgess oversees many of the

divisions in the department, which strain his time and resources. NCPD supervisors should be given

more authority for oversight and accountability of officers to ensure that each officer in the field is

accounted for and being held to the highest standards.

Recommendation 55.1: NCPD should ensure that all officers are operating under the prevue

of Policies A-01: Mission and Value Statement and A-03: Oath of Office and Code of Ethics.

Recommendation 55.2: NCPD should evaluate the oversight component within each division

to ensure that supervisors are playing an active role in oversight and holding officers

accountable for their actions.

Finding 56: NCPD is actively working to promote consistency and hold all officers accountable,

which is a major point of concern for North Charleston community members.

During listening sessions and interviews, community members from many sectors of North

Charleston called for NCPD to hold their officers accountable for their actions. One of Chief Burgess’

goals is for his department to be consistent in their work, namely knowing what they need to do in

the community and consistently aligning their practices with policy. Some community members have

little faith that NCPD would hold their officers accountable for policy violations or inappropriate

behavior, even sensing that officers protect other officers. Although some community members had

their doubts, many noted their confidence in Chief Burgess working to hold the department

accountable; however, some limitations may be beyond his control.

Recommendation 56.1: NCPD should ensure that all officers are operating under the

guidelines in the full policy manual.

Recommendation 56.2: When a policy violation or inappropriate behavior is apparent, NCPD

should take appropriate steps to mitigate the situation, hold the officer accountable, and keep

the community informed.

Finding 57: NCPD previously had an established Citizens Police Advisory Committee (CPAC);

however, this committee has disbanded.

In previous years, a community committee called the CPAC operated alongside the department. The

CPAC had many functions, including but not limited to the following: enhancing communication

between the North Charleston community and the police department, educating the community on

how to bring issues to the commission, strengthening and promoting community policing programs,

evaluating police relations with the community and recommending changes to NCPD, reviewing

complaints and disciplinary actions, and participating in recruitment, hiring, and promotions.

Although this committee was set up to work closely with the department, many community members

felt it had little power to make recommendations or hold the department accountable for their

actions. One community member even noted a situation in which an officer was allowed much more

time to explain themselves in front of the CPAC and justify their actions than the victim and their

advocate.

Sufficient oversight of the actions of NCPD officers as well as discipline are important to the

community. The community has called for a revamp of the previous committee, including the power

to review complaints and discipline, and influence policy. They also would like to see this committee

working alongside NCPD to confirm the facts of cases and provide oversight. Implementation of

community advisory boards is a complex task, one that agencies across the country are working to

manage successfully. Community advisory committees must balance various perspectives and needs,

including accountability desires from the community as well as concerns about officer privacy, and

should be representative of the community. NCPD could begin by involving such a committee in

relatively straightforward tasks like policy and training review and proceed progressively from there

to more complex engagement. Many departments across the country have established committees

that have taken different forms based on the community’s wants and needs.

Recommendation 57.1: NCPD and the City of North Charleston should revisit the concept of a

community advisory committee or board to provide input on department operations and

policy, with the goal of re-establishing such a board.

Recommendation 57.2: NCPD should determine what policies, processes, and practices the

board can immediately begin providing input on; which will require medium-term planning;

and which will be feasible in the long term, and NCPD should then communicate these

expectations to the community.

Finding 58: Policy A-03: Code and Ethics does not delineate guiding principles for officers.

The policy requires a sworn oath to the Constitution and follows the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics,

but does not include in writing the oath nor guiding principles.

Recommendation 58.1: NCPD should delineate foundational principles such as justice,

excellence, humility, and harm reduction in policy.

Finding 59: The NCPD crime analysis unit currently develops annual reports, among a range

of other duties, but has opportunities to expand responsibilities.

Policies A-16: Administrative Reporting, A-17: Planning and Research, and A-18: Crime Analysis

describe the responsibilities of the NCPD crime analysis unit, including developing internal audits

and an annual report. These policies do not include guidance for strategic planning, analyzing the

impact of proposed or pending legislation on NCPD operations or crime, or finding and pursuing

grant opportunities. Chief Burgess does create a Strategic Plan that projects the goals for five years

in the department; however, that plan was developed under his prevue and not under the Crime

Analysis Unit. Many departments include these activities as part of their planning and research

functions. Additionally, the policy does not call for analysis of various policing strategies and

practices such as deployment strategies, traffic stop analysis, use of force, and other special studies

to identify racial and other disparities in policing outcomes and publicly report findings.

