The Denver Police Department is seeking to implement a program of “Education Based Development” or EBD The program would substitute current disciplinary policy with a non-disciplinary training program for specific policy violations.
What is Education Based Development?
EBD is derived from “Education Based Discipline”, a policy concept that is designed to de-emphasize punishment in favor of correcting officer behavior through training and skills development. EBD is controversial. Proponents suggest EBD is a more efficient and innovative approach to addressing minor misconduct, while others suggest EBD lacks a foundation of evidentiary support and communicates a tolerance for officer misconduct.
Under the draft policy, if an officer’s conduct violates DPD policy, they may be referred for EBD. The draft policy involves a recommendation from the Office of the Independent Monitor, but the OIM does not determine whether a case is appropriate for EBD. The program would be administered by the Denver Police Department, and DPD staff would determine if a case is appropriate for EBD.
The draft DPD policy would connect EBD eligible misconduct to 1 or more specific training domains. Only some conduct violations would be eligible for the EBD process. The maximum number of training hours would be determined by the category of violation. The expected timeframe for completion would be 90 calendar days, with the potential for extended time beyond 90 days
It is important to understand that EBD is a non-disciplinary policy. Officers must agree to participate in EBD and follow an EBD Agreement. No discipline can be included in an EBD Agreement, including written reprimands or suspending an officer. If an officer fails to complete the conditions in the agreed upon timeframe, the case will continue through the disciplinary process.
Why does DPD want to implement the EBD policy?
DPD representatives have stated publicly that the EDB policy would result in faster timeframes for resolving misconduct complaints and allow officers to understand their mistakes, resulting in improved performance. Leadership noted that disciplinary actions may not be carried out until well after misconduct is identified, suggesting that delays can make disciplinary actions less meaningful for officers and less satisfying for community members. Check out the policy proposal to hear more about DPD’s goals with EBD.
What are the concerns?
The lack of formality, lack of evidentiary support, and the significant latitude without external accountability it provides are top criticisms offered against the EBD policy. Others have criticized the process by which DPD developed the policy, noting a lack of transparency and sidelining of stakeholders. The more minimal role played by the Office of the Independent Monitor (OIM) also prompts concern. Take a look the COB’s public comment on the proposed EBD policy here.
The Bottom Line
The draft policy indeed includes a more minimal role for the OIM – the only involvement of the OIM in the draft policy is to make a recommendation regarding EBD – approval is not required.
While the policy itself emphasizes which categories of violation are or are not eligible for EDB, a lot of discretion remains in applying the facts and classifying a violation, and, it appears that under the current system, those determinations are often made after a formal investigation.
It appears that officer training under the draft EBD policy will be paid work time. Therefore, penalties for officer misconduct could in many cases be substituted for paid training that an officer would have had to complete in the ordinary course of their employment.
Ultimately, training is a valuable tool that many advocacy groups support. But while training can address skill and knowledge deficits, misconduct is not solely a result of skill and knowledge deficits. While this policy is focusing on milder forms of misconduct and “low level offenses,” those could point to underlying higher level offenses or reflect patterns of conduct that would be revealed through deeper investigation. Concerns remain that EBD is not supported by a body of evidence that it is an effective alternative to traditional discipline, that it will reduce officer recidivism, or that it will improve public trust and satisfaction.
The concerns about procedure and community feedback must also be fairly addressed. Stakeholders should have the opportunity to meaningfully interrogate the policy change and dig further into other potential approaches that address DPD’s concerns and also support public confidence and meaningful consequences for officer misconduct.