HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 02 Use of Force ReportAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date:
4/24/2023
Meeting Type:
Work Session
Staff Contact/Dept.:
Chief Andrew
STATEMENT:
Shearer/Police
Staff Phone No:
541-726-3722
Estimated Time:
45 Minutes
SPRINGFIELD Council Goals:
Strengthen Public Safety
CITY COUNCIL
by Leveraging
Partnerships and
DISCUSSION/
Resources
ITEM TITLE: ANNUAL USE OF FORCE REPORT 2022
analysis report that provided a synopsis of the force used during the previous calendar
ACTION
Provide feedback on Springfield Police Department 2022 Annual Use of Force Report
REQUESTED:
and Analysis
ISSUE
The Springfield Police Department's 2022 Use of Force Analysis is an annual report
STATEMENT:
that provides a summary of the force used during the 2022 calendar year and
recommendations to consider to further improve process by reducing injuries and uses
of force.
ATTACHMENTS:
1: Use of Force Report
2: Use of Force Slide Deck
3: Use of Force Summary Infographic
DISCUSSION/
In 2020, the Springfield Police Department implemented a yearly use of force
FINANCIAL
analysis report that provided a synopsis of the force used during the previous calendar
IMPACT:
year. Use of force incidents analyzed are officer responses to calls that resulted in
either a display of force or actual use of force, requiring a police report and
supervisor's review per the department's Use of Force General Order, 1.5.1., which
can be located on the City website at https://springfield-or.goy/wP-
content/uploads/2021/11/1-5-l.pdf .
The 2022 Use of Force Report was completed using the Springfield Police
Department's use of force data retrieved from the IAPRO/Blue Team software. In
November 2021, the Springfield Police Department began implementation of an
enhanced data collection process for capturing information related to officer uses of
force and officer displays of force. During 2022, the Springfield Police Department
took 49,921 calls for service and 29,431 of those required a sworn officer's response.
Those calls resulted in 3,303 persons arrested, with 174 events in which force was
used. The average number of uses of force per officer during the year was 7.2. The
median number of uses of force per officer, per year, was 4.5. It was determined
when comparing the volume of calls for service and actual arrests made by the
Springfield Police Department to the number of uses of force incidents, 5.27 percent
of arrests required a use of force and .59 percent of dispatched calls for service
required use of force.
100019236:1)
Springfield Police Department
2022 Use of Force Report
Created by:
Professional Standards Division
Andrew Shearer
Chief of Police
Springfield Police Department 'ment 230 4th Street, Springfield, OR 97477
Attach1, Page 1 of 22
1. Purpose
This comprehensive use of force analysis is intended to identify trends and patterns that
indicate a need to modify existing training, equipment, and/or policy. Improvements
implemented as a result of this analysis are intended to produce safer interactions between
community members and Springfield Police Department (SPD) members. Sharing SPD force
data builds transparency, increases community trust, and adds an additional layer of internal
accountability. Collection and review of use of force reports (as required by GO 1.5.1) were
critical to this analysis.
2. Introduction
In November of 2021, SPD implemented an improved data collection process for capturing
information related to officer uses of force and officer displays of force. The information is
collected in a software platform called "Blue Team", which is stored and managed by the Office
of Professional Standards using the paired software, "IAPro".
The process for reviewing uses and shows of force remained the same in 2022. After the
involved member(s) inputs the data into Blue Team, the on -duty Watch Commander (Sergeant)
collects the police report(s), body/vehicle footage, photos, and any other related media for that
incident. The Watch Commander then reviews all materials to ensure completeness, identify
deficiencies that require correction, or pinpoint any incidents that may rise to the level of a
required notification to PSD. If the Watch Commander approves the use or show of force entry,
it is forwarded to the Division Commander (Lieutenant) for further review. If the Division
Commander approves the report, it is then forwarded to the Office of Professional Standards
where the data is retained for tracking and further reporting (figure 1).
Figure 1. Use and Show of Force Review Process
Officer opens Blue Team
Force entry is submitted to
Professional Standards Division
where it is given a final review
and tracked in IAPro.
Incident Type
9
'I Use of Force - Potrol
❑ Vehicle Pursuit
❑ Commendation
:o
Officer enters use of force details
Blue Team
Report
of
io
Officer submits use of force entry. Watch commander
attaches body cam footage, photos, and reports. Watch
conunander reviews the incident and forwards to the
division lieutenant for additional review.
IAPRO 1
THE LEADING PROFESSIONAL Division lieutenant reviews all
STANDARDS SOFTWARE.
WORLDWIDE. AEJtE,�,TF.V submitted materials for approval
or additional follow up.
Attachment 1, Page 2 of 22
2022 was the first year Blue Team was utilized to capture an entire calendar years' worth
of force data. Data in this report is compared with the data from 2021 (which combined data
from both Blue Team and hand -entered reports) and 2020 (prior to the existence of Blue Team).