Recommendation 59.1: NCPD should ensure the crime analysis unit has the in-house

capability to conduct more robust internal audits on the impacts of various policing strategies

and practices.

Recommendation 59.2: NCPD should consider enhancing the capability of the crime analysis

unit to engage in a broader range of activities including applying for federal and state grants.

Recommendation 59.3: NCPD should redirect the responsibility of the annual report

development from the crime analysis unit to the research and planning unit. If NCPD chooses

to keep the report under the crime analysis unit, the policy should clearly detail exactly how

and when the crime analysis unit should develop this report and release it to the public.

Finding 60: Policy A-19: Criminal Intelligence states that NCPD is currently not collecting

ethnicity or race information when collecting intelligence.

Collecting ethnicity and race information would allow NCPD to effectively assess whether any police

operations are leading to racial disparities or biased treatment. Collecting this type of data is an

emerging best practice for police departments to ensure they better understand their practices and

operations and are not biased against certain community groups.

Recommendation 60.1: NCPD should collect ethnicity and race information when collecting

intelligence.

Finding 61: Policy O-24: Unusual Occurrences requires more structure for conducting after-

action reports (AARs).

Conducting AARs following exercises, routine emergencies, and critical incidents provides valuable

guidelines for future incidents. All AARs should answer the basic questions: what happened, what

actions were taken, why were they taken, and what variables should be considered in future

responses. NCPD should include representatives from various segments of the department including

officers, civilians, supervisors, and managers. If the event involved other agencies, they also should

be included in the AAR process. The policy does not currently require an annual tabletop exercise

involving multi-agency participation to train for coordinated agency responses to unusual

occurrences and public safety emergencies. Such an annual exercise would help NCPD to be prepared,

and it would improve their relationships with adjacent jurisdictions that frequently work with NCPD

in unusual occurrences and public safety emergencies.

Recommendation 61.1: NCPD should revise this policy to improve the process for developing

AARs.

Recommendation 61.2: NCPD should work with adjacent jurisdictions to conduct an annual

tabletop exercise to train for a coordinated agency response to unusual occurrences and

public safety emergencies.

Finding 62: Policy A-30: Performance Evaluations does not currently include considerations of

community engagement activities, nor does NCPD consider whether an individual’s practices

result in racially or ethnically disparate outcomes.

The policy outlines a process and criteria used to make performance evaluation determinations.

However, the evaluation criteria are unclear regarding the impact of recent disciplinary actions and

do not consider community engagement metrics such as participation in community meetings and

problem-oriented policing projects. The policy also fails to include analysis of evaluations to

determine whether the criteria produce racially disparate results requiring further departmental

examination.

Recommendation 62.1: NCPD should modify its performance evaluation system to consider

community engagement metrics and disciplinary history.

Recommendation 62.2: NCPD should annually analyze the performance evaluation criteria to

determine whether they result in racially or ethnically disparate outcomes and develop

remedial strategies.

Finding 63: Policy A-15: Written Directives states that it is the employee's responsibility to

update their own policy and procedures manual every time a policy is updated.

Several NCPD employees expressed that they do not update their policy and procedures manual

when a new policy is released. Additionally, NCPD cannot monitor which employees have maintained

an updated policy and procedures manual. All officers should receive an updated manual in full each

time there is an update.

Recommendation 63.1: NCPD should develop a system to ensure all personnel are aware of

and operating from the current version of the policy and procedures manual, and move away

from reliance on printed copies of the manual for employee awareness.

Finding 64: In many police-community interactions, BWC footage has not been present after

the fact.

All officers are operating under Policy 0-41: Video and Audio Recording Equipment; however,

community members noted that footage was sometimes missing when they filed a complaint with

the department. One community member even remembered seeing the officer wearing a BWC;

however, there was no footage of the incident. Officers should be operating their BWCs efficiently

and appropriately according to policy. They should also be activating their cameras at all times noted

in the policy. Currently, supervisors review BWC footage on a monthly basis; however, this process

may need to be intensified until the department determines whether officers are violating policy or

the camera systems are not working properly.

Recommendation 64.1: NCPD should strengthen their BWC audit system to confirm the

functionality and appropriate activation of BWCs.

