FROM

f

OFFICE OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

Date: August 8, 2006 CAO File No. 0410-04818-0005Council File No. 01-2394Council District: All

To: The Public Safety Committee

From: William T Fujioka, City Administrative Officer ~\l

Reference: Put() Safety Committee Request of June 13, 2005-Subject: POLICE FLEXIBLE WORK SCHEDULE UPDATE - SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT

SUMMARY

On June 13, 2005, the Public Safety Committee (Committee) instructed the Office .of the CityAdministrative Officer (CAO) to provide a supplemental report to its February 1., 2005 reportregarding the impact of the Flexible Work Schedule (FWS) on the Los Angeles Police Department(LAPD). The FWS, phased in over a six-month period from November 2001 to May 2002, allowedPolice Officers to work eight-, 10-, or 12-hour shifts depending upon their assignments. Reportsanalyzing data on cost, crime, and response time in the time period after FWS implementation wereprepared by the CAO in November 2002 and June 2003. In December 2003, LAPDprepared a thirdreport which covered a wider range of issues that included officer attrition and morale. The CAO'sFebruary 2005 report analyzed updated information for the indicators reviewed in the prior CAO andLAPD studies, as well as data on routine and urgent call response times, fatigue, and additionalcategories of discipline complaints.

IS

I

'ì

For the February 2005 report, the LAPD did not have suffcient time to compile and provide data froma comparable time period prior to and following the implementation of FWS. Specifically, LAPDprOVided data from approximately one and a half years before FWS but two and a half.yearsfollowirig FWS. The CAO reported that such a discrepancy could skew the results and noted that itwould be preferable to compare equivalent periods. Therefore, this report includes data from FiscalYear 1998-~9 through 2004-05, in addition to several new indicators requested by the Public SafetyCommittee. .The report compares a"a~a on indicators for a three year period before FWS was ilTPlementedagainst data on the same ih9icators for an equivalent period after implementation. Factors other thanthe FWS may have affected 1'¡:1~ indicators studied. It was not possible in our comparison of thepre-and post-FWS data to isolate f~ effects of the FWS and non-FWS variables, and it is thereforenot possible to say that a change in ~-.' dicator is attributable solely to the FWS. In addition, astraight comparison of averages fails to ta into account trends that may have preceded FWS aswell as anomalous years. Therefore, this analys' identifies in the text and tables significant trendsand anomalies. .

,i

I

)

t""

r CAO File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

2

The CAO's findings in terms of changes in the indicators after FWS implementation are summarizedbelow and in table format in Attachment A.

Cost: The number of court overtime hours increased by 8.5 percent, and court overtime incidentsincreased by 4.8 percent, representing increased costs. This ilustrates that court days are less likelyto occur during regular work days after FWS. End of watch overtime, on the other hand, decreasedby 4.4 percent. Sick time hours used increased by 7.1 percent, while sick time incidents decreasedby 4.8 percent. The relief factor, which is used to calculate the number of officers required to ensurea desired level of coverage, has not changed significantly since 2000.

Service: In the pei!) /following the implementation of FWS there was an increase in Part I crimes of1.7 percent and in repressible property crimes of 6.2 percent. Repressible violent crimes, however,decreased by 5.2 percent. The total number of arrests decreased by 10.3 percent and the totalnumber of Part I arrests decreased by 14.5 percent. The LAPD was requested to provide data onseveral enforcement activities. However, the only available data was the number of traffic citations,which decreased by 10.5 percent. The amount of time that officers devoted to enforcement activitiesaimed at reducing repressible crime (available time) decreased by 13.5 percent. Atthe request of theCommittee the "crossover rates" were also analyzed. For deployment purposes, the PoliceDepartment has divided the City into 19 Geographic Areas. The "cross-in rate" measures the numberof times that a unit from one Geographic Area enters into another Area to provide police services.The "cross-out rate" measures the number of times a unit leaves its Area for this purpose. The cross-in rate more than doubled after FWS with increases of 101.2 percent, while the cross-out rateincreased by 112.5 percent. Based on a review of the statistical trends and anomalies, however,none of the changes in these service indicators can be wholly attributed to FWS.

Response Times: The LAPD divides all calls for service into 461 types based on the nature of theincident. Examples include Bomb Scare and Robbery in Progress. Each type of call for service isgiven a code that determines the nature and priority of the officer's response. On April 25, 2004 theLAPD adopted a new policy related to coding calls for service. Specifically, prior to the policy changeselected types of incidents within the three main codes ofThree, Two, and Non-Coded were given apriority of High. High priority calls were to be responded to prior to other calls within a given code.Following the April 2004 policy change, no calls within a code were designated as High priority.Types of calls that would have been coded as Code Two High or Non-Coded High were recoded asCode Three, Code Two, or Non-Coded. In addition, several other types of incidents were also re-coded.

In the February 2005 report, the CAO provided the number of calls for service and response timesusing the standard categories of Emergency, Urgent, and Routine calls for service. The report alsodiscussed the April 2004 LAPD change. Following this change in policy, there was a significantimpact especially on Emergency response times, shown in the prior CAO report as decreasing from10.2 minutes to 6.7 minutes. This decrease in response time can largely be attributed to the policychange which resulted in all Emergency calls being responded to using lights and sirens instead ofonly a limited number of the most serious calls. Due to this policy change, however, a comparison ofEmergency response times before and after its implementation is not an equivalent comparison.

CAO File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

3

Similarly, since the changes in response times that followed the policy change impact the post-FWSresponse times, the comparison between Emergency response times before and after FWS is alsonot an equivalent comparison. Therefore, the Committee requested that the CAO determine thechange in response times for all calls since 1998 that have been responded to using the samemethod and level of prioritization. In order to do this, the CAO reviewed calls based on their code(Code Three, Code Two High, Code Two, Non-Coded High, or Non-Coded) rather than theirclassification (Emergency, Urgent, or Routine). A summary of the findings follows:

a. Code Three Calls: In the four and a half years before FWS was implemented, the monthlymedian response time for Code Three calls averaged 5.5 minutes. After the FWS wasimplemented until the April 2004 policy change, the monthly median response time averaged6.4 minutes. This increase was consistent with an upward trend in Code Three responsetimes that preceded FWS. After the April 2004 policy change, the number of the types of callsfor service considered Code Three increased significantly from four to 75. The result was asignificant increase in the number of Code Three calls from a monthly average of 1,552 to11,016 following the policy change, and an increase in the monthly median response time toan average of 7.0 minutes.

b. Code Two HiQh Calls: Code Two High calls were eliminated after April 2004 as a result of thepolicy change. In the period before the FWS was implemented, the monthly median responsetime for Code Two High calls averaged 8.5 minutes. In the period following FWS through April2004, the monthly median response time for these calls averaged 11.1 minutes. This increasewas consistent with an upward trend in response times to these calls that preceded FWS.

c. Code Two Calls: The monthly median response time for Code Two calls increased from anaverage of 18.5 minutes in the period before the FWS was implemented to 23.6 minutes afterFWS was implemented. This increase was consistent with an upward trend in response timesto these calls that preceded FWS. Since the April 2004 policy change, the monthly medianresponse time for Code Two calls averaged 18.9 minutes. This may be the result of the 17.2percent decrease in the number of Code Two calls from 27,012 per month to 22,363 permonth following the April 2004 policy change.

d. Non-Coded HiQh: Non-Coded High calls were eliminated after April 2004 as a result of thepolicy change. In the period before the FWS was implemented, the monthly median responsetime for Non-Coded High calls averaged 26.9 minutes. In the period following FWS throughApril 2004, the monthly median response time for these calls averaged 39.8 minutes. Thisincrease was consistent with an upward trend in response times to these calls that precededFWS.

e. Non-Coded Calls: The monthly median response time for Non-Coded calls increased from anaverage of 33.0 minutes in the period before FWS was implemented to 44.2 minutes afterFWS. This increase was consistent with an upward trend in response times to these calls thatpreceded FWS. Since the April 2004 policy change, the monthly median response time forNon-Coded calls averaged 41.4 minutes.

CAG File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

4

Based on the statistical trends and the significant April 2004 policy change, changes in theseresponse time indicators cannot be clearly linked to FWS.

Deployment: After the FWS was implemented, units assigned to Geographic Areas were deployedon 10- or 12-hour watches instead of eight-hour watches. Each 10-hour unit provides 25 percentmore hours of coverage per day than an eight-hour unit, and each 12-hour unit provides 50 percentmore coverage. Thus, fewer units are now required to provide the same amount of coverage as wasprovided before the FWS went into effect. To convey the increased amount of coverage provided byeach unit, the LAPD provided adjusted data for Total Units Deployed and Response Units Deployed.In each post-FWS deployment period 25 percent was added to the number of 1 O-hour units deployedand 50 percent was added to the number of 12-hour units deployed. Based on LAPD's adjusteddata, the monthly average number of units deployed increased by 7.9 percent after implementationof the FWS, but the monthly average number of units assigned to respond to calls for service(response units) decreased by 8.0 percent.

The February 2005 CAO report noted that this adjusted data does not reflect the actual number ofunits deployed. It is, instead, an indicator of the amount of coverage provided by the units under theFWS. Therefore, this report reflects the CAO's analysis of deployment data to calculate the actualnumber of units deployed. Based on this data, the actual monthly average number of total unitsdeployed decreased by 22.2 percent after the implementation of FWS, while the number of actualresponse units decreased by 35.8 percent. The total number of officers deployed in response unitsalso decreased by 35.8 percent.

The total number of officers assigned to Bureaus decreased following FWS by 0.9 percent from anaverage of 6,628 to 6,566. This coincided with a 2.9 percent reduction in the overall number ofofficers, and thus the percent of officers assigned to bureaus increased following FWS from 69.9percent to 71.3 percent.

At the request of the Committee, this report provides a "harvesting rate." The harvesting rate refers tothe rate at which officers that are assigned to Geographic Areas are reassigned to, generally, non-patrol functions by their commanding officer. In Deployment Period 7 of 2005, the harvesting rate forpatrol officers was 24 percent. The rate for all officers was 15 percent.

Recruitment and Retention: In addition to the impact of FWS on recruitment and retention, theCommittee requested: (a) the monthly average number of police officer applications received sinceJanuary 2002; and, (b) of the officers hired post-FWS, the number that entered into the process pre-FWS. In 2004-05, the monthly average number of police officer applications was 39.7 percent lowerthan in the six months of 2001-02 following the implementation of FWS. Forty-six percent of theofficers hired between January 1, 2002 and July 31, 2005 began the testing process prior to theimplementation of FWS. The data presented does not conclusively show that FWS has had animpact on recruitment or retention. However, because all local law enforcement agencies surveyedoffer some form of FWS, this Office believes that the FWS is one of several factors that contributesto the ability of the LAPD to recruit and retain police officers.

,CAO File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

5

Additional Areas of Study: The Public Safety Committee expressed an interest in obtaining opinionsfrom the community regarding the quality and level of services provided by the Police Department.Conducting a survey of the community to obtain this information is beyond the budgeted resources ofthis Office. If Council desires such a community survey to be conducted, funding should be identifiedto contract out for development of the survey instrument, administration of the survey, and analysisof the results.

During the course of this Office's research in completing this report, the issue of police offcers'satisfaction with the Flexible Work Schedule was raised. The Public Safety Committee did notrequest that this issue be covered. However, if Council desires such a survey to be conducted, thisOffice also recommends that such a survey be contracted out.

