Knoxville Climate Assessment Report

Climate Assessment of the
Knoxville Police Department

21CP Solutions October 2022
21CP Solutions | Climate Assessment of the Knoxville Police Department
Note to Readers
The report that follows summarizes the findings and recommendations derived from a third-party
assessment of the climate within the Knoxville Police Department, conducted by 21CP Solutions.
The decision to proactively open the department up to external scrutiny, and then to share the
complete set of findings and recommendations with the public demonstrates a commitment by
KPD to transparency and improvement. It is a bold step by the new administration, and one that
they know to be important as they continue to cultivate a partnership with the Knoxville
community that is based on trust and accountability.
It is essential to note, however, that the recommendations laid out in this report are intended only
as an advisory tool. The expectation is that KPD leadership will evaluate the findings and
suggestions provided and take them under consideration. Each individual recommendation will
not necessarily be implemented, and those that are, will be refined based on the broader strategic
vision, and the fiscal and personnel realities of the department.
Lastly, it is important to recognize that the findings presented in this report reflect a baseline for
the new KPD leadership, and specifically, Chief Noel. The concerns and issues described by
department personnel are based on individuals’ perceptions, and not an audit or investigation. That
said, while the new chief and his recently promoted executive staff may have “inherited” many of
these challenges, they have also been presented with the opportunity to respond to them by
instilling meaningful, lasting, positive changes throughout the department.
1
Table of Contents
Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 3
Summary of Key Findings ................................................................................................................. 3
Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 5
Survey ............................................................................................................................................. 5
Focus Groups ................................................................................................................................... 5
Results ............................................................................................................................................. 6
Communication & Feedback ................................................................................................... 7
Key Findings and Recommendations ................................................................................................ 7
Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................. 7
Detailed Findings ............................................................................................................................. 8
Voice and Feedback............................................................................................................................................. 9
Escalating Problems Internally .......................................................................................................................... 10
Respect, Diversity, and Equity ............................................................................................... 12
Key Findings and Recommendations .............................................................................................. 12
Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................ 12
Detailed Findings ........................................................................................................................... 13
Racial Diversity and Inclusivity .......................................................................................................................... 15
Racial Discrimination ......................................................................................................................................... 16
Gender Diversity and Inclusivity ........................................................................................................................ 17
Gender-Related Discrimination ......................................................................................................................... 18
Other Factors Impacting Success Within the Organization ............................................................................... 19
Training and Advancement ................................................................................................... 20

Training and Professional Development ........................................................................................................... 21
Promotions and Assignments ............................................................................................................................ 22
Resources, Staffing & Equipment .......................................................................................... 26

