The rate of fatal police shootings in the United States shows large differences based on ethnicity. Among Black Americans, the rate of fatal police shootings between 2015 and December 2024 stood at 6.1 per million of the population per year, while for white Americans, the rate stood at 2.4 fatal police shootings per million of the population per year. Police brutality in the United States Police brutality is a major issue in the United States, but recently saw a spike in online awareness and protests following the murder of George Floyd, an African American who was killed by a Minneapolis police officer. Just a few months before, Breonna Taylor was fatally shot in her apartment when Louisville police officers forced entry into her apartment. Despite the repeated fatal police shootings across the country, police accountability has not been adequate according to many Americans. A majority of Black Americans thought that police officers were not held accountable for their misconduct, while less than half of White Americans thought the same. Political opinions Not only are there differences in opinion between ethnicities on police brutality, but there are also major differences between political parties. A majority of Democrats in the United States thought that police officers were not held accountable for their misconduct, while a majority of Republicans that they were held accountable. Despite opposing views on police accountability, both Democrats and Republicans agree that police should be required to be trained in nonviolent alternatives to deadly force.

The data for this study were collected in order to examine the delivery of police services in selected neighborhoods. Performances of police agencies organized in different ways were compared as they delivered services to different sets of comparable neighborhoods. For Part 1, Citizen Debriefing Data, data were drawn from telephone interviews conducted with citizens who were involved in police-citizen encounters or who requested police services during the observed shifts. The file contains data on the citizens involved in observed encounters, their satisfaction with the delivered services, and neighborhood characteristics. This file includes variables such as the type of incident, estimated property loss, police response time, type of action taken by police, citizen satisfaction with the handling of the problem by police, reasons for dissatisfaction, the emotional state of the citizen during the encounter, whom the officers referred the citizen to for help, the citizen's prior contacts with police, and the citizen's education, age, sex, and total family income. Part 2, General Shift Information, contains data describing the shift (i.e., the eight-hour tour of duty to which the officers were assigned), the officers, and the events occurring during an observed shift. This file includes such variables as the total number of encounters, a breakdown of dispatched runs by type, the number of contacts with other officers, the number of contacts with non-police support units, officer discretion in taking legal action, and officer attitudes on patrol styles and activities. Part 3, Police Encounters Data, describes police encounters observed by the research team during selected shifts. It consists of information describing the officers' role in encounters with citizens observed during a shift and their demeanor toward the citizens involved. The file includes variables such as the type of encounter, how the encounter began, whether the citizens involved possessed a weapon, the encounter location, what other agencies were present during the encounter and when they arrived, police actions during the encounter, the role of citizens involved in the encounter, the demeanor of the officer toward the citizens during the encounter, actions taken by the citizens, which services were requested by the citizens, and how the observer affected the encounter. Part 4, Victimization Survey Data, examined citizen attitudes about the police and crime in their neighborhoods. The data were obtained through telephone interviews conducted by trained interviewers. These interviews followed a standard questionnaire designed by the project leaders. Variables include perceived risk of victimization, evaluations of the delivery of police services, household victimization occurring in the previous year, actions taken by citizens in response to crime, and demographic characteristics of the neighborhood.

This survey was undertaken to learn more about how often and under what circumstances police-public contact becomes problematic. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) initiated surveys of the public on their interactions with police in 1996 with the first Police-Public Contact Survey, a pretest among a nationally representative sample of 6,421 persons aged 12 or older. That initial version of the questionnaire revealed that about 20 percent of the public had direct, face-to-face contact with a police officer at least once during the year preceding the survey. At that time, the principal investigator estimated that about 1 in 500 residents, or about a half million people, who had an encounter with a police officer also experienced either a threat of force or the actual use of force by the officer. The current survey, an improved version of the 1996 Police-Public Contact Survey, was fielded as a supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey (ICPSR 6406) during the last six months of 1999. A national sample nearly 15 times as large as the pretest sample in 1996 was used. The 1999 survey yielded nearly identical estimates of the prevalence and nature of contacts between the public and the police. This survey, because of its much larger sample size, permits more extensive analysis of demographic differences in police contacts than the 1996 pretest. In addition, it added a new and more detailed set of questions about traffic stops by police, the most frequent reason given for contact with police. Variables in the dataset cover type of contact with police, including whether it was face-to-face, initiated by the police or the citizen, whether an injury to the officer or the citizen resulted from the contact, crimes reported, and police use of force. Demographic variables supplied for the citizens include gender, race, and Hispanic origin.