The Discussion section of this report and the following attachments provide additional detail:

AttachmentAB

CDEFGH

I

JK

L

M

N

oPQRSTU

VWXYZ

AABBCC

IndicatorIndicators Analyzed and Average Pre- and Post-FWS RatesCost - Total "Officer Watches"; Ratios of Court Overtime and Sick Time IncidentsCost - Court Overtime HoursCost - Court Overtime IncidentsCost - End of Watch OvertimeCost - Sick Time HoursCost - Sick Time IncidentsService - Part I CrimeService - Repressible Violent CrimeService - Repressible Property Crime

Service - Total Arrests

Service - Part I ArrestsService - Available TimeService - Traffic Citations Issued

Service - Cross-Out RateService - Cross-In RateResponse Time - Code Three CallsResponse Time - Code Three Response Time

Response Time - Code Two High CallsResponse Time - Code Two High Response Time

Response Time - Code Two CallsResponse Time - Code Two Response TimeResponse Time - Non-Coded High CallsResponse Time - Non-Coded High Response TimeResponse Time - Non-Coded CallsResponse Time - Non-Coded Response TimeDeployment - Equivalent Total UnitsDeployment - Equivalent Response UnitsDeployment - Percentage of Equivalent Units that are Response Units

,

jCAO File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

6

DD Deployment - Actual Total UnitsEE Deployment - Actual Response UnitsFF Deployment - Percentage of Actual Units that are Response Units

GG Deployment - Officers in Actual Response UnitsHH Deployment - Officers Assigned to BureausII Deployment - Office Harvesting Rate: Deployment Period 7, 2005

JJ Recruitment and Retention - Police Officer Applications

RECOMMENDATION

Note and file.

FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT

This report is informational and there is no fiscal impact. It complies with the Financial Policies.

,

,CAO File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

7

DISCUSSION

Backqround

On June 13, 2005, the Office of the City Administrative Officer (CAO) presented its third reportevaluating the Police Department's (LAPD) Flexible Work Schedule (FWS) to the Public SafetyCommittee (Committee). In that report, the CAO presented findings regarding a series of indicatorsrelated to LAPD operations from both before and after the implementation of the FWS. Specifically,those indicators related to LAPD costs, service, response time, deployment, discipline, andrecruitment. The report compared data related to these indicators from approximately one and a halfyears before and two and a half years after the implementation of FWS, which occurred betweenNovember 2001 and May 2002.

The report stated that the period of time prior to the implementation of FWS may not have beensufficient to correct for anomalies in the data resulting from atypical performance related to theseindicators. As a result, the CAO offered to gather additional pre-FWS data and present it in asupplemental report. For this report, pre-FWS data goes back to 1998-1999 and post-FWS datagoes through 2004-05. This report also presents data on additional indicators that were requested bythe Committee.

In cases in which data was not used in its original form, the methodology used is described in therelevant section. The data is presented as straight comparisons between the three-year periodsbefore and after the implementation of FWS. This comparison does not control for other variablesthat may also impact the results related to the indicators presented. Therefore, while it is possible totheorize regarding the impact of the FWS on these indicators, these data do not in themselves allowfor definitive conclusions to be drawn. Further, such comparisons do not take into account trends thatmay have preceded FWS or anomalous years. Therefore, the discussions of each indicator belowboth present the straight comparison between the averages in the three-year periods before andafter FWS, and identify trends or anomalies in the data that may suggest whether or not the changesin these averages are the result of the implementation of FWS.

FindinQs

1. Cost (Attachments B through G)

In order to evaluate the impact of the FWS on costs, this Offce reviewed data related to the totalamount of court overtime, end of watch overtime, and sick time used by officers assigned to theGeographic Areas. In order to generate ratios of the total number of days worked by officers to boththe number of court overtime and sick time incidents, this Office calculated a statistic called "officerwatches." This statistic is the total combined number of shifts, or watches, that would have beenworked by all officers assigned to Geographic Areas in a deployment period if no officers evermissed a shift for any reason, such as sick time, vacation, or reassignment by their commandingofficer, and did not work extra days due to overtime. In addition, this Office compared historical relieffactors, which determine the number of officers required to maintain a desired level of constantstaffing. Overtime is a significant cost for the Department, and any policy that impacts the amount of

.CAG File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

8

overtime used would have significant cost implications. Sick time is a soft cost for the Departmentsince it does not routinely backfill for officers who call in sick. Taking into account trends andanomalous years, the two cost indicators most clearly impacted by the FWS are the increase in courtovertime, and the increase in sick time hours.

The following table summarizes the key data for the indicators related to cost:

Summary of Changes in Cost Indicators Since FWS

Cost Indicator Ave./DP: Ave./DP: Change PercentBefore FWS After FWS ChanQe

Total "Offcer Watches" at Geooraohic Areas 123,973 88,700 (35,273) (28.5%)Court Overtime Hours 25,003 27,136 2,133 8.5%Court Overtime Incidents 9,355 9,800 445 4.8%Davs Worked to Court Overtime Incidents 13.3:1 9.0:1 NA NAEnd of Watch Overtime 33,471 31,990 (1,481) (44%)Sick Time Hours 29,368 31,446 2,078 71%Sick Time Incidents 3,720 3,541 (179) (4.8%)Dav Worked to Sick Time Incidents 33.41 25.0:1 NA NA

Total "Officer Watches" Worked at GeoQraphic Areas: The Committee requested this Office tocompare the pre- and post-FWS ratios of the total number of days worked by all officers to thenumber of court overtime and sick time incidents. The Police Department could not, however,provide the CAO with data of the actual number of cumulative days worked by all officers assigned toGeographic Areas in each deployment period. Therefore, for the sole purpose of generating therequested ratios, this Office calculated a statistic called "officer watches."

"Officer watches" refers to the total potential number of shifts that all officers assigned to theGeographic Areas would have worked in a given deployment period if no officer missed days for anyreason, such as sick time, vacation, or reassignment by a commanding offcer, or worked additionaldays due to overtime. This does not reflect the actual number of shifts worked by all officers, but is atheoretical number of shifts that could be worked. This statistic is based on the total number ofofficers on the force in each deployment period. The following table illustrates how this statistic wascalculated in pre- and post-FWS deployment periods. The number of officers and percent of officersassigned to Geographic Areas are used for illustration, and do not reflect examples from actualdeployment periods.

Period (a) Total # (b) Percent of (c) Total Offcers (d) Total (e) Totalof Officers Officers Assigned Assigned to Days "Officeron Force to Geographic Geographic Areas Worked Per Watches"

Areas -Iai x Ibl DP (c) x (d)Pre-FWS 9,000 70 % 6,300 19 119,700Post FWS 9,000 70% 6,300 13.669 86,115

Column (d), "Total Days Worked Per DP," reflects the number of shifts required per deployment

.CAO File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

9

period based on whether the officers work an 8-, 10-, or 12-hour shift. Prior to FWS, all officersworked 8-hour shifts which required 19 days of work per deployment period. Following FWS, theLAPD reports that approximately 70 percent of officers work a 12-hour shift, which requires 13 daysof work per deployment period, and 30 percent work a 1 O-hour shift, which requires15.23 days ofwork per deployment period. The number used in the Post-FWS row of 13.669 is the weightedaverage of the number of days of work required per deployment period on these two schedules.

The final number was the total potential number of watches worked by officers at the GeographicAreas per deployment period. Based on this methodology, the average number of potential "officerwatches" per deployment period decreased following the implementation of FWS by 28.5 percentfrom 123,973 to 88,700 (Attachment B). Since this statistic was calculated simply to enable thisOffice to generate the requested ratios of days worked to court overtime and sick time incidents, thisOffice does not draw any conclusions from this comparison.

Court Overtime Hours: Court overtime is paid to officers when they are required to appear in court orat administrative hearings outside their normal hours of work. Because officers work fewer days perweek under the FWS, they would be available on fewer workdays when court is in session. Thus,court overtime hours were expected to increase after implementation of FWS. The data shows that inthe deployment periods after the FWS was implemented, the average number of court overtimehours worked per deployment period increased by 8.5 percent from 25,003 hours to 27,136 hours.Further, in each of the three years prior to the FWS, the number of court overtime hours haddecreased while in each of the three years following FWS, the number of hours has increased(Attachment C). This increase does represent an increased financial cost that has been impacted byFWS.

Court Overtime Incidents: The Committee requested that this Office include the changes in thenumber of court overtime incidents from before and after the implementation of the FWS. As withcourt overtime hours, court overtime incidents were also expected to increase after theimplementation of FWS since officers work fewer days per week and would be available on fewerworkdays when court is in session. The LAPD payroll system tracks court overtime by hours, notincidents. Therefore, LAPD had to count each time a court overtime-related payroll code was used.As a result, the number of court overtime incidents includes each time an officer was on call but didnot report, on call and did report, and directly reported to Court.

The data shows a 4.8 percent increase in the average number of court overtime incidents perdeployment period after the implementation of the FWS. The average number of incidents perdeployment period increased from 9,355 prior to FWS to 9,800 incidents after FWS. A downwardtrend in court overtime incidents from the years preceding FWS ended after FWS was implemented(Attachment D). This increase does represent an increased financial cost that has been impacted byFWS.

Ratio of Total Days Worked to Court Overtime Incidents: The Committee requested this Office todetermine the ratio between the total number of days that officers work and the number of incidentsof court overtime. This Office used the statistic of "officer watches" discussed above to represent thenumber of days worked. Because the total number of days worked by officers has been reduced due

.CAQ File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

10

to the FWS, and the number of court overtime incidents has increased, the ratio has also beenreduced from 13.3:1 to 9.0: 1. In other words, prior to FWS offcers worked an average of 13.3 daysbetween each day of court overtime, while they now work 9.0 days between each day of courtovertime (Attachment B).

End of Watch Overtime: End of watch overtime is paid to officers who must stay beyond the end oftheir scheduled hours. For example, officers may incur end of watch overtime if they make an arrestor respond to a call toward the end of their scheduled work hours. End of watch overtime hours werereduced in the period following FWS implementation by 4.4% from 33,471 hours to 31,990 hours perdeployment period. Average end of watch overtime hours were variable during the seven-year studyperiod, demonstrating no clear trend. The reduced average is largely due to an unusually high levelof end of watch overtime in 2000-01, the year preceding FWS, and cannot be definitively linked toFWS itself (Attachment E).

Sick Time - Hours: Sick time hours increased by 7.1 percent from 29,368 hours per deploymentperiod prior to FWS to 31,446 after FWS. The average number of sick time hours per deploymentperiod has been steadily increasing since the implementation of FWS after a three-year period ofdeclining sick time hours prior to FWS. This increase in sick time hours used represents a soft costfor the Department since it does not routinely backfill for officers who call in sick (Attachment F).

Sick Time - Incidents: The Committee requested that this Office include the changes in sick timeincidents from before and after FWS. FWS was expected to reduce the number of sick time incidentssince officers work fewer days and would therefore have less chance of being sick during workingdays.

The LAP D's payroll system tracks sick time hours rather than sick time incidents. Therefore, LAPDestimated the number of sick time incidents based on the hours reported using the followingmethodology: Total sick hours reported by a single officer in a pay period were divided by eight foreight-hour shifts, or 12 for 10- and 12-hour shifts, and the number of sick time incidents was roundedup. For example, if an officer working an eight-hour shift reported 18 hours of sick time in a payperiod, that number was divided by eight resulting in 2.25 which was considered to be threeincidents. Similarly, if an officer working a 10- or 12-hour shift reported 27 hours of sick time in a payperiod, that number was divided by 12 resulting in 2.25 which was considered to be three incidents.This process somewhat underestimates the number of incidents for officers on a ten-hour schedule ifthey use a large block of sick time during a single pay period. Since the data is not intended to beused to determine the number of sick time incidents, this procedure is necessarily imperfect.

Using this methodology, the average number of sick time incidents decreased by 4.8 percentfollowing FWS from 3,720 to 3,541 per deployment period. Despite this decrease, it appears that thenumber of incidents is rising. The lower average in the post-FWS period is largely due to the fact thatthe lowest totals during the seven-year study period occurred during 2002-03, the year immediatelyfollowing the implementation of FWS. The number of incidents has since returned to pre-FWS levels(Attachment G).

Ratio of Total Days Worked to Sick Time Incidents: The Committee requested this Office to

CAO File No PAGE0410-04818-0005 11

determine the ratio between the total number of days that officers work and the number of incidentsof sick time. This Office used the statistic of "officer watches" discussed above to represent thenumber of days worked. As a result, the ratio was reduced from 33.4:1 to 25.0:1. In other words,prior to FWS officers worked an average of 33.4 days between each day of sick time, while they nowwork 25.0 days between each sick day (Attachment B).

