Program Profile: Phoenix (Arizona) Police Department Crime Gun Intelligence Center

This is a collaborative law enforcement effort to collect, manage, and analyze crime gun evidence to identify serial shooters, disrupt criminal activity, and prevent future gun violence. The program is rated Promising. Posttest gun crime cases saw statistically significant increases in the likelihood of arrest, but no statistically significant difference in the likelihood of being charged or convicted, compared with cases in the pretest period.

A Promising rating implies that implementing the program may result in the intended outcome(s).

A Promising rating implies that implementing the program may result in the intended outcome(s).

Program Goals/Target Population

In 2017 the Phoenix (Arizona) Police Department established the Phoenix Crime Gun Intelligence Center. This is an interagency collaboration focused on the timely collection, management, and analysis of crime gun evidence, such as shell casings and semiautomatic handguns, that may be found at the crime scene. The Phoenix Crime Gun Intelligence Center is focused on intelligence-driven identification, arrest, and prosecution of individuals who have committed violent offenses, to help disrupt criminal activity and prevent future gun violence. The goal of the program is to collect, manage, and analyze crime gun intelligence and improve firearm-related investigative efforts and prosecutorial outcomes in Phoenix.

Program Components

Originally funded by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) in three cities in 2013, the Crime Gun Intelligence Center model calls for agencies and the ATF to collaborate in collecting, managing, and analyzing crime gun evidence generated by eTrace, an electronic firearm-tracing system, and the National Integrated Ballistics Information Network, which handles all ballistic imaging across the United States (King et al., 2013). As of 2020 the National Integrated Ballistics Information Network stored more than four million pieces of ballistic evidence and 45 million images and allowed for information to be shared promptly and efficiently, to encourage collaboration in federal, state, tribal, and local law enforcement agencies across the country (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 2021). Through real-time efforts, Crime Gun Intelligence Centers help identify crime gun sources and provide local decisionmakers with the most accurate gun crime data available to increase public safety.

Although Crime Gun Intelligence Centers may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, the model is structured around five fundamental principles (Police Foundation, 2017):

1. Regardless of the type and severity of a crime, all shell casings and guns at the crime site are immediately collected and treated as evidence.
2. Timely processing of National Integrated Ballistics Information Network and eTrace evidence is critical; within the first 24–48 hours of collection, shell casing data are entered into the network and guns are traced through eTrace.
3. Across offense types and police districts, dedicated teams coordinate the investigations of linked crimes that are found to have been committed with the same gun.
4. Forensic technology is used to investigate and prosecute crimes, as National Integrated Ballistics Information Network, eTrace, gunshot detection systems, and other technologies are employed to focus resources on individuals who use guns.
5. Police establish and maintain partnerships among investigative units, federal law enforcement agencies, and the courts, which then direct interagency resources toward high-priority violent individuals.

Phoenix Police Department’s Crime Gun Intelligence Center is 1 of 33 such centers across the country. Housed in the Violent Crime Bureau, Phoenix’s Center is a collaborative partnership involving law enforcement agencies and experts, including the Phoenix Police Crime Laboratory, the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, the ATF's Phoenix Field Division, and Arizona State University’s Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety. Each partner has a specific, defined role and responsibilities, and representatives regularly communicate and collaborate to review the program's progress, make decisions, and support the program's overall success (Katz et al., 2021). The process occurs in real time to identify serial shooters, disrupt criminal activity, and prevent future gun violence.

Key Personnel

In Phoenix, the Crime Gun Intelligence Center is staffed with two sergeants, eight National Integrated Ballistics Information Network weapons investigators, six digital forensic evidence detectives, five nonsworn police assistants, a secretary, and a criminal intelligence analyst. The sergeants supervise the investigators, five of whom are sworn ATF Task Force Officers; they coordinate with ATF Field Office agents, who bring together stakeholders from related investigations and contribute investigative resources and expertise, additional staff resources, and eTrace processing. The criminal intelligence analyst oversees the Center’s National Integrated Ballistics Information Network processing and generates additional intelligence, with mapping technologies and other resources that support the National Integrated Ballistics Information Network lead investigations. The police assistants are trained to properly swab evidence for DNA, test firearms, and enter evidence. The Phoenix Police Crime Laboratory processes DNA and fingerprints related to investigations and reviews and confirms National Integrated Ballistics Information Network hits. The Phoenix Police Department also trains other agencies’ personnel and permits them to enter evidence into the department’s National Integrated Ballistics Information Network equipment, allowing access to more locationally dense information networks.

