Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
CSU finds ShotSpotter accurate but limited; Cleveland to weigh staffing, cost and alternatives
Summary
Cleveland State University’s independent two‑year evaluation found ShotSpotter reliably detects gunfire, improves evidence collection and can speed responses to some incidents, but it rarely functions as a standalone crime‑reduction tool. The city acknowledged contract phase‑out plans, discussed costs/coverage and said it is evaluating alternatives (including Flock) while council members pressed for RFP transparency, staffing data and community‑trust analysis.
An independent two‑year evaluation by Cleveland State University (CSU) concluded that the ShotSpotter gunshot‑detection system reliably detects gunfire and can improve response times and evidence collection, but it is not a standalone solution for reducing violent crime. CSU researchers Stephanie Kent and Rachel Lovell told the Public Safety Committee that their mixed‑methods assessment — comparing ShotSpotter alerts with 9‑1‑1 data, conducting field observations, surveying officers and surveying and interviewing residents — produced six principal findings: ShotSpotter is generally accurate at identifying gunfire; it increases priority‑1 calls for service and can strain limited police resources; it improves evidence collection in some cases; it is difficult to fully integrate with other policing technologies without deliberate alignment; it shows no clear Fourth Amendment problems in their observed implementation;…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