Relief Factor: The Committee requested that this Office determine whether FWS has had an impacton the relief factor. The relief factor is the statistic that the Department uses to determine how manyofficers are required in order to sustain a certain level of coverage for a particular assignment. TheLAPD was only able to provide historical relief factors dating back to 2000. Those relief factors arelisted below:

Year Relief Factor2000 .2322001 .2322002 .2402003 .2322004 .2252005 .2222006 .225In order to calculate the required staffing, the Department multiplies the relieffactor by the number ofhours of coverage per day desired and by the number of officers desired to maintain a particularstaffing leveL. A higher relief factor would result in more officers being required to meet the desiredlevel of staffing. For example, to staff 100 officers on a 24 hour basis in 2001 would require that 557officers be assigned to that function (100 x 24 x .232). The same level of staffing in 2006 wouldrequire 540 officers (100 x 24 x .225), a reduction of 17 officers.

This calculation, and the calculation of the relief factor itself, is not impacted by the schedule that theofficers are on. Instead, the relief factor is calculated based on the actual reported employeeabsence hours for police officers assigned to the Geographic Areas. The relief factor takes intoaccount both unanticipated absences, such as sick leave, and anticipated absences, such asvacation and training. The higher these absence levels, the higher the relieffactor, resulting in moreoffcers required to maintain the desired level of staffing.

That the relief factor has not changed significantly since the implementation of FWS indicates thatthe FWS has not resulted in the need to staff a higher number of officers to meet the same level ofcoverage as was required prior to FWS.

2. Service (Attachments H through P)

In order to evaluate the impact that FWS has on police services, this Office evaluated the followingbroad range of service-related indicators: Part I Crimes, Repressible Violent Crimes, RepressibleProperty Crimes, Total Arrests, Part I Arrests, Available Time, the Cross-Out Rate, and the Cross-InRate. The Committee also requested that this Office present data related to changes in the levels of

CAO File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

12

the following enforcement activities: traffic citations, observation stops, field interviews, and officer-initiated activities. Of the enforcement activity information requested, the LAPD was only able toprovide data related to the number of traffic citations. Available time refers to the time during whichofficers are not responding to calls for service and are therefore able to engage in proactive policing,or activities intended to reduce repressible crime. The Cross-Out and Cross-In rates illustrate thefrequency with which patrol units must leave their Geographic Area in order to provide backup toactivities in other Areas. Although the pre- and post-FWS averages presented below show significantdifferences in these service indicators, a review of the trends, combined with an understanding thatmany factors impact these indicators, does not allow for any conclusive connection to be drawnbetween the changes and the implementation of FWS.

Summary of Changes in Service Indicators Since FWS

Service Indicator (Per Month) Ave./Mo.: Ave.lMo. Change PercentBefore FWS After FWS Chanae

Part I Crime 14,962 15,216' 254 1.7%Repressible Violent Crime 2,881 2,732 (149) 152%)Repressible Propertv Crime 7,852 8,336' 484 6.2%Total Arrests 13,672 12,264 11,408) 110.3%)Part I Arrests 2,919 2,496 (423) 114.5%)Available Time 39.1% 33.8% 15.3%) 113.5%)Enforcement Activities (Traffic Citations) 41,797 37,421 14,376) 110.5%)Cross-Out Rate 700 1,408 708 101.2%Cross-In Rate 708 1506 798 112.5%. These crime incidents in the post-FWS period only include data through December 2004 due to a change inreporting that be9an in 2005, which is discussed below.

Part I Crimes: The category of Part I crimes, as defined under the Federal Bureau of Investigation's(FBI) Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) guidelines, consists of violent crimes (homicide, rape, robbery,aggravated assault) and certain property crimes (burglary, grand theft auto, theft from a vehicle, andpersonal theft). The criteria for categorizing crimes are pursuant to these guidelines and do not takeinto account state or local law that determine whether the crimes are prosecuted as felonies ormisdemeanors.

The UCR criteria have not changed, but in early 2005, the LAPD changed its long-standing practiceof reporting all domestic violence assaults as Part I Crimes. The change resulted in domesticviolence aggravated assaults being reported as Part I Crimes, and domestic violence simple assaultsbeing reported as Part ii Crimes. The LAPD began reporting all domestic violence assaults as Part ICrimes during the 1980s as part of comprehensive efforts to provide an appropriate response toincidents of domestic violence following a lawsuit against the City that resulted in a consent decree.According to the LAPD, it was known internally that this reporting practice was not in strict adherenceto the UCR guidelines. In late 2004, the LAPD initiated a thorough review of its reporting practiceswhich included discussions with the Department of Justice. Based on that review, the LAPD decidedto change any crime reporting practices to ensure strict adherence with the UCR guidelines.

CAD File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

13

The LAPD stated that reporting domestic violence simple assaults as Part II Crimes is in strictadherence with the UCR guidelines which categorize all aggravated assaults as Part i Crimes and allsimple assaults as Part II Crimes regardless of the victim. Aggravated assaults are defined asattacks or attempted attacks with a weapon regardless of whether an injury occurred, and attackswithout a weapon when serious injury results. These are distinguished from simple assaults whichare defined as attacks or attempted attacks without a weapon resulting in no injuries, a minor injury,or an undetermined injury requiring fewer than two days of hospitalization. In California, simpleassaults are generally misdemeanors, but simple assaults against a family member are prosecutedas felonies. The statistical impact of this change in reporting was an immediate drop in the number ofPart I Crimes reported when the LAPD began reporting domestic violence simple assaults as Part iiCrimes.

In early 2005 the LAPD also changed a second reporting practice related to the theft of a rental carby the person who rented that car. This crime was reported as a Part I crime - grand theft auto -when the UCR guidelines categorize it as a Part ii crime - embezzlement. According to the LAPD,the number of these crimes is a much lower number than the number of domestic violence simpleassaults and this change had less of an impact on the crime reporting statistics.

The LAPD has not retroactively changed their reports of past crimes. The Department indicates thatthe amount of work to do so would be prohibitive as it would require a full review of all crimes reportsfor many years. Further, the LAPD states that it does not know, and cannot determine, how manyincidents of crime that would have been classified as Part I in the past are now being reported asPart II. As a result, there Is no way to determine with certainty the impact that the change in reportinghad on the actual number of Part I crimes reported. The LAPD has discussed the change with theFBI and the official crime reports note it for the public record.

On May 8, 2006, the Public Safety Committee considered a Parks - Rosendahl motion (C.F.05-1919) related to the LAPD's changes in crime reporting practices. At that meeting, the Committeerequested that the Office of the Chief Legislative Analyst report to the Committee on the actualimpact of the changes on the crime statistics reported, other jurisdictions' reporting practicespursuant to the UCR, and on methods available to the Council to urge the FBI to add UCR reportingcategories for domestic violence assaults.

In order to eliminate the impact that the change of reporting practices had on the number of Part ICrimes, this report compares the number of Part I Crimes prior to the implementation of FWS to thenumber of Part I Crimes from the implementation of FWS to the change in reporting practices in early2005. Using this criterion, the number of Part I Crimes per month increased by 1.7 percent from anaverage of 14,962 in the period preceding FWS to 15,216 In the period between the implementationof FWS and the changes in reporting. Since FWS, however, there has been an ongoing downwardtrend in Part I Crimes reported. In the six months of 2004-05 following the reporting changes, thenumber decreased to 12,020. This recent reduction must be explained, in part, by the changes inreporting (Attachment H).

Repressible Violent Crimes: Repressible violent crime is a subcategory of Part I crimes that includesviolent crimes that can be deterred by the use of police resources. The specific crimes within this

CAO File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

14

category include homicide, robbery, and various aggravated assaults. Domestic violence assaultsare excluded from the calculation of repressible violent crimes, and thus the January 2005 reportingchange discussed above did not impact the numbers reported. The average number of repressibleviolent crimes per month decreased by 5.2 percent from 2,881 in the period before theimplementation of FWS to 2,732 following the implementation of FWS. The number of repressibleviolent crimes reported has been trending downward since it peaked in 2001-02, the year that FWSwas implemented (Attachment i).

Repressible Property Crimes: Repressible property crime is a subcategory of Part i crimes thatincludes property crimes that can be deterred by the use of police resources. The specific crimeswithin this category include burglary, grand theft auto, and theft of property from an auto. TheJanuary 2005 reporting changes discussed above related to theft of a rental car by the person whorented the car. This change had the impact of reducing the number of repressible property crimesreported because these thefts, which had been reported as Part i Crimes (grand theft auto), began tobe reported as Part Ii Crimes (embezzlement). Thus, they no longer fell into the subcategory of Part iCrimes defined as repressible property crimes. According to the LAPD, the number of incidents oftheft of a rental car by the person renting the car is quite small, and thus the impact on the number ofcrimes reported should also have been smalL. The average number of repressible property crimesper month increased by 6.2 percent from 7,852 in the period before the implementation of FWS to8,336 in the period between the implementation of FWS and the change in the crime reportingmethodology. In the six months following the change in reporting, the number dropped to 6,915.Despite the increase when comparing the pre- and post-FWS period, there has been a downwardtrend in reports of these crimes beginning in 2003-04 (Attachment J).

Total Arrests: The monthly average number of total arrests has decreased by 10.3 percent since theimplementation of FWS from 13,672 to 12,264. This statistical decrease, however, is somewhatmisleading. The pre-FWS average is higher than the post-FWS average largely because the twoyears with the highest number of arrests during the seven-year study period were 1998-99 and1999-2000. In fact, the arrest rates have been steadily increasing in the years following theimplementation of FWS and the number of arrests in 2003-04 and 2004-05 have surpassed thenumber of arrests in 2000-01 and 2001-02 (Attachment K).

Part I Arrests: This category reflects arrests for Part I crimes. The total number of Part I arrests hasdecreased by 14.5 percent since the implementation of the FWS from a monthy average of2,919 to2,496. This decrease cannot be wholly attributed to FWS since there was a downward trendthroughout the seven-year study period (Attachment L).

CAD File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

15

Ratio of Crime to Arrests: As the Committee requested, the following table illustrates the ratio of PartI crimes to Part I arrests over the past ten years.

Part I Crime to Part One Arrest Ratio: 1996 through April 2005

Year Total Part I Total Part I RatioCrimes Arrests

1996 237,385 44,292 5.4:11997 206,110 43,071 4.8:11998 185,975 39,269 4.7:11999 164,893 37,178 4.4:12000 179,933 33,689 5.3:12001 188,943 32,404 5.8:12002 190,577 30,024 6.4:12003 181,566 30,605 5.9:12004 167,723 30,407 5.5:1

Jan - Apr, 2005 48,503 9,377 5.2:1

Available Time: Available time refers to the time during which officers are not responding to calls forservice and are therefore able to engage in proactive policing, or activities intended to reducerepressible crime. Available time is distinguished from hours worked in that hours worked refers tothe number of hours in each watch, while available time refers to the amount of that time that is notdedicated to calls for service.

The department continues to maintain the goal that 40 percent of every officer's hour of patrol beused as available time. This is part of the "7/40 Goal" adopted by Council in 1988 (C.F. 84-1586)which also states that the Department will respond to Emergency calls within seven minutes. TheDepartment has not achieved an annual average of the 40 percent available time component of thisgoal since 1998-99. The Department has not met this goal in anyone deployment period (DP) sinceDP 1 of 2002. The average available time dropped by 13.5 percent since the implementation of FWSfrom 39.1 percent to 33.8 percent. This represents a drop of 3.2 minutes per hour. Generally, though,

available time had been decreasing throughout the seven-year study period. It went from 41.8percent (25.1 minutes per hour) in 1998-99 to a low of 32.5 percent (19.5 minutes per hour) in2003-04 before rebounding slightly in 2004-05 to 34.3 percent (20.6 minutes per hour)(Attachment M).

Enforcement Activity: The Committee requested this Offce to investigate whether the level ofenforcement activity has been impacted by the implementation of FWS. Specifically, the Committeesuggested that the CAO review data related to traffic citations, observation stops, field interviews,and officer-initiated activities. The LAPD was only able to generate usable data on traffic citations,which is reviewed below. The other data was either not available, not consistently maintained, or notcoded in ways that permit the required analysis. For example, field interview cards were not useduntil recently, and therefore do not provide significant historical data priorto FWS. In addition, whileofficer activities are coded, it is not possible through the use of those codes to isolate all officer-

CAD File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

16

initiated activities.

