[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":3,"doc-seo-253051-105":53,"doc-detail-253051-en":126},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,14,19,24,29,34,39,44,49],{"id":8,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":11,"show_sort_weight":12,"slug":13},11,1,"Template","Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":15,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":16,"show_sort_weight":17,"slug":18},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":20,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":21,"show_sort_weight":22,"slug":23},14,"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":25,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":26,"show_sort_weight":27,"slug":28},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":30,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":31,"show_sort_weight":32,"slug":33},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":35,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":36,"show_sort_weight":37,"slug":38},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":40,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":41,"show_sort_weight":42,"slug":43},18,"Letters",30,"letters",{"id":45,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":46,"show_sort_weight":47,"slug":48},21,"Paper Templates",5,"papers-templates",{"id":50,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":51,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":52},158,"General","general-158",{"code":4,"msg":54,"data":55},"ok",{"site_id":56,"language":57,"slug":58,"title":59,"keywords":60,"description":61,"schema_data":62,"social_meta":119,"head_meta":121,"extra_data":123,"updated_unix":125},105,"en","porac-ripa-2022-report-analysis-one-pager","PORAC-RIPA-2022 Report Analysis-One Pager","","RIPA 2022 Report Analysis scrutinizes the Racial & Identity Profiling Advisory Board’s 2022 findings on racial profiling in California traffic enforcement. The review identifies statistical and methodological problems, including omitted data from the California Highway Patrol, timing issues that prevent determining whether race influenced the stop, and limited variables that exclude relevant context. It proposes revising reporting criteria, stop data collection forms, and required reporting funding so outcomes can be assessed accurately and fairly for public safety.",{"@graph":63,"@context":118},[64,80,101],{"@type":65,"itemListElement":66},"BreadcrumbList",[67,71,74,77],{"item":68,"name":69,"@type":70,"position":9},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":72,"name":10,"@type":70,"position":73},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/",2,{"item":75,"name":11,"@type":70,"position":76},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/presentations/",3,{"item":78,"name":59,"@type":70,"position":79},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/porac-ripa-2022-report-analysis-one-pager/253051/",4,{"url":78,"name":59,"@type":81,"image":82,"author":87,"headline":59,"publisher":90,"fileFormat":93,"inLanguage":57,"description":61,"dateModified":94,"datePublished":95,"encodingFormat":93,"isAccessibleForFree":96,"interactionStatistic":97},"DigitalDocument",{"url":83,"@type":84,"width":85,"height":86},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/porac-ripa-2022-report-analysis-one-pager/253051.png","ImageObject",442,249,{"name":88,"@type":89},"McQueen","Person",{"url":68,"name":91,"@type":92},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-28","2026-09-13",true,{"@type":98,"interactionType":99,"userInteractionCount":25},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":100},"ViewAction",{"@type":102,"mainEntity":103},"FAQPage",[104,110,114],{"name":105,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":107},"What major flaws did Dr. Withrow identify in the RIPA Board’s 2022 report?","Question",{"text":108,"@type":109},"The methodology distorted conclusions. Key issues include excluding California Highway Patrol data, using data collected after the police interaction, and limiting independent variables so important context could not be considered.","Answer",{"name":111,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":112},"Why does the report’s timing of data collection matter for assessing racial profiling?",{"text":113,"@type":109},"Because data was collected after the police interaction occurred, it cannot show whether race was a factor in initiating the stop, which is required under California law.",{"name":115,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What changes does PORAC propose to improve future assessments?",{"text":117,"@type":109},"PORAC proposes revising reporting criteria (including baseline disparity calculations), expanding the variables used to justify officer behavior, and revising the stop data collection form to capture context such as race discernment before the stop, warnings, and whether a person became confrontational.