Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/5107

Bill Overview

Title: Data on Interactions and Accountability for Law Enforcement with Individuals with Disabilities Act

Description: This bill expands activities to collect data about interactions between law enforcement officers and individuals with disabilities. In particular, the bill establishes a temporary advisory council within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to develop a methodology for collecting and reporting data on interactions between law enforcement officers and individuals with disabilities. HHS must award a grant to an independent research organization or institution of higher education to test the validity and reliability of the council's methodology. The council must also provide the Department of Justice with best practices to collect disability status in cases where a death or injury occurred because of an interaction with law enforcement. The bill also requires certain federal initiatives that collect information about interactions with law enforcement (e.g., the National Use-of-Force Data Collection) to include disability status. Further, the Bureau of Justice must award a grant to an independent third-party organization (e.g., an institution of higher education) for identifying trends using certain survey data in violence committed by law enforcement officers against individuals with disabilities.

Sponsors: Sen. Casey, Robert P., Jr. [D-PA]

Target Audience

Population: People with disabilities

Estimated Size: 40000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

unemployed (rural Kentucky)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I often feel like I'm not treated fairly by law enforcement due to my disability.
  • This policy might finally bring some accountability and safety.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 9 5

software developer (urban New York)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This data is crucial for policy change. I hope it leads to meaningful reforms and gives a voice to those who are often overlooked.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

teacher (suburban California)

Age: 29 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this data collection helps in training officers better.
  • Improving communication could lessen misunderstandings.

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

retired (urban Texas)

Age: 53 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • My family feels vulnerable with my condition. If this leads to extra training, it would be a blessing.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 5

farmer (rural North Dakota)

Age: 67 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I don't see how this policy will touch my life, seems targeted to urban settings.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

student (urban Ohio)

Age: 21 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this policy will make cities safer for people like me.
  • Training needs to be informed by real experiences.

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 9 5
Year 20 9 5

delivery driver (urban Florida)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This can prevent future legal issues for folks like me who have invisible disabilities.
  • I support more research for better outcomes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

artist (rural Montana)

Age: 58 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If done right, this can empower disabled communities and hold law enforcement accountable.

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 7 5
Year 20 7 5

healthcare worker (suburban Illinois)

Age: 46 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Critical insight into how disabled individuals are treated needs highlighting.
  • Expecting possible improvements in policy.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

policy analyst (urban Washington D.C.)

Age: 32 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Implementing this bill's recommendations could potentially save lives and push necessary reforms.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 9 6
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $4500000, High: $5500000)

Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $4500000, High: $5500000)

Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $4500000, High: $5500000)

Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $4500000, High: $5500000)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations