Police Force Analysis System℠

Tenth Summary Report

San Jose Police Department

Use of Force Data from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2025

Bob Scales, J.D.

Police Strategies LLC

bob@policestrategies.com

www.policestrategies.com

May 2026

Background

In January 2018 we produced the first Summary Report using data from the San Jose Police Department’s Police Force Analysis System℠. That report included data from January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2017. This is our Tenth Summary Report which includes use of force data through the end of 2025. Police Strategies will continue to update the system on a quarterly basis and produce annual Summary Reports.

Police Strategies LLC

Police Strategies LLC is a Washington State based company that was formed in February 2015. The company was built by law enforcement professionals, attorneys, and academics with the primary goal of helping police departments use their own incident reports to make data-driven decisions and develop evidence-based best practices. The company’s three partners are all former employees of the Seattle Police Department and were directly involved with the Department of Justice’s pattern or practice investigation of the department in 2011 as well as the federal consent decree that followed. They wanted to take the lessons learned from that experience and provide other police departments with the tools they need to monitor use of force incidents, identify high risk behavior, and evaluate the outcomes of any reforms that are implemented. The company has a partnership with the Center for the Study of Crime and Justice at Seattle University to assist in the analysis of the data.

Police Force Analysis System℠

In the summer of 2015, Police Strategies LLC launched the Police Force Analysis System℠ (PFAS). PFAS combines peer-reviewed research with state-of-the-art analytical tools to produce a powerful data visualization system that can be used by law enforcement, policy makers, academics, and the public. ^[1] The core of PFAS builds upon the research work of Professor Geoff Alpert and his Force Factor method. Force Factor analysis formed the basis of Professor Alpert’s 2004 book “Understanding Police Use of Force – Officers, Subjects and Reciprocity” ^[2] and has been the subject of several scholarly articles. ^[3]

PFAS is a relational database that contains 150 fields of information extracted from law enforcement agencies’ existing incident reports and officer narratives. The data is analyzed using legal algorithms that were developed from the evaluation criteria outlined in the United States Supreme Court case of Graham v. Connor , 490 U.S. 386 (1989). The Court adopted an objective reasonableness standard which evaluates each case based upon the information that the officer was aware of at the time the force was used and then comparing the officer’s actions to what a reasonable officer would have done when faced with the same situation. PFAS uses Force Justification Analysis to determine the risk that a use of force incident would be found to be unnecessary and Force Factor Analysis to evaluate the risk that the force would be found to be excessive.

PFAS examines relevant temporal data from immediately before, during and after an application of force.

PFAS uses powerful data visualization software to display the information on dynamic dashboards. Police management can use these dashboards to identify trends and patterns in use of force practices and detect high risk behavior of individual officers. The system can also be used to spot officers who consistently use force appropriately and effectively. Since the system can find both high risk and low risk incidents, PFAS can be used both as an Early Intervention System to correct problematic behavior as well as a training tool that highlights existing best practices.

PFAS contains several years of historical data for each agency and is designed to be updated on a regular basis. This allows the department to immediately identify trends and patterns as well as measure the impacts and outcomes of any changes that are made to policies, training, equipment, or practices. For example, if a department provides crisis intervention and de-escalation training to its officers, the system will be able to evaluate whether that training has had any impact on officer behavior.

PFAS currently has use of force data from more than ninety law enforcement agencies in eight states involving about 15,000 incidents and 5,000 officers who used force more than 25,000 times. PFAS is the largest database of its kind in the nation. Although the incident reports from each of these agencies use a different format, all the data extracted and entered into the system has been standardized which allows us to make interagency comparisons. The Police Force Analysis Network℠ allows agencies to compare their use of force practices with other agencies in the system.

The Police Force Analysis System℠ provides comprehensive information about police use of coercive authority and permits the study of the intersection of individual and contextual factors that explain situational, temporal, and spatial variation in the distribution of police coercive authority. PFAS supports meaningful community engagement about police coercion by providing comprehensive and relevant data to address and inform community concern regarding police-citizen interactions.

Data Collection from the San Jose Police Department

SJPD provided two types of reports for coding: (1) General Offense (GO) reports and (2) electronic Force Response Reports. These reports were received as Adobe Acrobat files and Excel spreadsheets. In addition, SJPD provided electronic data on some of the incident details (date, time, address, etc.) and subject details (age, race, gender).

In April 2025 Police Strategies LLC received SJPD use of force reports from the last three months of 2025. Data entry was completed in May 2025 and then the information was processed through the system’s legal algorithms. Finally, the interactive dashboards were updated. All the data entered into the system was geocoded and SJPD was able to provide shape files for the department’s divisions, districts, beats, and grids. This enabled us to prepare several customized dashboards that present the use of force data geographically.