This data was obtained from https://mappingpoliceviolence.us/.

Mapping Police Violence is a 501(c)(3) organization that publishes the most comprehensive and up-to-date data on police violence in America to support transformative change.

This is a database set on openly sharing information on police violence in America.

Some information on this data according to their website: Our data has been meticulously sourced from official police use of force data collection programs in states like California, Texas and Virginia, combined with nationwide data from The Gun Violence Archive and the Fatal Encounters database, two impartial crowdsourced databases. We've also done extensive original research to further improve the quality and completeness of the data; searching social media, obituaries, criminal records databases, police reports and other sources to identify the race of 90 percent of all victims in the database.

We believe the data represented on this site is the most comprehensive accounting of people killed by police since 2013. Note that the Mapping Police Violence database is more comprehensive than the Washington Post police shootings database: while WaPo only tracks cases where people are fatally shot by on-duty police officers, our database includes additional incidents such as cases where police kill someone through use of a chokehold, baton, taser or other means as well as cases such as killings by off-duty police. A recent report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics estimated approximately 1,200 people were killed by police between June, 2015 and May, 2016. Our database identified 1,100 people killed by police over this time period. While there are undoubtedly police killings that are not included in our database (namely, those that go unreported by the media), these estimates suggest that our database captures 92% of the total number of police killings that have occurred since 2013. We hope these data will be used to provide greater transparency and accountability for police departments as part of the ongoing work to end police violence in America.

In compliance with the 2015 Racial Identity Profiling Act, the Long Beach Police Department was one of seven law enforcement agencies required to begin collecting stop data on January 1, 2019, for individuals stopped by police and consensual encounters that resulted in a search. The Department will collect data for each calendar year and will submit the data to the California Department of Justice on an annual basis.

Data elements collected include demographic information of the stopped individuals that is perceived by the officer. This demographic information consists of race/ethnicity, gender, LGBT identity, age, English fluency, and perceived or known disability. The date, time, location, reason for stop, actions taken, contraband/evidence discovered, property seized, and result of stop are also included in the data collected.

The data for this study were collected in order to examine the delivery of police services in selected neighborhoods. Performances of police agencies organized in different ways were compared as they delivered services to different sets of comparable neighborhoods. For Part 1, Citizen Debriefing Data, data were drawn from telephone interviews conducted with citizens who were involved in police-citizen encounters or who requested police services during the observed shifts. The file contains data on the citizens involved in observed encounters, their satisfaction with the delivered services, and neighborhood characteristics. This file includes variables such as the type of incident, estimated property loss, police response time, type of action taken by police, citizen satisfaction with the handling of the problem by police, reasons for dissatisfaction, the emotional state of the citizen during the encounter, whom the officers referred the citizen to for help, the citizen's prior contacts with police, and the citizen's education, age, sex, and total family income. Part 2, General Shift Information, contains data describing the shift (i.e., the eight-hour tour of duty to which the officers were assigned), the officers, and the events occurring during an observed shift. This file includes such variables as the total number of encounters, a breakdown of dispatched runs by type, the number of contacts with other officers, the number of contacts with non-police support units, officer discretion in taking legal action, and officer attitudes on patrol styles and activities. Part 3, Police Encounters Data, describes police encounters observed by the research team during selected shifts. It consists of information describing the officers' role in encounters with citizens observed during a shift and their demeanor toward the citizens involved. The file includes variables such as the type of encounter, how the encounter began, whether the citizens involved possessed a weapon, the encounter location, what other agencies were present during the encounter and when they arrived, police actions during the encounter, the role of citizens involved in the encounter, the demeanor of the officer toward the citizens during the encounter, actions taken by the citizens, which services were requested by the citizens, and how the observer affected the encounter. Part 4, Victimization Survey Data, examined citizen attitudes about the police and crime in their neighborhoods. The data were obtained through telephone interviews conducted by trained interviewers. These interviews followed a standard questionnaire designed by the project leaders. Variables include perceived risk of victimization, evaluations of the delivery of police services, household victimization occurring in the previous year, actions taken by citizens in response to crime, and demographic characteristics of the neighborhood.

Context

On June 08th, 2020, I listened to an interview on National Public Radio (NPR) between Rachel Martin - An NPR's journalist - and D. Brian Burgharton about police brutality in the US. D. Brian Burghart has been studying police killings since 2012 and is the founder of Fatal Encounters. Fatal Encounters is the first national database to track how many people are killed by police. It began as a crowdsourced effort to compile public records about incidents where law enforcement officials killed someone. Although, he later changed his approach to compiling news reports that he finds with Google alerts.

Content

The dataset is a CSV file and contains 28335 rows and 29 columns. The 29 variables are the following: - Unique ID - Subject's name - Subject's age - Subject's gender - Subject's race - Subject's race with imputations - Imputation probability - URL of image of deceased - Date of injury resulting in death (month/day/year) - Location of injury (address) - Location of death (city) - Location of death (state) - Location of death (zip code) - Location of death (county) - Full Address - Latitude - Longitude - Agency responsible for death - Cause of death - A brief description of the circumstances surrounding the death - Dispositions/Exclusions INTERNAL USE, NOT FOR ANALYSIS - Intentional Use of Force (Developing) - Link to news article or photo of official document - Symptoms of mental illness? INTERNAL USE, NOT FOR ANALYSIS - Video - Date&Description - Unique ID formula - Unique identifier (redundant) - Date (Year)

Acknowledgements

Fatal Encounters

The Washington Post is compiling a database of every fatal shooting in the United States by a police officer in the line of duty since Jan. 1, 2015.

In 2015, The Post began tracking more than a dozen details about each killing — including the race of the deceased, the circumstances of the shooting, whether the person was armed and whether the person was experiencing a mental-health crisis — by culling local news reports, law enforcement websites and social media, and by monitoring independent databases such as Killed by Police and Fatal Encounters. The Post conducted additional reporting in many cases.

In 2016, The Post is gathering additional information about each fatal shooting by police that occurs this year and is filing open-records requests with departments. More than a dozen additional details are being collected about officers in each shooting. Officers’ names are being included in the database after The Post contacts the departments to request comment.

The Post is documenting only those shootings in which a police officer, in the line of duty, shoots and kills a civilian — the circumstances that most closely parallel the 2014 killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., which began the protest movement culminating in Black Lives Matter and an increased focus on police accountability nationwide. The Post is not tracking deaths of people in police custody, fatal shootings by off-duty officers or non-shooting deaths. The FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention log fatal shootings by police, but officials acknowledge that their data is incomplete. In 2015, The Post documented more than twice as many fatal shootings by police as had been recorded by the FBI. Last year, the FBI announced plans to overhaul how it tracks fatal police encounters.

The Post's database is updated regularly as fatal shootings are reported and as facts emerge about individual cases. The Post is seeking assistance in making the database as comprehensive as possible. To provide information about fatal police shootings since Jan. 1, 2015, send us an email at policeshootingsfeedback@washpost.com. The Post is also interested in obtaining photos of the deceased and original videos of fatal encounters with police.