Physical and Emotional Wellbeing .................................................................................................................... 27
Shift Length and Rotation .................................................................................................................................. 29
Equipment ......................................................................................................................................................... 32
About 21CP Solutions ........................................................................................................... 36
2
Introduction
On June 13, 2022, Paul Noel was sworn in as the 27th Chief of the Knoxville Police Department
(“KPD”). Chief Noel contracted with 21CP Solutions (“21CP”) to help in several key areas as he
begins his work, including conducting a climate assessment of the department to identify areas in
which he can best support the members of KPD in a meaningful and impactful way. 21CP
discussed with Chief Noel his areas of greatest interest and concern about the organization and
management. Based on that conversation, and experience conducting climate assessments across
the country, 21CP designed a plan to elicit voluntary input from all department personnel. 21CP
proposed to design and launch a survey, conduct focus groups, and engage in ad hoc interviews as
deemed necessary. The following report summarizes the methodology, assessment, findings, and
recommendations that resulted from this effort.
Summary of Key Findings
Following the survey and series of focus groups, described in detail in the pages that follow, 21CP
identified several strengths of the department and its culture, as well as some areas for
improvement for KPD leadership to reflect on and respond to.
Overall, KPD’s sworn and civilian personnel conveyed a strong affinity for their colleagues. The
vast majority of survey respondents (93%) stated that they feel respected by their colleagues.
Additionally, when asked during focus groups what the best part about KPD is, or why they
continue to stay with the department, the most common answer in every session was “the people”.
Many respondents to the survey and focus groups also recognized that the department has an
increasing array of physical and emotional health resources available, though some reported
having limited opportunities to make use of them.
Focus group participants generally seemed optimistic about the new administration, particularly
with respect to the increased direct communication from the Chief’s office via weekly emails.
Additionally, many of the Black officers 21CP spoke with reported having positive early
interactions with Chief Noel and perceived him to be someone who was comfortable meeting with
them and discussing the issues at hand. They reported being hopeful that the department would
undergo meaningful change related to diversity and equity under his leadership.
Nearly all major concerns within the department tied back to a central theme of transparency and
communication around decision making processes. In both the survey and focus groups,
respondents described times that decisions of great consequence to the rank and file were made at
the executive level without opportunities for employee input, or explanations of how the decision
was reached. As such, about half of employees surveyed reported feeling as though they do not
have a voice within the organization, and less than two-thirds reported feeling respected by the
organization. Of the major decisions made within the department, the greatest frustrations seemed
3
to focus on: shift length (specifically amongst patrol), promotions and specialized assignments,
and equipment.
The prevailing preference among patrol officers is to revert to a 10-hour shift. In the absence of
that possibility, the most common preference is to remain on 12-hour shifts but work a fixed shift
for a fixed length of time, rather than continually rotating. Many survey respondents and focus
group participants linked their preferences to concerns about their own and their colleagues’
physical and mental health, as well as work-life balance and family.
Only about half of KPD personnel reported feeling that the promotional process is fair, based on
their experience (of the Black officers who had experience with the promotional process, zero
reported perceiving it as fair, based on aspects of the process such as demographic disclosures on
the test, subjective selection practices, and disparate outcomes). Additionally, about two-thirds of
all personnel believe the promotional process is transparent. Many of the surveys, and most of the
focus groups surfaced widely held perceptions that promotional and assignment decisions are often
more influenced by factors other than qualifications, such as friendships, personal preferences, and
demographics.
Notably, many of the focus group conversations about equipment (e.g., firearm, patch, outer
carrier) tended to organically gravitate toward discussions about how decisions were made and by
whom, rather than the equipment itself. That said, there were also specific concerns raised about
the quality, age, and utility of certain pieces of equipment that should be evaluated, including
computer software, phones, laptops, office furniture, and vests fitted specifically for female
officers. Further, the need for dedicated IT personnel emerged as a real need for department
personnel to reliably perform key functions, and access mission critical data and tools.
KPD should routinely reassess the department climate, to determine if changes in policy and
practice are having the desired effects, and also to stay abreast of new issues and concerns as they
surface. Budgeting for recurring internal assessments such as surveys or focus groups every 18
months to two years would provide enough time for the department to develop and implement
solutions, and for personnel to potentially feel the effects of the reforms, before reporting back.
4
Methodology
Based on the stated goals of the departmental culture assessment, 21CP devised and executed a
two-pronged approach to collect opinions, ideas, and feedback from as many members of the
organization as possible.
Survey
Each member of KPD, both sworn and non-sworn, was provided a link to an online survey through
PowerDMS, the agency’s policy management and staff communication platform. The survey and
corresponding data were hosted externally on Alchemer.com, an online survey management tool.
Using Alchemer.com allows 21CP to ensure that all responses could be submitted anonymously,
and to allay concerns regarding identification and/or retribution. Only 21CP has access to the
individual survey responses and raw data. To further preserve the confidentiality of individual
responses, survey data are only being shared in the aggregate, though quotes are included
throughout the report to help illustrate certain findings.
The survey was introduced in a letter from the Chief explaining the purpose, its confidentiality,
and the role of 21CP. It launched on August 3, 2022 and remained open for two weeks, with
members receiving at least one reminder during the interim. Of the 374 sworn (per the 2022
Affirmative Action/Recruitment Plan for the City of Knoxville Police Department), 364 (97.3%)
completed some or all of the survey, and 88 of KPD’s 93 non-sworn personnel (94.6%) completed
the survey. Participants were advised that their responses were anonymous, and that most questions
on the form were voluntary, enabling them not to provide responses if they were uncomfortable
providing certain answers.
The survey questions covered general background information (e.g., role, tenure, demographics),
and perceptions about: respect and voice within the organization, opportunities for advancement,
diversity and inclusiveness, and resources, staffing, and equipment.
The high response rate on the survey is very positive. Members of police departments, particularly
sworn, often demonstrate reluctance, skepticism, and suspicion around surveys. For some in KPD
they report participating in surveys in the past and observed no change, for others, the reluctance
comes from fear of being identified as the source. Surveys, when trusted, provide the opportunity
for individual, private responses that are not subject to the influence of others’ opinions. 21CP,
with extensive experience with police officers, installed safeguards for the personnel, perhaps
contributing to the high response rate.
Focus Groups
To build upon the information collected through the survey, and better understand the concerns
and dynamics within KPD, two 21CP consultants spent two days conducting focus groups at KPD
5
headquarters. In total, seven focus groups were convened. To best facilitate conversations around
key topics and ensure the diversity of voices and experiences across KPD were appropriately
represented, participants were selected from each of the following groups: Black officers, female
officers (non-rank), two groups of all other officers (non-rank), sergeants and lieutenants,
investigators, and civilian/non-sworn employees. Each focus group consisted of approximately ten
members and lasted ninety minutes.
The topics covered during the focus groups roughly mirrored the sections of the survey, though
depending on the experiences of a particular group, the conversation sometimes focused more
heavily on one area than another. As with the survey, discussions were focused on the perceptions,
feelings, and experiences of personnel, and were not investigatory or a factual audit.
Focus group participation was anonymous, and 21CP does not have the names or contact
information of the individuals who participated. Responses and experiences shared during the
focus groups will be discussed generally in this report. However, in some cases where the nature
of the focus group is relevant to the finding, the group will be identified broadly. All reasonable
efforts have been made to ensure the identity of respondents has been protected.
Focus groups are beneficial in that facilitators can probe more deeply into responses, get context
and secure anecdotal evidence that support the opinions offered. The biggest challenge with focus
groups is that they can become an echo chamber – the strongest voice can lead a group and cause
those with opposing views to remain quiet. The facilitator’s opening remarks provided space for
disagreement and foreshadowed that silent members would be encouraged to participant. In the
KPD focus groups all members participated to some degree, increasing our level of confidence
that no focus group was dominated by a single point of view.
Results
The remainder of this report presents the themes and findings from the climate assessment. Our
intention is that Chief Noel and KPD leadership will use these findings to help inform the priorities
and action-items during the early months of his administration. The findings have been grouped
into four primary areas:
1. Communication & Feedback
2. Respect, Diversity & Equity
3. Training & Advancement
4. Resources, Staffing & Equipment
6
Communication & Feedback
Key Findings and Recommendations
The topic of communication within the department, and specifically from those in decision-making
and executive positions came up in every focus group and touched upon nearly all substantive
areas. The most consistent over-arching theme within the broad topic of communication was that
employees feel that decisions are often made that impact their work, environment, and ability to
do their job, without providing those most affected with opportunities to offer input or receive an
explanation of how the decision was reached. Many of the examples are explored in greater detail
elsewhere in this report, but generally included decisions about:
• Shift length and rotation
• Equipment, including firearms, software, outer carriers, and patches
• Testing and selection for specialized roles and promotions
Along these lines, only about half of KPD employees reported feeling that they have a voice within
the organization (i.e., feel that one’s supervisors are receptive to concerns or feedback); the lowest
rate was among Black sworn personnel (36%), and the highest was among civilians and sworn
personnel with ranks of sergeant and above (65% and 62%, respectively). However, over three-
quarters (78%) of survey respondents indicated there was a clear process for escalating problems
with colleagues or supervisors internally. These findings varied by demographic and rank, with
Black sworn personnel reporting this least often (57%), and civilians and sworn personnel ranking
sergeant and above, most frequently (83% and 80%, respectively). That said, many also
acknowledged that while there was a process, it was not necessarily effective, not universally
trusted to deal with the issues, and some felt using the process carried risk of retribution.
Recommendations
• Consistently provide explanations on why or how decisions are made when the
department announces changes to policies and SOPs. When feasible, offer a meaningful
process for all, or a representative cadre, of employees to weigh in before changes are
made. These additional steps will bolster internal procedural justice and help move
away from the widespread opinion that individual executives are making patrol level
decisions unilaterally. Research has shown that officers who feel respected by their
supervisors and peers, such as through principles of procedural justice, “are more likely
to accept departmental policies, understand decisions, and comply with them
voluntarily”.1
1
Nicole Haas et al., “Explaining Officer Compliance: The Importance of Procedural Justice and Trust inside a Police
Organization,” Criminology and Criminal Justice (January 2015), doi: 10.1177/1748895814566288; President’s Task
Force on 21st Century Policing. 2015. Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing.
Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
https://cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/taskforce_finalreport.pdf
7
• Use multi-functional groups to develop policies, procedures, and actions in key areas
like promotions, shift schedule, equipment, and technology.
• Continue providing weekly emails and written communication about significant news
and events occurring within KPD.
• Use a variety of methods to communicate upcoming changes including but not limited
to the weekly emails.
• Take steps to fully brief supervisors at all levels on policy changes before they take
effect, to ensure they are communicated and enforced consistently across all affected
units.
• Conduct an end-to-end review of internal processes for escalating and addressing
complaints, concerns, and problems raised by personnel. Focus specifically on the
responsibilities of supervisors, and identifying effective, non-punitive steps toward
escalation and resolution.
• Explore establishing an email address where members can ask questions, address
rumors, and get information. This email address must be monitored, and a commitment
made to respond within a set period of time in order to be effective.
• The Chief may want to institute an open office one day a month when members can
have a conversation with him or have a set time and day with members signing up to
attend a conversation with the Chief.
Detailed Findings
Numerous focus groups participants recounted instances in which they learned about major events
or changes within the department by watching the local news. As such, many were supportive of
the weekly emails from the chief, and hopeful that the higher level of communication and
transparency would continue. While this was seen as an improvement, there were still numerous
instances in which focus group participants from different units had diverging interpretations of
the same information, some of which had been shared through the department-wide emails. For
example, officers reported different understandings of recent or forthcoming changes to policies
about overtime, secondary employment, and uniforms, specifically outer carriers; and the officers
reported that different supervisors were providing different guidance on the policies as well.
Officers were unclear, and in some cases upset, about the policy changes, and how the decisions
were made. Thus, while it was clear that the increases in communication have been well received,
it was also apparent from just two days on site, that communication regarding policy changes
should be multifaceted (i.e., presented in numerous formats, such as in writing and during roll call
briefings), and include some documentation about how the decision was reached. Doing so would
help to clear up confusion among the ranks, ensure it is consistently enforced among supervisors,
and improve feelings of internal procedural justice. Supervisors too must be fully aware of the
details, understand the genesis of changes, and be provided language to explain to officers.
Supervisors must be clear and on the same page as the administration and each other to limit
confusion among the officers.
8
Participants across focus groups were eager to see more transparency regarding how decisions are
made, and to have more opportunities to provide meaningful feedback to leadership. Many people
recalled previous survey and feedback initiatives within the organization, but felt that generally,
by the time leadership reached out to them for input it was too late to have real influence. One
example of a feedback initiative that felt inauthentic to participants was a departmental meeting to
discuss the organization’s visible tattoo policy; one person who participated felt that by the time
the meeting was held, leadership had already reached a decision. Others cited previous outreach
efforts from leadership that did not produce results that were shared.
Voice and Feedback
The perception of having little influence over decisions, or opportunity to provide meaningful
feedback was consistent across the department – when asked in the survey “do you feel that you
have a voice in the organization (i.e., are supervisors receptive to your concerns or feedback?”
only about half of respondents said yes. When divided by demographic and sworn status, responses
ranged from a low of only 36 percent of Black sworn personnel feeling they had a voice, to a high
of just 65 percent of civilian staff indicating that they feel they have a voice within the organization.
Among those who responded that they do feel that they have a voice within the organization, many
respondents focused on the quality of their relationship with their current supervisor, while
acknowledging that this isn’t the case across all supervisors, and that the feedback often does not
make it past their immediate supervisor. For example:
• This has not always been the case, but my current supervisor is really receptive to my
concerns and feedback.
• My current supervisor is receptive, I can talk to him about anything, but his hands are tied
when it comes to resolving any issues we as a unit might have. He offers a sympathetic ear
and tries to understand yet has no power to effect any change.
• I do feel that they hear my concerns and although I bring practical solutions it seems that
my concerns and ideas are ‘lost up the chain.’
9
• I know that both my sergeant and lieutenant have listened to concerns that I have and take
my opinion into account when making decisions.
Among those whose survey responses indicated that they feel that they do not have a voice within
the organization, many referenced frustrations about feedback failing to make it up the chain of
command. Many specifically referenced a divide between those above and below the rank of
captain, regarding being able to affect meaningful change. Additionally, many respondents
specifically stated that the opinions of patrol officers do not often influence change, despite
sometimes being asked for their opinion, or praised as the “backbone” of the organization.
• It seems a lot of ideas from street officers stall out on their way up the chain and the officer
never knows if the idea made it to the right person to get it done or was rejected.
• Historically, no, we haven't had a voice. Bad decisions are made with no input from the
actual line personnel, who are the ones most impacted by the decisions.
• I feel like we are always asked for our opinion, but it never gets taken seriously.
• In the past most decisions that directly affect patrol haven’t been based on patrols opinion.
• I feel like when we are asked our opinion, we are all too often overlooked, such as when
we were asked our opinion of the patrol schedule in particular.
• Voicing a concern gets you labeled as negative or not a team player.
• The organization does not take feedback from anyone under the rank of captain.
Focus group discussions about voice and feedback echoed much of what was captured on the
survey. Many reported that the ability to speak up is dependent on for whom you work, and many
also reiterated that the largest disconnect between ranks begins at the captain level, where
individuals who have been removed from the day-to-day experience of patrol for many years make
decisions that impact much of what happens within the department.
Escalating Problems Internally
Survey respondents were also asked, “if you have a problem with a colleague or supervisor, is
there a clear process for you to escalate the issue toward a resolution?” Responses to this question
were a bit more positive, ranging from a low of 57 percent of Black sworn personnel stating “yes”,
to a high of 83 percent of civilian respondents. Of those who responded “yes”, nearly all cited the
chain of command and standard operating procedures as creating a clear process for raising and
escalating issues within the department.
10
Of those who responded “no”, many indicated that the process is unclear, applied inconsistently,
ineffective, or may lead to retribution internally. For example, comments included:
• Every unit and supervisor handles problems very differently.
• There is a process in place, but I do not trust it. I feel like some people are immune to
punishment or consequence and if you work directly for one of those people, keep your
mouth shut.
• Recent history shows that the process for escalating complaints about the behavior of
superior officers in the organization is perilous to the complainant, not subject to an
impartial arbiter, and lacking in oversight from city administration outside of the
department.
• Often times if you make a complaint, there is retaliation. Supervisors aren't keen on trying
to extinguish disagreements until they have escalated. And there is no avenue to resolve
issues with a supervisor.
Concerns about explicit and more subtle forms of retaliation for complaining were also raised
during focus group sessions. Several individuals reported that complaints had precipitated
individuals being moved to less desirable assignments. Others suggested that retaliation had
previously occurred higher up, such as at command staff levels, where it was less visible, but could
affect one’s long-term mobility within the organization.
Some focus group participants advised that one probably had a better chance of a positive outcome
if they were to file their complaint through the Civil Service Department than internally, where it
would be escalated, hit a ceiling, and ultimately go nowhere. In one particular and well-known
case, when a complaint was raised internally it generally stalled and went nowhere until the media
became involved and it became a much larger, and public issue.
11
Respect, Diversity, and Equity