The monthly average number of traffic citations has decreased by 10.5 percent since theimplementation of FWS from 41,797 to 37,421. This number is somewhat skewed due to anunusually high number of citations issued in 1999-2000 as compared to other years in the studyperiod. With the exception of that year, traffic citations issued have remained relatively stable, andhave demonstrated no clear trend during the past seven years (Attachment N).

Support Functions: The Committee requested that the CAO determine whether FWS has resulted inthe elimination of support functions such as DARE, juvenile operations, or other education,prevention, and intervention operations. The Department states that its youth programs (Explorer,Deputy Auxiliary Police, and Police Activity Leagues), education program (Magnet Schools),prevention programs (Jeopardy and Impact) and intervention program (Youth Advisory Program) areall currently operationaL. The DARE program was eliminated through the budget process and not asthe result of the implementation of FWS. The Department's Juvenile Services Group and JuvenileTables in the geographic Areas have been deactivated because the services are now performed bythe Detective Bureau and Detective Table. There is still a Juvenile Coordinator in each GeographicArea who supervises and assists with juvenile activities.

Basic Car InteQrity: The Committee requested the CAO to report on the impact of the FWS on theability of the Department to maintain "basic car integrity." Each of the 19 Geographic Areas arefurther divided into several smaller patrol areas. A patrol unit, or basic car, has as its primaryresponsibility crime suppression within one patrol area. "Basic car integrity" refers to the ability of apatrol unit to remain within its assigned patrol area. Frequent crossovers from one patrol area toanother could indicate that areas do not have adequate staffing.

The LAPD does not track when a patrol unit crosses from one patrol area to another within aGeographic Area. It does, however, track the number of times that a vehicle crosses into or out ofone Geographic Area to another. The crossover rates included in this report, therefore, only includethese incidents.

There are two measures of crossover rate used in this report. The Cross-Out rate measures thenumber of times a patrol car leaves its Geographic Area to provide service in another GeographicArea (Attachment 0). The Cross-In rate measures the number of times in which a Geographic Areawas the recipient of a patrol car from another Geographic Area (Attachment Pl. The Cross-In rate isslightly higher that the Cross-Out rate because each Bureau's Traffic Division is not assigned byGeographic Area. Thus, Traffic Division calls contribute to the Cross-In rate but not the Cross-Outrate. Both rates increased substantially following implementation of the FWS. The Cross-Out ratehas increased by 101.2 percent from an average of 700 incidents to 1,408 per deployment period,while the Cross-In rate has increased by 112.5 percent from 708 to 1,506. These increases areconsistent with a trend of rapidly increasing crossover rates throughout the seven-year study period.The trend may be reversing, as the 2004-05 cross-over rates went down for the first time in at leastsix years, and returned to levels comparable to 2001-02, the year the FWS was implemented.

CAD File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

17

3. Response Time (Attachments Q through Z)

This Office compiled the number of calls for service and response times to Code Three, Code TwoHigh, Code Two, Non-Coded High, and Non-Coded calls. The results were compared from thefollowing three time periods: (a) before FWS; (b) between the implementation of FWS and a changein LAPD's code system adopted in April 2004; and, (c) the period following the April 2004 change inpolicy. Taking into account the ongoing trends and significant April 2004 policy change, there is noconclusive connection between the changes in response times and FWS.

The following table summarizes the calls for service and response times during the three periodsidentified. Response time is defined as the period from when a call is received until the time whenthe officer arrives at the scene of the call for service.

Summary of Changes in Response Time Indicators Since FWS

Flex through April 2004 After April 2004 PolicyPre Flex Policy Chanae Chanae

Ave. Mo. Mo. Ave. Mo. Ave. Mo. Ave. Mo. Ave. Mo. Ave.Calls Med. Resp. Calls Med. Resp. Calls Med. Resp.

Code Time (min.) Time (min.) Time (min.)Three 1,391 5.5 1,552 6.4 11,016 7.0Two Hiqh 14,730 8.5 16,182 11.1 ° NATwo 15,923 16.0 17,125 19.9 21,808 18.8Non-Coded Hiqh 12,078 26.9 9,887 39.8 ° NANon-Coded 23,958 33.0 22,435 44.2 30,179 41.4

The LAPD has divided all calls for service into 461 incident types based on the nature of occurrence.Examples include Bomb Scare and Robbery in Progress. Each call for service is also given a codethat determines the method and priority of the officer's response. These codes are determined by theincident type with each incident type having a default code assigned to it. Although each incidenttype has a standard code, Police Service Representatives have the discretion to upgrade to a highercode for a specific call based on the details of that calL.

On April 25, 2004 the LAPD adopted a new policy related to coding calls for service through whichthe default codes assigned to several incident types were changed. In addition, prior to the policychange selected incident types within the three main codes of Three, Two, and Non-Coded weregiven a priority of High. High priority calls for service were to be responded to prior to other callswithin a given code. For example, Code Two High calls were responded to prior to other Code Twocalls and were included in the calculation of the number of and response time to Emergency calls.Non-Coded High calls were responded to prior to other Code Two calls and were included in thecalculation of the number of and response time to Urgent calls. Following the April 2004 policychange, the High priority designation was discontinued. Incident types that would have been codedas Code Two High or Non-Coded High were recoded as Code Three, Code Two, or Non-Coded.

The following table shows the number of the 461 incident types that were included in each code both

CAG File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

18

before and after the policy change.

Call Code Number of Incident TVDesPrior to Policy Chanae FollowinCl Policy Chanae

Three 4 75Two Hiqh 40 0Two 88 141Non-Coded Hiqh 98 0Non-Coded 231 245

As the table illustrates, the largest increase was in the number of incident types designated as CodeThree. Code Three prior to the policy change was only used for four incidents, three of which relatedto calls for help, and the fourth for a verified explosion. Following the policy change Code Threeincident types included, among others, several types of incidents during which: shots had been fired;a citizen is holding a suspect; the incident is in progress; or, the victim is at the location to which theofficer is responding. Some of these incident types were considered Code Two High prior to thepolicy change, but many others were given other, lower codes. The following table shows how manyincident types within each code prior to the policy change were re-coded following the change:

Followina the Policv ChanCle Coding of Same Incident Tvoes Prior to Policv ChanaeIncident Types Non-Coded

Call Code within Code Three Two High Two HiClh Non-CodedThree 75 4 20 36 6 9Two 141 0 20 50 53 18Non-Coded 245 0 0 2 39 204

Total Prior to Policy Change: 4 40 88 98 231

The policy change had a significant impact on the response to Emergency calls for service. Prior tothe change, Emergency calls included those with two separate codes: Code Three and Code TwoHigh. Code Three calls involve a serious public hazard or a crime of violence is in progress, or occurif a response could result in the preservation of life or the prevention of a crime of violence. For CodeThree calls, officers can use their lights and sirens permitting the quickest possible response. CodeTwo High calls were defined as being urgent and possibly life threatening. For Code Two High calls,officers could not use their lights and sirens. Since most Emergency calls were Code Two High, themajority of Emergency calls were not being responded to using lights and sirens.

After the policy change in April 2004, calls were no longer coded as Code Two High. Code Two Highcalls that were considered urgent and possibly life-threatening such as violations of domesticviolence restraining orders were re-coded as Code Three. This allowed officers to use lights andsirens when responding to these calls thereby shortening the response time. Additionally, callspreviously coded as Code Two High that did not have these characteristics, such as burglary from amotor vehicle that has just occurred, were downgraded to Code Two calls. Accordingly, thesedowngraded calls were excluded from the calculation for the total number of Emergency callsreceived by the LAPD and were excluded from the calculation of the median Emergency responsetimes. Instead, they were classified as Urgent calls.

CAG File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

19

The following tables summarize the impact of the policy change:

Response Categories Prior to April 25, 2004

Lights & Categorization forCall Type Code Definition Sirens May Purposes of Response

Be Used Time and Call NumberAny of the following are present:*. Serious public hazard.

Emergency 3. Preservation of life.

Yes Emergency. Crime of violence in progress.. Prevention of a crime of

violence.

Urgent 2 Hiqh Urqent, possiblv life-threateninq: No Emeroencv2 Urqent, not life threateninq* No Urqent

Non- Not an emergency or urgent, but ofCoded higher priority than other Non- No Urgent

Routine Hiqh Coded calls.

Non-Not an emergency or urgent*

Coded Officer response may be No Routineinterrupted bv other activities:*

* Communications Division's Divisional Order NO.6 (April 20, 2004).** Volume 2, Section 12.40 of the Manual of the Los Anqeles Police Department.

Response Categories After April 25, 2004

Lights & Included in CalculationCall Type Code Definition Sirens May of "Emergency Call"

Be Used Response TimeAny of the following are present:. Serious public hazard.. Preservation of life.

Yes EmergencyEmergency 3 . Crime of violence in progress.. Prevention of a crime of

violence.Uroent, oossibly Iife-threatenina Yes Emerqencv

Uroent 2 Urqent, not life threatenina No Uroent

Non- Not an emergency or urgent.Routine Coded Officer response may be No Routine

interrupted by other activities.

The LAPD generally reports response times based on the call types of Emergency, Urgent, orRoutine and the response times presented in the prior CAO report also used that methodology.Since the method of responding to most Emergency calls has changed, a comparison of responsetimes before and after the April 2004 policy change is not an equivalent comparison. Therefore, theCommittee requested this Office to compile and review data that breaks out Code Two High callsfrom before the policy change in order to more accurately determine the changes in response times.Most significantly, this allows for a direct comparison of all calls during which lights and sirens wereused from before and after the April 2004 and FWS policy changes. Similarly, since Non-Coded High

CAO File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

20

calls had been categorized as Urgent but were not responded to until all Code Two and Code Threecalls were cleared, this Office also broke out Non-Coded High calls from before the policy change.This allows an equivalent comparison of Code Two calls from before and after the policy change.Thus, this report presents median response times to Code Three, Code Two High (until the code wasdiscontinued as a result of the revised policy), Code Two, Non-Coded High (until the code wasdiscontinued as a result of the revised policy), and Non-Coded calls.

Code Three Calls: Code Three calls are the highest priority calls and are those calls officers canrespond to using lights and sirens. Prior to the April 25, 2004 policy change Code Three callsrepresented the subset of all Emergency calls that were responded to using lights and sirens. Alsoincluded in Emergency calls prior to the April 2004 policy change are Code Two High calls, althoughthose could not be responded to with lights and sirens. Part of the policy change was to recodeseveral non-Code Three incident types as Code Three, and as a result, the number of Code Threecalls increased following the implementation of the new policy. In addition, Code Three calls nowmake up Emergency calls in their entirety.

The number of Code Three calls was relatively consistent from 1998 through April 2004, althoughthere was an increase in the monthly average number after the implementation of FWS from 1,391to 1,552 calls. After the implementation of the new policy, the number of Code Three callsdramatically increased to an average of 11 ,016 per month reflecting that several incident types werereclassified as Code Three (Attachment Q).

The monthly average median response times for Code Three calls increased from 5.5 minutesbefore FWS to 6.4 minutes between the implementation of FWS and the April 2004 policy change.This increase cannot be attributed to FWS alone since there was an upward trend in Code Threeresponse times which preceded the implementation of FWS. Since the April 2004 policy change theresponse time has averaged 7.0 minutes. For many months leading up to the policy change themedian response time was 6.0 minutes. Thus, the increase in response time to 7.0 minutes suggeststhat the nearly sevenfold increase in Code Three calls has slowed the response to those calls(Attachment R). The vast majority of those calls, however, are those that had not been previouslyconsidered Code Three, which are now being responded to faster at 7.0 minutes than they had beenunder their prior, lower priority coding.

The following table illustrates the changes in the number of and monthly average median responsetime to Code Three calls before and after FWS, and before and after the April 25, 2004 policychange:

Total Calls I Code Three Percentage Monthly AverageTime Period Mo. Calls I Mo. of Code Median Response

Three Calls Time (Minutes)Pre-FWSlbefore definition change 68,080 1,391 2.0% 5.5I (Januarv 1998 - Anril 2002\Post-FWSlbefore definition

67,181 1,552 2.3% 6.4channe (Mav 2002 - Anril 2004\Post FWSlafter definition change 63,003 11,016 17.5% 7.0I (Mav 2004 - December 2005)

CAO File No. PAGE0410-04818-0005 21

Code Two Hiqh Calls: Code Two High calls were eliminated as part of the April 2004 policy change.Prior to that, they were considered to be Emergency calls like Code Three calls, but unlike CodeThree calls, they were not responded to with lights and sirens. Calls within this category were eitherre-coded as Code Three, or as Code Two.

The monthly average number of calls for service for Code Two High calls increased from 14,730before FWS to 16,182 between the implementation of FWS and the April 2004 policy change. Thisincrease cannot be attributed to FWS alone since there was an upward trend in Code Two High callsfor service that preceded the implementation of FWS (Attachment S). In addition, the medianresponse time to these calls was also increasing prior to FWS. Consistent with that trend, themonthly average response time increased after FWS from 8.5 to 11.1 minutes (Attachment T). Thefollowing table illustrates the changes in the number of and monthly average median response timeto Code Two High calls before and after FWS:

Total Calls I Code Two High Percentage of Monthly AverageTime Period Mo. Calls I Mo. Code Two High Median Response

Calls Time (MinuteslPre-FWSlbefore definition change

68,080 14,730 21.6% 8.5(Januarv 1998 - Aoril20021

Posl-FWSlbefore definition 67,181 16,182 24.1% 11.1chanoe (Mav 2002 - ADril 20041

Code Two Calls: Calls classified as Code Two are those that are considered urgent, but not Iife-threatening. They are only responded to after higher level calls are cleared. Until the April 2004policy change, the number of Code Two calls had generally been increasing for several years.Consistent with this trend, the monthly average number of calls for service for Code Two callsincreased from 15,923 priorto FWS to 17,125 between FWS and the April 2004 policy change. Afterthe change, the number of Code Two calls increased to 21 ,808 (Attachment U). This increase mustat least, in part, have been the result of the increase in the number of types of incidents designatedas Code Two from 88 to 141.

The monthly average median response times for Code Two calls increased from 16.0 minutes beforeFWS to 19.9 minutes between the implementation of FWS and the April 2004 policy change. Thisincrease cannot be attributed to FWS alone since there was an upward trend in Code Two responsetimes which preceded the implementation of FWS. Following the April 2004 change in policy,however, that trend has been reversed as the monthly median response times averaged 18.8minutes (Attachment V). The reduction in response time since the policy change is despite theincreased number of Code Two calls.

The following table illustrates the changes in the number of and monthly average median responsetime to Code Two calls before and after FWS, and before and after the April 2004 policy change:

CAG File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

22

Total Calls I Mo. Code Two Percentage Monthly AverageTime Period Calls I Mo. of Code Two Median Response

Calls Time (Minutes)Pre-FWSlbefore definition change

68,080 15,923 23.4% 16.0(Januarv 1998 - Aoril 2002\Post-FWSlbefore definition change

67,181 17,125 25.5% 19.9(Mav 2002 - Aoril 2004)Post FWSlafter definition change

63,003 21,808 34.6% 18.8(Mav 2004 - December 2005)

Non-Coded Hiqh Calls: Non-Coded High calls were eliminated as part of the April 2004 policychange. Prior to that, they were not considered to be an emergency or urgent, but were responded toprior to other Non-Coded calls. They were included in the calculation of Urgent calls for services andresponse times despite only being responded to after all higher priority calls were cleared.

The monthly average number of calls for service for Non-Coded High calls decreased from 12,078before FWS to 9,887 between the implementation of FWS and the April 2004 policy change. Thisdecrease cannot be attributed to FWS alone since there was a downward trend in the number ofNon-Coded High calls for service that preceded the implementation of FWS (Attachment Wi.

The monthly average median response time to these calls increased after FWS from 26.9 to 39.8minutes (Attachment X). Again, this trend cannot be attributed to FWS since a steady upward trendin response times to these calls preceded FWS. Specifically, each year of the seven-year studyperiod saw a three to five minute increase in these response times. The following table illustrates thechanges in the number of and monthly average median response time to Non-Coded High callsbefore and after FWS:

Total Calls I Non-Coded Percentage of Monthly AverageTime Period Mo. High Calls I Mo. Non-Coded High Median Response

Calls Time (Minutes)Pre-FWSlbefore definition change

68,080 12,078 21.6% 26.9(Januarv 1998 - April 2002)

Post-FWSlbefore definition67,181 9,887 24.1% 39.8chance (Mav 2002 - April 2004)

Non-Coded Calls: Classified as routine, Non-Coded calls are of the lowest priority. As a result, thesecalls generally have the longest response times. The number of Non-Coded calls was relativelystable in the period around the implementation of FWS with the monthly average number of callsdecreasing from 23,958 prior to the implementation of FWS to 22,435 between FWS and the April2004 policy change. Following the policy change, more calls are being coded in this category. Thenumber of Non-Coded calls has increased to a monthly average of 30,179 since the change(Attachment Y).

The monthly average median response times for Non-Coded calls increased from 33.0 minutesbefore FWS to 44.2 minutes between the implementation of FWS and the April 2004 policy change.

CAD File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

23

This increase cannot be attributed to FWS alone since there was an upward trend in Non-Codedresponse times which preceded the implementation of FWS. This trend of increased response timeshas been somewhat reversed since the annual median response time peaked in 2003 at 46 minutes.Thus, the monthly median response time to Non-Coded calls after the April 2004 policy changeaveraged 41.4 minutes (Attachment l).

The following table illustrates the changes in the number of and monthly average median responsetime to Non-Coded calls before and after FWS, and before and after the April 2004 policy change:

Total Calls I Non-Coded Percentage of Monthly AverageTime Period Mo. Calls I Mo. Non-Coded Median Response

Calls Time (Minutes)~re-FWSlbefore definition change

68,080 23,958 35.2% 33.0Januarv 1998 - Anril 20021Post-FWSlbefore definition

67,181 22,435 33.4% 44.2channe IMav 2002 - Aoril 2004)~ost FWSlafter definition ch~)nge

63,003 30,179 47.9% 41.4Mav 2004 - December 2005

4. Deployment (Attachments AA through II)

This Office compared the number of officers deployed before and after FWS. The prior CAO reportincluded deployment figures adjusted by the LAPD in the post-FWS period to reflect the additionalcoverage provided by officers on longer watches. The adjusted figures were intended to show eight-hour equivalents for units deployed on 1 O-hour and 12-hour watches. For each 1 O-hour watch unitdeployed, the LAPD multiplied the unit by 1.25, and for each 12-hourwatch unit, the LAPD multipliedthe unit by 1.5. The equivalent numbers from 1998-99 through 2004-05 are presented in the tablebelow. Comparisons were also made between the actual number of units deployed in the periodsbefore and after FWS. Other indicators related to deployment that were compared include the totalnumber of officers assigned to the response units, and the number of officers deployed to Bureaus.A harvesting rate from a recent deployment period is also provided below.

The following table summarizes the changes in deployment before and after FWS:

Summary of Changes in Deployment Indicators Since FWS

ployment Indicator Ave.lDP Ave.lDP ChangeBefore FWS After FWS

E uivalent Total Units 21,428 23,111E uivalent Res onse Units 14,990 13,787Actual Total Units 21,054 16,373Actual Res onse Units 14,922 9,579Number of Officers in Actual Res onse Units 29,411 18,874Number of Officers Assi ned to Bureaus. 6,628 6,566 62) 0.9%).This reflects the average number of officers assigned to the Bureaus in deployment period six across several years, notan average per deployment period.

CAD File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

24

This Office included these deployment indicators to respond to the Committee's request to comparethe number of response units deployed at any given time before and after FWS. The mostmeaningful comparison would be of the number of units deployed at standard periods throughout aday, such as comparing the average number of units deployed between 6:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m.both before and after FWS. Unfortunately, for reasons discussed below, the available data does notallow for direct comparisons at specific times throughout a day.

LAPD deploys units to work several watches, each with a different start-time and length. Both beforeand after FWS there were standard non-overlapping watches scheduled to provide 24-hourcoverage. For example, under an 8-hour schedule, there were three non-overlapping eight hourwatches covering a full 24 hour period. In a 12-hour schedule, there are two non-overlapping 12-hourwatches that cover a full 24-hour period. In addition, both before and after FWS there were severalother watches that overlay these standard watches but with different start times. Prior to FWS, therewere generally two overlaying watches. The start times for these watches tended to be same time inall Geographic Areas and did not change significantly over time. Following FWS, each Area wasgiven additional latitude to schedule these overlay watches in order to direct police resources totimes of the greatest need for policing in each Area. As a result, there are now as many as fiveoverlay watches used. Further, these overlay watches do not have standard start times acrossAreas, or even from deployment period to deployment period within an Area.

The deployment data made available to this Office included the number of units assigned to eachwatch every day. It did not include the start times for each watch. Since watch times prior to FWSwere relatively standard it would be possible to use this data to determine the average number ofofficers on duty at any given time prior to FWS. After FWS, however, since the watch start times areno longer standard it is not possible to use the available data to determine the average number ofofficers on duty at any given time. This Office requested that the LAPD provide information regardingthe actual watch start-times for all watches since FWS by Area and deployment period in order todetermine how much actual variation there is in watch start-times. In addition, this Office hoped touse this information to identify specific times when a comparison on pre- and post-FWS coveragecould be made. The LAPD reported that watch start times are not systematically maintained makingthis analysis impossible. Instead, the data presented below is the average number of units deployedper deployment period.

Equivalent Total Units and Response Units Deployed: Units deployed refers to all the units that havebeen deployed for law enforcement activity to the Geographic Areas. Among the units included are:response, detective, bicycle, gang, and special enforcement. Response units deployed refers tothose that are assigned to be available to respond to calls for service dispatched from theCommunication Center.

Before FWS was implemented, units were deployed based on eight-hour watches. After FWS wasimplemented, units were deployed only on 10- and 12-hour watches. Because the units deployedunder FWS are on longer watches, fewer units need to be deployed to provide the same amount ofcoverage. For example, prior to FWS, when all units were deployed based on an eight-hourschedule, if LAPD wanted to ensure that there was at least one unit on patrol in a neighborhood

CAD File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

25

during a 24-hour time period, the Department would have to deploy three units that day. Under FWS,however, if units were deployed based on 12-hour watches, only two units are needed to ensure thatthe neighborhood is covered in a 24-hour time period. Fewer units can provide the same amount ofcoverage as was provided in the 24-hour time period before FWS because each unit is on a longerwatch.

To convey the fact that each unit under FWS provides greater coverage per day than each unitunder an eight-hour schedule, LAPD adjusted the data for the units deployed in the post-FWS timeperiod into eight-hour equivalents. Each unit on a 12-hour watch provides the same coverage as oneand one-half eight-hour units. Thus, LAPD multiplied each 12-hour watch unit deployed by 1.5 toarrive at the equivalent number of eight-hour units. Similarly, for each unit deployed on a 10-hourwatch, LAPD multiplied the unit by a factor of 1.25.

Based on this adjustment, the number of equivalent total units deployed increased by 7.9 percentafter the implementation of FWS from 21,428 to 23,111 per deployment period. The number ofequivalent total units had been decreasing for the three years leading up to FWS, but that trend wasreversed after FWS (Attachment M). On the other hand, the number of equivalent response unitsdecreased by 8.0 percent after the implementation of FWS from 14,990 to 13,787 per month. Adownward trend in the number of response units preceded FWS and, therefore, this reduction is notan indication that FWS caused the decrease (Attachment BB). As a result of these two factors, thepercentage of all deployment units that were response units decreased after FWS from 70 percent to60 percent. Further, there has been a downward trend since the implementation of FWS, and in2004-05 the percent of all units that were response units was 54 percent (Attachment CC).

