August 4, 2009
Summary:
INTERIM REPORT
Evaluation Study of the
PWC Police Illegal Immigration
Enforcement Policy
www.virginia.edu/surveys
Project team
• Tom Guterbock, Director, Center for Survey Research,
UVa
• Karen Walker, Research Prof. of Psychology, UVa
• Milton Vickerman, Assoc. Prof. of Sociology, UVa.
• Abdoulaye Diop, Sr. Research Analyst, CSR, UVa
• Bruce Taylor, Dir. of Research, PERF
• Chris Koper, Deputy Dir. of Research, PERF
• Tim Carter, Prof. of Sociology, JMU
• Nicole Fedoravicius, F. Jennifer Jones, UVa
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
•
Background & history
Goals & limitations of the evaluation
Broad research questions
Data sources
The policy’s goals and possible consequences
Preliminary conclusions
– With summaries of key supportive data
• Next steps
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
3
Background and history
• July 2007: BOCS passes immigration resolution
• BOCS decides an outside evaluation is needed
– Funding approved October 2007
• UVa teams with PERF, assembles interdisciplinary
team
• Planning phase funded Dec 07 – Mar 08
• Main project: Spring 2008 – Fall 2010
• Interim report: August 2009
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
4
Evaluation Project Goals
1) Provide information about the policy’s
implementation
2) Provide information about the policy’s potential
effects on the community and police services in
Prince William County
3) Provide a blueprint for future research and data
collection by the Prince William County Police
Department
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
5
Some limitations
• No solid baseline we can compare PWC with
– But some police data can be examined from earlier years
• No “control group” or comparison County
– But we will soon be gathering crime statistics from other areas
• Immigration status often not recorded in police records
– Not in other available data sources, either
• Direct surveys of illegal immigrants not feasible
• Study initiated in a highly charged atmosphere with
strongly divided opinion
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
6
More limitations
• Important and rapid changes in the environment
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Decline in new construction in PWC
The mortgage crisis
General economic slowdown
Rapidly changing political climate
National immigration policy in flux
Shifts in public opinion
Strong media interest and attention
• Therefore: It is not possible to clearly attribute
observed changes in the community to the County
policy itself
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
7
We are NOT . . .
• Evaluating the BOCS or its policy decisions
• Attempting a comprehensive study of all effects of
the policy
• Making recommendations on the best way to
handle illegal immigration at the local level
• Investigating particular police-citizen interactions
for their legality
• Changing the way individual police officers are
evaluated
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
8
We are . . .
• Doing our best to maintain neutrality
• Listening to diverse groups and opinions
• Assisting the Police Department by providing
feedback as the policy implementation unfolds
• Learning from Police Department and County
staff as we do our work
• Keeping the County informed of our progress
• Planning to use the results of the evaluation in our
research and scholarly publications
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
9
Three levels of analysis
Police Dept.
Policy
Implementation
& Policing
Community
Three Broad Research Questions
for the Interim Report
1) What are the Police Department’s experiences in
implementing the policy?
2) What effect, if any, does the new policy appear to
have on other areas of the Department’s
policing?
3) What effect, if any, does the new policy appear to
have on members of the Prince William County
community?
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
11
Methods and data sources
• We are using a combination of methods
– Quantitative
– Qualitative
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
12
Quantitative data sources
• Collection of data from departmental records and
systems
–
–
–
–
–
Calls for service
Crime reports [UCR data]
Neighborhood services, school data
Planned: Arrest records
Planned: Field interview cards
• The annual PWC Citizen Survey
– Including new questions about the policy
• Survey of police officers in Fall of 2008
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
13
Qualitative data sources
• Focus groups
– Police officers at various levels
– Criminal Alien Unit
• “Key informant” and stakeholder interviews
–
–
–
–
County Board, County staff
Community groups on all sides
Immigrants (through churches)
Business leaders
• Observation
– At the jail
– “Ride-alongs” with patrol officers
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
14
Multiple Policy Goals:
• Improve public safety;
• Reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the
county;
• Save money by delivering fewer services to illegal
immigrants; and
• Reduce neighborhood overcrowding and public
disorder,
– such as loitering at day labor sites and public
intoxication.