Collegiality amongst peers is very high across the department. Survey respondents
overwhelmingly reported feeling respected by their colleagues (93% across all groups). This
sentiment was echoed in each one of the focus group conversations. Conversely, less than two-
thirds of respondents reported feeling respected by the organization. Many explained their
response as being due to the shift schedule, workload, promotional process, and sentiment that
many decisions are based on friendships rather than merit.
The survey, and some focus group conversations, surfaced feelings and experiences concerning
both racial and gender-based discrimination within the department. While both Black and white
personnel reported experiencing race-based discrimination, particularly around promotional and
advancement decisions, the proportion of Black personnel reporting experiencing discrimination
was markedly higher (53% by peers, 71% by the organization). Sworn female personnel reported
experiencing gender-based discrimination by their peers (26%) at a higher rate than by the
organization (21%), commenting that some of their peers do not want to work with females, or
perceiving a need to prove themselves.
Recommendations
• Explore meaningful changes that can be made to the recruitment and hiring process
that will address actual and perceived “tokenism” by minority groups. For example,
ensure that there is representation across diverse groups at every stage of the hiring
process, including background investigations, and reviews of all candidates for all
recruiting classes. Select background investigators that reflect the diversity sought in
incoming recruits. Implicit or explicit biases of individuals in these roles can unfairly
influence assessments about a candidate’s ability to succeed within the organization,
and these investigators can at times adopt an informal role as the agency’s culture
guardians.2
• Join the national 30x30 Pledge to reach a rate of 30% female police recruits by 2030.
This commitment involves a series of actions a department can take to "improve the
representation and experiences of women in sworn positions in all ranks”.3
• Consider developing a formalized mentorship and leadership program, particularly for
officers from underrepresented populations (e.g., Black, Latino, female, and LGBTQ+
officers). These processional development structures can help those who may face
2
Morison, Kevin P. 2017. Hiring for the 21st Century Law Enforcement Officer: Challenges, Opportunities, and
Strategies for Success. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-w0831-pub.pdf
3
The Policing Project at NYU School of Law. (2022, September 8). Advancing Women in Policing. 30x30 Initiative.
Retrieved September 20, 2022, from https://30x30initiative.org/the-30x30-pledge/
12
additional challenges on the job to receive added support, succeed, advance through
promotions, and stay with the agency for longer than they might otherwise.4
• As with the recommendations around communication, use principles of internal
procedural justice as a guiding principle when making decisions, and enacting policies
and processes. Ensure personnel from all backgrounds and roles within the Department
have a voice, and that diversity of experiences and the potentially disparate impacts of
organizational policies and operations are considered and acknowledged when
explaining decisions.
Detailed Findings
In each of the seven focus groups convened, members cited their colleagues as the best aspect of
coming to work at KPD. As such, it followed that over 90 percent of all survey respondents
answered positively when asked “do you feel respected by your colleagues?” Responses ranged
from a low of 79 percent, among Black sworn personnel, to a high of 99 percent of sworn
supervisors, sergeants and above.
Common sentiments expressed among those who responded “yes” in the survey included mutual
respect borne from a shared mission and shared experiences, and positive relationships with those
with whom they work most closely.
Of those who reported that they do not feel respected by their colleagues, comments included:
• I feel respected by my beat partners/peers, however, I do not from certain members of the
command staff. It seems more often than not that our voices aren't being heard, therefore,
it comes off as a lack of respect.
4
U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. 2016.
Advancing Diversity in Law Enforcement Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
https://www.justice.gov/crt/policediversity
13
• If you are a Black officer, you have to work five times harder, and officers will always
second guess you.
• Colleagues have expressed a dislike for laterals.
• Young officers often give impression older officers are dead weight, when in actuality the
senior officers are often carrying the burden of reliability, job knowledge, and working the
harder incidents.
• I feel like many officers do not celebrate other officers' successes.
• I feel sworn employees do not take civilian employees seriously.
Several respondents who did not feel respected by their colleagues stated in their comments that
they felt they were not respected by younger or newer officers. However, when the survey data
was analyzed by length of time with the department, those with ten years and above actually
reported the highest rates of perceived respect from colleagues. Additionally, civilian members of
the organization, some of whom have decades of loyalty to the work of the KPD don’t always feel
as if sworn members value their contributions to the overall success of KPD. Recognizing, in a
formal way, years of service, or exceptional work of civilians is missing and critically important
to their sense of worth.
Feelings of being respected were not as strong when members were asked “do you feel respected
by the organization?” Overall, only 63 percent of personnel answered yes, ranging from a low of
56 percent by sworn females, to a high of 75 percent amongst sworn supervisors (sergeant and
above).
For those who feel respected by the organization, reasons included:

