What would more officers, technology, or training achieve? How does police spending compare to alternative investments?
Best Viewed on Desktop
This page contains detailed charts and visualizations that are optimized for larger screens.
NYC spends $6 billion annually on NYPD. But we cannot answer the most basic budget questions:
The Marginal Value Problem: Every additional dollar should produce more benefit than cost. Without marginal analysis, we do not know if we are over-invested, under-invested, or correctly invested in policing.
The Alternative Investment Problem: A dollar spent on police cannot be spent on mental health, housing, or education. Without cross-sector ROI comparison, budgeting is political posturing rather than evidence-based optimization.
These are answerable questions that every responsible government should ask. NYC does not.
Marginal impact on crime and clearances
NYPD constantly requests more officers. But if adding 1,000 officers only reduces crime by 1% or improves clearances by 2%, that is terrible ROI. Marginal analysis reveals whether more officers are the solution or a waste.
Econometric analysis of officer count vs crime rates and clearances
Requires academic research: Regression analysis using historical NYPD staffing levels, crime rates, and clearance rates to estimate marginal impact of additional officers
Technology investment ROI
If $100M in better forensic databases, video analysis tools, or case management systems increases clearance rates by 10%, that is better ROI than hiring more officers. Understanding technology ROI drives investment allocation.
Technology pilot program evaluations and cost-effectiveness studies
FOIL request: "Technology investment pilot programs, evaluation reports, and cost-benefit analyses for forensic tools, investigative databases, and case management systems"
Training investment ROI
If Bronx detectives clear 62.6% of rapes while Manhattan clears 31.4%, training could close that gap. If $100M in intensive training improves clearance rates by 15%, that is massive ROI. But we do not know current training effectiveness.
Training program evaluations and before/after clearance rate comparisons
FOIL request: "Detective training program descriptions, budgets, duration, and evaluation reports measuring impact on clearance rates and case quality"
Efficiency at current scale
If NYPD is already so large that adding resources produces minimal benefit, we should stop growing and focus on efficiency. Diminishing returns analysis reveals whether we are over-invested in policing.
Historical analysis of budget growth vs outcome improvements
Requires econometric analysis: Compare NYPD budget growth (2010-2025) against crime rate reductions and clearance rate changes to assess if returns are diminishing
Cost-benefit analysis of scaling
Every additional dollar should produce more benefit than cost. If the optimal budget is $5B and we are spending $6B, we are wasting $1B. If optimal is $7B and we are spending $6B, we are under-investing. Optimization drives rational budgeting.
Comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of NYPD spending
Requires academic research: Multi-factor optimization model incorporating crime costs, policing costs, clearance values, and social impacts to estimate optimal budget allocation
Alternative investment ROI
If 30% of police calls are mental health crises and $500M in mental health infrastructure could handle them better and cheaper, that frees police for actual crimes. Cross-sector ROI comparison drives smart resource allocation.
Mental health call volume data + cost analysis of mental health vs police response
FOIL request: "911 call volume by type (mental health, substance abuse, quality of life) with police response costs" + mental health service cost estimates from NYC Health Department
Addressing root causes
If homelessness drives property crime and housing is cheaper than policing, housing investment could reduce crime more cost-effectively than enforcement. Root cause analysis reveals upstream interventions that beat downstream enforcement.
Correlation analysis between housing insecurity and crime rates
Requires academic research: Analysis of relationship between housing availability, homelessness rates, and property crime rates using NYC data (2010-2025)
Prevention vs enforcement ROI
Youth intervention programs have strong evidence of crime reduction. If $500M in after-school programs, mentoring, and job training prevents more crime than $500M in additional policing, that is better investment. Evidence-based budgeting requires cross-sector comparison.
Youth program evaluation research + crime prevention cost-effectiveness studies
Academic literature review: "Cost-effectiveness of youth intervention programs vs police enforcement" + NYC-specific program evaluation data from Department of Youth and Community Development
Comparing police vs social services
Without rigorous cross-sector ROI analysis, budgeting is political theater. We need to know: Does $1 in policing, mental health, housing, or education produce the most public safety value? This drives rational resource allocation across city agencies.
Integrated cost-effectiveness framework for public safety investments
Requires Office of Management and Budget analysis: "Comparative cost-effectiveness of public safety investments across NYPD, mental health services, housing programs, and youth services" using standardized metrics
No Marginal Analysis: NYPD requests more officers every year without demonstrating what additional officers would achieve. Without marginal impact analysis, we do not know if 1,000 more officers would reduce crime significantly or waste $150 million annually for minimal benefit.
No Technology ROI: NYC invests tens of millions in policing technology without rigorous evaluation. If $100M in better forensic tools or case management systems would improve clearance rates more than hiring 667 officers, we should invest in technology. But we have no cost-effectiveness analysis to guide these decisions.
No Diminishing Returns Analysis: NYPD has grown dramatically over decades. At some point, additional resources produce minimal benefit - but we do not know if we have reached that point. Without diminishing returns analysis, we cannot determine optimal budget size.
No Cross-Sector Comparison: Mental health crises, homelessness, and youth disconnection drive crime. If social services prevent crime more cost-effectively than enforcement, we should shift resources. But without rigorous cross-sector ROI analysis, budgeting is political rather than evidence-based.
The Bottom Line: Rational budgeting requires marginal analysis, technology ROI evaluation, diminishing returns assessment, and cross-sector comparison. NYC does none of this for NYPD. We allocate $6 billion annually based on politics and inertia rather than evidence and optimization.
This is standard practice in every well-run organization. NYC refuses to do this for NYPD.