DOI: 10.3886/icpsr20351.v1
title: Multi-Method Study of Police Special Weapons and Tactics Teams in the United States, 1986-1998
title: Version 1

description: This research study was designed to pursue three specific
 goals to accomplish its objective of enhancing knowledge about Special
 Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams and the role they play in
 contemporary American policing. The first goal was to develop a better
 picture of the structure and nature of SWAT teams in American law
 enforcement. The second goal of the research project was to increase
 the amount of knowledge about how SWAT teams prepare for and execute
 operations. The project's third goal was to develop information about
 one specific aspect of SWAT operations: the use of force, especially
 deadly force, by both officers and suspects. To gather this
 information, the SWAT Operations Survey (SOS) was conducted. This was a
 nationwide survey of law enforcement agencies with 50 or more sworn
 officers. The survey sought information about the agencies' emergency
 response capabilities and structures. The SOS included two
 instruments: (1) the Operations Form, completed by a total of 341
 agencies, and containing variables about the organization and
 functioning of SWAT teams, and (2) the Firearms Discharge Report,
 which includes a total of 273 shootings of interest, as well as items
 about incidents in which SWAT officers and suspects discharged
firearms during SWAT operations.
description: This research study was designed to pursue three
 specific goals to accomplish its objective of enhancing knowledge
 about Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams and the role they play
 in contemporary American policing. The first goal was to develop a
 better picture of the structure and nature of SWAT teams in American
 law enforcement (e.g., the mix of full- and part-time teams, how
 crisis negotiations and emergency medical services are structured).
 The second goal of the research project was to increase the amount of
 knowledge about how SWAT teams prepare for and execute operations
 (e.g., what sorts of training they do, how they plan for specific
 operations, and what they do during actual operations). The project's
 third goal was to develop information about one specific aspect of
 SWAT operations: the use of force, especially deadly force, by both
officers and suspects.
description: The SWAT Operations Survey (SOS) was a nationwide
 survey of law enforcement agencies with 50 or more sworn officers. It
 sought information about the agencies' emergency response capabilities
 and structures. The SOS included two instruments: (1) the Operations
 Form, completed by and containing a total of 341 agencies, and
 containing variables about the organization and functioning of SWAT
 teams, and (2) the Firearms Discharge Report, which includes a total
 of 273 shootings of interest, as well as items about incidents in
 which SWAT officers and suspects discharged firearms during SWAT
 operations. The National Tactical Officers Association (NTOA) placed
 calls to the office of the head (usually a chief of police or sheriff)
 of 2,027 agencies to inquire whether they had a SWAT team. When this
 call indicated that the agency did not have a team, the respondent was
 thanked for his or her time, and the negative response was noted in a
 data file that had been established to track the information obtained
 during the survey. When this call indicated that the agency did have a
 SWAT team, the respondent was asked to supply the name and contact
 information of the commander of the SWAT team so that further
 correspondence could be sent directly to that individual. The next
 step of the data collection effort consisted of sending a small
 information packet to the SWAT commander, which included a letter that
 briefly introduced the research project, explained the expanded data
 collection efforts, and sought their participation in the project. The
 information packet also included a stamped, self-addressed envelop and
 a reply form for commanders to provide some basic information about
 their team (e.g., the number of officers currently assigned to it) and
 to indicate whether they would participate in the study. The reply
 form also asked commanders to indicate whether they would like to
 report the information via standard paper instruments or via computer,
 through data collection software the NTOA had developed. After six
 weeks had passed, NTOA personnel recontacted the SWAT commanders of
 those agencies that had not responded to the mailing in order to
 ensure that they had received the packet and to encourage
 participation in the research effort. Messages were left for those
 commanders who were not available when the calls were made, and
 follow-up mailings were sent to those who reported that they had not
 received the initial packet. Once agencies replied to the initial
 contact efforts, indicated whether they would like to participate in
 the data collection efforts, and indicated their preference for
 participating via computer or paper and pencil (among those who
 indicated a desire to participate), NTOA staff sent the appropriate
 survey media, along with a set of instructions for filling out the
relevant (paper or computer) forms and returning them to the NTOA.