• That has improved over the years as the "old regime" has retired or left. Fortunately, as
new leaders are promoting the "good ole boy" system seems to be fading some.
• I can tell that the command staff respect me and my decisions by the assignments I receive
and the amount of trust that they put in me.
• I do feel respected although I personally feel like a lot of tasks are pushed off on patrol.
14
Among those who reported not feeling respected by the organization, many mentioned shift
lengths, assignments to cover special events, and challenges advancing within the department.
• It has been common practice to treat individuals differently depending on who they are and
who they are friends with.
• We all too often get pulled to cover for special events such as U.T. football games, the bike
race and several other events with little to no regard on how that affects our
family/personal life.
• The organization does not respect that the current work schedule and workload is not good
for the officer’s health and family life. Officers were able to stay healthy while working 10
hour shifts. It also allowed more time with family.
• My prior experience as a police officer is not valued by the department.
• As a Detective, I do not believe the position, with the expectations, training, and greater
responsibilities carries the appropriate respect, authority/rank and pay that it should.
• I've applied for several jobs within the department had interviews and still was not
considered although my experience and education qualify me for various positions.
As described in greater detail in the sub-sections that follow, the department still has some work
to do regarding its practices and communication about diversity and inclusivity. There is a
perception throughout the department, and especially amongst white, male, sworn personnel, that
minority officers (particularly Black officers) and female officer receive preferential treatment in
hiring, promotional, and assignment decisions. However, this perception is not reflected in the
demographic profile of KPD, in which there is currently only one Black and nine female officers
with ranks of sergeant or higher.
Racial Diversity and Inclusivity
Survey respondents were asked about the department’s dedication to racial diversity and
inclusiveness. While over three-quarters of personnel find KPD to be either very or extremely
dedicated to these efforts, it was clear that Black personnel feel that there is still more the
department can be doing. Note that responses from Black sworn and civilian personnel were
pooled in this section, to protect the anonymity of the Black civilian respondents, of which there
were few.
How dedicated is the organization to racial diversity and inclusiveness?

All All Civilians All Sworn Black Personnel
(Sworn and Civilian)
Extremely dedicated 31% 22% 33% 6%
Very dedicated 45% 37% 47% 18%
Somewhat dedicated 18% 30% 16% 29%
Not so dedicated 4% 10% 2% 12%
Not at all dedicated 2% 1% 2% 35%
# of Responses 422 81 339 17
15
Among those who responded that KPD is dedicated to racial diversity and inclusiveness, many
provided comments that indicated that while the organization has tried to make racial diversity and
recruitment of non-white officers a priority, the efforts have not always worked. Others who felt
that the department is dedicated suggested that it was to the detriment of the organization, because
they felt it unfairly influenced hiring, promotional, and/or disciplinary decisions.
Of those who responded that the department is not dedicated to racial diversity and inclusivity,
comments reflected a belief that a higher standard for minority candidates exists during the
selection, academy, and field training processes. Others commented that KPD’s diversity policies
look good on paper but have led to very little in practice.
During focus group conversations about racial diversity efforts, many identified the fact that the
department has only 14 sworn officers who are Black, including only one Black female, and only
one Black officer of rank, as evidence that there is still progress that needs to be made. A few
participants homed in on the recruitment and hiring practices as requiring improvement,
highlighting the fact that there is a lack of diversity and representation amongst those who are
conducting background checks, making hiring decisions, and working on retention efforts. Some
provided examples of instances in which qualified candidates of color were disqualified from the
hiring process for reasons seen as nitpicking, while others who were less likely to be successful
were pushed through. Similarly, the lack of diversity among ranking officers, paired with the lack
of transparency or consistency in the promotional process contributes to the feeling that minority
officers are unlikely to advance within the organization.
Racial Discrimination
The survey also asked about whether personnel had ever felt discriminated against by the
organization or by their peers, due to their race. Black personnel reported experiencing
discrimination at a dramatically higher rate relative to KPD as a whole. However, among those
who indicated that they had experienced racial discrimination, the majority self-identified as white.
Specifically, of the 38 respondents that they felt the organization discriminated against them
because of their race, 65.8% were white, and 34.2% were Black. Similarly, of the 22 who
responded that they felt discriminated against by their peers due to their race, 59.1% were white,
and 40.1% were Black.
When discussing racial discrimination experienced by the organization, comments included:

• Look at the diversity in the department.
• If you are black at KPD your automatically seen as less of an officer.
• When applying for posted positions and training, if more than one Black officer applied
for a job that has multiple open slots only one Black officer would get selected and the
other one would be told to wait until the next posting.
• As a white male it is so often spoken that the department is promoting or advancing officers
based off race and gender versus job ability and knowledge.
16
• White males are the first to be punished, the hardest to promote, and last to be transferred
to a coveted position.
Comments concerning racial discrimination by members’ peers included:

• People are less likely to help you or back you up if you are Black and they are not familiar
with you.
• Comments have been made to me and about me being Mexican.
• As a Latino I take my fair share of discriminatory statements, usually the peers I do receive
it from I consider family… However, I’ve had a training officer make remarks I did not
appreciate I felt at the time I could not do anything about it.
• When incidents of racism and discrimination are brought up, minorities are told we're just
overreacting, and the incident is not taken seriously by the department.
Gender Diversity and Inclusivity
Survey respondents were also asked about the department’s dedication to diversity and inclusivity
across genders. Half of sworn females, and over half of female civilians reported that KPD is either
very or extremely dedicated to gender diversity and inclusiveness. Note that several respondents
selected “other/non-binary” as their gender identity when completing the survey. These responses
are not classified individually, as (i) there were too few to protect anonymity, and (ii) in a few
instances, comments provided by the individual in response to other questions suggested the
response may not have been accurate. Nevertheless, the organization should be aware that there
are several personnel that identify this way, and ensure that policies, language, and actions are
inclusive of this group.
Similar to the comments about the organization’s dedication to racial diversity and inclusiveness,
respondents who indicated that KPD was very or extremely dedicated to gender diversity and
inclusiveness often perceived it as a negative characteristic. Many respondents suggested that
promotions or hiring decisions that considered gender often meant that a male candidate who was
better qualified did not have a fair chance.
17
How dedicated is the organization to diversity and inclusiveness across genders?