Study

Flippin, Katz, and King (2021) used a quasi-experimental time-series design (with a control group) to assess the effectiveness of the Phoenix (Arizona) Police Department’s Crime Gun Intelligence Center on clearance rates and prosecutorial outcomes for gun crimes 2 years after implementation of the center.

The pretest period consisted of the 12-month period immediately before the implementation of the Crime Gun Intelligence Center program in Phoenix (October 2016 to September 2017). The two posttest periods span the first year (October 2017 to September 2018) and second year (October 2018 to September 2019) of the program’s operation. The CrimeSolutions review of this study focused on gun crime clearance rates and prosecutorial outcomes for National Integrated Ballistics Information Network (NIBIN) leads with a connection to a Phoenix Police Department case outcomes at the second posttest period, 2 years after the Crime Gun Intelligence Center implementation.

Three sources of data were made available through the Phoenix Police Department. First, Phoenix Police Department Records Management System data—including information related to calls for service, computer-aided dispatch detail reports, incident reports, and arrests—were collected. Second, the department’s database of impounded evidence was used to better contextualize the number of crime scenes that resulted in the recovery of guns and other ballistic evidence. Additionally, the department made NIBIN lead data available. Once ballistic evidence is entered into the NIBIN, trained technicians identify likely matches or high-probability hits, known as NIBIN leads. Leads offer critical evidentiary information for conducting criminal investigations, helping identify links between suspects and crimes. The NIBIN lead data included information about evidence eligible for NIBIN entry, whether that evidence had been entered, time elapsing between an incident and NIBIN entry, and the number of leads produced. Finally, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office provided data pertaining to cases charged and resulting in convictions. These data were collected and analyzed for the entire study period, October 2016 through September 2019.

Pretest and second year posttest differences in NIBIN leads with a connection to a Phoenix Police Department case were examined. Difference-in-difference models were used to determine whether over time the treatment group (NIBIN–related cases, cases in which an arrest was aided by a NIBIN lead) significantly changed relative to the control group (non–NIBIN cases), while accounting for potential time-period effects (from the pretest period 1 year before the Crime Gun Intelligence Center implementation to the second year posttest) that may have occurred in the control group and that are tangential to the treatment. Equivalency between non–NIBIN and NIBIN–related cases was not assessed. No subgroup analysis was conducted.

These sources were used in the development of the program profile:

These sources were used in the development of the program profile:

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. 2021. Fact Sheet–National Integrated Ballistic Information Network. Washington, D.C.

Katz, Charles Max, Michaela Flippin, Jessica Huff, William R. King, and Jessica Ellefritz. 2021. Evaluation of the Phoenix Crime Gun Intelligence Center. Phoenix, Ariz.: Center for Violence Prevention & Community Safety, Arizona State University.

King, William R., William Wells, Charles M. Katz, Edward Maguire, and James Frank. 2013. Opening the Black Box of NIBIN: A Descriptive Process and Outcome Evaluation of the Use of NIBIN and Its Effects on Criminal Investigations. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.

Police Executive Research Forum. 2017. The “Crime Gun Intelligence Center” Model: Case Studies of the Denver, Milwaukee, and Chicago Approaches to Investigating Gun Crime. Washington, D.C.

Police Foundation. 2017. Five Things You Need to Know About Crime Gun Intelligence Centers. Arlington, Va.

Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this practice:

Reducing Gun Violence

Reducing gun violence is a persistent public policy concern for communities, policymakers and leaders. To reduce gun violence, several strategies have been deployed including public health approaches (e.g., training and safe gun storage); gun buy-back programs; gun laws; and law enforcement strategies. The practice is rated Promising for reducing violent gun offenses.

Evidence Ratings for Outcomes

Crime & Delinquency - Violent offenses

Why might a practice's outcome ratings differ from the ratings of specific programs encompassed by that practice?