Actual Total Units and Response Units Deployed: The Committee requested this Office to reviewactual deployment numbers and determine the changes in total units and response units deployedwithout using the LAPD's 1.25 and 1.5 multipliers to adjust for eight-hour equivalents. Based on thatreview, actual units and response units deployed decreased after FWS. The total number of unitsdeployed decreased by 22.2 percent in the period following the implementation of FWS from 21 ,054to 16,373 per month. Although there has been a slight upward trend in the years since FWS, themonthly average of 16,977 total units deployed in 2004-05 is below the 20,413 average unitsdeployed during the last full pre-FWS year of 2000-2001 (Attachment DD).

The monthly average number of response units decreased by 35.8 percent after the implementationof FWS from 14,922 to 9,579. The downward trend is continuing with 9,081 response units deployedper month in 2004-05. Although the size of this drop is due to FWS, since the trend of decreasingresponse units preceded FWS, the trend itself cannot be attributed to FWS (Attachment DD). Thepercentage of total units that are response units decreased from 71 percent to 59 percent followingthe implementation of FWS. Further, there has been a continuing downward trend since theimplementation of FWS, so that in the Fiscal Year 2004-05 the percent of all units that wereresponse units was 54 percent (Attachment FF).

Officers in Response Units Deployed: This Office also used the actual units deployment data todetermine the number of officers deployed within the response units. The deployment data identifiedwhether the response unit is assigned one officer or two officers. Since the vast majority of response

CAG File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

26

units contain two officers, the percent change from before and after FWS closely mirrors the percentchange in the number of units before and after FWS. The average number of response officersdeployed per deployment period (DP) decreased by 35.8 percent following the implementation ofFWS from an average of 29,411 to 18,874. This continued a downward trend from before theimplementation of FWS, although the number dropped significantly when comparing the full yearbefore FWS (29,583 response officers deployed per DP in 2000-01) to the full year following (19,307response officers deployed per DP in 2002-03) (Attachment GG). As with the number of units, thisdrop is due to the fact that under FWS, officers now work fewer watches, but the hours are longer.

Officers AssiQned to Bureaus: The prior CAO report presented a 12-year comparison of the totalnumber of officers assigned to the Bureaus and the percentage of all officers assigned to theBureaus in Deployment Periods seven and 13 from 1993 through 2004. As part of the 2006-07Budget process the LAPD again presented similar data for DP six from 1996 through 2006 brokendown by Bureau. This data showed that the average number of officers assigned to the Bureaus inDP six during the four years prior to FWS was 6,628. This was reduced by .9 percent in the fouryears following FWS to 6,566. This decrease coincided with a 2.9 percent decrease in the averagetotal number of officers during these periods from 9,479 to 9,204. Thus, while the number of offcersassigned to Bureaus decreased, the percentage of officers assigned to Bureaus increased from 69.9percent of the total force prior to FWS to 71.3 percent following FWS (Attachment HH).

Harvestinq: The Committee requested that this report include the number of officers "harvested"in the 19 Geographic Areas. The harvesting rate is designed to measure the degree to which acommanding officer at a Geographic Area reassigns his/her officers or patrol officers to otherfunctions. The harvested officer can take on any range of new assignments generally associatedwith a temporary increase in workload. The Department was not able to provide historical data onthe percentage of officers harvested, but it did provide the total number of officers harvested in arecent deployment period (DP 7, 2005). In that period, 15 percent of all officers and 24 percent ofpatrol officers were "harvested" (Attachment II). Absent historical data, it is not possible to identifywhether the harvesting rate has changed since the implementation of FWS.

5. Recruitment and Retention (Attachments JJ)

The Committee requested this Office to evaluate the impact that FWS has had on recruitment andretention. FWS is one of many factors that impacts recruitment and retention. For example,recruitment was curtailed from September 2003 through January 2005 due to the City's fiscalsituation. The Personnel Department reports that it takes time for recruitment levels to rebound afterthey are scaled back. In March 2002, it implemented an online Preliminary Background Applicationwhich gave applicants an immediate indication of whether they could qualify for the applicationprocess. The Department estimates that this may have dissuaded as many as 20 percent of potentialapplicants. The Department also indicated that application numbers correspond with theunemployment rate, increasing as the unemployment rate increases. The Los Angeles CountyUnemployment rate has declined consistently from 7.0 percent in 2003 to 5.3 percent in 2005. It isexpected that this trend would result in a decreasing number of applications.

The Committee requested that this Office present the number of police officer applications received

CAG File No.

0410-04818-0005PAGE

27

per month since January, 2002 (Attachment JJ). The monthly average number of police officerapplications was 39.7 percent lower in 2004-05 than in the six months of 2001-02 following theimplementation of FWS. As discussed, this could reflect any number of factors.

The Committee also requested that this Office determine which of the officers hired since theimplementation of FWS entered the hiring process prior to FWS. According to data from thePersonnel Department, of the 1,713 officers appointed between January 1,2002 and July 31,2005,790, or 46 percent, were tested prior to January 1, 2002 when FWS was not yet available.

Retention is also impacted by a wide range of factors. The DROP Program has provided an incentivefor officers to remain in the LAPD past the point when they may have retired, and thus has increasedretention. Officer morale could also impact whether officers stay in the Department when faced withopportunities to move elsewhere.

Both recruitment and retention are also impacted by the package of salary and benefits that areoffered. This is especially true in a region such as Southern California where there are so manyoptions for law enforcement professionals. Thus, given that the FWS appears to be popular amongthe officers, the LAPD could lose qualified candidates and officers to other agencies with the FWS ifthis work schedule were discontinued. The CAO conducted a survey of several local lawenforcement agencies and identified the following agencies which offer some form of FWS:Burbank, Glendale, Los Angeles County, Long Beach, San Diego, Santa Monica, Santa Ana,Anaheim, Huntington Beach, Inglewood, Irvine, Redondo Beach, Beverly Hills, Ventura County, SimiValley, and Pasadena.

Additional Areas of Study

The Public Safety Committee expressed an interest in obtaining opinions from the communityregarding the quality and level of services provided by the Police Department. Conducting a surveyof the community to obtain this information is beyond the budgeted resources of this Office. IfCouncil desires such a community survey to be conducted, funding should be identified to contractout for development of the survey instrument, administration of the survey, and analysis of theresults.

During the course of this Office's research in completing this report, the issue of police officers'satisfaction with the Flexible Work Schedule was raised. The Public Safety Committee did notrequest that this issue be covered. However, if Council desires such a survey to be conducted, thisOffice also recommends that such a survey be contracted out.

WTF:JWG.JWWjww: 1 8060044

Attachments

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

A: I

ND

ICA

TO

RS

AN

ALY

ZE

D A

ND

AV

ER

AG

E P

RE

- A

ND

PO

ST

-FW

S R

AT

ES

IND

ICA

TO

R U

SED

BE

FOR

EA

FTE

RPE

RC

EN

T

IC

RIT

ER

IAF

OR

EV

ALU

AT

ION

FWS

FWS

CH

AN

GE

CH

AN

GE

RE

LE

VA

NT

TR

EN

DS

Cos

tT

otal

"O

ffce

r W

atch

es"

123,

973

88,7

00(3

5,27

3)(2

8.5%

)U

sed

to g

ener

ate

ratio

s of

day

s w

orke

d to

cou

rt(P

erat

Geo

grap

hic

Are

asov

ertim

e in

cide

nts

and

sick

tim

e in

cide

nts.

depl

oym

ent

Cou

rt O

vert

ime

Hou

rs25

,003

27,1

362,

133

8.5%

Pos

sibl

y du

e to

FW

S: d

ownw

ard

tren

d pr

ior

to F

WS

peri

od)

reve

rsed

afte

r F

WS

.C

ourt

Ove

rtim

e9,

355

9,80

044

548

%P

ossi

bly

due

to F

WS

: dow

nwar

d tr

end

prio

r to

FW

SIn

cide

nts

reve

rsed

afte

r F

WS

.D

ays

Wor

ked

to C

ourt

13.3

:19.

0:1

NA

NA

Due

prim

arily

to fe

wer

day

s be

ing

wor

ked.

Ove

rtim

e In

cide

nts

End

of W

atch

33,4

7131

,990

(1,4

81)

(4.4

%)

No

clea

r tr

end;

red

uctio

n re

sult

of a

n un

usua

lly h

igh

Ove

rtim

eye

ar p

rior

to F

WS

.Si

ck T

ime

Hou

rs29

,368

31,4

462,

078

7.1%

Pos

sibl

y du

e to

FW

S: d

ownw

ard

tren

d pr

ior

to F

WS

reve

rsed

afte

r F

WS

.Si

ck T

ime

Inci

dent

s3,

720

3,54

1(1

79)

(4.8

%)

Due

to a

n un

usua

lly lo

w n

umbe

r of

inci

dent

s in

yea

rfo

llow

ing

FW

S; h

as r

etur

ned

to p

re-F

WS

leve

ls.

Day

s W

orke

d to

Sic

k33

.4:1

25.0

:1N

AN

AD

ue p

rimar

ily to

few

er d

ays

bein

g w

orke

d.T

ime

Inci

dent

sSe

rvic

eP

art I

Crim

e14

,962

15,2

1625

41.

7%A

lthou

gh th

e th

ree-

year

ave

rage

ref

lect

s an

incr

ease

,(C

rime

and

the

num

ber

has

been

dec

reas

ing

sinc

e F

WS

arre

st s

tats

are

reve

rsin

g an

upw

ard

tren

d pr

ior

to F

WS

.m

onth

ly:

Rep

ress

ible

Vio

lent

2,88

12,

732

(149

)(5

.2%

)U

n up

war

d tr

end

prio

r to

FW

S w

as r

ever

sed

afte

rA

vaila

ble

time

Cri

me

FWS.

and

cros

sove

rR

epre

ssib

le P

rope

rt7,

852

8,33

648

46.

2%N

otw

ithst

andi

ng th

e hi

gher

num

ber

sinc

e F

WS

, the

rera

tes

are

per

Cri

me

has

been

a d

ownw

ard

tren

d in

thes

e cr

imes

sin

cede

ploy

men

t20

03-0

4.pe

riod

)T

otal

Arr

ests

13,6

7212

,264

(1,4

08)

(10.

3%)

Not

with

stan

ding

the

low

er n

umbe

r, a

rres

ts h

ave

been

incr

easi

ng s

ince

FW

S.

Par

t i A

rres

ts2,

919

2,49

6(4

23)

(14.

5%)

Thi

s de

crea

se is

con

sist

ent w

ith a

dow

nwar

d tr

end

over

the

entir

e pe

riod.

Ava

ilabl

e T

ime

39.1

%33

.8%

(5.3

%)

(13.

5%)

Thi

s de

crea

se is

con

sist

ent w

ith a

dow

nwar

d tr

end

thro

ugho

ut th

e pe

riod,

alth

ough

ther

e w

as a

slig

htin

crea

se in

200

4-05

. The

40

perc

ent g

oal h

as n

otbe

en m

et fo

r an

ent

ire y

ear

sinc

e 19

98-9

9, o

r in

any

one

DP

sin

ce D

P 1

of 2

002.

Enf

orce

men

t Act

iviti

es41

,797

37,4

21(4

,376

)(1

0.5%

)Lo

wer

num

ber

afte

r F

WS

is d

ue to

an

unus

ually

hig

h(Traffc Citations)

num

ber

of c

itatio

ns in

199

9-20

00.

Cro

ss-O

ut R

ate

700

1,40

870

810

1.2%

Con

sist

ent w

ith r

apid

incr

ease

thro

ugho

ut th

e pe

riod.

In 2

004-

05 d

ecre

ased

to th

e 20

01-0

2 le

vels

.C

ross

-In

Rat

e70

815

0679

811

2.5%

Con

sist

ent w

ith r

apid

incr

ease

thro

ugho

ut th

e pe

riod.

