Resolution on Enhancing Data on Crime and Clearance Rates
| Model Bill Info | |
|---|---|
| Bill Title | Resolution on Enhancing Data on Crime and Clearance Rates |
| Date Introduced | December 5, 2024 |
| Date Finalized | December 31, 2024 |
| Type | Model Resolution |
| Status | Final |
| Task Forces | Judiciary |
| Keywords | Criminal Justice |
Resolution on Enhancing Data on Crime and Clearance Rates
WHEREAS, a 2024 Council on Criminal Justice Crime Trends Working Group report identified significant gaps in the nation’s crime data that make it difficult for policymakers and practitioners to develop and implement tailored and timely interventions to make communities safer; and
WHEREAS, as of 2024, only 13 states publish accessible and timely current crime data online; and
WHEREAS, more than 3,000 local law enforcement agencies, mostly representing less populous jurisdictions, did not report crime data in 2022 for inclusion in the state Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program that in turn informs the FBI’s annual crime reports. Although this figure has been improving, closing the remaining gap will require additional training and resources for records management; and
WHEREAS, closing the gaps in crime and clearance rate data must account for varying resources of law enforcement agencies, given that research reveals that 21% of the 18,000 law enforcement agencies in the U.S. have 4 or fewer officers and another 24% have 5 to 9 officers; and
WHEREAS, some major law enforcement agencies, such as the New York City and Los Angeles Police Departments, are using the antiquated Summary Reporting System (SRS) to report crime for inclusion in FBI data, which is inferior to the new National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) method in several ways; and
WHEREAS, NIBRS provides a more complete picture of crime because it includes lesser offenses that were part of the same incident; and
WHEREAS, NIBRS incorporates 52 less common offenses like terrorism and white collar crime while SRS data incorporates only 10 of the most common index offenses like homicide and assault; and
WHEREAS, distinguishing between random offenses and those involving people who know each other is important in determining what types of interventions might have prevented such crime. NIBRS includes expanded victim-to-offender relationship data. SRS data reports the relationship of the victim to the offender (e.g., the victim was the husband, wife, employer, or employee, of the offender) only for homicides (i.e., murder and non-negligent manslaughter, manslaughter by negligence, and justifiable homicide). NIBRS includes an individual victim’s relationship to the offender(s) for all crimes against the person and for property crimes such as robbery that have a violent element (assault), as well as adding other categories of victims such as businesses, religious institutions, financial institutions and the public: and
WHEREAS, research demonstrates that crime, especially violent crime not involving intimate partners and property street crime, is typically geographically concentrated. These hotspots often relate to gang activity and evolve over time. The capacity to monitor these trends is instrumental for developing the most effective responses which also tend to be geographically targeted; and
WHEREAS clearance rates are calculated by the total number of crimes cleared each year divided by the total number of crimes in a specific jurisdiction in that year. Clearance most commonly occurs through an arrest and this rate thus represents an imperfect yet important barometer of the chance that a perpetrator will be caught and a victim will have a chance to obtain justice; and
WHEREAS, clearance rates have declined dramatically over the last half century; murders which were solved at a 90 percent clip in the 1950’s are now only solved about half the time, and clearance rates for property crimes is about 12 percent; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that ALEC urges states to enact or strengthen statutes to require local law enforcement agencies to report (NIBRS)-compliant crime data and clearance rate data to state UCR programs on a monthly basis; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, states should consider providing technical assistance to smaller agencies to compile their crime and clearance rate data. A state-level crime analyst could efficiently process data for many smaller agencies rather than these agencies adding an employee or contracting for this work; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that we support state efforts to require major law enforcement agencies to make clearance rate data available on their websites and provide statewide public reporting of clearance rates for violent crime, disaggregated by the type and year of the offenses, how the offense was cleared (by arrest or by exceptional means), and the time between the offense and the clearance date.