Finding 65: Community members believe NCPD officers have sometimes been terminated for

their actions but immediately hired in nearby jurisdictions.

Community members repeatedly listed concerns that officers who are held accountable for their

actions and terminated by NCPD are later hired in surrounding jurisdictions. Community members

would like to see NCPD document, track, and share information with the public to ensure officers are

held accountable. Although NCPD cannot prevent agencies from hiring terminated officers, they can

keep the public aware and keep their department clear of any inappropriate behavior that violates

policy or discriminates against marginalized populations.

Recommendation 65.1: NCPD should ensure they are documenting, tracking, and sharing

information regarding officers terminated because of policy violations or inappropriate

behavior.

Finding 66: Community members would like to see NCPD strengthen their practices and

operations regarding individuals experiencing mental health challenges in their community.

Throughout interviews and listening sessions, community members continuously expressed their

desire for NCPD to conduct a deep dive into their policies, practices, and operations regarding mental

health calls for service. They believe that supervisors and line-level officers could improve their

interactions with community members who are experiencing mental and emotional health

challenges, which could include post-traumatic stress disorder, alcohol and drug addiction, and much

more. Currently, NCPD employs only one mental health counselor to provide assistance to victims of

crime and to officers. Additionally, the victim advocates have high caseloads. NCPD could benefit from

expanding this department to better serve their community.

Policing nationally is working towards alternative response models to policing, including specific

response models for calls involving an individual experiencing a mental health crisis. NCPD could

benefit from examining various models to understand what model would work best for the North

Charleston community. The community’s input is crucial to the development of this model to ensure

it serves their needs and desires.

Recommendation 66.1: NCPD should expand their partnerships with local mental health

institutions and law enforcement agencies.

Recommendation 66.2: NCPD should consider expanding their current unit to include

additional mental health counselors and victim advocates.

Recommendation 66.3: NCPD should examine various alternative response models to policing

and determine what response model would best serve the community of North Charleston.

Finding 67: NCPD currently develops a five-year strategic plan, but it is not fully socialized

among department personnel and the community.

Chief Burgess creates a five-year strategic plan for NCPD that details his goals and objectives, along

with how the department will achieve these goals. In our interviews with NCPD personnel, many

officers did not know whether their department worked under a strategic plan. To address this, all

officers should understand the department’s goals and work collaboratively to reach them. As a best

practice, agencies with strategic plans should publish at least an overview summary of the plan for

the public; however, making a comprehensive plan available for public knowledge would be even

more beneficial. For a strategic plan to be robust, it must include measurable goals that are attainable

and important to the department and the community they serve.

Recommendation 67.1: NCPD should ensure all officers are aware of and familiar with the

current strategic plan.

Recommendation 67.2: NCPD should post their strategic plan publicly for review and input

from the community.

Conclusion

For the past five years, the North Charleston community has called for change in the department

following the tragic incident involving Walter Scott. Community members remain frustrated and

need to see reform within the department that will help ensure the safety and security of their

community. The community has been very involved in this assessment, including by attending

various listening sessions, agreeing to interviews, and sending written comments to the assessment

team. Common themes community members spoke of include disparate enforcement practices, a lack

of community engagement, accountability issues, training concerns, issues interacting with Spanish-

speaking populations, and personnel concerns. Although the community expressed concerns

regarding the department, they commonly felt that Chief Burgess has been a strong leader for the

department. They believe he has diligently worked to improve the relationship between the

department and the community and will continue making great strides in community policing

practices. However, more work is necessary under Chief Burgess’ leadership.

Throughout the assessment, NCPD personnel have been cooperative and responsive to our team’s

requests, showing their desire to improve their department and keep their community safe. Chief

Burgess has many goals for the department, and at the forefront is building trust and relationships

with the North Charleston community. In previous years, the community has lacked trust in the

department in response to over-policing, disparate enforcement practices, and fear of the presence

of officers. Strengthening these relationships will take time; however, the community and

department are both willing to work towards that common goal. Collaboration with City of North

Charleston officials and community members will be essential to help NCPD effectively implement

these recommendations after careful consideration. The CNA team offers 67 findings with 128

associated recommendations based on our review of documents, policies, data, interviews with

personnel and community members, listening sessions, and received public comments.

