Madison police outline data‑driven 'stratified policing' model, set 5% reduction goals for focal crimes

MADISON, Wis. — The Common Council accepted the Madison Police Department’s first‑quarter report Tuesday after a roughly hour‑long presentation on a new “stratified policing” model, focal crime goals and quarterly crime trends.

The report, provided quarterly since 2017, lays out a data‑driven approach that identifies priority geographic areas, problem locations and microtime hot spots, and applies evidence‑based tactics — including Koper (intermittent) patrols and problem‑oriented policing — paired with organizational accountability at multiple levels, Assistant Chief Matt Tai said.

“Stratified policing…is a data‑informed model,” Tai said. It starts with the department setting focal crimes and annual crime‑reduction targets. “So this year, homicides, subjects struck by gunfire, burglaries, stolen autos, and theft from autos — and we’re looking for a 5% reduction in each of those focal crimes,” he said.

The department reported first‑quarter figures (Jan. 1–March 31): 30 shots‑fired incidents (a 14.3% decrease from the fourth quarter), 44 known overdose events (a 13.7% decrease), 22 robberies (an 18.5% decrease), 99 burglaries (a 3.1% increase from the fourth quarter), 65 stolen autos (one more than the prior quarter) and 131 thefts from autos (a 21% decrease).

Chief Patterson and Assistant Chief Tai described how the model overlays crime data on geography and time, assigns responsibilities through the department hierarchy, and uses regular accountability meetings to adjust tactics. Tai described “Koper patrol” — short, intermittent high‑visibility patrols shown in research to reduce crime in targeted areas — and said the department emphasizes community outreach alongside enforcement.

Council members pressed department leaders on several issues: cross‑referencing police data with community programs (including CARES, the city’s mental‑health response program), race and ethnicity reporting, restorative‑justice referrals and mutual aid.

Alder Evers asked whether arrest rates differ when CARES participates in responses compared with police responses without CARES, and whether the department could compare arrest data across those response types. Chief Patterson said the department has compared data with the CARES team in the past but would pursue the specific cross‑analysis requested and would report back. He also noted a planned sequential‑intercept mapping exercise this summer to examine how individuals interact with multiple systems, including law enforcement and hospitals.

On restorative justice, Patterson described three diversion paths: automatic referrals for ages 12–16 (handled by community organizations rather than officer citations), Dane County Community Restorative Court referrals for ages roughly 17–25 for limited offense types (disorderly conduct, certain thefts, criminal damage and battery, among others), and a pre‑arrest diversion program called Maury that handles many overdose‑related cases. The department said it sees room to expand direct referrals and broaden eligibility but that doing so requires agreement across county partners and the district attorney’s office.

Alder Madison pressed for measures aimed specifically at reducing arrests among Black youths. Patterson said the department has previously run an arrest “stress test” on a random sample of arrests to look for potential bias and that staff are tracking distinct individuals who have repeated contacts with the system to identify unmet needs.

On traffic enforcement, the department said it plans to issue a traffic strategic plan to staff around Memorial Day that will target high‑injury networks and incorporate resident complaints into enforcement priorities; the chief said he would circulate that plan to council members after internal briefings.

Council members also asked about data quality and measurement. Tai and Patterson said demographic information is primarily self‑identified and that the department logs “unknown” or “other” when not available. The report includes use‑of‑force data, restorative‑justice referrals, training updates and revisions to standard operating procedures. The department said it could provide incident‑type breakdowns tied to use‑of‑force incidents in future reports to give members more context.

On mutual aid, the chiefs said assistance among county agencies is governed by Wisconsin statute and that the department sometimes assists suburban partners and sometimes requests help depending on incident demands; they cited a major December incident as an example of when outside assistance was necessary.

Alder Figueroa Cole and others sought clarity on how current data are used to define priority areas and whether older data might bias deployment toward historically over‑policed neighborhoods. The chiefs acknowledged ongoing refinement of priority areas and said they were reviewing recent 12‑month and current year data along with time‑of‑day patterns to better tailor responses.

The report was moved, seconded and accepted by unanimous voice vote. The department said it will follow up with additional analyses requested by council members, including CARES comparisons, incident‑type breakdowns for use‑of‑force incidents, and progress reporting on the traffic strategic plan.