The Department has contracted for ongoing updates of PFAS. The next Summary Report will be produced in mid-2027.

Summary of San Jose PD’s Police Force Analysis System℠

The San Jose Police Department’s Police Force Analysis System℠ contains eleven years of use of force data from 2015 to 2025. The database includes detailed information on 6,753 subjects who had force used against them and the 1,491 officers who used force during the eleven-year period. In 2025 there were 598 use of force incidents involving 468 officers who used force a total of 1,230 times. This report will examine the eleven-year trends in uses of force and will summarize the use of force data from 2025. In our Sixth Summary Report we noted that there were 179 use of force incidents in May and June of 2020 that were related to the protests over the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Those incidents were analyzed in that prior report and will not be examined again in this report. When measuring long-term patterns and trends in use of force practices by San Jose PD officers, the 179 protest related incidents from 2020 were excluded since these were driven by factors outside the Department and are not necessarily reflective of the Department’s policies, practices, and training.

The annual number of use of force incidents fell by 37% from 2015 to 2021 (741 incidents to 467 incidents). Between 2021 and 2025 the annual number of use of force incidents rose by 28% from 467 to 598.

1) Date, Time, and Location of Use of Force Incidents

In 2025, August had the most force incidents (66) and December had the fewest incidents (35). During the week, Saturdays had the most incidents (108) and Thursdays had the fewest incidents (68). The peak hour for force incidents was between midnight and 1am (42).

Over the last 11 years Western Division had the highest share of the City’s use of force incidents (29%). Foothill and Central Divisions each had 26% of force incidents while Southern Division had 19%. While force incidents can fluctuate year by year, in 2025 the percentage of force incidents for each Division is similar to the percentages in 2015. In 2025 Western Division had the most force incidents (178) while Southern Division had the fewest (106). From 2015 to 2025 Lincoln District had the highest percentage of the City’s force incidents (13.3%) followed by Edward District (9.8%) and Charles District (9.5%). In 2025 Lincoln District had the most force incidents of all the Districts (77). Over the last eleven years Beat E3 has had the highest percentage of the City’s force incidents (3.5%), followed by Beat L4 (3.3%) and Beat E2 (3.2%). In 2025 Beat E2 had the most force incidents of all the Beats (27).

In 2025 the most use of force incidents (10) occurred on Saturday November 29, 2025. The longest period of time with no force incidents was between December 9, 2025 and December 14, 2025.

Use of Force Incidents – 2015 to 2025

Use of Force Incident Locations – 2025

Use of Force Incident Locations – 2015 to 2024

Use of Force Heat Map - 2025

Use of Force Heat Map – 2015 to 2024

2) Reason for Contact

In 2025 the reason for the initial contact was most likely to be a dispatched call for service (69%), followed by an officer-initiated stop (25%) and then assist the officer or agency (6%). In 2025 the reason for the initial contact was more likely to be a violent crime or a property crime (65%) than in prior years (55%).

3) Force Frequency

In 2025 there were 598 use of force incidents involving 468 officers who used force a total of 1,230 times. Five officers used force 10 or 11 times each. There were nineteen officers who used force between 7 and 9 times each, 55 officers who used force between 5 and 6 times each, 103 officers who used force 3 or 4 times, 105 officers who used force twice, and 181 officers who only used force once. The top 10% of officers made up 27% of all force used by the Department.

Uses of force are linked to arrests. About 4% of all arrests result in a use of force because the subject resists arrest by failing to comply, fleeing, or threatening or assaulting the officers or others. Therefore, the officers who use force more frequently tend to be the officers that are making the most arrests in the Department.

4) Force Justification

The Force Justification Score is based upon the four Graham Factors: (1) seriousness of the crime being investigated; (2) the level of threat to the officer or others; (3) the level of resistance; and (4) whether the subject fled from the officer. Low Justification Scores are indicative of incidents where subjects were not committing serious crimes, did not pose a significant threat to the officer or others, did not present a high level of resistance, and did not flee.

In 2025, 11% of San Jose’s use of force incidents had low Force Justification scores (<6). The average justification score was 13.5 on a scale of 0 to 20. For each of the four Graham factors, the average crime score was higher in 2025 than prior years (4.0 vs. 3.2). The average threat score was also higher in 2025 (2.1 vs. 1.6) as well as the average flight score (1.6 vs. 1.3). This indicates that subjects were more threatening to officers, were committing more serious crimes, and were more likely to flee in 2025 than in prior years.