CNA believes this report reflects all information gathered and reviewed during the assessment period

and will help NCPD to strengthen their policies, practices, and operations. CNA will continue to work

with NCPD through 2022 during the implementation phase of each recommendation. During the

implementation phase, our project team will work to conduct additional analysis as needed to

supplement the current recommendations, as well as work with NCPD to recommend additional

areas of change through community input and feedback.

This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix A: Acronyms

Acronym

Definition

AARs

After-action reports

BWCs

Body-worn cameras

CAJM

Charleston Area Justice Ministry

CPAC

Citizens Police Advisory Committee

CALEA

Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement

Agencies

COP Community Oriented Policing

CSOs

Community service officers

CAP

Cops Athletic Program

CPTED

Crime prevention through environmental design

CISM

Critical Incident Stress Management

DUI

Driving under the influence

FTO

Field Training Officer

GOs

General Orders

NAACP

National Association for the Advancement of Colored

People

NASRO

National Association of School Resource Officers

NROs

Neighborhood resource officers

NCPD

North Charleston Police Department

OPS

Office of Professional Standards

PAL

Police Athletic League

POP

Problem-Oriented Policing

SROs

School resource officers

SCCJA

South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy

U visas

U nonimmigrant visas

This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix B: Resources

The assessment team suggests various supplemental resources to aid the NCPD in understanding and

implementing recommendations. Each of the resources listed are broken down and categorized by

sections with their accompanying recommendation. Please note that this list of resources that NCPD

should use in understanding and implementing each recommendation is not comprehensive.

In addition, as of October 2021, the City of North Charleston, in partnership with the City of

Charleston, will be participating in a multi-year Department of Justice training and technical

assistance program: the National Public Safety Partnership. Through the National Public Safety

Partnership, communities are given access to resources from the Department of Justice’s

programmatic and law enforcement components. The assessment team encourages NCPD to leverage

these resources to support implementation of the recommendations noted in this report.

Law enforcement operations

To support implementation of Recommendation 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, the assessment team

recommends the following resources:

Town of Niskayuna Department of Police General Order. 2020.

https://www.niskayuna.org/sites/g/files/vyhlif4781/f/uploads/10.20.2020_-

_use_of_force_policy_final_0.pdf

1115 Use of Force | Baltimore Police Department. 2019. Www.baltimorepolice.org. November 24,

2019. https://www.baltimorepolice.org/1115-use-force

To support implementation of Recommendation 2.1 and 2.2, the assessment team

recommends the following peer agencies:

Peer connection with the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office

Peer connection with the Sturgis, Michigan Police Department

To support implementation of Recommendation 4.1, the assessment team recommends the

following resources:

Bryant, K. M., Collins, G., & Villa, J. (2014). An evaluation of data-driven approaches to crime and

traffic safety in Shawnee, Kansas: 2010-2013. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Assistance, Smart

Policing Initiative.

Bryant, K. M., Collins, G. M., & White, M. D. (2015). Shawnee, Kansas, Smart Policing

Initiative. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Assistance, Smart Policing Initiative.

To support implementation of Recommendation 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4, the assessment team

recommends the following resources:

Final Report on the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department

of Justice: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2015.

Seattle Police Department. (n.d.) Mission Statement and Priorities. Retrieved from:

https://www.seattle.gov/police-manual/general-policy-information/mission-statement-and-

priorities#:~:text=The%20mission%20of%20the%20Seattle,professional%20and%20dependable

%20police%20services.&text=Professionalism%20is%20our%20hallmark%20and,%2C%20comp

etent%2C%20and%20ethical%20policing.

To support implementation of Recommendation 6.1 the assessment team recommends the

following resources:

Lethality Assessment Program: A project of the Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence. (n.d.).

Retrieved from https://www.lethalityassessmentprogram.org/

To support implementation of Recommendation 10.1, 10.2, and 63.1, the assessment team

recommends the following resources:

Body-worn camera training and technical assistance. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://bwctta.com/

Haug, S. (2020). Audits and compliance reviews can strengthen body-worn camera programs.

Retrieved from

https://bwctta.com/resources/commentary/audits-and-compliance-reviews-can-

strengthen-body-worn-camera-programs

Bureau of Justice Assistance body-worn camera toolkit. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://bja.ojp.gov/program/bwc

To support implementation of Recommendation 11.1 and 11.2, the assessment team

recommends the following resources:

President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. 2015. Final Report of the President’s Task Force on

21st Century Policing. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Retrieved

from: https://cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/taskforce_finalreport.pdf

Las Vegas, NV Police Department. (2020). Partners with the Community: Body Worn Cameras.