The use of force' events analyzed in this report are SPD member -reported uses of force
that require police reports and supervisory review in accordance with the Use of Force General
Order 1.5.1, section VII. Shows of force were also accounted for to document methods that
supported achieving compliance without having to use force.
The Springfield Police Department used force in 174 events in 2022. Data was broken
down in the following categories:
• Comparison by gender, race, and age
• Types of force used
• Number of persons armed with a weapon, and type of weapon
• Injuries to persons (including officers)
The method for counting uses of force is described by figure 2.
Per eventlincident
22-XXXXX
(case number)
----------------
Per officer
Figure 2. Force Counting Method
Per force Per number
option used of applications
Takedown xl
Hand Strike — xl
Hand Strike x2
Per subject
1 use of force incident
2 officers
1 subj ect
2 force options used
4 applications of force
----------------------------------------
'Use of force is generally defined as the means of compelling compliance or overcoming resistance to an officer's
command(s) in order to protect life or property or take a person into custody.
State statute ORS 161.235, except as provided in ORS 161.239 (Use of deadly physical force in making an arrest or
preventing escape), a peace officer is justified in using physical force upon another person only when, and to the
extent that, the peace officer reasonably believes it necessary:
(1) To make an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of an arrested person unless the peace officer
knows that the arrest is unlawful; or
(2) For self defense or to defend a third person from what the peace officer reasonably believes to be the
use or immanent use of physical force while making or attempting to make an arrest or while
preventing or attempting to prevent an escape [1971 c. 743 §27].
2
Attachment 1, Page 3 of 22
3. Professional Standards Division
The Springfield Police Department's Professional Standards Division (PSD) reports
directly to the Chief of Police and consists of two sergeants and a crime analyst. The analyst
was hired in July 2022 and assists the Professional Standards Sergeant with managing IAPro
and Blue Team, collecting use of force data, and analyzing data collected through department
software. The Professional Standards Sergeant also serves as the litigation liaison between
the department and the City Attorney's Office and oversees all internal affairs investigations.
In early 2023, there was a realignment of existing Sergeant positions. One sergeant was then
assigned to PSD to manage all department training and assist with recruiting/hiring efforts.
4. Synopsis
The Springfield Police Department received 49,921 calls for service in 2022. Sworn
officers were dispatched to 29,431 of these calls. These sworn officer responses resulted in
3,303 arrests (2,219 individuals), and 174 calls for service resulted in use of force on 168
individuals.
On average, each sworn SPD member used force six times in 2022. The median number
of uses of force per sworn member in 2022 was four. Each SPD sworn member assigned to
patrol (not including detectives and command personnel) used force approximately seven
times in 2022. The median number of uses of force per patrol member in 2022 was
approximately four. Tables 1 and 2 compare 2022 and 2021 statistics.
2022 2021
Number o Sworn Personnel Employed 56 58
Average applications of force per sworn employee 6 6
Median applications of force per sworn employee 3 4
Table 1. All Sworn Personnel Force Applications
2 A average (mean) is the central value in a data set and is calculated by dividing the sum of the set's values by the
number of values in the set. The average is affected by outliers.
The median is the middle (midpoint) value in a data set. It is calculated by ordering the numbers in a set from
smallest to largest and finding the value in the middle. The median is less affected by outliers.
The mode is the most common value in a data set.
Attachment 1, Page 4 of 22
2022 1 2021
Number o Patrol Officers and Sergeants Employed
44
46
Average applications of force per patrol officer
Average use of force events per patrol officer
Median applications of force per patrol officer
Median use of force events per patrol officer
Model applications of force per patrol officer
Number of patrol officers who used the mode number of applications of force
Number ofvatrol officers who did not use force at all
7.2
8.4
5.6
6.4
4.5
6.5
3
4
3
3
7
5
5
4
Table 2. Patrol Officer Force Applications
Overall, force was used during 5.27% of arrests and during 0.59% of dispatched calls for
service. 5.09% of arrestees had force used on them.
5. Policy Review and Revisions
The department's use of force policy (1.5. 1) was reviewed by command staff in 2022 and
no revisions were made to the policy.
Attachment 1, Page 5 of 22
Individuals
Percentage of
Percentage of
Who Had
Arrests that
Arrestees Who
Number of Use of Force
Force Used
Resulted in Use
Had Force
Year
Arrests Events
on Them
of Force
Used on Them
2020
3,894 229
204
5.88%
5.24%
2021
3,483 190
174
5.46%
5.00%
2022
3,303 174
168
5.27%
5.09%
Table 3. Year -to -Year Arrests Comparison
Number of
Percentage of
Calls
Dispatched Calls
Use of Force
that Resulted in Use
Year
for Service
Events
of Force
2020
32,301
229
0.71%
2021
28,779
190
0.66%
2022
1 29,431
174
0.59%
Table
4. Year -to -Year Calls for Service Comparison
5. Policy Review and Revisions
The department's use of force policy (1.5. 1) was reviewed by command staff in 2022 and
no revisions were made to the policy.