All Sworn (All) Sworn (Female) Civilians (All) Civilians (Female)
Extremely dedicated 29% 31% 25% 23% 14%
Very dedicated 46% 48% 25% 39% 43%
Somewhat dedicated 20% 17% 33% 30% 33%
Not so dedicated 4% 3% 15% 8% 9%
Not at all dedicated 1% 1% 3% 1% 2%
# of Responses 420 340 40 80 58
Gender-Related Discrimination
Sworn female employees reported experiencing a higher rate of gender-based discrimination

relative to all sworn personnel within KPD. That said, more than half of those who responded that
they felt discriminated against by the organization due to their gender self-identified as male (n=26,
61.9% of yes responses). Comments about gender discrimination by the organization included:
• Women have to work extremely hard to prove our worth here.
• I have been passed up for promotion or selection due to being a white male.
• People are promoted or hired even if they're not the most qualified so as to balance
numbers. Not fair to the qualified person getting looked over because of their gender.
• Volunteers were asked to assist in Mississippi due to a hurricane, but females were not
allowed due to concerns of "hygiene". Several of us volunteered to go knowing the possible
conditions but were not allowed.
Female civilians reported a slightly lower rate of experiencing gender-based discrimination from
their peers, relative to all civilian employees. This trend is likely influenced by the fact that, unlike
among sworn personnel, over two-thirds of civilian employees who responded to the survey
identified as female. However, across all assignments, the majority of respondents who indicated
that they have experienced gender-related discrimination from their peers self-identified as female
(n=15, 78.9% of yes responses). Of those who felt discriminated against by peers due to their
gender, comments included:
18
• Some officers do not want to work with females and aren't afraid to make that clear. Most
are dismissive.
• Comments have been made regarding female's emotions affecting the way a job is done.
• Honoring pronoun preference or understanding the nuance of gender is non-existent. I
have attempted to correct other officers and have been ridiculed.
• We have to show we can handle ourselves prior to them accepting us. Whereas the male
officers get that respect right when they start but could lose it if they are found lacking.
Women have to prove it from the get-go.
Other Factors Impacting Success Within the Organization
Survey respondents were asked whether they felt any additional factors, other than race or gender,
made it more difficult for them to be successful within the organization. Of those who indicated
that they did, factors included: nepotism (n=32), education (n=23), age (n=21), disability (n=13),
sexual orientation (n=6), and religion (n=4). Note that these responses are not presented as a
percent, as respondents could provide multiple answers, if relevant. Additionally, 28 respondents
selected “other”, and wrote in the factors that they felt negatively impacted their success. The most
common response was favoritism or relationships that influenced assignments or advancement;
other responses included non-sworn status, weight, military experience, and being from outside
the south.
19
Training and Advancement
Confusion, cynicism, and frustration over KPD’s assignment, advancement, and promotional
processes were communicated during each of the seven focus groups convened and reflected in
the survey findings. Only about half of all KPD personnel reported feeling that the promotional
process is fair, based on their experience, and about two-thirds of all KPD personnel believe the
promotional process is transparent. Many survey respondents and focus group participants shared
perspectives that friendships, demographics, and other characteristics not related to skills or
qualifications had undue influence over advancement opportunities.
Additionally, about 60% of KPD’s sworn and civilian personnel feel that the department provides
opportunities to develop the skills necessary to advance in their career, and that KPD supports a
culture of continuous training and mentorship. As with promotional processes, many expressed
confusion and frustration around the lack of clarity about training opportunities, and perceived
inconsistency in who was able to take advantage of them.
Recommendations
• KPD should reassess the promotional and assignment process from end to end. Once
revised, each step of the process should be documented and shared with all personnel.
In particular, KPD should ensure that promotional criteria are as clear, merit-based, and
objective as possible.5
• Consider increasing transparency into the promotion and assignment process by
posting demographic information (e.g., race, gender) about the number of people
applying to open positions and then the number selected.
• KPD should develop specific required job performance skills criteria (not based on
achievements in particular assignments) for specialty assignments, cultivate the skills
among a diverse pool of officers, post positions, and create an authentic competitive
process for these assignments.
• As KPD explores options for new promotional exams, the organization should: (i)
ensure the test effectively assesses job-related functions and skills, and (ii) establish
processes to routinely and objectively evaluate the exams once implemented, to ensure
they are fair, and do not disparately impact certain groups.6
• Consider developing processes to facilitate transfer of knowledge as positions with
little turnover are vacated, and as a large portion of the department becomes eligible
for retirement.
5
U.S. Department of Justice. 2019. Law Enforcement Best Practices: Lessons Learned from the Field. Washington,
DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-w0875-pub.pdf
6
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. 2019. New Era of Public Safety: A Guide to Fair, Safe,
and Effective Policing. https://civilrights.org/wp-content/uploads/Policing_Full_Report.pdf
20
Detailed Findings
Training and Professional Development
Across focus groups and survey responses, many indicated that they had experienced challenges
with the process of obtaining training or professional development. More than half of all groups,
other than civilians in the investigation unit, responded on the survey that they felt KPD provided
opportunities to develop the skills necessary to advance their career.
The most frequent feedback provided about training and professional development centralized
around a few topics:
1. Sworn personnel would like to see leadership training occur before people are promoted
2. Lack of transparency around decisions about who is selected to participate in training, and
what training will be funded contributes to sentiments about favoritism and bias within the
department
3. Opportunities to advance within the organization seem to be limited, particularly in certain
units and roles with little turnover
4. Training opportunities as well as advancement opportunities are more available to sworn
personnel than civilians, and to those in specialized units than patrol
5. Mentorship is provided by some supervisors, but there is no structured or organized
program
A lack of clarity about what training the department is and is not willing to pay for, reimburse, or
recognize has led to frustration by many, including those in specialized units. Further, perceptions
that favoritism, particularly at the executive level, influence all levels of decision making within
21
the department proliferated here as well, as some recounted being turned down for investigative
training, while some top brass and close associates attended a firearm convention in Las Vegas.
Investigators recounted taking the lead on serious cases for months, and in other situations for
years, before being sent to homicide school or other formal training.
Overall, many officers in the focus groups talked about KPD’s former status as a standard-bearer
for what was cutting edge in the field. However, many participants in the focus groups agreed that
they do not believe the organization has evolved with the changing demands of the field, has
stagnated, and ultimately fallen behind peer agencies when it comes to training and development.
Promotions and Assignments
There is widespread agreement across the department that the testing, promotional, and assignment
processes are not transparent, and require significant improvement. In focus groups and surveys,
many members of the organization shared that they felt the wrong people were being promoted,
the process was dictated by friendships and preference over skills, and that rankings and interviews
had little-to-no impact on who was ultimately selected for assignments or promotions.
Across various ranks and demographics, few outside of ranking sworn personnel and civilians
reported experiencing a fair or transparent promotional process. Of those with relevant experience
(i.e., excluding reports of “not applicable”), only about half of respondents reported the process
was fair. Notably, zero Black sworn perceived experiencing a fair promotional process, based on
aspects of the process such as required demographic disclosures on the test, subjective selection
practices, and disparate outcomes.
22
Many in focus groups and survey responses reported that too much emphasis was placed on the
test, which was seen as outdated and a poor measure of who would make a good supervisor. Others
were frustrated by the fact that scores on the test were irrelevant, and that someone who scored a
70% could be selected over a candidate who scored 100%, without additional justification. One
officer who sat for the most recent promotional exam questioned why they were asked to disclose
their race and sex on the top of the test. Additionally, some questioned the practice of having
different people grading exams, suggesting that different graders were likely to score exams
inconsistently.
Further, some reported that the questions asked by interviewers were superficial, or that by the
time the interviews were held, leadership already knew who they wanted to promote. Within
specialized units, it was reported that many moves to fill vacancies (not necessarily promotions)
were done by supervisors, without the position first being posted, or made available to patrol.
Among those who reported that they did not feel the promotional process was fair, comments
included:
• Whether or not you get promoted has always depended more on who you are friends with
and how well you are liked more than any sort of objectivity.
• It doesn't matter where you are on the "list" - they choose who they want.
• Usually in my opinion the people are already picked before the application comes out
• The testing process is subjective, and promotions don't always go to those who earned
them. Politics.
23
Similarly, many felt that the process lacked in transparency. Of those who had gone through the
sworn promotional testing and interview process, candidates reported being frustrated by the lack
of feedback on what they could do to improve the likelihood of being selected in subsequent
rounds. Comments provided about transparency included:
• Those who do not get selected are not given honest feedback on how to improve their
chances in the future of getting selected.
• It always comes down to who the leadership wants, not who the best person for the job is.
• The timeline for lateral officers to promote is unclear.
• It's really all about who you know. Not your merits.
Conversations during focus groups also revealed that there are certain downsides to pursuing the
promotional process. For example, for some the transition from the PO4 rank to sergeant
historically involved increased responsibilities and “headaches” without a significant increase in
compensation. Conversely, some discussed a lack of mobility to higher ranks or more desirable
assignments as disincentivizing patrol officers from working hard.
For investigators, promotion has typically required returning to patrol, with a low likelihood of
ever being able to return to CID, given low turnover within the division’s supervisor positions.
Conversely, it was also noted that there had been sergeants through deputy chiefs with no
investigations or case experience who had received these coveted CID supervisor positions. It was
speculated that these roles were given to friends of decision makers, rather than the most qualified
candidates. According to the investigators engaged in the discussion, the negative implications of
having supervisors who lack this experience include: not receiving funding for tools critical to
solving cases because their supervisor did not see the value, and losing investigators altogether,
because the supervisors did not recognize or appreciate the impact of burnout, and thus declined
requests for temporary reassignment.
24
Another theme within the topic of assignments was frustration over sworn personnel who were not
being called upon to work special events at the same rate as patrol. Some called out certain
specialized units that typically avoid supplemental assignments and forced overtime. Others
discussed sworn personnel in assignments typically filled by civilians, suggesting that reassigning
them back to patrol could be a first step in helping to address staffing shortages.
25
Resources, Staffing & Equipment
Survey respondents and focus group participants discussed the resources that the department
provides, to include physical and emotional support, staffing, and the tools and equipment needed
to perform their jobs. Most employees, sworn and civilian, agree that KPD provides resources to
support the physical (79%) and emotional (82%) wellbeing of personnel. However, many also
indicated that there are few opportunities to take advantage of these resources – for example, shift
length and staffing shortages prevent some from using the allotted time to exercise, and for some,
there are perceived risks related to utilizing emotional wellness resources.
The prevailing opinion amongst patrol is that a 10-hour shift is preferential over 8- or 12-hour
options. The next best option would be to remain on 12-hour shifts but work a fixed shift for a
fixed period. Many discussed the harmful effects the 12-hour rotating shifts have had on their
physical and mental health, as well as home life.
Inconsistency, poor communication, and lack of transparency in equipment procurement and