Twenty percent of force incidents (120 incidents) received the highest Force Justification score of 20, which is higher than the 11% average for the prior ten years. Most of these cases involved assaults on the officers before the officer made the decision to use force.

In 2025 there were 106 officers who were involved in at least one incident with a low Force Justification score. Most officers were only involved in one low Force Justification incident each. One officer was involved in three low Force Justification incidents each while nineteen officers had 2 incidents each.

In 2025 Female subjects had a higher average Force Justification score (14.5) than Males (13.4). By race White subjects had the highest average Force Justification score (14.7) while Hispanic subjects had the lowest average score (12.6). By subject age, average Force Justification scores were lowest for ages 40-49 (11.6) and were highest for ages 30-39 (14.6). By body mass index, average Force Justification scores were highest for subjects who were underweight (15.8) and were lowest for overweight subjects (13.4).

5) Force Factor

The Force Factor Score is based upon the proportionality of force to resistance and scores range from -6 to +6. A negative score means that the subject’s resistance level was higher than the officers’ force level. A medium Force Factor Score is between 0 and +2. This is the range where most officers can gain control of a subject by using force that is at least proportional to the level of resistance or slightly above. A Force Factor of +3 or above is considered a high score. This does not mean that the force was excessive, but these incidents do present a higher risk to the department.

In 2025 7% of force incidents had a high Force Factor score (+3 or above). There was one incident with a +5 Force Factor, 11 incidents that had a +4 Force Factor, and 29 incidents had a +3 Force Factor. No incidents had a Force Factor score of +6 in 2025. There were 63 officers involved in the 87 high Force Factor incidents in 2025. Two officers were involved in four high Force Factor incidents each and eleven officers were involved in two or three high Force Factor incidents each.

OC was involved in 41% of high Force Factor incidents followed by projectile weapons (20%), electronic control weapons (7%), canines (7%) and impact weapons (5%).

In 2025 the most common Force Factor Score was +1 (38%) followed by 0 (32%) and +2 (14%). These numbers indicate that most officers in the department behave very consistently when faced with a given level of resistance and they tend to use the minimal amount of force necessary to gain compliance. In 2025 the percentage of low Force Factor incidents was 9% compared to 8% in prior years. These incidents typically involve officers who were being assaulted and were able to control the subject without using weapons or aggressive physical tactics.

6) Force Tactics

Of the 598 use of force incidents that occurred in 2025, 73% involved physical force only, 9% involved only the use of weapons by officers and 18% involved both physical force and the use of a weapon. Officers were more likely to use physical force only in 2025 than in prior years (73% vs. 66%) and were less likely to use weapons (27% vs. 34%).

Compared to prior years, officers were less likely to use weight, pain compliance, pushing, wrestling, projectile weapons, impact weapons and canines in 2025. In 2025 officers were more likely to use grabbing, strikes, and OC than in prior years.

Over the last eleven years (excluding the 2020 protest related incidents) officers have used 33,746 individual physical force tactics and weapons during 6,574 incidents. Between 2024 and 2025 there was a significant decline in officers use of pain compliance, pushing, and wrestling while the use of strikes increased by 42%.

Between 2024 and 2025 the use of canines increased from 5 incidents to 8 incidents while the use of projectile weapons fell from 35 to 30. The percentage of impact weapon use in 2025 (5.2%) was the lowest level in the last 11 years.

7) Subjects

Between 2015 and 2024 there were four demographic groups (gender, race, and age) that made up 63% of all use of force subjects (Hispanic, White and Black Male subjects between 18 and 39 and Hispanic male subjects over 40). In 2025 the subject demographics were substantially similar to prior years.

Compared to the prior ten years, use of force subjects in 2025 were less likely to be White (15%), 18 to 29 (28%), or Transient (13%) and were more likely to be Asian (12%) or 30 to 39 (38%).

Use of Force Subject Characteristics - 2015 to 2024

Use of Force Subject Characteristics - 2025

Compared to prior years, use of force subjects in 2025 were less likely to be angry (27% vs. 40%), under the influence of alcohol or drugs (50% vs. 58%), or have mental health issues (20% vs. 26%).

From 2015 to 2023 the possession of weapons by use of force subjects rose from 9.4% to 32.9% before falling to 25.3% in 2024 and 23.0% in 2025.

Compared to the previous ten years, officers in 2025 were more likely to encounter aggressive resistance (37.3%) and were less likely to encounter defensive physical resistance (49.5%).

