When people have concerns or complaints about potential police misconduct, those concerns need to be heard, investigated, and resolved. At Austin’s Office of Police Oversight (OPO), everything we do is to promote an atmosphere of earned trust between Austinites and the Austin Police Department (APD). Their goal is to make it easy, accessible, and safe for Austinites to provide information and start the process. Our office also:
Historically, two-thirds of complaints investigated by Internal Affairs and monitored by the Office of the Police Monitor were internal complaints. Internal complaints are complaints that originated from within the Austin Police Department. The difference between internal complaints and external complaints (those arising from the community) is quite significant. It raised several red flags for Austin’s Police Monitor. It was apparent there are barriers to the complaint process but it was not clear exactly what those barriers were or how to fix them. The Police Monitor enlisted the assistance of the City of Austin’s Office of Design and Delivery and Paper Census project partner Austin Tech Alliance, to conduct research on the barriers of the complaint process.
Our Goals
How might we help the Office of the Police Monitor make the complaint process more accessible and responsive to public needs?
Understand how complaint intake, processing, and follow up works including any pain points, opportunities, and/or gaps in these processes
Identify opportunities to address pain points and gaps and test ideas to help the Office of the Police Monitor deliver a more accessible and responsive service.
In just two months, our team of 4 created a user research plan, conducted stakeholder/provider /user interviews, synthesized the research identifing key themes and barriers, and recommended solutions to the identified barriers. The research team’s report was extremely helpful to the Office of the Police Monitor as it sought to address and remove the barriers to filing a complaint, the process, and building of trust between the community and the OPM.
Who: Service Design Lab / Austin Tech Alliance / Office of the Police Monitor
Role: Design/Research (Foundational/usability interviews, Synthesis and ideation of data, service blueprint creation, wireframe creation, Presentation of work and recommendations)
Website: Office of Police Oversight
Project History
On March 22, 2018, the City Council passed Resolution 20180322-047 directing the City Manager to develop evidence-based best practices regarding police oversight and report back to Council with any recommendations that would improve the effectiveness, transparency, and efficiency of our current system. In doing so, Council directed the City Manager to consult with various stakeholders including the Office of the Police Monitor, the Austin Police Department, law enforcement accountability offices, interested community organizations, and various City Boards and Commissions.
In Response they conducted extensive research on various models of police oversight across the country. The research has helped to inform the strengths and weaknesses of the various oversight models and advised of 12 Core Elements for an effective police oversight system.
Survey
Shadowing is a useful behavioral observation of a user in their natural environment that provides ideas for further user research. We conducted various scenarios and observed a resident filing a complaint, at the OPM office. Shadowing then lets us understand existing behaviors, pain points in the process etc, so that we can adapt our designs to those behaviors. This also assists with identifying other issues like messaging or physical/environmental obstacles (file the complaint at a police facility, ID Required to enter, lack of parking).
Current Experience
Interview
During this project, Interviews were conducted in person and on location at the OPM office, resident homes, grassroot community centers, as well as city hall and police stations. They helped us gain a deeper understanding into people’s behaviors and why they do what they do. This helps identify users’ pain points or struggles to answer your problem statement.
Throughout the interview we explored how users currently navigate through the system providing an idea of what they consider important, pain points, how they problem solve, and how they feel when interacting with the service. The interview helped us dig deeper into the user reasoning behind their choices and behaviors during review of observations.
Identifying Patterns and Opportunities
After we have collected data, it’s important that we periodically regroup to analyse it. In this case, we used tools to make sense of the data we collected. One is a journey map or service blueprint. These trace the experience of a user as they interact with a service or tool across time and touch points. Along with these, we generated user archetypes, or personas, findings, and insights that hone in on the gaps, pain points, and opportunities for departments as they use information to deliver the service. These insights and findings will later frame our ideation around solutions to address these gaps, pain points, and opportunities.
After reviewing out finding and insights, we made sure each recommendation fell under one of these 12 core element categories. The outcome is our recommendations address research insights, using opportunities that correlate with core elements proven to work.
Example of insight share-out
Police Oversight Advisory Working Group Recommendations
Informing and Advocating for Resource
Wireframes and beyond
Data Snapshot
Prior to release of form, the police monitor received less than 10 complaints filed a month on average since its launch in 2018, 3/4 where internal police complaints.
After form launch, first year, the OPM averaged 80 contacts a month, with 94 Thank You’s total, which led to positive police reform. Demographic information is not collected as it is optional.