Common use of Body-Worn Camera Program Clause in Contracts

Body-Worn Camera Program. Recommendations and Lessons Learned‌ open records requests played a role when we were deciding how long to keep the video. To protect privacy, you have to go through every video and make sure that you’re not disclosing something that you shouldn’t. It takes a lot of time, and personnel, to review and redact every tape. If you keep video for five years, it is going to take even more.” Agencies have also explored cheaper storage methods for videos that by law must be retained long- term, such as those containing evidence regarding a homicide or other serious felony. For example, the Greensboro Police Department deletes videos requiring long-term storage from the online cloud after importing them into its RMS or Internal Affairs case management systems. This reduces overall consumption of expensive cloud storage for videos that are required for future court proceedings or long-term retention under state personnel laws. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department recently completed a body-worn camera trial program, and Major Xxxxxx said that the department is exploring alternative storage methods. “Long-term storage costs are definitely going to be a problem. We are looking at cold storage, offline storage, and shorter retention times as a way to keep those costs more manageable,” he said. Many police agencies have also found it useful to conduct a cost-benefit analysis when exploring whether to implement body-worn cameras. For example, agencies can conduct an audit of their claims, judgments, and settlements related to litigation and complaints against officers to determine what costs they may already be incurring. The costs associated with deploying body-worn cameras may be offset by reductions in litigation costs, and agencies should carefully assess their ongoing legal expenses to determine how they could be reduced through the use of body-worn cameras. Lessons learned about financial considerations In interviews with PERF staff members, police executives and other experts revealed a number of lessons that they have learned about the financial costs of body-worn cameras: r The financial and administrative costs associated with body-worn camera programs include costs of the equipment, storing and managing recorded data, and responding to public requests for disclosure. r It is useful to compare the costs of the camera program with the financial benefits (e.g., fewer lawsuits and unwarranted complaints against officers, as well as more efficient evidence collection). r Setting shorter retention times for non-evidentiary videos can help make the significant costs of data storage more manageable. r Videos requiring long-term storage (e.g., those involving serious offenses) can be copied to a disc, attached to the case file, and deleted from the internal server or online cloud. This frees up expensive storage space for videos that are part of an ongoing investigation or that have shorter retention times. r Linking recorded data to the agency’s records management system or using electronic tablets, which officers can use in the field, can ease the administrative burden of tagging and categorizing videos.

Body-Worn Camera Program. Recommendations and Lessons Learned‌ open records requests played a role when we were deciding how long to keep the video. To protect privacy, you have to go through every video and make sure that you’re not disclosing something that you shouldn’t. It takes a lot of time, and personnel, to review and redact every tape. If you keep video for five years, it is going to take even more.” Agencies have also explored cheaper storage methods for videos that by law must be retained long- term, such as those containing evidence regarding a homicide or other serious felony. For example, the Greensboro Police Department deletes videos requiring long-term storage from the online cloud after importing them into its RMS or Internal Affairs case management systems. This reduces overall consumption of expensive cloud storage for videos that are required for future court proceedings or long-term retention under state personnel laws. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department recently completed a body-worn camera trial program, and Major Xxxxxx said that the department is exploring alternative storage methods. “Long-term storage costs are definitely going to be a problem. We are looking at cold storage, offline storage, and shorter retention times as a way to keep those costs more manageable,” he said. Many police agencies have also found it useful to conduct a cost-benefit analysis when exploring whether to implement body-worn cameras. For example, agencies can conduct an audit of their claims, judgments, and settlements related to litigation and complaints against officers to determine what costs they may already be incurring. The costs associated with deploying body-worn cameras may be offset by reductions in litigation costs, and agencies should carefully assess their ongoing legal expenses to determine how they could be reduced through the use of body-worn cameras. Lessons learned about financial considerations In interviews with PERF staff members, police executives and other experts revealed a number of lessons that they have learned about the financial costs of body-worn cameras: r • The financial and administrative costs associated with body-worn camera programs include costs of the equipment, storing and managing recorded data, and responding to public requests for disclosure. r • It is useful to compare the costs of the camera program with the financial benefits (e.g., fewer lawsuits and unwarranted complaints against officers, as well as more efficient evidence collection). r • Setting shorter retention times for non-evidentiary videos can help make the significant costs of data storage more manageable. r • Videos requiring long-term storage (e.g., those involving serious offenses) can be copied to a disc, attached to the case file, and deleted from the internal server or online cloud. This frees up expensive storage space for videos that are part of an ongoing investigation or that have shorter retention times. r • Linking recorded data to the agency’s records management system or using electronic tablets, which officers can use in the field, can ease the administrative burden of tagging and categorizing videos.