Subject Maximum Resistance Level - 2025

In 2025 officers perceived some type of threatening subject behavior in 49.5% of use of force incidents which is similar to prior years. Officers were more than twice as likely to be assaulted in 2025 (21.2%) than in prior years (8.9%).

Subject Maximum Threat Level - 2025

8) Injuries

In 2025 there were 206 officers who were injured a total of 301 times. The officer injury rate was 24%, which is higher than the 17% injury rate for the prior ten years. One officer was injured seven times, sixteen officers were injured 3 to 5 times each, and fifty officers were injured twice. Most of the injuries involved a bruise or scrape (63%), a minor cut (18%) or a complaint of pain only (19%). One officer had a fracture or broken tooth and one officer received a gun or knife wound.

Most of the injured officers received injuries to their arms or legs and 18 officers received an injury to their head.

Of the 301 officer injuries in 2025, 13% were treated by EMTs and 20% were treated at a hospital.

In 2025 460 subjects who had force used against them were injured (77% of all incidents). This is higher than the 61% average injury rate for prior years. Of the subjects who were injured, most of the injuries were minor: complaint of pain only (35%), ECW probe (9%), bruise/scrape (31%) or minor cut (17%). Six subjects were bitten by a canine, 17 subjects had chemical irritation, three subjects lost consciousness, and 12 subjects suffered a fracture or broken tooth, and two subjects had a gun or knife wound.

Three quarters of injured subjects received injuries to their head, arms or torso.

Of all the subjects who were injured, 14% were treated by EMTs only and 65% were treated at a hospital.

9) Force Analysis Trends

The average Force Justification score in 2025 (13.5) was higher than in any prior year. This indicates that subjects involved in force incidents in 2025 were committing more serious crimes and presenting a higher level of threat and resistance than in prior years. The average Force Factor scores have remained relatively constant over the last 11 years averaging 0.59. The average number of Force Sequences in 2025 was the lowest in the eleven-year period at 3.0 sequences after peaking at 5.5 sequences in 2021. This is significant since the average Force Factor has not increased significantly and the average Force Justification is the highest it has ever been. This suggests that officers are using lower levels of force more effectively despite facing greater resistance and threat from subjects.

Use of force incidents are dynamic events. Officers will respond to the resistance presented by the subjects and both the resistance levels, and the force levels can both change during the incident. Each time the Force-Resistance dynamic changes a new Force Sequence is coded up to six Force Sequences. If an officer is able to control a resisting subject after only one or two Force Sequences, then the officer is using force tactics effectively. However, if the force incident continues to five or six Force Sequences that is an indication that the officer is having difficulty controlling the subject. Often a high number of Force Sequences are the result of a combination of several factors.

There is a strong correlation between Force Factor and Force Sequences. When officers use overwhelming force compared to resistance (i.e., high Force Factor), the number of Force Sequences will be lower. Conversely when subject resistance levels are higher than officer force levels (i.e., low Force Factor), the number of Force Sequences will be higher.

There is also a strong correlation between the number of Force Sequences and injury rates for both officers and subjects. The more Force Sequences there are the more likely it is that both the officer and the subject will be injured. Incidents that are resolved within one Force Sequence have an officer injury rate of 8% and a subject injury rate of 55%, but incidents that go to six sequences have an officer injury rate of 42% and a subject injury rate of 67%.

The following diagram shows the relationship between average Force Factor and average Force Justification scores and the number of Force Sequences. When incidents are resolved within two Force Sequences officers generally use a higher level of force compared to resistance. Incidents that have a higher Force Justification score (subject is fleeing and presenting a high level of threat and resistance and is involved in a more serious crime), are more likely to go on longer than two Force Sequences.

When the Force Justification scores are broken down into the four Graham factors, it appears that subject flight and subject threat factors have no correlation with the number of Force Sequences. Therefore, if a subject is fleeing or threatening the officer, these attributes do not tend to increase the number of Force Sequences significantly. Levels of resistance are strongly correlated with Force Sequences. The higher the level of resistance the more Force Sequences will be involved. The average crime score has a negative relationship with the number of Force Sequences but only for one and two Force Sequence incidents.

If officers initiate a force incident with overwhelming force, they will generally be able to control the subject faster than if lower levels of force are used. However, if the force level is too high it may be considered to be excessive. Therefore, an officer should choose an appropriate level of force that will control the subject as quickly as possible without using force that would be considered to be excessive. In many use of force incidents there is little time for an officer to conduct a calculation of the appropriate level of force to use, and this is made even more difficult by the uncertainty of the subject’s possible responses to the initiation of force.