description: Part 1, SWAT Survey: Operations Data, provides the
 year the agency established its SWAT team, whether the agency has a
 full- or part-time SWAT team, whether the agency had its own SWAT team
 or it supplied officers to a multiagency team, the number of officers
 assigned to the SWAT team, the nature of incident command in
 situations in which the SWAT team was mobilized, and deadly force
 decision-making in hostage/barricade situations. Part 1 variables also
 include crisis negotiations structure, Emergency Medical Services
 (EMS) when SWAT is deployed, the amount of time SWAT officers train
 per month, the sources of training received by SWAT officers, the
 types of situations for which SWAT officers trained, and the annual
 number of SWAT mobilizations of various sorts (e.g., barricaded
 suspect incidents, hostage incidents, and warrants) from 1986 through
 1998. Other variables in Part 1 pertain to the annual number of
 incidents in which SWAT officers discharged lethal weapons during SWAT
 operations, the annual number of SWAT operations in which suspects
 discharged weapons, but SWAT officers held their fire, the number of
 suspects who killed themselves each year during SWAT operations,
 whether and how often the SWAT team had physically rescued hostages,
 as well as whether and how often suspects killed hostages during SWAT
 operations. Part 2, SWAT Survey: Firearms Discharge Data, provides the
 year the incident occurred, the nature of the incident (e.g.,
 barricaded suspect, hostage incident, warrant service), the number of
 SWAT officers deployed, as well as the number of suspects, the weapons
 each one possessed, whether each suspect fired any guns they
 possessed, whether each suspect was taken under fire by SWAT, and the
 nature of the wounds each suspect fired upon suffered. Part 2
 variables also include the number of SWAT officers who fired their
 weapons, their assignment (e.g., entry, long rifle, containment), the
 type of weapon they fired (e.g., pistol, assault rifle, submachine
 gun) and the number of rounds they fired. Other variables in Part 2
 pertain to the total number of rounds fired at suspects by SWAT during
 the incident, the number of rounds fired by SWAT that struck suspects,
 the number of rounds fired by SWAT that were not directed at humans
 (e.g., warning shots, accidental discharges, suppressive fire), the
 nature and number of wounds suffered by SWAT officers, and whether
 suspects who were shot by SWAT officers may have been committing
"suicide-by-cop".
description: None
description: Response Rates: The SWAT Operations Survey yielded a final response
 rate of 30 percent (365/1,207). Part 1, SWAT Survey: Operations Data,
 contains 341 cases and does not include the 24 agencies that were
 omitted from the original list of 1,183 agencies with SWAT teams.
 Because information about each of these 24 teams had been reported in
 the response sent by the agency that submitted a SWAT Operations
 Survey to the NTOA, the researchers classified these 24 agencies as
having responded to the survey.
description: Presence of Common Scales: None
description: The sampling frame of 2,027 agencies included all state,
 county, municipal, and special district law enforcement agencies in
 the United States, which employed 50 or more sworn officers in 1996.
 Respondents at 1,183 of the 2,027 agencies telephonically contacted by
 NTOA staff reported that their department had a SWAT team. Several of
 the agencies that returned SWAT Operations Surveys indicated that they
 contributed officers to multi-jurisdictional SWAT teams. Each of these
 agencies was contacted to obtain a list of the other agencies that
 participated in their multi-jurisdictional team. The list produced by
 this effort was checked against the roster of 2,027 agencies that
 comprised the sampling frame to see if the various additional agencies
 identified by the phone calls were (1) within the sampling frame, and
 if so (2) identified as having a SWAT team. This cross-check
 identified an additional 24 agencies that had not been listed in the
 original list of 1,183 agencies with SWAT teams. Adding these 24
 agencies to the 1,183 agencies already counted as having SWAT teams
 yielded a revised count of 1,207 agencies within the sampling frame as
 having SWAT teams. Respondents were instructed to complete a separate
 Firearms Discharge Report only for each incident in which any SWAT
 officers fired their weapons. Accordingly, Part 2, SWAT Survey:
 Firearms Discharge Data, offers information on the 273 shootings of
 interest (i.e., those that involved shots fired toward people or
accidental discharges).
description: Datasets: 
DS0: Study-Level Files
DS1: SWAT Survey: Operations Data
DS2: SWAT Survey: Firearms Discharge Data
description: State, county, municipal, and special district law
 enforcement agencies in the United States, which employed 50 or more
sworn officers in 1996. Smallest Geographic Unit: None
description: mail questionnaire; Web-based surveyData from the Post Critical Incident Report (PCIR)
 Project, site visits, and observations from training and field
 deployment at critical incidents are not available as part of this
collection.