CALLING FOR MORE DATA

This blog is my personal opinion and I don't speak for the Commission as a whole.

At the November 21st Police Commission meeting, I made a motion asking the Edmonton Police Service to share data on emergency calls. For the past three years, EPS’s annual reports haven’t provided either the volume of emergency calls or the response times to those calls. I think these numbers are important for us to understand the demands that are placed on the police service and how resources need to be deployed to meet that need. I think these numbers are also important for Edmontonians to understand what service levels they can expect for different types of calls they may be making. 

To provide some background, when you call 911, your call gets prioritised based on urgency. Priority 1 (P1) calls are the most urgent with a crime in progress, whereas reporting a garage break-in after the fact would be ranked lower (the drop-down below has more details). Historically, a lot of focus was put on how quickly the police responded to P1 calls, with a goal of an officer being on the scene within seven minutes at least 80% of the time. The last time EPS response times were presented was in 2020, with 70% of P1 calls meeting that benchmark. The 2021 Annual Report also included a breakdown of call types but since then, these numbers haven't been available.

EPS Annual Report, 2021, pg 6

• Call Priority Descriptions

  • Priority 0: Officer in Distress

  • Priority 1: In Progress, Person at Risk. Response will likely prevent or reduce harm to a person - Ex. Assault with a weapon in progress.

  • Priority 2: In Progress, Property at Risk. Response will likely prevent or reduce further loss of property - Ex. Autotheft in progress

  • Priority 3: Just Occurred. Immediate response increases likelihood of locating a suspect - Ex. Mischief that occurred very recently

  • Priority 4: Time Sensitive - Ex. a shoperlifter is in-custody with a security and is cooperative

  • Priority 5: General Service. Not Time Sensitive - Ex. a business finds that they were vandalised the night before (absence of in progress or just occurred)

  • Priority 6: Minor in Nature - Ex. Bylaw infraction

  • Priority 7: Hold. A P5 call placed on hold until the EPS and caller are both available to make contact - Ex. a business was vandalised right before closing, which is put on-hold until morning.

  • Priority 9: Broadcast. Information Only
    

    From EPS Annual Report, 2021, Appendix C

I agree with my Commission colleagues and EPS leadership who are concerned that relying on response times as the sole measure of police effectiveness is very problematic. This measure doesn’t capture a significant number of emergency responses that EPS is involved in, including the vast majority of 911 calls that aren't ranked P1. This measure also doesn't capture the quality of responses, or other important policing outcomes like crime diversion, investigative work, and traffic safety. To get a complete picture of the police service and identify strategic needs, we need to rely on a host of measures, many of which are included in the Annual Report.

But, just as you can't get a complete picture with only P1 calls, I don't think we can get a full picture of the police service without them. The Community Policing Bureau, which is responsible for responding to calls, represents a third of the annual police budget, the largest portion of any bureau. From a governance perspective, it's important to understand the level of demand on these resources. Demands change over time and EPS has been innovating and changing to meet them. But it's difficult to evaluate what those changing demands are - in particular what type of calls the police service are responding to - and how those changing demands are being met without data to support our conclusions and direction. Call volume and response time is a crucial part of evaluating how new deployment methods and a changing city are affecting service delivery.

Call volume and response times are also important metrics for transparently setting public expectations. Most Edmontonians will, thankfully, never have to call 911 but EPS's ability to respond is a critical component of public trust and perceptions of safety. 

As a result of these factors, on Thursday I made a motion to have EPS provide two sets of data in the next Annual Report. The first was the number of each type of call that EPS received and responded to, broken down by geographic area. The second was to provide data on call response times, both how long it takes to handle a call at the dispatch level, and how long it takes for an officer to arrive. Having these two measures helps to untangle the question of police being available to respond from the impact that traffic or longer travel distances might have on arrival time. 

Although my motion didn't pass, I'm hopeful that we can continue to explore meaningful metrics that can be used to both inform the creation of our upcoming strategic plan, and evaluate the subsequent outcomes of that plan. Evidenced-based policing is a cornerstone of EPS and a vital component to serving Edmontonians well. The data will help show either that great service is being provided or that there are opportunities to enhance responses and better align resources with demand. Both outcomes are important to support effective oversight and ensure a police service that meets the needs of Edmontonians. It is information worth knowing.