Attachment 1, Page 5 of 22
6. Subject Demographics
Subject demographic information was calculated based on the number of unique
individuals contacted. Collecting data in this manner prevents repeat offenders from skewing
the data and accounts for the possibility of having more than one suspect during a use of
force event. The demographic data from 2021 was retabulated in order to reflect this
counting method and for the purposes of year-to-year comparison. There were no significant
changes in demographic representations in use of force situations between 2021 and 2022.
There were 168 individuals who had force used on them in 2022; 72% of these people
were male, while 28% were female. Officers have the ability to select "Non -Binary" and
"Unknown" in addition to "Male" and "Female" when marking the subject's gender in Blue
Team. In 2022, only males and females were reported.
Figure 3. 2022 Use of Force and Gender of Subject
5
Attachment 1, Page 6 of 22
Number of Subjects
Percentage of
Percentage of
Gender
in 2022
Subjects in 2022
Subjects in 2021
Female
47
28.0%
28.3%
Male
121
72.0%
71.7%
Total
168
100%
100%
5
Attachment 1, Page 6 of 22
Out of the 168 subjects who had force used on them, 86.3% were white, 7.7% were
black, 3.6% were Hispanic, 1.2% were Native American, 0.6% were Asian, and 0.6% were an
unknown race.
Figure 4. 2022 Use of Force and Race of Subjects
sown -
0%
Asian -
0.60%
ck - 7.7%
panic -
.6%
\—Native
American -
1.2%
Race
Black
Hispanic
Native American
White
Asian
Unknown
Total
Number of
Subjects in 2022
13
6
2
145
1
1
168
Percentage of
ubjects in 2022
7.7%
3.6%
1.2%
86.3%
0.6%
0.6%
100%
Percentage of
'ubjects in 2021
7.5%
3.7%
1.1%
87.2%
0.5%
0%
100%
Most of the subjects who had force used on them were between 31 and 40 years of age.
60
50
40
30
0 20
10
z 0
20
<=20
Figure 5. 2022 Use of Force and Age of Subjects
36
21-30
52
31-40
35
19
41-50 51-60
Years of Age
0
Attachment 1, Page 7 of 22
2
61-70
1
>70
3
Unknown
IM
Age range
Number of
Percentage of
Percentage of
(years)
Subjects in 2022
Subjects in 2022
Subjects in 2021
<=20
20
11.9%
11.2%
21-30
36
21.4%
29.4%
31-40
52
31.0%
27.3%
41-50
35
20.8%
21.4%
51-60
19
11.3%
7.5%
61-70
2
1.2%
3.2%
>70
1
0.6%
0%
Unknown
3
1.8%
0%
Total
168
100%
100%
7. Reasons for Show of Force or Actual Use of Force
In Blue Team, officers characterize the resistance level of their subject(s) in the "citizen
resistance" tab. These resistances provide reasons for why officers use or show force and are
broken down into the following 12 categories.
Figure 6. Resistances Influencing Use and Show of Force
Perceived Sharp Weapon —I 6
Confirmed Firearm 1 6
Confirmed Other Weapon W 8
Perceived Firearm D 12
Perceived Other Weapon D 13
Confirmed Sharp Weapon ME= 13
Threat to Life MML;J 14
Other 26
Assaultive/Combative 72
Passive Non -Compliance 81
Fleeing 117
Resistant 122
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Number of Incidents
7
Attachment 1, Page 8 of 22
25
20
E
z 10
11
Figure 7. Suspect Weapons - Confirmed vs. Perceived
6
Firearm
Sharp Weapon
■ Confirmed o Perceived
M
Attachment 1, Page 9 of 22
Other Weapon
8. Use of Force Training
The following is an accounting of training hours related to use of force that SPD
members participated in during the 2022 calendar year:
De-escalation Tactics
4 hours
Less Lethal Pepper Ball
1 hour
Less Lethal 40mm Launcher
4 hours
Duty to Intervene
1 hour
Airway Training
3 hours
Lateral Recovery Restraint Position
1 hour
Firearms
16 hours
Annual Taser Certification
1 hour
Patient Evaluation for Law Enforcement (House Bill 2513)
2 hours
Active Violence Incident Response
4 hours
Crisis Intervention Training -CIT (7 members)
40 hours
Advanced CIT Training (2 members)
20 hours
CIT Coordinator Certification (1 member)
8 hours
Mental Health First Aid
8 hours
C.A.L.M2 Training
8 hours
2The C.A.L.M. Approach is a comprehensive program designed to provide law enforcement officers a practical
skillset they can exercise when dealing with open, empty-handed force encounters; skills that encompass proper
communication strategies, sound decision-making, and lifesaving medical considerations.