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
15
Possible other consequences?
• Create fear and a sense of being unwelcome
among immigrants in general;
• Cause immigrants (including legal immigrants) to
leave the county; and
• Result in lower crime reporting and greater
victimization among immigrants.
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
16
Preliminary Conclusions
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
17
1. A Contentious Process
of Policy Formulation
• Large, rapid demographic change in the County 2000-2006
• Once started, action by the BOCS was speedy
• Very public controversy over the policy
– Prominently featured in local and regional media
– The publicity and public conflict may have had as much effect on
the immigrant community as the policy itself
• BOCS gave tight deadlines for implementation of this
major policy change
– Police and County staff had 60 – 90 days to develop details
• Policy was modified by BOCS in April 2008
– Changed to cover only those physically arrested
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
18
2. Smooth Implementation
by the Police Department
• PWCPD prepared carefully, consulted with legal
counsel, developed training materials
• Every officer trained before policy went into effect
(Jan – Feb 2008)
– 4,884 officer-hours devoted to this training
• All were re-trained for policy revision, May 2008
– 500 officer-hours
• Criminal Alien Unit created, trained in 287g
program
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
19
Officer Survey shows:
Effective training
Statement
Strongly Agree or
Agree
Currently, I believe it is clear how to implement the PWC
immigration policy.
83.9%
I believe I have enough knowledge about the current policy to enforce
this policy correctly.
85.0%
The training I have been provided by the PWPCD has adequately
prepared me to enforce the PWC immigration policy.
82.3%
My personal beliefs are supportive of the current PWC immigration
policy.
61.7%
My personal beliefs will have no effect on how to enforce any lawful
PWC immigration policy.
92.2%
When appropriate, I have the necessary skills to ask immigration
status questions.
88.9%
I have the necessary skills to review identification (e.g., driver’s
license) for fakes.
78.5%
Officer survey Fall 2008, N=379
PWCPD Community Outreach
• Board directed extensive community education
– Particularly with minority groups
• Over 100 meetings with community groups & media
– Most attended by Chief Deane
• Meetings with over 300 County employees
• Pamphlets and media coverage
• Emphasizing:
– Focus on those who commit crimes
– Protection for crime victims and those who report crime
– No racial profiling
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
21
Contacts with Suspected
Illegal Immigrants
• Over 1,000 contacts March – December 2008
– More frequent contacts under original policy
– Few contacts while policy was suspended (May)
– Average of 106 contacts per month, June – December
• Under the current policy, 68% of contacts with
illegal immigrants resulted in an arrest
• 98% of suspected illegal immigrants were
confirmed to be illegal
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
22
More Officer Survey Results
• 63% of officers had questioned at least one person about
their immigration status
• Officers felt well prepared for these encounters
– 84.2% said the training was helpful
– 96.1% felt confident about handling these
• Few problems reported with implementation of the policy
– No racial profiling lawsuits so far
• Revised policy somewhat easier to implement than the
original
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
23
More Officer Survey Results
Statement
Str.
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Str.
Disagree
The policy is a useful tool
for PWCPD officers.
16.4
48.8
26.4
7.0
1.3
The policy is too restrictive
for PWCPD officers to
do their job.
3.0
9.1
41.7
38.4
7.8
Officer survey Fall 2008, N=379
More Officer Survey Results
Question
Very
Positive
Somewhat
Positive
Neutral
Somewhat
Negative
Very
Negative
Overall, since July 1,
2008, what has been
your experience with
General Order 45.01?
12.7
28.3
51.5
6.2
1.3
Officer survey Fall 2008, N=379
3. Effects on Crime Show:
Mixed indications
• Illegal immigrants were just 3-5% of those
arrested for crime (Mar – Dec 2008).