Retrieved from:

https://www.lvmpd.com/en-

us/InternalOversightConstitutionalPolicing/Documents/LVMPD%205-

210.01%20Body%20Worn%20Cameras%20rev.%206-20%20(1).pdf

Police Executive Research Forum. (2016). Critical issues in policing series: Guiding principles on use

of force. Washington, DC.

International Association of Chiefs of Police. (2017). National consensus policy and discussion paper

on use of force. Alexandria, VA.

“BWC FAQs Card | BWC TTA.” n.d. www.bwctta.com. Accessed 2021. https://www.bwctta.com/bwc-

faqs-card.

“A Spotlight on BWCs and Training | BWC TTA.” 2017. Bwctta.com. June 28, 2017.

https://bwctta.com/tta/webinars/spotlight-bwcs-and-training.

To support implementation of Recommendation 12.1 and 12.2, the assessment team

recommends the following resources:

National Association of School Resource Officers. (n.d.). Frequently asked questions. Retrieved from

https://www.nasro.org/faq/

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. (2019). School resource officers and school-based

policing. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. Retrieved from

https://cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/SRO_School_Policing_Factsheet.pdf

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. (n.d.). Supporting safe schools. Retrieved from

https://cops.usdoj.gov/supportingsafeschools

Community-oriented policing practices

To support implementation of Recommendation 14.1 and 14.2 the assessment team

recommends the following peer agencies and resources:

Peer connection with the West Memphis, Arkansas Police Department

Peer connection with the Indianapolis, Indiana Police Department

Diaz, A. (2019). Community policing: A patrol officer’s perspective. Washington, DC: Office of

Community Oriented Policing Services.

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. (2014). Community policing defined. Washington,

DC: US Department of Justice. Retrieved from https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-p157-

pub.pdf

President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. (2015). Final report of the President’s Task Force

on 21st Century Policing. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services. Retrieved from https://cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/taskforce_finalreport.pdf

Santos, R. (2019). Community policing: A first-line supervisor’s perspective. Washington, DC: Office

of Community Oriented Policing Services.

To support implementation of Recommendation 14.3, the assessment team recommends the

following peer agency and resource:

Peer connection with the Brooklyn Park, Michigan Police Department

CNA (2020) Precision Policing Initiative Toolkit. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services. Retrieved from https://www.cna.org/CNA_files/centers/ipr/jri/policing-

toolkit/PPI-Toolkit-FEB-27-2020.pdf

To support implementation of Recommendation 16.3, the assessment team recommends the

following resources:

International Association of Chiefs of Police. (n.d.). Community member feedback as an effective tool

for building and maintaining trust. Retrieved from

https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/243806_IACP_Community_Member_Feedback_p1.pdf

International Association of Chiefs of Police. (2015). IACP national policy summit on community-

police relations: Advancing a culture of cohesion and community trust. Retrieved from

https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/all/c/CommunityPoliceRelationsSummitReport_Jan1

5.pdf

To support implementation of Recommendation 16.4 and 16.5, the assessment team

recommends the following resources:

Eck, J. E. (2013). Assessing responses to problems: An introductory guide for police problem solvers.

Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

The Problem-Oriented Policing Center. “The SARA Model.” Available online:

https://popcenter.asu.edu/content/sara-model-0.

To support implementation of Recommendation 17.3, the assessment team recommends the

following peer agency:

Peer connection with the Camden County, New Jersey Police Department

To support implementation of Recommendation 18.1, the assessment team recommends the

following peer agencies and resources:

Peer connection with the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement

Peer connection with the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency

Peer connection with the Albuquerque, New Mexico Community Policing Councils

Peer connection with the Andalusia, Alabama Police Department

Peer connection with the Hallandale Beach, Florida quadrant safety boards

Peer connection with the Metropolitan (Washington, DC) Police Department

Peer connection with the Prince William County, Virginia Police Department

Peer connection with the Tulsa, Oklahoma Police Department

Peer connection with the West Goshen, Pennsylvania Police DepartmentCitizen Advisory Boards in

Contemporary Practice: A Practical Approach in Policing. Retrieved from:

https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/citizen-advisory-boards-in-contemporary-practice-a-

practical-approach-in-policing/?ref=7a04f5abf7ab746c4a68012838472330

Decker, Scott & Shjarback, John. (2020). Options for Increasing Civilian Oversight of the Police.