Data Dictionary

This data collection was undertaken to gather information on the extent of police officers' knowledge of search and seizure law, an issue with important consequences for law enforcement. A specially-produced videotape depicting line duty situations that uniformed police officers frequently encounter was viewed by 478 line uniformed police officers from 52 randomly-selected cities in which search and seizure laws were determined to be no more restrictive than applicable United States Supreme Court decisions. Testing of the police officers occurred in all regions as established by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, except for the Pacific region (California, Oregon, and Washington), since search and seizure laws in these states are, in some instances, more restrictive than United States Supreme Court decisions. No testing occurred in cities with populations under 10,000 because of budget limitations. Fourteen questions to which the officers responded were presented in the videotape. Each police officer also completed a questionnaire that included questions on demographics, training, and work experience, covering their age, sex, race, shift worked, years of police experience, education, training on search and seizure law, effectiveness of various types of training instructors and methods, how easily they could obtain advice about search and seizure questions they encountered, and court outcomes of search and seizure cases in which they were involved. Police department representatives completed a separate questionnaire providing department characteristics and information on search and seizure training and procedures, such as the number of sworn officers, existence of general training and the number of hours required, existence of in-service search and seizure training and the number of hours and testing required, existence of policies and procedures on search and seizure, and means of advice available to officers about search and seizure questions. These data comprise Part 1. For purposes of comparison and interpretation of the police officer test scores, question responses were also obtained from other sources. Part 2 contains responses from 36 judges from states with search and seizure laws no more restrictive than the United States Supreme Court decisions, as well as responses from a demographic and work-experience questionnaire inquiring about their age, law school attendance, general judicial experience, and judicial experience and education specific to search and seizure laws. All geographic regions except New England and the Pacific were represented by the judges. Part 3, Comparison Data, contains answers to the 14 test questions only, from 15 elected district attorneys, 6 assistant district attorneys, the district attorney in another city and 11 of his assistant district attorneys, a police attorney with expertise in search and seizure law, 24 police academy trainees with no previous police work experience who were tested before search and seizure law training, a second group of 17 police academy trainees -- some with police work experience but no search and seizure law training, 55 law enforcement officer trainees from a third academy tested immediately after search and seizure training, 7 technical college students with no previous education or training on search and seizure law, and 27 university criminal justice course students, also with no search and seizure law education or training.

This study examines whether or not prior experiences with the police, both directly and indirectly through the experiences of others, can influence one's decision to report a crime. Data from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) was linked with the Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS) to construct a dataset of the police-related experiences of crime victims and non-victims. Variables include information on the prevalence, frequency, and the nature of respondents' encounters with the police in the prior year, as well as respondents' personal and household victimization experiences that occurred after the administration of the PPCS, including whether the crime was reported to the police. Demographic variables include age, race, gender, education, and socioeconomic status. The ICPSR's holdings for both the NCVS and the PPCS are available in the NCVS series.

Policing is an important structural determinant of HIV and other health risks faced by vulnerable populations, including people who sell sex and use drugs, though the role of routine police encounters is not well understood. Given the influence of policing on the risk environment of these groups, methods of measuring the aggregate impact of routine policing practices are urgently required. We developed and validated a novel, brief scale to measure police patrol practices (Police Practices Scale, PPS) among 250 street-based female sex workers (FSW) in Baltimore, Maryland, an urban setting with high levels of illegal drug activity. PPS items were developed from existing theory and ethnography with police and their encounters with FSW, and measured frequency of recent (past 3 months) police encounters. The 6-item scale was developed using exploratory factor analysis after examining the properties of the original 11 items. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to model the factor structure. A 2-factor model emerged, with law enforcement PPS items and police assistance PPS items loading on separate factors. Linear regression models were used to explore the relative distribution of these police encounters among FSW by modeling association with key socio-demographic and behavioral characteristics of the sample. Higher exposure to policing was observed among FSW who were homeless (β = 0.71, p = 0.037), in daily sex work (β = 1.32, p = 0.026), arrested in the past 12 months (β = 1.44, p

About this dataset

The Washington Post compiled a dataset of every fatal shooting in the United States by a police officer in the line of duty since Jan. 1, 2015.

In 2015, The Post began tracking more than a dozen details about each killing by culling local news reports, law enforcement websites and social media and by monitoring independent databases such as Killed by Police and Fatal Encounters. The available features are: - Race of the deceased; - Circumstances of the shooting; - Whether the person was armed; - Whether the victim was experiencing a mental-health crisis; - Among others.

In 2016, The Post is gathering additional information about each fatal shooting that occurs this year and is filing open-records requests with departments. More than a dozen additional details are being collected about officers in each shooting.

The Post is documenting only those shootings in which a police officer, in the line of duty, shot and killed a civilian — the circumstances that most closely parallel the 2014 killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., which began the protest movement culminating in Black Lives Matter and an increased focus on police accountability nationwide. The Post is not tracking deaths of people in police custody, fatal shootings by off-duty officers or non-shooting deaths.

The FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention log fatal shootings by police, but officials acknowledge that their data is incomplete. In 2015, The Post documented more than two times more fatal shootings by police than had been recorded by the FBI. Last year, the FBI announced plans to overhaul how it tracks fatal police encounters.

How to use this dataset

• Understanding US Police Shootings by Curtis Thompson
• Dataset Questions and Suggestions
• More datasets

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the authors.