• PERF analyzed PWCPD ‘calls for service’ data
for past ten years
– Several types of crime and disorder calls have declined
significantly (-2% to -11%) since policy went into
effect
– Calls about violent crime are down by -9% to -11%
– Less crime . . . Or less reporting?
• Citizen survey (2008) shows no difference in
crime reporting rate between Hispanics and others
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
26
Effects on crime, continued . . .
• Crime statistics from PWCPD show a 36% decline
in aggravated assaults in 2008
– But illegal immigrants are just 3% of those arrested for
this type of crime
• The policy may have contributed to reductions in
some forms of crime and disorder, including
violent crime.
– But violent crime is down slightly across the region
• The policy is a reasonable way of targeting serious
offenders who are illegal immigrants.
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
27
4. Large-Scale Implementation
Would be Challenging
• In the first eight months of the policy, 76% of
arrests of illegal immigrants were for:
– Public drunkenness
– Driving without a license
– DUI
• ICE has struggled to keep up with flow of persons
detained by PWC for immigration violations.
• It would not be possible for ICE to keep up if
many localities adopted a similar policy
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
28
5. Most Residents Satisfied with
Implementation & Police
Lower Satisfaction among Hispanics
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
29
New question about police execution
of the immigration policy
• “The Prince William County Board of County Supervisors
recently ordered the Department of Police to be more
active in checking the citizenship or immigration status of
people, to see if they are in violation of federal
immigration law. How satisfied are you with the job the
Police Department is doing in carrying out this policy?”
• If R SAYS OPPOSED TO POLICY, SAY: “We realize that
opinions are divided on the policy. Would you be able to
rate the job the police department is doing in carrying out
the policy?”
• IF INSISTS THAT CANNOT RATE: SELECT “DECLINES
TO RATE (VOLUNTEERED).”
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
30
Question about police execution
of the new policy
• IF SAYS POLICY CHANGED: “In July 2007, the Board
ordered the Dept of Police to inquire into the citizenship or
immigration status of detained persons when they are
stopped and there's probable cause to believe the person is
in violation of federal immigration law. In late April 2008,
the policy was modified and it now applies only to persons
who are actually placed under arrest. Taking into account
the old and new policies together, are you . . .”
• The question asks about the police, not the policy itself.
• Asked of 1,223 respondents in 2008
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
31
Satisfaction: carrying out policy
How satisfied are you . . .
% of all asked
% of those
with opinion
Very satisfied
36.0
48.1
Somewhat satisfied
24.2
32.4
Somewhat dissatisfied
6.1
8.1
Very dissatisfied
8.6
11.5
Decline to rate/oppose the policy
7.7
No opinion/don’t know
17.2
Refused
0.2
Satisfaction: carrying out policy
Very
Dissatisfied
11.5%
Somewhat
Dissatisfied
8.1%
Somewhat
Satisfied
32.4%
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
Very
Satisfied
48.1%
Overall satisfaction:
80.5%
33
Satisfaction: Carrying out the Policy
by ethnic/racial group
White
86.7%
Asian
75.8%
Hispanic
51.0%
Black
76.6%
0%
25%
50%
75%
Pe rce nt Satisfie d
100%
Reasons for being very satisfied
Comments from 48% who were very # of responses
satisfied:
% of
cases
Illegal immigration causes problems
in the community
67
15.7
The policy is good/needed
134
31.4
The policy’s enforcement is having
positive results
105
18.3
The police have been doing a good
job of carrying out the policy.