policy changes, ranging from technology, to firearms, outer carriers, and patches have contributed
to frustration. For example, sworn personnel would generally prefer a service weapon that has a
larger magazine capacity and single action, but would also like to ensure that it is selected and
vetted through a rigorous, transparent process. Additionally, some office equipment and most
technology seems to be purchased at the unit level based on available budget, the interest of the
highest supervisor, and perceived need.
Lastly, based on survey and focus group feedback, the department’s technology infrastructure is
disjointed, inefficient, inadequate for a contemporary police department, and may be vulnerable to
breaches. The department would benefit from having dedicated IT personnel in house or at the
city’s IT services to ensure that KPD members across all shifts and assignments can reliably
perform key functions, and access mission critical data and tools. Partnering dedicated IT staff
with KPD business experts will enhance the processes for study, acquisition, and use of critical
technology.
Recommendations
• KPD should examine whether it is possible to return to a 10-hour shift. A 2011 study
by the National Policing Institute concluded that 10-hour shifts had advantages over
both 8- and 12-hour shifts, with no known disadvantages.7
7
Amendola, K. L., Weisburd, D., Hamilton, E. E., Jones, G., & Slipka, M. (2011). The shift length experiment: What
we know about 8-, 10-, and 12-hour shifts in policing. Washington, D.C.: National Policing Institute.
https://www.policinginstitute.org/publication/shift-length-experiment/
26
• The department should conduct a comprehensive technology assessment to

systematically map out the agency’s current landscape, critical workflows, needs, and
vulnerabilities. A technology system integrator can support KPD in identifying and
mapping out software and hardware needs and oversee project management of the
procurement and implementation of critical programs, such as a new RMS.
Additionally, KPD should promptly identify vulnerabilities to its network, including
use of personal mobile devices and computers.
• A multi-year funding plan for technology and equipment, including vehicles, should be
developed and reflect both new purchases and replacements for existing technology
and equipment.
• KPD needs ongoing, dedicated IT expertise if not in house, at the City’s IT department.
• KPD should develop and formalize transparent vetting and procurement processes for
new equipment. Generally, these processes should involve systematic testing by a
diverse group, including in-house experts, of those who will ultimately be using the
equipment, and those who will be providing instruction on its proper use. When a
decision is reached, information on why and how the equipment was selected should
be shared. A standing uniform and equipment committee can help solicit member input
and feedback.
• KPD should create acquisition processes, tied to the Department’s fiscal managers,
procurement specialists, and subject experts (e.g., weapons, equipment, technology).
• Health and wellness must be integrated into the ethos of the department and not be
viewed as initiatives or programs. KPD should consider instituting a holistic and
comprehensive system and suite of responses ranging from education to integration of
wellness and safety with professional and personal success. See the Department of
Justice Blue VALOR Safety and Wellness Program, Georgetown University Law
School Active Bystandership of Law Enforcement (ABLE), Critical Incident Stress
Management, Peer Support and more to add to the existing initiatives.
Detailed Findings
Physical and Emotional Wellbeing
Most units within KPD indicated at rates greater than 80 percent, that they feel that the department
supports their physical wellbeing. While a majority (70%) of patrol acknowledged that KPD
provides resources to support physical health, many, particularly those on patrol, noted that they
do not actually have the ability or support to use them. For example, during focus groups and in
survey comments, many discussed the implementation of a policy that allows officers to exercise
while on duty for one hour per day and having access to a department gym facility and yoga class.
However, the ability to take advantage of these resources was compromised by short staffing and
high call volumes. This was further complicated by the transition to 12-hour shifts, without
overlaps in staffing.
27
Comments from the survey, across all units, included:

• The allotment of time to exercise is appreciated but call volume and lack of shift overlap
prevents many from taking advantage of it.
• Resources are provided, but it is hard to utilize them with the 12-hour shifts.
• The growth of the yoga program is a good example.
• Not currently but as I understand it the new facility will have state of the art equipment
and that's a great thing!
Similarly high rates of personnel affirmed that KPD provides resources that support the emotional
wellbeing of its personnel. Many indicated that they were aware of the EAP program but had not
used it themselves. Others stated that while the department does provide resources, there still exists
a stigma within KPD that leads them to believe there is a risk associated with actually using the
resources. Others spoke about their own strong support for and belief in using EAP and focusing
on the mental health and well-being of themselves and colleagues.
28
Comments from the survey included:

• I don't think we utilize them well, but we have a robust Chaplain Corps and Peer Support
Team (and available EAP). There is a kind of machismo in this profession which
discourages talking about feelings.
• When an officer is burnt out on the street they have no ability to request a different position
without "backdooring" it or fearing "burning bridges" within their career.
• I believe there are some resources, but I do not think KPD does a good job with the mental
health aspect on its officers. A lot of the times mental health within patrol is looked frowned
upon and help is very limited. Once you express this you seem "unfit" for duty.
• I do not think that just saying I'm good, to a physician once a year is an effective way to
check on officers emotional wellbeing. I think there is an enormous lack of support into
how officers actually feel. In most cases, officers have to put on a tough front because they
will be look down on if they say anything different.
During the focus groups, participants provided mixed feedback on the availability of mental health
and emotional support resources within the department. In some groups, one participant would
mention a particular resource – such as an in-house therapist, or emotional support dog – and others
would indicate that they were just hearing about it for the first time. Some felt that the services
that they were aware of, such as a support dog or yoga, were “band-aids”, and that if the department
were truly committed to emotional wellness, there would be better options for officers who say
that they’re experiencing problems, such as burnout or an abusive supervisor.
Some were skeptical about the EAP program, stating that it was available, but a contracting service,
and seen as a “liability factor”. Others stated that it was difficult to find someone local to talk to
through the EAP process. Many mentioned that they are required to check in with some form of
counseling or mental health professional each year during the month of their birthday, but that it
was done on the honor system, and the employee just had to sign of that they talked to someone
(e.g., their own doctor or clergy).
One KPD member was optimistic that peer support team resources, including a website, would be
available within the next few months. He described some of the peer support resources that have
been available for the past few years, particularly in response to critical incidents, but also
described resistance by officers to participate in post-incident debriefs.
Shift Length and Rotation
Amongst sworn personnel on patrol, staffing and shift rotation was the most pressing issue, and
based on focus group conversations, causing some to consider leaving KPD. Survey respondents
were asked a series of questions about their preferences for the rotation cycle, and shift length.
When asked to choose between the current 28-day rotation and other options, across all ranks the
most common choice was “fixed choice for a fixed period”. The second choice varied by rank,
29
with patrol officers showing a preference for 90-day rotations over 28 days, whereas 28 days was
slightly more popular than 90 days when all patrol ranks were considered. Similar patterns
emerged when asked to rank rotation preferences for 8-hour shifts.
There is a lot of conversation at KPD about shifts and shift rotation. The current shift is 12 hours,
with a rotation every 28 days to the opposite half of the day‚ days and nights. What would be your
preference for rotation cycles, still with the 12-hour shift?
Every 28 Every 90 Every 180 Once Fixed shift for a
days days days annually fixed period
Sworn: All 31% 20% 3% 1% 46%
Sworn: Patrol (Officers and above) 24% 23% 3% 1% 50%
Sworn: Patrol (Officers only) 17% 25% 4% 1% 54%
Another option is 8-hour shifts. If the department adopted an 8-hour shift length, with what
frequency would rotations work best for you?
Every 28 Every 90 Every 180 Once Fixed shift for a
days days days annually fixed period
Sworn: All 33% 16% 3% 2% 46%
Sworn: Patrol (Officers and above) 24% 16% 2% 3% 55%
Sworn: Patrol (Officers only) 16% 18% 3% 3% 61%
While sworn personnel in patrol had unfavorable opinions of the 12-hour shift, two-thirds
indicated that they preferred it over the other option of an 8-hour shift. During focus group
conversations on the topic, some indicated that they would resign if the department moved to 8-
hour shifts.
Do you prefer a 12-hour shift length over 8-hour shifts?

No
Yes No Preference
Sworn: All 46% 36% 18%
Sworn: Patrol (all ranks) 64% 20% 17%
Sworn: Patrol Officers 68% 20% 12%
The most popular option voiced during discussions, and in survey comments was the 4/3 10-hour
shift. In the absence of a 10-hour option, the preference as evidenced by both the survey and focus
groups, is a 12-hour fixed schedule. While many find the 12-hour shift too long, the continuous
rotation appears to be the aspect that patrol personnel find most disruptive.
30
If rotation of shifts was eliminated, what ideas do you have to ensure that shifts, irrespective of
their length, achieve a balance of officer tenure to achieve a diversity of experience on each shift?
All officers rank choices (day/night Create a process that proposes a specific
or 1/2/3) of shift then central number of positions for different levels
personnel endeavor to satisfy of seniority by shift and then select
preferences and create a balance positions and shift by seniority Other
Sworn: All 37% 42% 21%
Sworn: Patrol (all ranks) 38% 41% 22%
Sworn: Patrol Officers 43% 38% 20%
Survey respondents were provided space to describe their preferred approach to scheduling if shift
rotation was eliminated. Most used the opportunity to voice their preference for the 4/3 10-hour
shift. Others described an annual or semi-annual bidding processes based on seniority,
specialization, and other criteria, and the possibility of offering differential pay for off-hour shifts.
Further, several indicated that even though they would prefer to work the day shift, they would
take a night shift if it meant that rotations could end. Comments included:
• Create a point system that allows officers with special teams, children, and seniority to
have preferences on schedule selection.
• I don't think anyone disliked the 4/3. What they disliked was there was no process to change
shifts when that schedule was rolled out. As a sergeant over evening shift, at that time, my
officers were only frustrated that they were stuck on that shift for years with no way out.
• Offer a shift pay differential. Those that work off hours receive a higher pay rate for those
hours. This would attract senior officers to work afternoon and night shifts. Once this
offered then have officers bid for the shift they want.
• Rotating shifts cause a lot of health problems over time because of the lack of set sleep
patterns. I would prefer a day shift but would work nights if I had to if it meant no rotating
shifts. Older officers especially can't handle rotating shifts.
• 12-hour shifts are hard for family life on a day-to-day basis. It does provide for shorter
work week, but you only have time to go home rest then go to bed get up and do it again.
No length of personnel time with family except for days off.
Conversations during focus groups echoed these sentiments. Many felt that the department would
be short staffed regardless of shift length, so KPD might as well go back to a schedule that better
supported officers’ physical and mental health, family life, and morale. Several participants
reinforced the disruption caused by the continuous rotation, with examples including making poor
decisions on and off the job, working while exhausted, experiencing family issues, and relying on
drinking excessively in order to sleep. In focus groups there was a regular refrain about the 12-
hour shift being another example of inequity. Not all units work the 12-hour shift and not all in
patrol work similar schedules. In reality, there appears to be a range of shifts and schedules being
worked by KPD employees.
31
Equipment
All groups were asked whether they had the tools and equipment needed to successfully perform
their jobs. Two-thirds of all survey respondents indicated they had access to the necessary
equipment, ranging from a low of 51 percent amongst those working in investigations, to a high
of 78 percent among those whose assignment was self-classified as “other”. Many survey
respondents mentioned staffing as the most critical unmet need for successfully performing their
job.
Both the survey comments and focus group discussions identified numerous areas in which
personnel felt that KPD needed to improve the equipment or resourcing. Consistent with the
overarching theme of the feedback collected throughout the survey and the focus groups, many
were less concerned with the equipment itself (some lateral transfers from other departments even
commented on how much more equipment they were issued by KPD) than they were concerned
by how equipment-related decisions were made.
For example, some voiced frustration with the number of people who must sign off on procurement
decisions, and the fact that these decisions were made at the captain level. Many had the perception
that when decisions were made at the captain level and above, politics and friendships had undue
influence on whose requests were ultimately fulfilled.
Others were upset by the lack of a systemic process behind equipment selection and vetting. Many
felt that if there was a documented process for testing and choosing which equipment was
purchased and deployed in the field, then there would be less pushback when it came time to adopt.
Others were concerned that people who spent little to no time in the field, or hadn’t worked patrol
in many years, seemed to be making unilateral decisions about key procurements and changes,
such as a new firearm or patch. Across the board, more transparency, explanation, and
opportunities for feedback were desired.
32
Technology
Concerns about technology within KPD included (i) access to hardware, such as laptops, (ii)
software, ranging from Microsoft Office to records management systems, video editing, and facial
recognition programs, (iii) reliable department-issued cell phones, and (iv) dedicated IT support
that has coverage during at least part of each shift.
In particular, investigators felt that they should be issued laptops so that they can access cases and
case files from the field and while on call. Further, investigators were concerned by the age and
capacity of the computers and software available to them, which some reported could not open
videos or media shared by victims or download phone contents, due to the age of the system.
Additionally, some in CID were frustrated by their lack of software access to Crime Lab systems,
needed to search for evidence and updates to cases, and also by their inability to access others’
body worn camera footage. Additionally, many members reported that the software systems within
the department are so siloed that different units, even within CID, have access to different
databases and different case management systems (when they exist), making it difficult to establish
links between cases that may be related.
Across units there was a great deal of confusion about access to certain core software, such as
Microsoft Office. Several people expressed frustration over a transition away from Microsoft
Word to a free word processing program called Libre, while others indicated that no such transition
had occurred, and access remained available. Similarly, many of the computers continue to run on
outdated operating systems, such as Windows 7, which can impact the ability to use Adobe. As a
result, some have taken to conducting essential business functions on their personal devices –
raising concerns about data security, and CJIS compliance.
Data security is a particular concern, given the recent ransomware attack faced by the organization
and many others across the nation. Despite this issue, some officers disclosed using their personal
cell phones to take photos, enter e-citations, and dictate report narratives, when in the field, rather
than using the department-issued phone, which they find to be of lesser quality and functionality.
Many across the department expressed frustration over the lack of dedicated IT personnel, both
for support services and technology procurements. Some reported difficulty accessing timely
software updates to critical systems such as CAD and described problems that arise from having
someone outside the agency in charge of software programs and firewalls. Further, some indicated
that they cannot receive live support during their off-hours shifts, and must wait until the next
business day, often when their shift is over.
Uniform
Many sworn personnel, particularly patrol officers, were upset by what they understood to be
changes to the load bearing vest or outer carrier policy. Several focus group participants and survey
respondents stated that they were going to have to reorder the same vest that they already owned
in a new color, as a result of the policy change. Some were frustrated by the expense, which they
estimated to be over $200, particularly as they had one that was still functional. Others were more
33
upset by the transition, limitations on the items on the carrier, and the need to relocate more of
their equipment back onto their belts, putting additional strain on hips and backs. Further, many
were frustrated that there was no opportunity to weigh in on the decision or provide input before
the policy was changed.
Sworn personnel also raised concerns about their body armor. Several people reported that vests
were not replaced by their expiration dates, though at least one indicated that wearing an expired
vest was intentional, as it was more comfortable. Discussion with female officers surfaced a
concern that the people who typically take measurements for vests are men who seem
uncomfortable measuring women. As a result of not being correctly measured, some of the women
feel that their vests have never fit correctly.
Firearms
All sworn personnel in the focus groups, as well as all respondents to the survey had the
opportunity to weigh in on the department issued firearm. Nearly all feedback provided touched
upon a few key areas:
1. Frustration over how the decision to change the firearm was made, and lack of transparency
into the process; feeling that not all users, such as female officers were considered
2. Feel safety is compromised when the gun only has an eight-round capacity
3. Feel safety is compromised when the gun requires double action
4. Current gun requires more maintenance and cleaning
Overall sworn personnel didn’t advocate strongly for a particular caliber of service weapon, and
instead emphasized the importance of having a greater magazine capacity and single action.
Otherwise, they were more concerned with having the right people responsible for making the
decision. For example, some suggested leaving the final decision up to the rangemaster and
firearms instructors, and some suggested making sure that people with a variety of hand sizes had
the opportunity to test different weapons before one was selected.
Aside from the officers’ service weapon, some feedback was also provided in the survey about the
department’s rifles. According to several comments, the rifles are not equipped with optics, white
34
lights, or adjustable stocks. Additionally, a few respondents also mentioned that ballistic shields
are not readily available in each district, for active shooter situations.
Office Equipment
Civilian personnel discussed conditions in their work environments that ranged from inconvenient
or problematic to dangerous. For example, some discussed issues with office furniture, such as
broken chairs, that they have been told will not be replaced until they move to the new
headquarters. Some personnel have resorted to bringing in their own office furniture, and in some
cases personal computers, that they have purchased themselves. Some civilians also reported
having to purchase their own paper towels, toilet paper, and soap for their unit. Others reported
that their units are not professionally cleaned, due to issues of data security.
Additionally, some civilian employees recounted an instance in which sewage leaked into an
office, and an employee wound up getting sick. Another stated that they purchased a mop to keep
in their office, which floods each time it rains.
Patch
When asked to choose between changing to a new departmental patch or keeping the patch as it
is, a strong majority of sworn personnel were in favor of making a change, while civilians were
relatively evenly split. Among those surveyed, many feel that the current patch is “cartoonish”,
reminiscent of “South Park”, unprofessional, and too large. Many indicated that they would be fine
with or would even prefer changing back to the old patch; some would like at the very least to see
the current patch converted to grayscale.
That said, while a minority selected to “keep it as is”, focus group conversations revealed two
important contextual findings:
1. People were just as upset, if not more upset, by the process and people involved in changing
the patch than they were about the patch itself
2. Some felt that relative to other issues that should be addressed internally, the appearance
of the patch was minor, and if the new administration worked to change the patch ahead of
these more important issues, it would minimize some of the real problems within KPD.
35
About 21CP Solutions