BibTeX

@misc{wapo-police-shootings-bot , author = {The Washington Post}, title = {data-police-shootings}, month = jan, year = 2015, publisher = {Github}, url = {https://github.com/washingtonpost/data-police-shootings} }

License

CC BY NC SA 4.0

Splash banner

Image by pixabay avaiable on pexels.

This study's purpose was twofold: to investigate the nature of police patrol work in a community policing context and to field-test data collection instruments designed for systematic social observation. The project, conducted in Richmond, Virginia, where its police department was in the third year of a five-year plan to implement community policing, was designed as a case study of one police department's experience with community policing, focusing on officers in the patrol division. A team of eight researchers conducted observations with the police officers in the spring and summer of 1992. A total of 120 officers were observed during 125 observation sessions. Observers accompanied officers throughout their regular work shifts, taking brief field notes on officers' activities and encounters with the public. All of an observed officer's time during the shift was accounted for by either encounters or activities. Within 15 hours of the completion of the ridealong, the observer prepared a detailed narrative account of events that occurred during the ridealong and coded key items associated with these events. The study generated five nested quantitative datasets that can be linked by common variables. Part 1, Ridealong Data, provides information pertinent to the 125 observation sessions or "rides." Part 2, Activity Data, focuses on 5,576 activities conducted by officers when not engaged in encounters. Data in Part 3, Encounter Data, describe 1,098 encounters with citizens during the ridealongs. An encounter was defined as a communication between officers and citizens that took over one minute, involved more than three verbal exchanges between an officer and a citizen, or involved significant physical contact between the officer and citizen. Part 4, Citizen Data, provides data relevant to each of the 1,630 citizens engaged by police in the encounters. Some encounters involved more than one citizen. Part 5, Arrest Data, was constructed by merging Parts 1, 3, and 4, and provides information on 451 encounters that occurred during the ridealongs in which the citizen was suspected of some criminal mischief. All identification variables in this collection were created by the researchers for this project. Variables from Part 1 include date, start time, end time, unit, and beat assignment of the observation session, and the primary officer's and secondary officer's sex, race/ethnicity, years as an officer, months assigned to precinct and beat, hours of community policing training, and general orientation to community policing. Variables in Part 2 specify the time the activity began and ended, who initiated the activity, type, location, and visibility of the activity, involvement of the officer's supervisor during the activity, and if the activity involved problem-solving, or meeting with citizens or other community organizations. Part 3 variables include time encounter began and ended, who initiated the encounter, primary and secondary officer's energy level and mood before the encounter, problem as radioed by dispatcher, and problem as it appeared at the beginning of the encounter and at the end of the encounter. Information on the location of the encounter includes percent of time at initial location, visibility, officer's prior knowledge of the initial location, and if the officer anticipated violence at the scene. Additional variables focus on the presence of a supervisor, other police officers, service personnel, bystanders, and participants, if the officer filed or intended to file a report, if the officer engaged in problem-solving, and factors that influenced the officer's actions. Citizen information in Part 4 includes sex, age, and race/ethnicity of the citizen, role in the encounter, if the citizen appeared to be of low income, under the use of alcohol or drugs, or appeared to have a mental disorder or physical injury or illness, if the citizen was representing an establishment, if the citizen lived, worked, or owned property in the police beat, and if the citizen had a weapon. Also presented are various aspects of the police-citizen interaction, such as evidence considered by the officer, requests and responses to each other, and changes in actions during the encounter. Variables in Part 5 record the officer's orientation toward community policing, if the suspect was arrested or cited, if the offense was serious or drug-related, amount of evidence, if the victim requested that the suspect be arrested, if the victim was white, Black, and of low income, and if the suspect represented an organization. Information on the suspect includes gender, race, sobriety level, if of low income, if 19 years old or less, if actively resistant, if the officer knew the suspect adversarially, and if the suspect demonstrated conflict with others. Some items were recoded for the particular analyses for which the Arrest Data were constructed.

This dataset contains demographic information on offenders alleged to commit violent and property crimes reported to the Anderson Police Department in Anderson, CA. The data includes information on the sex, race, and gender of offenders. It covers violent crimes such as assault and robbery, as well as property crimes such as burglary and theft. Charges are listed by the CJIS IBR Offense Codes, not by statute.