6
Attachment 1, Page 10 of 22
9. Types of Force Used by Officers
The types of force used and shown by officers were broken down into the following 15
categories. The display of a weapon (show of force) is defined as the pointing of or otherwise
plain -view display of that weapon at a person in order to gain compliance or in reasonable
anticipation of use of force.
In February 2022, SPD gained a fourth patrol K9 team (In 2021, SPD had three patrol K9
teams for most of the year). In addition, four SPD patrol personnel were equipped with Presidia
Gel, a CS -based restraint that projects in a stream instead of a aerosol spray, as part of a trial
period.
Figure 8. Use and Show of Force Type Counts
Firearm Discharge 0
OC (Pepper) Spray Discharge 0
40mm Less Lethal Discharge ] 1
Pepperball Launcher Display 9 1
Bean Bag Display i 1
40mm Less Lethal Display 0 3
Hobble -1 4
Presidia Gel Discharge ] 4
o K9 Bite —1 7
w
Taser Discharge 17
Taser Display � 31
Leg/Hand Strike — 31
K9 Display
Takedown
76
RIM
Firearm Display 89
Control Hold
176
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Number of Applications
10
Attachment 1, Page 11 of 22
10. Force Type Effectiveness
Overall, uses and shows of force were 92.1% effective (as reported by officers). While K9
bites, 40mm less -lethal displays, and pepper ball displays were the most effective force types,
they only account for 2% of all uses and shows of force. 40mm less -lethal discharge and bean
bag display were each utilized once but were deemed ineffective in those specific cases.
Table 5. Force Type Effectiveness
11
Attachment 1, Page 12 of 22
Percentage of
Percentage of
Effective
Ineffective
Effectiveness in
Effectiveness
Force Type
Uses
Uses
Uses
2022
in 2021
K9 Bite
7
7
0
100%
100%
40mm Less -Lethal Display
3
3
0
100%
Not Used
Pepper Ball Launcher
1
1
0
100%
Not Used
Display
Takedown
81
80
1
98.8%
85.7%
K9 -Display
76
75
1
98.7%
100%
Control Hold
176
170
6
96.6%
93.6%
Firearm Display
89
81
8
91.0%
97.1%
Taser Display
31
28
3
90.3%
83.3%
Hobble
4
3
1
75%
100%
Leg/Hand Strike
31
23
8
74.2%
79.5%
Taser Discharge
17
9
8
52.9%
77.8%
Presidia Gel Discharge
4
1
3
25%
Not Used
40mm Less -Lethal
Discharge
1
0
1
0%
100%
Bean Bag Display
1
0
1
0%
Not Used
Total
522
481
41
92.1%
90.9%
Table 5. Force Type Effectiveness
11
Attachment 1, Page 12 of 22
Incident
Heavy or
Loose
Clothing
Darts
Penetrated
Skin
Follow -Up
Drive Stun
Attempted
Reason for
Ineffectiveness
Ste (s) Taken
Limited
effectiveness —
Control holds by
I
Unknown
Unknown
No
suspect was
SWAT personnel.
not fully
incapacitated.
Only one probe
Suspect eluded but
2
No
One probe
No
penetrated
was soon
apprehended by
skin.
assisting agency.
Only one probe
Other officer
3a
Loose
One probe
No
penetrated
attempted to tase
clothing
skin.
suspect. It was also
ineffective (see 3b).
3b
Loose
None
No
No probe
Control holds
clothing
penetration.
Suspect fought
Other officer
4a
No
Drive Stun
No
through drive
attempted to tase
stun.
with probes (see 4b).
4b
No
Yes
Yes
Poor spread.
Control holds and
hand strikes.
S
No
Yes
Yes
Poor spread
Control holds and
hand strikes
Control holds, hand
6
Yes
No
No
No probe
strikes, takedown,
penetration.
and Presidia Gel
discharge.
Table 6. Ineffective Taser Deployments
Reason for
Incident Gel got in Eyes Ineffectiveness Ste (s) Taken
1 No Suspect did not respond to Takedown and control holds.
Suspect continued to
2 Yes physically resist even Hand strikes and control holds.
though the gel got in his
eyes.
Suspect turned away and Another application of gel was
3 Yes blocked the spray. delivered a short time later and
was effective.
Table 7. Ineffective Presidia Gel Deployments
12
Attachment 1, Page 13 of 22
11. General Overview
During 2022, officers responded to 29,431 calls for service.
(less than 1% of the dispatched calls) resulted in a use of force.
force used on them.