In 2

004-

05 d

ecre

ased

to th

e 20

01-0

2 le

vels

._.

oUJ::Z¡:Zou.lI-ZUJ:æ:iu'"l-I-'"

UJ LO

~ 8'" .' ,,':iI u ,

i-w~I a: C)IMUZ ~~"'~UJ :ia. u

CIoZUJ~l-I-Z'";:UJ..UJ~

en C (JQ. w= Q.U0) +- ro UJ (lc.~ u c: c.ct 00- a c...c°a.o(J 8 II (/.0Q. co ~~ enE ;" c =:. ~~ CD enOJ:; -.c uen ro 5:""c~.9Q)~8. (l (/ 0) aU)-C Q. C UCLd- E ro ii- .._.. c'+ (I.. CJ 00", OJ;"zOJ", '" UeLL C :. "'ooooec__g-c.ro.."' Q) "" rZrn (l i-O;::5'5 c°i-..--N"''-"0- a.c.. c ï:: "'::.. c. aa ro ~ c: U- OJ-~..E~.9OJ "' (" -- (/"S:i 3: ~ C!Q. a c. c E0: ü :: :::.

~oioi

~oCDaC"

~oCD

l'

~oCD

,.N

~~, ~

o:~~

~~oi

l'0000oi

~oa00v

:;ovB

~ooiC"C"

~oCD

~"'CD~

I

I

NL!v.~

'C..

Na"!

. ~

':, ;;

~';oioi

0000

a;N~~

MNL!

N~~

~~

~CD~

oi "'N

L!N~,.

00a00~N

¡eaN~

~~;".

~CI~;:u. u.'"

~C"00 a~al' C"CD CD

~~

al'