156
36.5
Other
40
9.4
Base: 427 respondents who explained why they were very satisfied
Reasons for being very dissatisfied
Comments from 11.5% who were very # of responses
dissatisfied:
% of
cases
The policy inadequately addresses
the problems of illegal immigration
22
25.9
The policy is bad
41
48.2
Results of enforcing the policy are
negative
13
15.3
Problems with enforcement
7
7.1
Police are racial profiling
14
16.5
Other
5
5.9
Base: 85 respondents who explained why they were very dissatisfied
Overall police performance
by ethnic/racial group
White
93.2%
Asian
94.9%
Hispanic
72.8%
Black
83.5%
0%
25%
50%
75%
Pe rce nt Satisfie d
100%
Overall rating of police
by ethnic/racial group, by year
100%
95%
90%
85%
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
55%
50%
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1 Hispanic
1999
2000
2001
2002
2 Black (non-hispanic)
2003
2004
2005
3 All Others
2006
2007
2008
Police attitudes and behaviors
by ethnic/racial group, by year
100%
95%
90%
85%
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
55%
50%
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
1 Hispanic
2000
2001
2002
2003
2 Black (non-hispanic)
2004
2005
3 All Others
2006
2007
2008
PD treats everyone fairly
by ethnic/racial group
White
82.6%
Asian
79.7%
Hispanic
49.4%
Black
61.6%
0%
25%
50%
75%
Pe rce nt Satisfie d
100%
6. Changes in the Community
Associated with
the Policy
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
41
7. Some Immigrants Left,
Growth of Immigrants Slowed or Halted
• There are no hard data on counts of illegal
immigrants before or after the policy was enacted.
• Multiple informants, from the community and
from local agencies, agree that some people left
because of the policy and the controversy about it.
• Supportive data (not conclusive):
– Lower ESL enrollments in local schools, Sept 2008
– Decrease in births to uninsured mothers
– Individuals detained and turned over to ICE
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
42
More on loss of immigrants . . .
• We estimate that several thousand illegal
immigrants left when the policy was enacted
• Economic crisis contributed
– Mortgage crisis
– Loss of construction jobs, housing market decline
• Growth in immigrant population was rapid and
increasing 2000 – 2006
– The pattern of rising growth has halted
– The growth was probably reversed
– The police policy was partly responsible for the shift
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
43
8. Overcrowded Housing and
Loitering Declined
• Neighborhood services records show dramatic
decline in complaints about parking in
overcrowded properties
– Down 38% from 2006 to 2008
• Residents reported less loitering at day labor sites
– But this problem came back after its initial decline
• Mortgage foreclosures reached crisis proportions
• Complaints about neglected vacant properties
went up substantially
– Weed/tall grass violations doubled from 2006 to 2008
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
44
9. Little Evidence for
Improved Sense of Safety
• Some individuals reported feeling safer after the
policy was implemented
– Especially those in neighborhoods that had experienced
problems with overcrowding, public drunkenness
• But there was no decline in county-wide
perceptions of safety (as measured in annual
citizen surveys) during the years when
immigration increased
• And there was no overall increase in the feeling of
safety in the 2008 citizen survey
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
45
10. Hispanic Perceptions
of PWC Became Negative
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
46
Want to live in PWC 5 years from now?
1 Hispanic
2 Black (non-Hispanic)
3 All Others
100%
90%
80%
% ‘yes’
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2002
2004
2006
2008
11. Trust in PWC Government
Dropped for Hispanics, Blacks
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
% who trust
PWC
government to
do what’s right
all or most of
the time
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
1998
1999
2000
1 Hispanic
2001
2002
2003
2004
2 Black (non-hispanic)
2005
2006
2007
3 All Others
2008
Overall . . .
• Police implemented the policy smoothly, with a
high level of effort and professionalism
• The policy has had significant effects
– Some of these match the multiple goals
– Some of these are negative for the County
• The social costs of the policy were high
– Sharp ethnic disparities in perception emerged in the
2008 Citizen Survey
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
49
Next steps
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
We’ll report on 2009 Citizen Survey next month
Second survey of officers
New round of informant interviews
More police officer focus groups
Intensive, follow-up interviews
Focus group with citizens on perceptions of Police
Gather data on crime from other jurisdictions
Final report mid-2010
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
50
August 4, 2009
Summary:
INTERIM REPORT
Evaluation Study of the
PWC Police Illegal Immigration
Enforcement Policy
www.virginia.edu/surveys