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":78,"og:type":120,"og:title":59,"og:site_name":91,"og:description":61},"article",{"robots":122,"canonical":78},"index,follow",{"doc_id":124,"site_id":56},253051,1791720644,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":127},{"doc_id":124,"user_id":128,"nickname":88,"user_avatar":129,"doc_module":9,"category_id":8,"category_name":11,"doc_title":59,"doc_description":61,"doc_content":130,"file_id":131,"file_url":132,"file_type":133,"file_size":134,"view_count":25,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":9,"is_downloadable":9,"audit_status":9,"page_count":73,"language":135,"language_code":57,"site_id":56,"html_lang":57,"table_of_contents":136,"faqs":137,"seo_title":138,"seo_description":61,"update_tm":139,"read_time":9},5909890329169,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","RIPA 2022 REPORT ANALYSIS  \nRacial & Identity Profiling Advisory (RIPA) Board 2022 Report Contains Statistical Flaws  \nRacial bias permeates every aspect of American society, and law enforcement is no exception. If peace officer behavior in the course of basic traffic enforcement isto be legislated, it is paramount that lawmakers are equipped with data that accurately reflects the state of racial profiling in California. Unfortunately, the RIPA Board’s 2022 Report failed to meet that standard. PORAC enlisted the help of racial profiling expert Dr. Brian L. Withrow to conduct a thorough review of the Board’s 2020 stop data analysis as contained in the Board’s 2022 Annual Report. Dr. Withrow found that the Board’s flawed methodology distorted the conclusions drawn in the report. PORAC has re-commissioned Dr. Withrow to conduct a review of the latest 2023 report released by the Board in January of this year and will also be conducting our own original analysis of the 2021 stop data covered by the latest 2023 report. This original analysis will yield a more accurate and current assessment of the state of racial profiling in the course of basic traffic enforcement throughout the state.  \nPROBLEM:  \nRIPA Board Chose to Exclude Large Swaths of Vital Data  \n• California Highway Patrol data-accounting for over half of all stops-was left out of analyses, as was the severity of the traffic violation for which the driver was stopped.  \n• Data was collected after the police interaction occurred, making it impossible to determine whether race was a factor in initiating the stop, as required to determine that racial profiling occurred under California law.  \n• Race/ethnicity was the only independent variable considered when attributing a reason for the stop, preventing important contextual information from being considered.  \n• Report cherry-picked news articles to serve as “sources,” while neglecting to conduct a thorough and proper review of the peerreviewed literature that forms the body of evidence and best practices in conducting statistical analyses of this type.  \nSOLUTION:  \nRevise the Reporting Criteria  \n• End the use of stops involving White residents as the baseline for calculating disparity. California is the most diverse state in the country, and this approach ignores how race is perceived in predominantly Black, Hispanic and Asian neighborhoods.  \n• Consider the consequences that restricting traffic stops will have on driver safety, vehicle thefts, and tax revenue when there is no real way to measure the correlation between minor traffic violations and pretext.  \n• Expand the variables field of potential justifications for officer behavior to include categories consistent with police systems and professional standards. A notable omission to the data set is recording by whom officer use of force was initiated.  \nPeace Officer’s Research RIPA 2022 1  \nAssociation of California Report Analysis  \nCONCLUSIONS:  \nLocal Departments Need Funding to Support Reporting Requirements  \n• Given the substantial amount of data collected at each stop, the time commitment associated with completing reports exceeds the labor hours available in understaffed police departments.  \n• After passing SB 2, SB 16, AB 26, and AB 48 all in the last two years, PORAC encourages lawmakers to give these reforms the time they need to be properly and thoroughly implemented to discern what impact they may have on public safety outcomes before further legislating the profession.  \n• If California expects local police departments to comply with these new and additional reporting requirements, the mandated state funding to support the additional work associated with compliance must be paid to these departments promptly.  \nRevise the Stop Data Collection Form Officers Use to Report Outcomes  \n• If the RIPA Board’s goal is to accurately assess the state of racial profiling in the course of basic traffic enforcement, that goal will be served well by revising the stop ","cbCaiiSwrI8WlFoC","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiiSwrI8WlFoC","pdf",149672,"English","# RIPA 2022 report analysis\n## Problem: flawed methodology and omitted data\n## Solution: revise reporting criteria and data collection\n## Conclusions: funding needs and form revisions","[{\"question\":\"What major flaws did Dr. Withrow identify in the RIPA Board’s 2022 report?\",\"answer\":\"The methodology distorted conclusions. Key issues include excluding California Highway Patrol data, using data collected after the police interaction, and limiting independent variables so important context could not be considered.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the report’s timing of data collection matter for assessing racial profiling?\",\"answer\":\"Because data was collected after the police interaction occurred, it cannot show whether race was a factor in initiating the stop, which is required under California law.\"},{\"question\":\"What changes does PORAC propose to improve future assessments?\",\"answer\":\"PORAC proposes revising reporting criteria (including baseline disparity calculations), expanding the variables used to justify officer behavior, and revising the stop data collection form to capture context such as race discernment before the stop, warnings, and whether a person became confrontational.\"}]","PORAC-RIPA-2022 Report Analysis-One Pager | PDF",1789264084]