Search Documents and Resources

    • Mission and Vision
    • Board & Staff
    • Financials
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Donor Privacy Policy
    • Explore our work
    • Center for Defense Information
    • The Constitution Project
    • Congressional Oversight Initiative
    • Policy Letters
    • Reports
    • Testimony
    • For Oversight Staff
    • Whistleblower Resources
    • Report Corruption
  • Take Action
  • Sign Up
  • Donate
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
    • Mission and Vision
    • Board & Staff
    • Financials
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Donor Privacy Policy
    • Explore our work
    • Center for Defense Information
    • The Constitution Project
    • Congressional Oversight Initiative
    • Policy Letters
    • Reports
    • Testimony
    • For Oversight Staff
    • Whistleblower Resources
    • Report Corruption
Project On Government Oversight
  • Take Action
  • Sign Up
  • Donate
  • Afghanistan
  • More Topics
  • About
  • Mission & History
  • Board & Staff
  • Financials
  • Take Action
  • For Federal Employees
  • COVID-19: Tips
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe
  • Donate
Project On Government Oversight
    • Mission and Vision
    • Board & Staff
    • Financials
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Donor Privacy Policy
    • Explore our work
    • Center for Defense Information
    • The Constitution Project
    • Congressional Oversight Initiative
    • Policy Letters
    • Reports
    • Testimony
    • For Oversight Staff
    • Whistleblower Resources
    • Report Corruption
  • Take Action
  • Sign Up
  • Donate
Effectiveness

POGO Urges Improvements to Justice Department Death Data Collection

By Brandon Brockmyer & David Janovsky | Filed under letter | August 27, 2021

Laura Wyckoff
Bureau of Justice Assistance
810 Seventh Street NW
Washington, DC 20531

Re: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Death in Custody Reporting Act Collection

The Project On Government Oversight (POGO) is submitting this comment regarding the Death in Custody Reporting Act (DCRA) collection notice published on June 28, 2021.1

POGO is a nonpartisan independent watchdog that investigates and exposes waste, corruption, abuse of power, and when the government fails to serve the public or silences those who report wrongdoing. We champion reforms to achieve a more effective, ethical, and accountable federal government that safeguards constitutional principles.

As we outlined in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland in July,2 we are concerned that the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA)’s program for collecting state and local data on deaths in custody has several shortcomings that will likely prevent it from providing an accurate account of deaths in custody or insight into how to prevent them. Accordingly, we urge the bureau to use a more detailed and standardized collection form and to take additional steps to ensure the completeness of collected data. We also urge the bureau to proactively develop and publicize its plan to make DCRA data, and analysis of that data, available to the public.

A More Detailed and Standardized Collection Form Is Necessary

The collection notice indicates that BJA has not improved Form DCR-1A.3 As we wrote in our letter, the most recent version of the form is inadequate to ensure that the bureau will receive sufficient details about death in custody incidents, and it lacks the standardization necessary to allow for meaningful analysis.

In addition to providing the decedent’s name and time and date of death, agencies using the form must complete nine data fields: Four relate to basic demographic information about the decedent; four relate to the facility and agency with custody; and one relates to the cause and circumstances of the death. While all of these fields are important for discerning patterns in deaths in custody, the last is likely to elicit some of the most important information. Unfortunately, it is the worst-designed. The rest of the fields use either checkboxes or fill-in-the-blank lines for specific information. The final field has checkboxes to indicate one of seven general causes of death (including “unavailable, investigation pending” and “other”). It then contains a prompt to enter a “brief description” of the circumstances in plain text.

At best, the design of this final field may lead to confusion. The prompt for a text description is presented on the form as an eighth checkbox, giving the impression that checking one of the seven preceding boxes eliminates the need to provide any further description. This would seriously reduce the amount of information the department receives.