21CP Solutions helps states, cities, communities, and universities effectively tackle the challenges
of delivering safe, effective, just, and constitutional public safety services in the 21st Century. We
empower communities across the country to develop and implement equitable and integrity-driven
public safety –grounded in building trust and strengthening relationships.
21CP is an outgrowth of many of its consultant’s experiences as members of President Obama’s

Task Force on 21st Century Policing. Building on the accomplishments of the Task Force and its
work, several of the Task Force’s members formed 21CP in 2015 to assist local law enforcement
agencies and communities with implementing strategies for ensuring officer and public safety,
constitutional policing, and an authentic partnership with the community.
We are police chiefs who have worked to turn around troubled police departments and renew
community confidence in their agencies. We are civil rights lawyers and leaders who have helped
to oversee some of the country’s most successful police reform efforts. We are social scientists
and academics who have spent careers understanding what works in policing and what is possible
in public safety. And we are all professionals who have worked in, with, and for communities to
drive safe, effective, and constitutional policing.
21CP does not simply make recommendations about improvements or reforms to policies,
practices, or procedures. Instead, it actively works with communities across the country to provide
ongoing technical assistance and translate broad public safety objectives to operational realities.
21CP’s recommendations, guidance, and counsel to jurisdictions and institutions are never “cookie
cutter” proposals. Instead, we endeavor to be informed by the specific histories, experiences, and
values of the diverse communities in each location that 21CP assists.
21CP’s experts have significant experience working on major assessment, monitoring,

organizational change, and oversight projects. Specifically, 21CP has in several other jurisdictions
compared current agency practices with best practices; surveyed and interviewed agency
personnel; assessed community perceptions of and trust in their police departments; and delivered
high-quality, rigorous, and accessible reports to local governments and universities on how to
enhance community well-being by re-imagining public safety.
36

Knoxville Climate Assessment Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Knoxville Climate Assessment Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Knoxville Climate Assessment Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Climate Assessment of the

Knoxville Police Department

Training and Advancement ................................................................................................... 20

Resources, Staffing & Equipment .......................................................................................... 26

About 21CP Solutions ........................................................................................................... 36

Summary of Key Findings

Communication & Feedback

Key Findings and Recommendations

Voice and Feedback

Escalating Problems Internally

Respect, Diversity, and Equity

For those who feel respected by the organization, reasons included:

Racial Diversity and Inclusivity

How dedicated is the organization to racial diversity and inclusiveness?

When discussing racial discrimination experienced by the organization, comments included:

Comments concerning racial discrimination by members’ peers included:

Gender Diversity and Inclusivity

How dedicated is the organization to diversity and inclusiveness across genders?

Sworn female employees reported experiencing a higher rate of gender-based discrimination

Other Factors Impacting Success Within the Organization

Training and Advancement

Key Findings and Recommendations

Training and Professional Development

Promotions and Assignments

Resources, Staffing & Equipment

Key Findings and Recommendations

Inconsistency, poor communication, and lack of transparency in equipment procurement and

• The department should conduct a comprehensive technology assessment to

Physical and Emotional Wellbeing

Comments from the survey, across all units, included:

Comments from the survey included:

Shift Length and Rotation

Do you prefer a 12-hour shift length over 8-hour shifts?

About 21CP Solutions

21CP is an outgrowth of many of its consultant’s experiences as members of President Obama’s

21CP’s experts have significant experience working on major assessment, monitoring,

You might also like