Bill Overview
Title: Invest to Protect Act of 2022
Description: This bill directs the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services within the Department of Justice to award grants to local and tribal governments that employ fewer than 200 law enforcement officers. Grant funds may be used for various activities, including to provide de-escalation training and improve recruitment and retention.
Sponsors: Sen. Cortez Masto, Catherine [D-NV]
Target Audience
Population: People affiliated with or served by small law enforcement agencies
Estimated Size: 3000000
- The bill targets local and tribal governments employing fewer than 200 law enforcement officers, indicating its primary impact is on smaller police departments.
- Grants can be used for activities such as purchasing body cameras, which is specifically relevant to law enforcement officers in these small departments.
- De-escalation training funded by the bill is meant for improving the skills and wellbeing of police officers, which indirectly impacts community members they serve.
- Improving recruitment and retention in these departments could have long-term effects on both current and future officers and their families.
- Indirectly, communities served by these police departments will also be impacted because of improved policing capabilities and practices.
Reasoning
- The bill targets small and tribal police departments which are typically understaffed and underfunded compared to larger urban counterparts.
- Programs such as these can have a ripple effect, improving not only the safety and effectiveness of officers but also public trust in law enforcement.
- Participation in the grant program would likely see tangible benefits, like better equipment and training, within these small departments, and possibly improved job satisfaction for officers.
- The indirect effect on the communities could include improved community relations and reduced tensions, which improves wellbeing scores within those communities.
Simulated Interviews
police officer (rural Iowa)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy could help our department upgrade our old equipment.
- Body cameras have been proven to protect both officers and citizens.
- De-escalation training is sorely needed in many departments, including ours.
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 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
community liaison officer (tribal area in South Dakota)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Tribal police departments often get overlooked, but this policy recognizes our unique needs.
- I hope this policy enables more collaboration and trust between the police and community.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
chief of police (small town Texas)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having a financial cushion for recruitment and retention could relieve a lot of pressure.
- Most of our officers earn less than their counterparts in big cities, leading to high turnover.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
teacher (rural Vermont)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel safer knowing officers have body cameras and de-escalation training.
- Improved policing means a safer environment for my students.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
retired (rural Georgia)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If the police improve, then maybe I won't feel the need to keep my home as fortified.
- More police visibility and presence could reduce crime, I hope.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
police dispatch (small town Ohio)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Better training and equipment could reduce the strain on everybody during stressful situations.
- Anything that supports our officers is a win for me and my family.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
farmer (rural Kansas)
Age: 48 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I like the idea of seeing officers more integrated into our community instead of being seen as outsiders.
- Investment in the department could mean better security for my property.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
college student (suburban New Mexico)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could increase job opportunities and better training for people like me entering the field.
- A well-resourced department improves the community's perception of law enforcement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
healthcare worker (tribal area in Arizona)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy leads to better response times and a safer community.
- We often are on our own out here, so stronger local police would help greatly.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
mechanic (small town Louisiana)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More officers staying long-term in the community means stronger, more personal relationships.
- With better resources, maybe we can see less crime and more support for youth programs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Key Considerations
- Sustainability of funding beyond initial grant allocations.
- Monitoring and accountability measures for the use of grant funds.
- Variation in costs and needs among different communities should be addressed for equity.