Let's start with the bad.

On Monday, the FBI announced that it will begin to collect and release certain policing data to the public through their Uniform Crime Reporting Program. Specifically, the program will gather data on "the number of police officers who are slain, as well as the number of justifiable homicides by police that are reported by law enforcement agencies." The program is also looking for "information about nonfatal shootings by police of civilians, including the facts and circumstances of each incident and who was involved." After this data is collected, the FBI is planning to release a report that will give details on use of force by law enforcement.

There are a number of problems with the FBI's data collection plan.

First of all, at no point during the proposed data collection does the FBI mention maintaining records of unjustified police shootings.

That's right. The FBI, presumably at least partially in response to the current movement against police brutality, has proposed improved data collection. Yet, nowhere in that proposal does the FBI mention tracking unjustified homicides—despite the fact that these homicides are what galvanized the movement in the first place. It goes without saying that without tracking unjustified homicides, the FBI data's value is significantly reduced. This isn't only a slight oversight, it's an active choice and an intentional omission.

Another thing: There's no accountability measure here, either. Police departments submit data and the FBI takes them— and their numbers— at their word. After all, they can't double check every statistic.

Lastly, the FBI's data collection is voluntary. Police department data collection is regulated by states, so the FBI can't mandate collection or release. In other words, no department will be forced to give up the numbers.

At first glance, an FBI report on national policing data seems like a huge step forward. "We hope this information will become part of a balanced dialogue in communities and in the media—a dialogue that will help to dispel misperceptions, foster accountability and promote transparency in how law enforcement personnel relate to the communities they serve," said FBI director James Comey.

Unfortunately, this is a grand gesture that rings hollow. Data collection has the potential to be a true turning point in police reform. If the FBI collected holistic data on police interactions in every jurisdiction, perhaps we would be able to accurately map police interactions and address police brutality. Perhaps the agency would be able to fulfill the goals that Comey highlights above. But without the right data points from every jurisdiction, it's impossible.

Meanwhile, the NYPD announced their own data collection program on Thursday. According to the New York Times, it is the first time in recent history that the NYPD is "establishing explicit guidelines — backed by a sweeping new tracking system — for using and documenting force."



Every police officer will have to detail virtually every instance when force is used not only in an arrest but also in other encounters with the public, including the sort of brief, violent detention and release that occurs routinely on the street[.]

The NYPD has long required close records on shots fired by officers. But other instances of force have not been carefully tracked. Although officers can indicate that force was used on an arrest form, that option is not offered for any other interaction that police have with citizens—such as "car stops, criminal summonses and dealings with emotionally disturbed people."

But now a new Force Incident Report will be used, requiring officers to indicate anytime they use force, "including a hand strike, takedown, baton blow, or a bite by a police dog." The NYPD will also release a report annually detailing the interaction data as well as the demographic data.

The NYPD will also be subject to increased accountability. The Times reports:



"Officers, who have long been required to intervene when they see other officers using excessive force, will now face formal discipline, up to and including dismissal, not only if they fail to step in or report excessive force, but also if they also fail to seek medical assistance for someone who requests it."

The NYPD's new data collection plan isn't perfect. Along with tracking the moves of every police officer, it also gives officers room to mark citizens' actions. in a way that could ultimately be harmful. The Force Incident Report provides space for indicating when an officer has "encountered forced from a person, such as a strike with an object, hand or foot, or spitting, pushing or grappling." There's no doubt that this is concerning and could be ultimately harmful. And in an ideal world, data collection and analysis would be subject to community oversight to guarantee accountability.

But the NYPD's proposal is one of the best, especially for a big police department. The difference between the FBI's plan and the NYPD's is vast and ultimately critical. Data collection is not valuable if it is simply symbolic. Collection cannot be cursory or partial, because then the data is simply not valuable. To be effective, numbers must be consistent, specific, and exacting.

The NYPD has garnered rightful skepticism for their handling of police brutality. This is certainly not the solution, but it is an important step. “What we’re developing here could become the national template for how do you not only investigate all levels of use of force, but how do you report it in a way that it is transparent,” said NYPD Police Chief William Bratton on Wednesday. Unlike Comey, his words may ultimately ring true.