Moreover, relying solely on an open-ended text-entry field for information about the circumstances of a death leaves too much discretion to the agency responsible for filling out the form and introduces another source of potential bias and inaccuracy into the analysis. Different people may have different interpretations of what details are important, and agencies that may wish to hide or gloss over information can use the discretion inherent in the text field to do so. Even if the information provided is complete, text-based data is much harder to analyze; in order to compare different events and determine trends, bureau staff will have to sort the text information into categories that can be analyzed mathematically. In addition, a method using an expansive text field is also likely more time consuming for those filling out the forms.

Improving the collection form does not need to be an onerous process: The form used by the Bureau of Justice Statistics for its federal DCRA collection provides a good template.4 It utilizes significantly more checkbox data fields, which should result in more granular data being submitted in a standardized and readily analyzed format.

The Collection Program Should Include Data Improvement Measures

The current collection program lacks data quality-control measures, which we have noted in multiple communications to the department.5 In 2016, BJA’s proposed collection methodology would have required reporting agencies to submit plans for improving the quality of their data, and it would have checked submitted data against public sources, drawing from a methodology used by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).6 However, that methodology was withdrawn in 2018 and replaced by the current program, which lacks both safeguards.

We are concerned that the current methodology will yield significant undercounts, an issue that is not hypothetical. In 2014 BJS had to suspend a similar program, the Arrest-Related Deaths Program, due to data problems. A subsequent analysis suggested the program had only captured half of all homicides by law enforcement.7 Since monitoring and preventing homicides by law enforcement were Congress’s primary motivations for passing DCRA,8 and remain two of the most pressing policy issues facing the country today, continuing with a methodology that has been proven inadequate in the past is unacceptable. BJA should restore the safeguards from its 2016 collection proposal.

Ensure Public Access to Selected Data

For the information collected under DCRA to truly foster accountability and inform meaningful reforms to reduce deaths, the public must have timely access to the data. However, the department’s commitment to facilitating this access has been uneven at best. During the prior administration, guidance from BJA indicated that data collected under DCRA would only be released in response to Freedom of  Information Act requests.9 We were heartened this spring to see that guidance replaced by a statement that federal privacy law allows the department to release non-personally identifying information and that the Office of Justice Programs does publish “general data related to deaths in custody.”10 However, neither of those statements represents an affirmative commitment from the Office of Justice Programs or BJA to release data from the state and local collection program in the future. We urge the department to make that affirmative commitment.

Crucially, public access must be timely. It took until the end of 2020 for BJS to release its report on DCRA data for fiscal years 2016 and 2017. When it did release the data, it was in the form of a highly aggregated analytical report.11 Delays of this magnitude render the data nearly useless for informing public consideration of reforms. To speed public access, non-identifying data could and should be made available to the public before the department’s analysis is complete. Notably, using a more standardized collection form, as discussed above, would likely make it easier to make certain types of data available more quickly.

DCRA can be an important tool to shed light on a crucial issue. However, BJA’s implementation has prevented it from serving this purpose to date. Over a year since the bureau started collecting data under the act, it is time to take these straightforward steps to ensure the data it receives is of the highest possible quality, is in the most readily useable form, and is made available to the public as quickly as possible. If you have any questions or wish to discuss these recommendations further, please do not hesitate to contact Brandon Brockmyer ([email protected]) or David Janovsky ([email protected]).

Sincerely,

Brandon Brockmyer
Director of Research

David Janovsky
Analyst

The Constitution Project

The Constitution Project seeks to safeguard our constitutional rights when the government exercises power in the name of national security and domestic policing, including ensuring our institutions serve as a check on that power.

Author

  • Author

    Brandon Brockmyer

    Brandon Brockmyer is the director of Investigations and Research at POGO.

  • Author

    David Janovsky

    David Janovsky is a policy analyst for The Constitution Project at POGO.

