Providence’s approach to public safety has come into question as recent data reveals a stark contrast between rising police budgets and stagnant crime-solving rates. This disconnect raises important questions about the effectiveness of increased police spending and challenges common assumptions about the role of law enforcement in our communities. However, Providence is not alone in this predicament. A broader look at national trends over the past six decades paints a similar picture, suggesting that the relationship between police funding and public safety is far more complex than many assume.

Providence’s police budget has grown steadily over the past decade, with the percentage allocated from the total budget to policing increasing from 15% in 2015 to over 18% in 2024. This translates to a significant jump in per-resident spending, from about $380 in 2015 to nearly $560 in 2024. With the fiscal year 2025 police budget approaching over $100 million, taxpayers might reasonably expect a corresponding improvement in public safety outcomes.

However, the data tells a different story. Despite the substantial increase in funding, the number of violent crimes cleared – i.e. someone was charged with committing the crime – has remained virtually unchanged. According to data provided to the FBI by the Providence Police Department, in 2015 approximately 205 incidents of violent crime were cleared. By 2022, that number had barely moved, hovering around 206 – a negligible improvement given the massive influx of resources, far better technology, and increased use of specialized military equipment.

This stagnation in crime-solving efficiency prompts a deeper examination of how we measure police effectiveness and what Providence residents should expect from their law enforcement agencies. It’s crucial to understand that the clearance rate, not the overall crime rate, is the most direct indicator of police performance. This distinction is often overlooked in public discourse about crime and policing.

Contrary to popular belief, police generally do not prevent crimes from occurring. Their primary function is to respond to crimes after they have been committed, investigate, and work towards arresting and prosecuting the perpetrators. This reactive role is why the clearance rate is such a vital metric – it directly measures how well the police are performing their core duties. While each police department may use slightly different measurements for what is considered a clearance, comparing the same department’s number of clearances over time is generally considered a reliable measure of effectiveness over time.

The focus on violent crimes in this data set is significant, as these are typically prioritized by law enforcement due to their severity. It’s worth noting that the clearance rates for non-violent offenses, such as property crimes (shown below), are often much lower. This means that the overall picture of crime-solving effectiveness is even less impressive than what the violent crime data suggests.

Expanding our view to the national level, we find that Providence’s experience is not unique. A comprehensive review of state and local police spending over the past 60 years shows no correlation nationally between spending and crime rates. This finding challenges the intuitive assumption that increased police funding leads to reduced crime.

In 1960, state and local governments spent about $2 billion on police, with about 1,887 crimes per 100,000 Americans, including 161 violent crimes. By 1980, spending had surged to $14.6 billion, but crime rates had also soared to 5,950 crimes per 100,000 Americans and 597 violent crimes. Over the next two decades, crime rates fell to about 4,120 crimes per 100,000 people and 507 violent crimes, while spending spiked more than fourfold to over $67 billion.

By 2018, the most recent year for which full data are available, crime rates had fallen further to 2,580 crimes per 100,000, including 381 violent crimes. However, when adjusted for inflation, the pattern since 1960 shows crime and spending increasing at a similar pace until the early 1990s, when crime rates began to drop but spending continued to soar.

Even in recent years, when national spending per person has fluctuated, crime hasn’t risen correspondingly. In 2006, the United States spent $386 per person on state and local police, with a crime rate of about 3,800 per 100,000 people and a violent crime rate of 474 per 100,000. In 2010, spending rose to $412 per person, and crime rates dropped to 3,350 per 100,000 overall and 405 violent crimes per 100,000. In 2012, spending decreased to $389 per person, yet crime rates continued to fall, reaching 3,256 per 100,000 overall and 388 per 100,000 for violent crimes.

Statistical analysis shows no significant correlation between changes in spending and overall or violent crime rates, even when accounting for potential delayed effects. This lack of correlation holds true whether examining immediate impacts or assuming a four-year delay between spending changes and crime rate shifts.

These findings challenge the common narrative that increased police funding is the key to reducing crime. They suggest that the relationship between police spending and public safety outcomes is far more nuanced and complex than often portrayed in public discourse or political debates.

The situation in Providence and the national data both point to the need for a more sophisticated approach to public safety. Simply increasing police budgets does not appear to be a reliable method for improving crime-solving rates or reducing crime. Instead, communities across the country are beginning to explore alternative strategies, such as community-based crime prevention programs, mental health crisis response teams, and social services aimed at addressing the root causes of crime.

As taxpayers and community members, it’s crucial to engage in informed discussions about how public resources are used. The goal should be to create a system that not only responds effectively to crime but also works proactively to build safer, more equitable communities. Ultimately, regardless of your political beliefs, we all would like to feel safe and we should aim to achieve this using policy that is both effective and more affordable than the status quo. This may involve reimagining the role of police, diversifying public safety strategies, and finding ways to measure and improve the outcomes that matter most to residents.

It’s also worth considering how transparency and accountability factor into this equation. Regular, detailed reporting on police performance metrics, beyond just budget figures, could help citizens better understand what they’re getting for their tax dollars. The Providence Police Department has a website that provides crimes committed for public review. However, this website does not report PPD’s clearance rates overall or by crime-type, nor does it report response times (the time it takes between the crime being reported and police arriving on scene). Additionally, Uprise RI reached out multiple times to the press liaison as listed on their website, requesting this data. We received no response. Our research shows this is generally due to the data reflecting poorly on the department. PPD is eager to share clearance data in specific situations when the numbers are in their favor. Greater performance transparency, such as that offered by the NYPD, can foster more productive dialogues between law enforcement, city officials, and the communities they serve.

However, it’s important to acknowledge the political challenges inherent in this issue. As noted in the national report, media narratives often leave elected officials facing a difficult balancing act. The fear of being perceived as “soft on crime” or responsible for a potential increase in criminal activity on the 6 o’clock news can make it politically risky to advocate for shifting funds away from police departments, even when data suggests that such shifts do not negatively impact public safety.

As Providence continues to invest heavily in its police force, and as similar debates play out in cities across the nation, residents across the political spectrum have a right to expect tangible improvements in public safety outcomes. The current data, both local and national, suggests that there is room for a more nuanced approach to policing and public safety – one that goes beyond simply increasing budgets and instead focuses on innovative, evidence-based strategies to truly enhance community well-being.

In the end, the goal of any public safety system should be to create safer, more just communities for all residents. Achieving that goal may require looking beyond traditional approaches, being willing to ask tough questions about how we allocate resources, and having the courage to implement strategies that align with what the data is telling us about the relationship between police spending and public safety outcomes.