Terrill, William. (2020). “Reduce Use of Force.” In E. Maguire & C. Katz (eds.), Transforming the Police

(pp. 73-89 ). Long Grove, IL, Waveland Press.

To support implementation of Recommendation 24.1, the assessment team recommends the

following peer agency:

Peer connection with the Seattle, Washington Police Department

To support implementation of Recommendation 25.1, the assessment team recommends the

following resource:

National Association of School Resource Officer. 2018. Standards and Best Practices for School

Resource Officer Programs. Retrieved from:

https://www.nasro.org/clientuploads/About-

Mission/NASRO-Standards-and-Best-Practices.pdf

To support implementation of Recommendation 26.1, the assessment team recommends the

following peer agency:

Peer connection with the Chicago, Illinois, Police Department

Complaints

To support implementation of Recommendation 28.1, 28.2, and 28.3, the assessment team

recommends the following resource:

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. (n.d.). Standards and guidelines for internal affairs:

Recommendations from a community of practice. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

Retrieved from https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-p164-pub.pdf

To support implementation of Recommendation 29.1, 29.2, 31.1, 31.2, and 32.1, the

assessment team recommends the following resource:

Investigation of Allegations of Employee Misconduct. Alexandria, VA: International Association of

Chiefs of Police: Law Enforcement Policy Center, 2019.

To support implementation of Recommendation 33.1, the assessment team recommends the

following peer agency and resources:

Peer connection with the Sturgis, Michigan Police Department

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. (n.d.). Standards and guidelines for internal affairs:

Recommendations from a community of practice. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

Retrieved from https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-p164-pub.pdf

Stephens, D. W. (2011). Police discipline: A case for change. Washington, DC: US Department of

Justice, National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/234052.pdf

To support implementation of Recommendation 34.1, the assessment team recommends the

following peer agencies and resources:

Peer connection with the Los Angeles, California Police Department

Peer connection with the Las Vegas, Nevada Police Department

Peer connection with the New Orleans, Louisiana Police Department

Amendola, K. L., & Davis, R. C. (2019). Best practices in early intervention system implementation

and use in law enforcement agencies. Arlington, VA: National Police Foundation. Retrieved from

https://www.policefoundation.org/publication/best-practices-in-early-intervention-system-

implementation-and-use-in-law-enforcement-agencies/

Walker, S. (2003). Early intervention systems for law enforcement agencies: A planning and

management guide. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services. Retrieved from https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-w0085-pub.pdf

Worden, R. E., Harris, C., & McLean, S. J. (2014). Risk assessment and risk management in policing.

Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management.

Recruitment, hiring, and promotions

To support implementation of Recommendation 35.1, 35.2, and 35.3, the assessment team

recommends the following peer agency and resources:

Peer connection with New Orleans, Louisiana Police Department

Peer connection with Denver, CO Police Department

Peer connection with Arlington, TX Police Department

Violence Reduction Network. (2016). VRN webinar: Recruiting a diverse police department through

digital outreach. Retrieved from

https://www.nationalpublicsafetypartnership.org/clearinghouse/Resource/370

Linos. E. (2018). More than public service: A field experiment on job advertisements and diversity in

the police. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(1), 67–85.

Shjarback, J., & Todak, N. (2019). The prevalence of female representation in supervisory and

management positions in American law enforcement: An examination of organizational correlates.

Women & Criminal Justice, 29:3, 129-147. Retrieved from

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/08974454.2018.1520674?needAccess=true

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. (2009). Law enforcement recruitment toolkit.

Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. Retrieved from

https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-p171-pub.pdf

Copple, J. E. (2017). Law enforcement recruitment in the 21st century: Forum proceedings.

Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Retrieved from

https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-w0830-pub.pdf

Collaborative Reform Initiative Technical Assistance Center. (2020). Report out from Rhode Island

regional roundtable on recruitment, hiring, and retention. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

Retrieved from https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-w0899-pub.pdf

Bradley, K. (2020). Recruiting and retaining officers in small and rural agencies. Washington, DC:

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Retrieved from

https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-p426-pub.pdf

Police Executive Research Forum. (2019). The workforce crisis, and what police agencies are doing

about it. Washington, DC.