The dataset was provided by the Anderson Police Department in response to our Public Records Act request and covers the time period from Jan 1, 2022 through Dec 31, 2023. The data is presented in Word format. Each row summarizes individual offenses. The demographic labels are grouped by column.

As of late May 2020, an overwhelming majority of U.S. adults surveyed - ** percent - supported training police in how to de-escalate conflicts in order to reduce the number of deadly force encounters involving police in the United States. In the same survey, only ** percent of respondents supported cutting funding to police departments as a method to achieve the same goal.

Dataset

This dataset was created by Isaac Trussell

Contents

Data on armed police encounters in the Philippines from 2006 to 2015 for the National Capital Region, Regions 3, 4a, 4b, 7 and 10. Differentiated by subregional unit and year. Categories: suspects killed, suspects wounded, police officers killed, police officers wounded.

This study aimed to improve the understanding of procedural justice during police-citizen encounters with a comprehensive approach including officer surveys, systematic social observations, and citizen surveys. First, the study used officer surveys to evaluate the effectiveness of a procedural justice training program in Norfolk, Virginia. In 2017, an eight-hour training was conducted for all Norfolk police officers. A pretest and posttest survey was given to each officer during the training, which asked about their opinions on a multitude of statements representing the key elements of procedural justice in policing (e.g., voice, respect, trustworthiness, and neutrality). In 2019, the officers were given a second-wave survey to assess the long-term effects of the training. The study also examined officers' procedurally fair behavior during interactions and citizens' behavioral responses through systematic social observations of police-citizen interactions captured by the police body-worn cameras. Patrol shifts were randomly selected and observed between December 2017 and March 2019. The third component included a survey of citizens who interacted with the police during the observation period. Randomly selected officers were, prior to the shift, encouraged to hand out survey cards to all citizens they encountered. These cards invited the citizens to take a survey online. Citizens could also give their phone numbers to the officers so that they could be contacted to take the survey over the phone. The goal of the citizen survey was to obtain information about the citizens' opinions of the Norfolk police in general and the specific encounters they had with the Norfolk police. Taken together, the three components of this study offered a systematic understanding of the policing issues related to procedural justice, including officers' perceptions about procedural justice, officers' procedurally fair behavior during interactions, citizens' behavioral responses, and citizens' subjective evaluations of their encounters.

This dataset contains demographic information on offenders alleged to commit violent and property crimes reported to the Anderson Police Department in Anderson, CA. The data includes information on the sex, race, and gender of offenders. It covers violent crimes such as assault and robbery, as well as property crimes such as burglary and theft. Charges are listed by the CJIS IBR Offense Codes, not by statute.

The dataset was provided by the Anderson Police Department in response to our Public Records Act request and covers the time period from Jan 1, 2022 through Dec 31, 2023. The data is presented in Word format. Each row summarizes individual offenses. The demographic labels are grouped by column.

The Counted is a project by the Guardian – and you – working to count the number of people killed by police and other law enforcement agencies in the United States throughout 2015 and 2016, to monitor their demographics and to tell the stories of how they died.

The database will combine Guardian reporting with verified crowdsourced information to build a more comprehensive record of such fatalities. The Counted is the most thorough public accounting for deadly use of force in the US, but it will operate as an imperfect work in progress – and will be updated by Guardian reporters and interactive journalists frequently.

Any deaths arising directly from encounters with law enforcement will be included in the database. This will inevitably include, but will likely not be limited to, people who were shot, tasered and struck by police vehicles as well those who died in police custody. Self-inflicted deaths during encounters with law enforcement or in police custody or detention facilities will not be included.

The US government has no comprehensive record of the number of people killed by law enforcement. This lack of basic data has been glaring amid the protests, riots and worldwide debate set in motion by the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown in August 2014. The Guardian agrees with those analysts, campaign groups, activists and authorities who argue that such accounting is a prerequisite for an informed public discussion about the use of force by police.

Contributions of any information that may improve the quality of our data will be greatly welcomed as we work toward better accountability. Please contact us at thecounted@theguardian.com.

CREDITS
Research and Reporting: Jon Swaine, Oliver Laughland, Jamiles Lartey
Design and Production: Kenan Davis, Rich Harris, Nadja Popovich, Kenton Powell