174 of these calls for service
168 unique individuals had
2022 2021
Total Calls or Service
49,921
50,157
Dispatched calls for service
Calls for service that resulted in use of force
Calls for service that resulted in show of force
Percentage of dispatched calls that resulted in a use of force
Percentage of dispatched calls that resulted in a show offorce
29,431
28,779
174
190
139
93
0.6%
0.66%
0.5%
0.32%
Incidents Involving Arrest
3,303
3,483
Percentage of arrest incidents that involved a use offorce
5.3%
5.46%
Percenta e o arrest incidents that involved a show o once
4.2%
2.67%
Individuals Arrested 2,219 2,244
Arrested individuals involved in a use of force
Arrested individuals involved in a show of force
Percentage of arrested individuals involved in a use offorce
Percentage of arrested individuals involved in a show offorce
168
187
146
-
7.6%
8.3%
6.6%
-
Police officer holds by police officers
Police officer holds involving use of force
Percentage ofpolice officer holds that resulted in a use offorce
127
141
15
18
12%
13%
Table 8. Calls for Service Breakdown
13
Attachment 1, Page 14 of 22
There were 127 police officer holds in 2022. Fifteen of these incidents (12%) resulted in
use of force. Officers are approximately twice as likely to be involved in a use of force situation
during a police officer hold than during a normal police encounter.
Figure 9. Uses of Force for Arrests and Police Officer Holds
Arrests Involving Use of Force
Arrests Involving Use of Force -
174 (5%)
Police Officer Holds Involving Use of Force
Police Officer Holds Involving
Use of Force - 15 (12%)
12. Use of Force Usage — Geographically
SPD members patrol the city in two districts — "East" and "West". East covers all property
east of 28th Street, while the West covers all property west of 281h Street. The West generated
66.3% of all calls for service in 2022 and accounted for 63% of use of force events. The East
generated 29.4% of all calls for service in 2022 and accounted for 29.0% of use of force events.
All other calls for service (outside city limits) accounted for 8% all calls for service and 4% of
use of force events.
14
Attachment 1, Page 15 of 22
E 7 -
��-
...
Coburg w
� 6 �+ '64
§
�A—w> t,a
�`5 .�
| ■;
| z �
| � s 28th s \ .
/ M .s .
, \
�
e ®m¥ P ss~
y a -% 0'
G &
} 2 ( `.
|
/ 9
r 0
\ \
! d
(
\
:
! = v, s J
/ . �-
�--
�
15
Attachment t Page 16 of 22
13.Injuries
Out of 174 incidents involving use of force, 59 resulted in injury to the suspects(s)
(33.9%). 56 unique suspects received 68 different injuries. Multiple types of force can
contribute to one injury or injury type.
Table 9. Suspect Injuries
Iniury Type I Force Used to Cause Iniury Contributions
Control Hold
Percentage of
Injury Type
Occurrences
Total Injuries
Abrasion / Laceration
35
51.5%
Bruise
5
7.4%
Complaint of Pain
15
22.0%
Minor Injury
13
19.1%
Total Number of Injuries
68
100%
Number of Suspects Injured
56
-
Table 9. Suspect Injuries
Iniury Type I Force Used to Cause Iniury Contributions
Table 10. Suspect Injuries and Types of Force Used
16
Attachment 1, Page 17 of 22
Control Hold
12
Takedown
9
Abrasion/Laceration
Leg/Hand Strike
5
Taser Discharge
3
K9 Bite
5
40mm Less Lethal Discharge
1
Bruise
Control Hold
4
Leg/Hand Strike
1
Control Hold
8
Takedown
3
Complaint of Pain
Leg/Hand Strike
2
Taser Discharge
1
Presidia Gel
1
Control Hold
3
Takedown
2
Minor Injury
Leg/Hand Strike
2
Taser Discharge
3
K9 Bite
2
Hobble
1
Table 10. Suspect Injuries and Types of Force Used
16
Attachment 1, Page 17 of 22
Out of 174 events involving use of force, 24 resulted in injury to the officer(s)
(13.8%). 14 unique officers received 29 injuries. Multiple types of force can contribute to
one injury or injury type.
Table 11. Officer Injuries
In'u ry Typ e
Force Used to Cause
In'u ry
Percentage of
Injury Type
Occurrences
Total Injuries
Abrasion / Laceration
11
38%
Complaint of Pain
14
48%
Minor Injury
4
14%
Total Number of Injuries
29
100%
Number of Officers Injured
14
-
Table 11. Officer Injuries
In'u ry Typ e
Force Used to Cause
In'u ry
Contributions
Control Hold
7
Abrasion/Laceration
Takedown
6
Leg/Hand Strike
5
Control Hold
4
Takedown
5
Complaint of Pain
Leg/Hand Strike
7
OC Spray
1
Control Hold
3
Minor Injury
Takedown
1
Lea/Hand Strike
2
Table 12. Officer Injuries and Type of Force Used
14. Year -to -Year Comparison
Blue Team and IAPro were implemented by the Springfield Police Department in
November 2021. Consequently, use of force reports were back -entered into the system
months after the incidents occurred. The Professional Standards Division manually processed
all the police reports and supplemental reports for 2021. This process was not ideal, so for
2022 and beyond we expect the data to be much more accurate.
