Cleveland State University researchers want to know residents’ views on gun violence and the Cleveland police department’s use of ShotSpotter, the gunshot detection technology set up around the city.

Residents’ responses to a community survey will help researchers understand the effectiveness of ShotSpotter and how the technology has affected the relationship between communities and police. 

The survey is one of several ways lead researcher Stephanie Kent and researcher Rachel Lovell are evaluating ShotSpotter. Cleveland City Council contracted Cleveland State University’s Levin College of Public Affairs and Education to study the effectiveness of the technology after approving more than $2.75 million in American Rescue Plan Act funds to expand ShotSpotter, which has recently rebranded itself as SoundThinking, across Cleveland. 

City Council is paying $150,000 for the independent evaluation. Council members and Mayor Justin Bibb have defended the city’s use of ShotSpotter, saying people don’t always call 911 when they hear gunshots. 

In a news conference last week, council members said safety is one of their top priorities. Council President Blaine Griffin said the council has approved everything the Bibb administration has requested to make Cleveland communities safe. 

“People say they don’t want to bother calling, which is one of the reasons why we’ve invested in tools like ShotSpotter and other things because some areas have become numb to making calls,” Griffin said.  

Researchers evaluating how the technology is used 

ShotSpotter has been controversial in several places. Some cities, such as Dayton, are not renewing their contract with SoundThinking. 

Critics of the technology say it encourages officers to “stop and frisk” by directing police to arrive at a scene after a ShotSpotter alert and question people in the vicinity as they investigate the shooting. Critics also say the technology increases surveillance of Black communities.  

But Cleveland Division of Police and city leaders have said people are not calling 911 to report gunfire, and ShotSpotter alerts are the only way officers are able to respond to some shootings. Police have also said those responses have allowed officers to save lives.  

Kent, a professor of criminology at Cleveland State and the principal investigator for the evaluation, and Lovell, director of the Criminology Research Center at CSU and co-lead investigator, said they want to better understand how Cleveland police are using the technology and what impact the technology and police response has had on community trust. 

Lovell said policy is made based on how tools are actually being implemented, not “in the abstract.” 

“It isn’t just technology,” she said. “Technology in and of itself is one thing. But it’s how technology is used that is really the key part of any effective [tool].” 

Survey asks residents’ perception of safety

The survey asks residents how safe they feel in their neighborhoods, their experience with hearing gunshots and whether they call 911 to report gunshots. It also asks if they are familiar with ShotSpotter.

A second part of the survey asks about people’s perception of the Cleveland Division of Police and how police currently deal with responding to and preventing violent crime in neighborhoods. 

It also invites respondents to reach out to Kent or Lovell via email if they want to share more. 

The survey takes less than 10 minutes to complete. About 100 people have submitted the survey so far, Kent said. 

Researchers also interviewing police, analyzing data

Kent has attended monthly police district meetings to talk to residents. When she asks residents how they feel about ShotSpotter, they often ask her, “Does it work?” 

“That’s what we’re trying to figure out. But it’s a fair question,” she said. 

Kent and Lovell have also attended community events where ShotSpotter and other police technology was discussed, and they read through Cleveland Documenters’ notes and other meeting materials to look for residents commenting on these tools. (Editor’s note: Signal Cleveland is home to Cleveland Documenters.) 

The researchers are also interviewing police staff ranging from department heads to everyday officers and dispatchers to understand how the department uses ShotSpotter in their day-to-day work and what they think of it. 

Kent and Lovell are also collecting and analyzing data, including the number of ShotSpotter alerts police get, how many shell casings, if any, are found, and whether there was an injured person at the scene. 

They plan to analyze how often responding to ShotSpotter alerts led to arrests and criminal convictions and how ShotSpotter was used in those investigations. 

“Maybe we’ll be able to use the data to help the police inform how they respond in the future to the people,” Kent said. “Not just related to ShotSpotter, but in general.”

Kent and Lovell are providing the city with progress reports every six months. The researchers plan to collect data through the summer of 2025 and deliver a final report before the end of that year.