During most use of force incidents, officers will use multiple types of force tactics in an attempt to control the subject. The timing of the use of a force tactic will have a significant impact on the Force Sequences. A projectile weapon used in the first Force Sequence may resolve the incident quickly but, in some cases, a projectile weapon may be used as a last resort in the last Force Sequence. Given these limitations, the following diagram examines the number of Force Sequences associated with different types of force tactics.

Wrestling is more of an indicator than a force tactic and is used when there is a protracted physical struggle between the officer and the subject. Wrestling is associated with a high number of Force Sequences and 82% of wrestling incidents go to five or six Force Sequences. Canines, projectile weapons, and OC are associated with incidents that have the shortest number of Force Sequences. When these weapons are used, about a quarter of incidents are resolved within one or two Force Sequences. Even though these types of weapons are more effective than other force tactics, their use may not be appropriate in many situations. More than half of incidents that involve the use of impact weapons or electronic control weapons go to five or six Force Sequences. This is because these weapons are often used as a secondary force tactic after other physical force tactics have been attempted. Takedowns appear to be the most effective physical tactic. Nearly two-thirds of incidents that involve a strike go on for five or six Force Sequences.

Over the last eleven years both officer injury rates and subject injury rates have been on an upward trend. In 2025 the incident injury rate for subjects (77%) and officers (24%) was the highest in the last eleven years. The higher injury rates for both officers and subjects without an increase in the average Force Factor suggests that officers are involved in more physical confrontations against more aggressive subjects rather than responding with higher rates of less lethal weapons.

Between 2015 and 2021 the percentage of force incidents where three or more officers were present rose from 41% to 60% and then declined to 53% by 2025. The percentage of force incidents where only one officer used force declined from a peak of 46% in 2017 to 33% by 2025.

The use of weapons in force incidents has declined from 41% of all force incidents in 2015 to 27% of force incidents in 2025.

10) Long-Term Use of Force Trends

a) Arrests and Uses of Force

From 2015 to 2025 the number of annual arrests made by SJPD fell by 22% from 19,179 arrests to 15,014 arrests. During this same period, the number of uses of force fell by 19% from 741 in 2015 to 598 in 2025. From 2015 to 2019 the use of force rate per 100 arrests ranged between 3.7% and 4.2% before falling to 2.7% in 2020. By 2025 the use of force rate per 100 arrests rose to 4.0%. The average use of force rate per arrest for all 100 agencies using PFAS is 3.7%.

b) Calls for Service and Uses of Force

From 2015 to 2025 the number of annual calls for service to SJPD rose by 15% from 303,167 calls to 349,713 calls. During this same period, the number of uses of force fell by 22% from 741 in 2015 to 598 in 2025. From 2015 to 2019 the use of force rate per 100 calls for service ranged between 0.19% and 0.24% before falling to 0.12% in 2020. By 2025 the use of force rate per 100 calls for service rose to 0.17%. The average use of force rate per call for service for all 100 agencies using PFAS is 0.10%.

11) Firearm Pointing Incidents (Show of Force)

In 2021 San Jose PD began providing data on incidents where the only force used was the pointing of a firearm at a subject. These incidents are sometimes referred to as “show of force.” Police Strategies LLC has analyzed these incidents, and the following is a summary of the results.

From 2021 to 2025 show of force incents dropped by 60% from 549 incidents to 218 incidents.

More than three-quarters of all show of force (SOF) incidents involve only one officer who pointed his/her firearm. Sixteen percent of SOF incidents involve a rifle and 1% involve a shotgun. Almost half of SOF incidents are the result of a 911 call. The two most common offense types for SOF incidents were assaults and weapon offenses.

The most common reason for SOF was because the officer believed the subject was armed (85%). Fifty-two percent of SOF incidents involved a violent crime and in 46% of incidents the officer perceived some type of threat.

Between 2021 and 2025 the percentage of SOF incidents involving a violent crime increased from 26% to 46% while incidents involving a weapon decreased from 17% to 11%. In 2025 93% of show of force subjects were Male and 67% were Hispanic. Juveniles made up 4% of subjects.

1. Capitola Police creates online database to track use of force stats, Santa Cruz Sentinel, August 2016.

   SJPD puts use-of-force data online in pioneering move, San Jose Mercury, January 2018 ↑

2. Understanding Police Use of Force – Officers, Subjects, and Reciprocity, Cambridge Studies in Criminology, 2004. ↑

3. See, e.g., Reliability of the Force Factor Method in Police Use-of-Force Research, Police Quarterly, December 2015. ↑