17
Attachment 1, Page 18 of 22
Figure 11. Year -to -Year Force Type Comparison
Firearm Discharge
X01
40mm Less Lethal Discharge
X01
Pepperball Launcher Display
X01
Bean Bag Display
X01
40mm Less Lethal Display
` 3
Improvised/Unspecified
�0
Hobble
`2
4
Presidia Gel Discharge
0 4
4
w K9 Bite
7
Taser Discharge
El 1817
Taser Display
18
31
Leg/Hand Strike
r19
31
K9 Display
45
76
Takedown
0
81
Firearm Display 70
89
Control Hold 156
176
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
❑ 2021 2022
Uses
18
Attachment 1, Page 19 of 22
0
Hpl�
a�
U
0
w
15. Jail Use of Force
In 2022, the Springfield Municipal Jail booked in 1,395 inmates from the following agencies:
Springfield Police Department, US Marshal Service, Eugene Police Department, Coburg Police
Department, And Junction City Police Department. SPD is also prohibited from participating in
any immigration enforcement according to Springfield Municipal Jail Policy Manual Section 6
(Adults in Custody: Intake and Release) and Oregon House Bill 3265. Forty of these inmate
bookings (3% of all bookings) resulted in use of force.
Figure 12. Force Type Applications
Taser-Discharge I 1
Taser-Display ■ 2
Restraint Chair --] 4
Leg/Hand Strike 8
Takedown 10
Escort Hold 31
Control Hold 1 61
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Applications
Force Type
Uses
Effective
Uses
Ineffective
Uses
Percentage of
Effectiveness in
2022
Percentage of
Effectiveness in
2021
Takedown
10
10
0
100%
92.3%
Restraint Chair
4
4
0
100%
Not Counted
Taser-Display
2
2
0
100%
Not Used
Taser-Discharge
1
1
0
100%
0%
Escort Hold
31
29
2
93.5%
94.7%
Control Hold
61
57
4
93.4%
88.6%
Le /Hand Strike
8
7
1
87.5%
70.0%
Total
117
110
7
94.0%
87.9%
Table 13. Force Type Effectiveness
19
Attachment 1, Page 20 of 22
Force Not Required
97%
16. Reporting
Figure 13. Bookings Requiring Force
Force Required - 40
3%
In accordance with G.O. 1.5.1, any use of force by a member of the department shall be
documented promptly, completely, and accurately in an appropriate report. The involved
member shall articulate the level of resistance, weapons used (if any), types of force used,
injuries, medical treatments, and any other reasonably relevant information that explains or
justifies the use of force. The involved member should also articulate the factors perceived and
why he/she believes the use of force was objectively reasonable under the totality of the
circumstances. SPD collects data related to use of force (and show of force) to allow for analysis
to improve outcomes. Outcomes may include enhancement of officer and community member
safety, development of future training, and determining resource needs.
20
Attachment 1, Page 21 of 22
17. Recommendations
Recommendation I
The percentage of police officer holds that resulted in a use of force is
approximately two times greater than the percentage of arrests that resulted in a use of
force. In future years, the data will be further analyzed to identify indicators that lead to
uses of force during police officer holds. These indicators may then be evaluated to
determine how SPD can mitigate and reduce uses of force during police officer holds.
Recommendation 2
When police officers identify subject resistance (section 7), they have the option
of selecting "other". Currently, SPD does not require the officers to expand on what
"other" means. The Professional Standards Division will look into ways to more
accurately capture the "other" resistances. This may include adding more options to the
Blue Team drop-down list or leaving space for officers to type custom answers into the
Blue Team entry.
Recommendation 3
SPD currently does not have an objective way of tracking successful de-escalation
applications. In the future, the data will be further analyzed to determine if there are other
data points that can be used to quantify additional attempts at de-escalation (i.e. time
spent on calls, an increase in shows of force with a decrease in uses of force, additional
use of CAHOOTS).
Recommendation 4
Taser discharges were reported as being 52.9% effective in 2022, which is 25%
less effective than taser discharges in 2021 (77.8% effective). Additionally, Presidia Gel,
which was adopted for use by several department members in 2022, was only effective
25% of the time. These effectiveness ratings have been shared with the Defensive Tactics
Team, and they will review training and equipment to assess future needs.
21
Attachment 1, Page 22 of 22
' .fes,.• � - �,r. - -
PPESEN TED BY
���� CA411'Yl TLSS tR
r
THE CITY OF SPPIIVGFIELD POLICE DEPAPTMEIV T
749
Springfield Police Department
2022 USE OF
FORCE
REPORT
Attachment 2, Page 1 of 12
V.
144
POL16
X022 USE OF FORCE REPORT
• Routing
• Force Counting Method
• Training
• Force Types Used and Displayed
• Force Type Effectiveness
• Uses of Force and Calls for Service
• Subject Injuries
• Officer Injuries
• Year -to -Year Force Type Comparison
• Recommendations
2022 USE OF FORCE REPORT
SPRINGFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT
Attachment 2, Page 2 of 12
9
i
Rol..jtin
PO L 16p, 9
I !! MUM
600" Ws
Officer opens Blue Team
Force entry is submitted to
the Professional Standards
Division where it is given a
final review and tracked in
IAPro.