Morison, K. P. 2017. Hiring for the 21st century law enforcement officer: Challenges, opportunities,

and strategies for success. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

Todak, N. (2017). The decision to become a police officer in a legitimacy crisis. Women & Criminal

Justice, 27:4, 250-

270. Retrieved from

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/08974454.2016.1256804?needAccess=true

To support implementation of Recommendation 38.1, 39.1, and 39.2, the assessment team

recommends the following peer agencies:

Peer connection with Bexar County Sheriff’s Office

Peer connection with Cary, North Carolina Police Department

Peer connection with Fayetteville, North Carolina Police Department

Peer connection with San Antonio, Texas Police Department

Peer connection with Sturgis, Michigan Police Department

Training

To support implementation of Recommendation 42.1, the assessment team recommends the

following resources:

Bureau of Justice Assistance National Training and Technical Assistance Center:

https://bjatta.bja.ojp.gov/working-with-nttac/requestors

Brooks, Rosa. “Stop Training Police Like They're Joining the Military.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media

Company, August 12, 2020.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/police-

academies-paramilitary/612859/.

“The Reno Model. Reno Police Department’s Police Training Officer Basic Manual.” 2017:

https://renopd.com/formAdmin/content/pdfs_lib/PTO2.0%20Manual%202017.pdf

To support implementation of Recommendation 42.2, 46.1, 46.2, the assessment team

recommends the following peer agency and resources:

Peer connection with Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office

Final Report on the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department

of Justice: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2015.

MILO. “Police Implicit Bias Training | Unconscious Bias Training.” FAAC.

https://www.faac.com/milo-range/solutions/police-implicit-bias-training/

To support implementation of Recommendation 51.1, 51.2, and 51.3, the assessment team

recommends the following peer agency and resource:

Final Report on the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department

of Justice: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2015.

Peer connection with the Albuquerque, New Mexico Police Department

Oversight and accountability

To support implementation of Recommendation 56.1, the assessment team recommends the

following resources:

Stephens, D. W., Scrivner, E., & Cambareri J. F. (2018). Civilian oversight of the police in major cities.

Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

De Angelis, J., Rosenthal, R. S., & Buchner, B. (2016). Civilian oversight of law enforcement: A review

of the strengths and weaknesses of various models. OJP Diagnostic Center.

To support implementation of Recommendation 57.1, the assessment team recommends the

following resource:

Seattle, Washington Police Department. (n.d.). Code of Ethics. Retrieved from:

https://www.seattle.gov/police-manual/general-policy-information/code-of-

ethics#:~:text=As%20an%20employee%20of%20the,community%20policing%2C%20and%20ha

rm%20reduction.

To support implementation of Recommendation 58.1, 58.2, and 58.3, the assessment team

recommends the following resources and peer agencies:

Bureau of Justice Assistance grants: https://bja.ojp.gov/funding

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services grants: https://cops.usdoj.gov/grants

National Institute of Justice grants: https://nij.ojp.gov/funding

Bond, B. J., & Gabriele, K. R. (2018). Research and planning units: An innovation instrument in the

21st-century police organization. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 29(1), 67–88.

Peer connection with Lowell, Massachusetts Police Department

Peer connection with Los Angeles, California Police Department

Peer connection with Chicago, Illinois Police Department

To support implementation of Recommendation 60.1, the assessment team recommends the

following resources:

National Police Foundation. 2020. How to Conduct an After Action Review. Washington, DC: Office of

Community Oriented Policing Services.

Carleton, B., Felix, T., Jenkins, M., Rickman, S., White, R., Woodmansee, T., and Speer, M. (2020).

Philadelphia Police Department’s Response to Demonstrations and Civil Unrest. Retrieved from:

https://www.cna.org/CNA_files/PDF/IAA-2020-U-028506-Final.pdf

To support implementation of Recommendation 61.1, the assessment team recommends the

following peer agency:

Peer connection with Camden, New Jersey Police Department

To support implementation of Recommendation 63.1, the assessment team recommends the

following resource:

Wohl, E., Bryson, B., Carleton, B., & Thorkildsen, Z. (2020). Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office traffic

stops quarterly review: Supervisor review findings and recommendations. Phoenix, AZ: Maricopa

County Sheriff’s Office. Retrieved from https://www.mcsobio.org/traffic-stop-data