Bill Overview
Title: Supporting Women COPS Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes a Task Force on Women in Law Enforcement to (1) study state hiring standards for law enforcement officers, (2) develop national hiring standards for law enforcement officers, and (3) develop recommendations for retention and promotion of female officers. It also incentivizes states to adopt the recommendations of the task force.
Sponsors: Rep. Ross, Deborah K. [D-NC-2]
Target Audience
Population: Women in Law Enforcement
Estimated Size: 84000
- The bill primarily targets women in law enforcement, focusing on hiring, retention, and promotion standards.
- There are approximately 700,000 full-time law enforcement officers in the United States according to the U.S. Department of Justice.
- Women make up about 12% of local police officers in the U.S., which is approximately 84,000 women.
- The global law enforcement community is much larger, but exact worldwide numbers are difficult to ascertain.
Reasoning
- This simulation assumes the Supporting Women COPS Act of 2022 is targeted towards women in law enforcement, comprising approximately 12% of all officers. The target population would be about 84,000 women, given there are about 700,000 law enforcement officers in the U.S.
- The budget constraints imply the policy might affect department funding, training programs, and promotional processes. The impact will likely vary based on roles within law enforcement and location due to differing state resources and policies.
- Not all impacts are direct; therefore, including a mix of individuals directly affected and others who might experience changes in department culture or policy indirectly is crucial.
- Considering diversity within the target population allows us to see a wide range of outcomes that reflect different work environments, seniority, and immediate concerns.
Simulated Interviews
Police Officer (Austin, TX)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The new policy seems promising as it could help create standardized guidelines for promotions and retention, which might help my career prospects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Police Recruit (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful that having national standards might give me more equal footing in hiring across different departments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Police Sergeant (Seattle, WA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might not affect me directly, but I hope it encourages more diversity and opportunities for the capable women in my team.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Detective (Miami, FL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There is hope this policy might break the promotion glass ceiling that has been tough in my department.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Sergeant (Chicago, IL)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am cautiously optimistic that the task force's recommendations could provide more resources for those balancing demanding schedules.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Police Captain (New York, NY)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could help standardize some practices, but it needs careful implementation to be effective.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Patrol Officer (Houston, TX)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could lead to better career development experiences, if implemented correctly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Law Enforcement Officer (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- New hiring standards could attract more support for equality in the hiring process.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Chief of Police (Denver, CO)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My concern is balancing new mandates with budget constraints. Optimistic about fairer women representation, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Lieutenant (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The initiative seems well-intentioned, but execution will determine real benefits especially for wellness-related improvements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $11000000, High: $21000000)
Year 3: $15000000 (Low: $11000000, High: $21000000)
Year 5: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $22000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Implementation of this act requires coordination between federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.
- The development of national standards will need to respect existing state autonomy and diversity in law enforcement practices.
- Financial incentives are critical to ensuring state adoption of the task force's recommendations.