Incident. -
Li Use of Force - Patrol T-- LJ Vehicle Pursuit
LJ Commendation
7Selecct Tool5
w7:- Z \
a
%* 01
Officer inputs use of force details
IAPRO
THE LEADING PROFESSIONAL
STANDARDS SOFTWARE.
WORLDWIDE.
Rawo l 110/1
V
Blue Tear
Report
0
Officer submits use of force entry. Watch
commander attaches body cam footage, photos,
and reports. Watch commander reviews entry and
forwards to the division lieutenant for additional
review.
Division lieutenant reviews all
submitted materials for approval or
additional follow up.
Fir
Per
event/incident
2 2-XXXXX
(case number)
Per Officer
Pq
Per force option used
Per number of
applications
Takedown A
Hand Strike x1
Per subject
•
FFIF
1 use of force incident
2 officers
1 subject
2 force options used
4 applications of force
TRAININGS
De-escalation Tactics
Less -Lethal Pepper Ball
Less -Lethal 40mm Launcher
Duty to Intervene
Airway Training
Lateral Recovery Restraint Position
Firearms
Annual Taser Certification
Patient Evaluation for Law Enforcement (HB 2513)
Active Violence Incident Response
Crisis Intervention Training - CIT (7 members)
Advanced CIT Training (2 members)
CIT Coordinator Certification
Mental Health First Aid
C. A. L. M. Training
2022 USE OF FORCE REPORT
SPPINGFIELD POLICE DEPAPTMEN T
Attachment 2, Page 5 of 12
4
hours
1
hour
4
hours
1
hour
3 hours
1 hour
16 hours
1 hour
2 hours
4 hours
40 hours
20 hours
S hours
S hours
S hours
'SLI
21
FORCE TYPES USED AND DISPLAYED
200
150
100
091
0
C
Q`
N�p
l
2022 USE OF FORCE REPORT
SPPINGFIELD POLICE DEPAPTMEN T
Attachment 2, Page 6 of 12
Ido
Q o�
Qo
OC'
POLIC'�-
5
For Type Effectiveness
Force 7'�:' e
U se.5
octmw
Uses
Ineffecd-ve
V-se.5
Pere-e#tage of
EffecHvemess in
2022
Percentage o
Effecdvemess
in 2021
100%
K9 Bite
7 7 0 100%
Le 3 9 -L ethal D isp1ay
0
1000,1
Not UE ed
Pepper Ball Latmchrr
0 rG
Not _ ed
Display
Takedo-wn
91
so
1
99.90"110,
85_7%
K9 -Display
76
75-
1
99-7%
100%
Control Hold
176
170
6
96.60,,,'0'
93_6%
Fi n Display
89
81
8
91.0%
97. 1 %
Tasef Display-
q 1
28
q
90 . r
83.3%
Hobble
4
3
1
75%
1000.1/0
L 'g.. -Hand Strike
q 1
23
9
74-2%
79.5%
Taser Discharge
17
9
9
52-9%
77.8%
Presidia Gel Ibis charge
4
1
q
25%
Not UE ed
40mm Less -Ledial
%
orf
IDchaisze
L can L a g D isplay
1
0
1
0%
Not UE ed
TOW
522
481
41
92-1%
-go-9%
Fir
USES OF FORCE AND CALLS FOR SERVICE
2022
2021
Fatal Calls for ,Semce 1 495921 1 50,157
Dispatched callsfor semce
Calls _for service that resulted in use of force
CaIIsfog- service that resulted in show offorge
Percentage of dispatched calls that resulted in a use offorce
f'orce
Percentage of dispatched cabs khat resulted an a shoii.� o_fforce
Incl den is Involving -Arrest
Percentage of arrest 1 nci den is that in volved a iise of fo ree
Perce to,ee of arrest incidents that involved a s holV 0
o rce
Individuals Arrested
Arrested individuals t 7wolved in a use offorce
Arrested individuals r olled in s show. o force
Percentage of arrested individuals involved in a use offorce
Percentage of arrested - div duals 1 ��oNed i a show qfiorce
293431
174
139
0.6%
0,5%
31303
,3%
4.2%
21219
168
146
7.6%
6.6%
Po I ice officer h olds by polis e officers 127
Police officer holds in volvi c USe Offorce 1
Percen tage qfp of 1-c e o c er ho l e that res ulted in a iise offorce 121/10
J7
190
93
0.66%
0,32%
A8
5,46%
x.67
2.244
_ 187
.3%
141
1
13%
F Ir
SUBJECT INJURIES
Control Holds, Takedowns, Leg/Hand Strikes,
Tasers, K9 Bites, 40mm
Complaint of Pain 15 Control Holds, Takedowns, Leg/Hand Strikes,
Tasers, Presidia Gel
i'lthnn ftAinnn Ininx I el Control Holds, Takedowns, Leg/Hand Strikes,
� �i
2022 USE OF FORCE REPORT
SPPINGFIELD POLICE DEPAPTMENT
Tasers, K9 Bites, Hobble
Control Holds, Leg/Hand Strikes
Attachment 2, Page 9 of 12
A
OFFICER INJURIES
Abrasion/ Laceration 11 Control Holds, Takedowns, Leg/Hand
Strikes
Complaint of Pain
Other Minor Injury
2022 USE OF FORCE REPORT
SPPINGFIELD POLICE DEPAPTMENT
14
0
Control Holds, Takedowns, Leg/Hand
Strikes, Presidia Gel
Control Holds, Takedowns, Leg/Hand
Strikes
Attachment 2, Page 10 of 12
9
Year -to -Year Force Type Comparison
200
150
100
50
❑/
2021
P Ol
2022
0
0 0 �
od D�
Fir
PO 10
RECOMMENDATIONS
Identify indicators
that lead to use of
force during a
police officer hold
(POH] and further
evaluate these
factors to
determine how
SPD can mitigate
and reduce uses of
force during POHs.