Related Tags

    Effectiveness Justice System Transparency Department of Justice (DOJ) Death in Custody Reporting Act (DCRA) Law Enforcement Equity and Justice

Related Content

  • Accountability

    POGO Calls for Garland to Improve Justice Department’s Implementation of Death in Custody Reporting Act

  • Oversight

    Past Deaths in Custody Highlight Dire Risks for Immigration Detainees During Coronavirus Outbreak

  • Accountability

    POGO Calls on Attorney General to Support Accountability at DOJ

  • Accountability

    Unqualified Impunity: When Government Officials Break the Law, They Often Get Away With It

1 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Death in Custody Reporting Act Collection, 86 Fed. Reg. 34047-8. June 28, 2021, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/
2021/06/28/2021-13634/agency-information-collection-activities-proposed-ecollection-ecomments-requested-death-in-custody
.
2 Letter from Danielle Brian and Brandon Brockmyer to Attorney General Merrick Garland regarding DCRA implementation, July 8, 2021, https://www.pogo.org/letter/2021/07/pogo-calls-for-garland-to-improve-justice-departments-implementation-of-death-in-custody-reporting-act/. 3 “Death in Custody Reporting Act Fiscal Year 2020, Form DCR-1A,” Bureau of Justice Assistance, https://www.doj.nh.gov/criminal/documents/death-in-custody-reporting-form.pdf. 4 “DOJ DCRA Collection Program, FY 2016—Federal Agencies: Form CJ-13A Arrest-Related Death Incident Report,” Bureau of Justice Statistics, https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/CJ-13A2016.pdf. 5 Letter from Danielle Brian and Brandon Brockmyer to Attorney General Merrick Garland regarding DCRA implementation, July 8, 2021, https://www.pogo.org/letter/2021/07/pogo-calls-for-garland-to-improve-justice-departments-implementation-of-death-in-custody-reporting-act/; Letter from nongovernmental organizations to Attorney General Jeff Sessions regarding DCRA collection proposal, September 28, 2018, https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/dcra_sign_on_9-28-18.pdf; Duren Banks, Lance Couzens, and Michael Planty, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Assessment of Coverage in the Arrest-Related Deaths Program, NCJ 249099 (October 2015), https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pu... 6 New Collection: Death in Custody Reporting Act Collection, 81 Fed. Reg. 91948 (proposed December 19, 2016), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/19/2016-30396/agency-information-collection-activities-proposed-collection-comments-requested-new-collection-death; 7 Duren Banks, Lance Couzens, and Michael Planty, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Assessment of Coverage in the Arrest-Related Deaths Program, NCJ 249099 (October 2015), 3, https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/acardp.pdf. 8 House Judiciary Committee, Markup of the Kilah Davenport Child Protection Act of 2013 (H.R. 3627) and the Death in Custody Reporting Act of 2013 (H.R. 1447), December 4, 2013, 17-18, https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20131204/101567/HMKP-113-JU00-Transcript-20131204.pdf. 9 Bureau of Justice Assistance, Death in Custody Reporting Act: Performance Measurement Tool Frequently Asked Questions, March 2020, 3, archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20210321055239/https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/
files/xyckuh186/files/media/document/dcra-faq-3-2020.pdf
.
10 Bureau of Justice Assistance, Death in Custody Reporting Act: Performance Measurement Tool Frequently Asked Questions, 3, https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/media/document/DCRA-FAQ_508.pdf. 11 Connor Brooks, Kevin M. Scott, and Anthony Whyde, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Federal Deaths in Custody and During Arrest, 2016-2017 – Statistical Tables, NCJ 252838, December 2020, https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fdcda1617st.pdf.

Site Footer

  • facebook
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • Press Center
  • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Briefing
  • Newsletters
  • Publications
  • Report Corruption
Better Business Bureau Accredited Charity CharityWatch Top Rated Charity Great Nonprofits 2021 Top-Rated Charity Navigator Four-Star Charity

©2023 POGO | Privacy Policy

Project On Government Oversight logo

Project On Government Oversight

Oversight in your inbox.