Determine how to
capture subject
resistance
designated as
"other" (section 7
of the report) - add
items to drop-down
menu or designate
custom response
area in Blue Team.
Determine if there
is an objective way
to track successful
deescalation
applications -
tracking time on
call, increase in
shows of force with
decrease in uses of
force, or additional
use of CAHOOTS.
Further analyze
Taser and Presidia
Gel effectiveness
compared to other
force options and
discuss areas of
improvement with
the Defensive
Tactics Team.
Fir
SPRINGFIELD OREGON POLICE DEPARTMENT
2022 USE OF FORCE SUMMARY
CALLS FOR SERVICE:
CO HONE
CSO & ACIk RESPONSE:
CAHOOTS
OTHER SERVICE:
WJ
POLICE:
ARRESTS:
USE OF FORIE EVENT
COUNTER/PHONE SERVICE
20%
OTHER SERVICE
1%
CSO/ACO RESPONSE
8.8%
CAHOOTS RESPONSE
11.2%
POLICE OFFICER RESPONSE
59%
0.6% OF POLICE OFFICER CALLS FOR SERVICE RESULTED IN USE OF FORCE
0.35%OF TOTAL CALLS RESULTED IN USE OF FORCE
321 Applications of Force
•7Restraint:
Control
Presidia Gel*le
Bean Bag
Pepper Ball
Hold:
Discharge:
Display:
Takedown:
176
4
81
Leg/Hand
Taser
K9
40mm
Strike:
Discharge:
Bite:
Discharge:
31
17
7
1
321 Applications of Force
3,303 Arrests
321 Applications of
Force
127 Police Officer Holds* > >
201 shows of force
56 subjects injured
from use of force
• 0 fatalities
• 0 hospitalizations
5.3% OF ARRESTS RESULTED IN USE OF FORCE
14 officers injured
from use of force
• 0 fatalities
• 0 hospitalizations
Counter/Phone: reports and calls for CSO/ACO: Community Service and Police Officer Holds: Custodies that are
service taken by records and other Animal Control Officers are non -sworn, transported to a hospital because they
are in need of immediate care and are a
staff via telephone or front counter un -armed staff who respond to various
contact. public service calls. danger to themselves others
(ORS 426.228J.).
Other: Calls for service involving other CAHOOTS: mobile mental health Presidia Gel: a CS -based restraint that
SPD personnel or calls originating from intervention team comprised of a medic projects in a stream instead of an
another agency. and a crisis worker. aerosol spray.
• • •-
Firearm
Bean Bag
Pepper Ball
Display:
Display:
Display:
89
1
1
Taser
K9
40mm
Display:
Display:
Display:
31
76
3
3,303 Arrests
321 Applications of
Force
127 Police Officer Holds* > >
201 shows of force
56 subjects injured
from use of force
• 0 fatalities
• 0 hospitalizations
5.3% OF ARRESTS RESULTED IN USE OF FORCE
14 officers injured
from use of force
• 0 fatalities
• 0 hospitalizations
Counter/Phone: reports and calls for CSO/ACO: Community Service and Police Officer Holds: Custodies that are
service taken by records and other Animal Control Officers are non -sworn, transported to a hospital because they
are in need of immediate care and are a
staff via telephone or front counter un -armed staff who respond to various
contact. public service calls. danger to themselves others
(ORS 426.228J.).
Other: Calls for service involving other CAHOOTS: mobile mental health Presidia Gel: a CS -based restraint that
SPD personnel or calls originating from intervention team comprised of a medic projects in a stream instead of an
another agency. and a crisis worker. aerosol spray.