N00

~~~

C"NoiL!~

a. CD~

..

,

NL!L!

CD~avCD

CD~

aC"l'V~

L!00

00oiC"

L!C"v_NN

oil'~Nvv

v~v~

UJ

~CI0;:tl u.lD

a00a~ "

L!L!

aC"

~oiC"~

oiCDN

. aC"C"

00L!oiC"N

.

Q.~ ~ rn mID ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ en ~ ~~~~~ J vU U~ J :i ~ ~v § § ~ ~ ~ ~v § §.,.-Li- ",9 Dc. c. Dc. a.VI i- Q. (l VI ~ (/.. - (f rJ .. - CJ en:: '" CI ~ = v OJ OJ OJ OJ v OJ OJ oi OJ v OJ OJ V'~:: ~ '" OJ OJ J c; æ E OJ .~ 'Í 0 E 0 0 c; a: a: ~ ~ E c; a: a: a

I-0~~(J~~ Q.~£F~1- a ~F~ 3~o o~"' uFu "'~"' "'~~~~ro~I-"'~"'I-~I-~ 5:"0 a. "01-"'5: 5:ID~"'Q.Q.Q."'Q."'Q. ~ru~~~ou ~I-~ 5 § I-~ § ~ ~I- 1-~8~8§8~u~~8 8~oi. -È)Q)(lWa.a.Q.IDc. a.ã)WQ.WQ)WciiID OJ 1eU1C.lïiiIaJ1zO 2 ß:. "' U"C U"C 00"0 cn""u ü"C en "0 ü"C U"O Q.ETI OJE cue en c ü cue WE co' OJE-LL1oooowowoinowOoWOWOWOQ.O 0 OQ.OWOWOQ.O

i- i- a. U a: u a: u a: u a: ~ u a: u a: u a: u a: u ~ u ~ z a: z a: z a: z a: z ~ z ~

'"iiUJl-iiu

Q) ~ Q.II i- co . _ en il 00t: i. Q.~C ro~Q. co ",u..O .co:rnC. 11 .: .- __ a. (/ __ ct -cnErn~CCIQ.cO:"C&!~8c? ~~c§ ~ ¡; ~

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

A, C

ON

TIN

UE

D

CR

ITE

RIA

IND

ICA

TO

R U

SED

BE

FOR

EA

FTE

RC

HA

NG

EPE

RC

EN

TR

EL

EV

AN

T T

RE

ND

SF

OR

EV

ALU

AT

ION

FWS

FWS

CH

AN

GE

Dep

loym

ent

Equ

ival

ent T

otal

Uni

ts21

,428

23,1

111,

683

7.9%

A d

ownw

ard

tren

d pr

ior

to F

WS

was

rev

erse

d af

ter

(Per

FWS.

Dep

loym

ent

Equ

ival

ent R

espo

nse

14,9

9013

,787

(1,2

03)

(8.0

%)

Con

sist

ent w

ith a

dow

nwar

d tr

end

that

pre

cede

dPe

riod

)U

nits

FWS.

Actual Total Units

21,0

5416

,373

(4,6

81)

(22.

2%)

Larg

e re

duct

ion

imm

edia

tely

follo

win

g F

WS

but

asl

ight

upw

ard

tren

d si

nce

FW

S.

Act

ual R

espo

nse

Uni

ts14

,922

9,57

9(5

,343

)(3

5.8%

)La

rge

decr

ease

imm

edia

tely

follo

win

g F

WS

, but

cons

iste

nt w

ith a

tren

d of

dec

reas

ing

resp

onse

uni

tsth

at p

rece

ded

FW

S.

Num

ber

of O

ffcer

s in

29,4

1118

,874

(10,

537)

(35.

8%)

Larg

e de

crea

se im

med

iate

ly fo

llow

ing

FW

S, b

utA

ctua

l Res

pons

e U

nits

cons

iste

nt w

ith a

tren

d of

dec

reas

ing

offc

ers

inre

spon

se u

nits

that

pre

cede

d F

WS

.N

umbe

r of

Offc

ers

6,62

86,

566

(62)

(0.9

%)

No

clea

r tr

ends

.A

ssig

ned

to B

urea

us

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

B: C

OS

T -

"O

FF

ICE

R W

AT

CH

ES

"; R

AT

IOS

OF

CO

UR

T O

VE

RT

IME

AN

D S

ICK

TIM

E IN

CID

EN

TS

.___

. _..

n.__

_...

.._. .

.~._

..__

-' ~-

... .

.,-"~

, ....

.... -

... .

......

. ,...

..

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

913

1,50

713

1,02

213

0,88

813

0,83

413

0,87

513

0,75

313

0,37

712

9,31

912

9,10

512

9,02

512

9,15

912

9,25

212

9,46

619

99 2

000

128,

089

127,

674

127,

647

127,

594

127,

406

127,

126

126,

738

123,

527

123,

042

122,

218

121,

759

122,

571

122,

348

2000

-200

112

2,03

412

0,45

012

0,96

112

0,14

912

0,43

712

0,09

711

9,63

912

0,41

812

0,47

111

9,96

812

0,07

411

9,69

011

9,50

520

01-2

002

118,

738

118,

342

117,

905

118,

236

117,

773

118,

143

117,

760

116,

641

107,

575

99,6

4291

,609

83,7

2283

,920

2002

-200

383

,524

82,8

2784

,250

84,3

8285

,088

85,1

3585

,088

88,1

1288

,344

88,4

7088

,915

88,7

6088

,760

2003 2004

89,3

7089

,728

90,0

7689

,893

89,7

1890

,222

90,0

4791

,883

91,4

6691

,674

91,1

2990

,951

90,9

412004 2005

90,9

4190

,941

90,4

5590

,227

90,3

8690

,386

90,0

2988

,784

89,1

5689

,342

89,6

0789

,930

90,1

06

.~...

... ..

....

.,....

. ....

......

... ..

. ....

.... .

....,.

.."..

",..,

....,,

""..'

....

IVJl

il..ll

~r.

.llvu

~ U

l 1 I~

.."' '

'''''

I;i;r.0:dt;;;upl- I' UI-.t1' I

0.1-

.91

UH

:1t 1

0,0.

1-11

. I ,0

1:,1

4: I

01-

13 I

Ul"

1I

UI-

Z I

"UI-

,'3I

0.1-4' I

VI-

bI

Ul:d

~ tf

lTOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

913

.8:1

13.4

113

.4:1

13.3

:112

.6:1

13.3

:115

.2:1

12.2

:111

.9:1

13.2

:113

.0:1

14.2

:113

.5:1

1999

-200

013

.0:1

13.6

:113

.8:1

13.3

:112

.4:1

13.3

:116

.4:1

12.2

:112

.2:1

13.1

:114

.7:1

15.7

:114

.8:1

2000 2001

15.6

:115

.2:1

15.4

:115

.3:1

13.1

:113

.5:1

16.1

:111

.8:1

12.2

:112

.3:1

12.4

:113

.4:1

12.7

:12001 2002

12.5

:112

.7:1

13.4

:111

.5:1

11.3

:111

.9:1

15.7

:110

.8:1

10.0

:110

.2:1

9.4:

19.

5:1

9.2:

120

02-2

003

9.2:

19.

3:1

8.8:

19.

0:1

8.9:

19.

2:1

12.4

:17.

8:1

8.1:

18.

9:1

8.8:

18.

8:1

9.5:

120

03-2

004

9.8:

195

:18.

8:1

8.2:

18.

6:1

9.4:

113

.6:1

8.1:

18.

2:1

8.7:

18.

3:1

8.4:

19.

5:1

2004 2005

9.1:

19.

3:1

9.1:

18.

6:1

8.1:

18.

6:1

11.4

:1

KatlO OT "unlcer watcnes" to :SICk lime Incidents Per De lovment Period - By Fiscal Year

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

938

.21

42.0

:142

.6:1

38.0

:138

.0:1

36.3

:135

.8:1

35.3

:137

.1:1

39.0

:136

.0:1

38.8

:138

.0:1

1999

200

035

.6:1

38.7

:135

.9:1

32.8

:131

.4:1

25.9

:127

.2:1

32.9

:129

.3:1

29.2

:131

.7:1

31.4

:132

.8:1

2000

-200

134

.5:1

39.4

:134

.5:1

30.0

129

.1:

28.3

:128

.2:1

29.7

:129

.8:1

31.0

:133

.7:1

329:

136

.5:1

2001

-200

235

.1:1

34.7

:134

6:1

31.1

:131

7:1

29.6

:129

.4:1

30.5

:129

.1:1

28.9

:126

.3:1

25.1

:125

.2:1

2002

-200

327

.9:1

27.7

:129

.1:1

26.7

:126

.6:1

24.5

:123

.2:1

30.3

:127

.2:1

28.9

:127

.5:1

26.6

:124

.4:1

2003

-200

427

.6:1

26.0

:125

.41

24.4

:124

.6:1

20.6

:119

.6:1

28.0

:126

.6:1

25.8

:126

.2:1

26.8

:123

.5:1

2004 2005

26.0

:125

.6:1

25.1

:122

.2:1

22.6

:121

.6:1

17.0

:1

Ave

rage

"O

ffcer

Wat

ches

" P

er D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

- B

y F

isca

l Yea

r

140.000 -I

130,

122 -

120,

000

100,

000

.80

,000

~ § z60

.000

40,0

00

20,0

00 a

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

1

~

2001

-200

220

02-2

003

2003

-200

420

04-2

005

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg

,

(Per

DP

)13

0,12

212

5,21

112

0,29

910

8,46

286

,281

90,5

4690

,022

13.0

:113

.61

13.6

:111

.3:1

9.0:

19.

0:1

9.1:

1

38.0

131

.6:1

31.8

:130

.1:1

26.8

:124

.7:1

22.4

:1

Cha

nge

(Fro

m B

ase)

(Bas

e)-3

.8%

-7.5

%-1

6.6%

-33.

7%-3

0.4%

-30.

8%

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS.

(Avg Per OP)

Before 123,973

After' 88,700

Cha

nge:

-28

5%

Bef

ore'

13

.3:1

Aft

er-

9.0:

1

Before: 33.4:1

Aft

er' 2

5.0:

1

.. O

Ps 2

thro

ugh

4, 2

002,

are

not

incl

uded

in th

ese

aver

ages

sin

ce th

ey r

epre

sent

the

tran

sitio

n pe

riod

to th

e F

WS

.

Ave

rage

"O

fcer

W

atch

es"

Per

Dep

loym

ent

Period- BElfore

and

Afl

er

FWS

140,

000

123,

973

120,

000

100,

000

80,0

00

60,0

00

40,0

00

20,0

00

Bef

ore

Aft

er

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

C: C

OS

T -

CO

UR

T O

VE

RT

IME

HO

UR

S

I ota

l (;o

urt U

vert

ime

Hou

rs P

er D

enio

men

t Per

iod

- B

Fis

cal Y

ear

"""

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

992

9983

8511

689

8821

9322

7276

9891

9133

8528

8008

8522

7793

1999

2000

9044

1153

075

6270

6773

5074

9061

8684

4081

0467

0662

7261

1261

6320

00-2

001

6030

5193

6041

6086

7187

6787

5575

7957

7614

7811

7345

6963

7189

2001

2002

7434

7313

6297

8404

7875

7446

5965

8410

8085

7348

7250

7083

7217

2002

2003

7453

7465

7355

7729

7567

7951

5941

9697

8842

8092

8303

8545

7753

2003

2004

7766

8231

8431

9203

7719

7848

5625

1034

997

5483

5183

7690

5971

6220

0420

0582

5979

4482

85T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9976

4562

6192

4565

0552

1377

5470

3269

0566

8966

6562

2566

5019

9920

0064

1258

4163

1866

4670

3668

8156

1974

2276

0668

2060

1956

1557

7220

00~2

001

5164

5000

4711

4830

5480

5698

5193

6891

6872

6378

6834

5614

6398

2001

-200

259

6767

3764

2867

6376

6271

6052

3563

0770

5664

0964

2252

8463

9120

0220

0355

8853

7455

7952

6057

3949

6236

5466

0365

0860

8360

3669

8264

7820

0320

0463

3359

0570

8081

9779

5773

2541

3873

0774

9066

5970

5072

2566

0020

0420

0549

1847

7252

85T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

7134

5797

7790

7109

5555

4864

7557

6778

5992

6316

5767

1189

919

99-2

000

6544

5302

5893

5436

5754

5050

4116

5487

5230

4731

4895

4306

4313

2000

2001

4032

4055

4238

4327

4581

4820

3685

5524

4355

4686

5089

4829

5062

2001

2002

4864

4692

5212

5398

4611

5456

3915

6709

6751

6202

5752

5130

5727

2002

-200

358

8461

3560

0359

4960

4758

7540

7268

4065

4561

3559

0961

7756

3520

0320

0457

6063

1261

7967

3161

8758

8641

9669

0169

8862

1569

0064

9155

0220

04-2

005

5810

5891

6244

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

7028

5191

6838

5458

5466

4242

5738

6581

5212

5424

5420

5674

1999

-200

053

1451

5650

1058

1665

7755

5643

9160

6558

3859

7548

3742

9953

0720

00-2

001

4333

4412

4291

4069

5440

5447

3917

5815

6013

6104

6078

5195

5871

2001

-200

262

3452

4950

4463

4263

2058

9843

0366

9269

3363

0471

1260

7761

4220

02-2

003

5803

5482

7162

6418

6691

6498

4607

7969

7361

6333

6577

7280

6204

2003

-200

464

5867

1078

3474

3579

4265

5351

2184

3878

9685

4188

7286

0170

9820

04-2

005

7321

6428

6623

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

931

105

2563

435

563

2789

425

556

2413

630

218

2939

726

420

2641

325

933

3201

719

9920

0027

314

2783

024

783

2496

426

717

2497

720

313

2741

426

778

2423

222

023

2033

221

556

2000

-200

119

559

1866

019

281

1931

222

788

2275

218

370

2618

724

854

2497

925

346

2260

124

520

2001

-200

224

499

2399

122

981

2690

726

468

2596

019

418

2811

828

825

2626

326

536

2357

425

477

2002

2003

2472

824

456

2609

925

356

2604

2528

618

274

3110

929

256

2664

326

825

2898

326

070

2003

2004

2631

627

159

2952

331

566

2980

527

613

1908

032

994

3212

829

766

3119

731

376

2636

220

0420

0526

308

2503

526

437

Ave

rage

Cou

rt O

vert

ime

Hou

rs P

er D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

- 8y

Fis

CC

I Yea

r

3500

0

3000

0

2500

0

2000

0

" 0 i15

000

1000

0

1999

-200

020

00-2

001

2001

-200

220

02-2

003

2003

-200

420

04-2

005

FisC

CIY

ear

Avg

.C

hang

e

I

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(Per DP) (From Base)

(Av9

. Per

DP

)88

89(B

ase)

7540

-15,

2%67

52-2

4.0%

Bef

ore:

7644

7394

-16.

8%A

fter

.80

0178

99-1

1.1%

Cha

nge

4,7%

8298

--,6

%81

63-8

,2%

6899

(Bas

e)64

62--

.3%

5774

-16,

3%

I

Bef

ore

6408

6448

--.5

%A

fter

6162

5757

-15.

5%C

hang

e-3

.8%

5857

-0.5

%49

92-2

7.6%

6880

(Bas

e)51

58-2

5.0%

4558

.33.

6%

I

Bef

ore

5460

5417

-21.

3%A

fter

6006

5939

-13.

7%C

hang

e10

.0%

6173

-10.

3%59

82-1

3.1%

5689

(Bas

e)53

96-5

.2%

5153

-94%

I

Bef

ore.

5548

6050

6,3%

Aft

er69

1864

9114

.1%

Cha

nge

247%

7500

31.8

%67

9119

4%

2835

7(B

ase)

2455

6-1

34%

2224

7-2

1.5%

2530

9-1

0.7%

2608

7--

.0%

2883

71.

7%25

927

-8.6

%

Bef

ore

Aft

erC

hang

e

2500

327

136

8.5%

Ave

rage

Cou

rt O

vert

ime

Hou

rs P

er D

ePlo

yme~

l-pe

n-o:

~~B

efor

e an

d A

fter

FW

30000 ~_~

2713

6 i I i i

1

2500

0

2000

" 5150

00i

1000

0

5000 o

Bef

ore

Aft

er:

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

D: C

OS

T -

CO

UR

T O

VE

RT

IME

INC

IDE

NT

S

I oia

ll.ou

n uv

enim

e in

ciae

nts

DV

ue

iovm

ent t

'erio

a . t

:v l-

I$ca

i Yea

ru"

""lJ

J£Y

,"""

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

926

8928

1029

5829

8132

3732

4526

7833

5732

4929

7129

9629

0028

4719

9920

0031

9130

9627

7026

4428

2828

5322

8030

4230

2125

4223

5722

6323

4820

00-2

001

2428

2228

2395

2418

2865

2623

2226

3051

2911

2987

2798

2642

2717

2001

2002

2829

2835

2391

3161

3042

2748

2255

3068

2835

2568

2488

2517

2442

2002

-200

325

5525

3226

2826

1326

2526

7820

6333

3331

5828

6829

5428

6726

1220

0320

0425

5626

9127

4530

1926

3226

1318

7934

8832

3928

9329

0429

2724

3120

0420

0528

0828

0728

4430

8529

7230

6522

67T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9923

8225

9125

3424

4126

0122

2621

1724

9226

5823

6924

2121

4224

7619

99-2

000

2389

2212

2358

2554

2726

2511

2147

2711

2813

2541

2280

2162

2122

2000

2001

2008

2124

1985

1984

2201

2235

2080

2642

2626

2474

2570

2287

2343

2001

-200

223

4125

9324

0825

3329

3927

3020

7726

2626

6724

5323

3820

5722

9520

0220

0322

1920

7521

1621

1322

1320

4115

4528

4926

2424

2524

3624

7323

5720

03-2

004

2196

2102

2435

2809

2708

2507

1460

2463

2585

2310

2445

2512

2483

2004

-200

523

3922

7422

3123

2125

8323

6919

18T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

922

3022

5222

8423

5523

1822

0920

5324

8524

7423

2223

0720

2921

2619

99-2

000

2294

2012

2164

2057

2198

1966

1537

2060

2041

1959

1784

1693

1711

2000

-200

116

6917

4917

6617

2419

0819

1415

6522

2718

2418

6219

8319

5520

3720

01-2

002

1996

1878

2067

2212

2027

2165

1549

2686

2635

2397

2282

1967

2196

2002

-200

322

4123

6722

9423

1923

3422

1815

9425

7625

0923

6523

0822

7921

4620

03-2

004

2125

2287

2259

2466

2298

2185

1518

2492

2539

2336

2512

2335

2103

2004

-200

522

3423

2123

8825

5626

3923

416

10T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

922

0421

4619

7020

8622

4621

8217

2422

2924

8320

9221

7720

1721

1019

99-2

000

1976

2045

1958

2366

2499

2185

1769

2309

2221

2254

1881

1701

2059

2000

2001

1711

1810

1718

1727

2226

2127

1575

2290

2502

2440

2324

2042

2298

2001

2002

2355

1993

1959

2349

2413

2262

1843

2445

2664

2315

2645

2231

2210

2002

-200

320

3019

6925

5023

3124

2423

3518

4027

7325

8923

3323

6825

2022

6820

03-2

004

2242

2392

2765

2620

2780

2289

1740

2968

2793

2990

3088

3076

2525

2004

2005

2652

2341

2493

2502

2911

2729

2080

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1999

9505

9799

9746

9863

1040

298

6285

7210

563

1086

497

5499

0190

8895

5919

99-2

000

9850

9365

9250

9621

1025

195

1577

3310

122

1009

692

9683

0278

1982

4020

0020

0178

1679

1178

6478

5392

0088

9974

4610

210

9863

9763

9675

8926

9395

2001

2002

9521

9299

8830

1025

510

421

9905

7524

1082

510

801

9733

9753

8772

9143

2002

-200

390

4589

4395

8893

7695

9692

7268

4211

331

1088

099

9110

066

1013

993

8320

0320

0491

1994

7710

204

1091

410

418

9594

6597

1141

111

156

1052

910

949

1085

095

4220

04-2

005

1003

397

4399

5610

464

1110

510

507

7875

1200

0

1000

0198

06

8000

" \60

00z

4000

2000

Ave

rage

Cou

rt O

vert

ime

Inci

dent

s P

er D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

- B

y F

isca

l Yee

r

1005

899

55

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03-2

0G4

2004

-200

5

Fisc

alV

ear

Avg

.C

hang

eI

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(PerDP) (From Base)

(Avg

Per

DP)

2994

(Bas

e)27

10-9

,5%

2638

-11,

9%

I

Bef

ore

2782

2706

-9,6

%A

fter

2742

2730

-8,8

%C

hang

e-1

4%27

71-7

4%28

35-5

,3%

2419

(Bas

e)24

250.

2%22

74-6

.0%

I

Bef

ore

2406

2466

1.9%

Aft

er23

0622

53-6

.9%

Cha

nge:

-4,2

%23

86-1

.4%

2291

-5.3

%

2265

(Bas

e)19

60-1

3.5%

1860

-17,

9%

I

Bef

ore.

2048

2158

-4.7

%A

fter

2269

2273

0.4%

Cha

nge:

10.8

%22

6600

%22

991.

5%

2128

IBas

el20

94-1

.6%

2061

-3.2

%

I

Bef

ore

2134

2268

6.6%

Aft

er24

7323

188.

9%C

hang

e15

.9%

2636

23,9

%25

3018

.9%

9806

(Bas

e)91

89-6

,3%

8832

-9.9

%95

99-2

.1%

9573

-2.4

%10

058

2.6%

9955

1.5%

Bef

ore

Aft

erC

hano

e

9355

9800

4.8%

Ave

rage

O:u

rt O

vert

ime

Inci

dent

s Pe

r D

eplo

ymen

tPe

riod

-Bef

ore

and

Afl

erFW

S

1200

0

1000

0

8000

. ~ 6000

z

4000

2000

Bef

ore

Alle

r:

owo

p

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

E: C

OS

T -

EN

D O

F W

AT

CH

(E

OW

) O

VE

RT

IME

......

uve

rum

e M

OU

I" w

orK

ea t'

er u

eia

vmen

t r '"

iVy

- u

r ,"

'....,

'....

,"

"T

OT

AL

CE

NT

RA

L B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

3926

9411

7914

9635

8572

7167

6724

8744

7159

6316

7111

7651

8143

1999

2000

6995

6362

6104

6171

6586

5013

6018

6607

5898

7350

7836

7419

8869

2000

2001

7601

2673

773

7183

4085

1569

1466

4781

6078

4594

1685

4885

9910

478

2001

-200

290

9610

367

9824

8865

8807

7285

7339

8547

6323

6630

7433

6639

7098

2002

2003

7261

8564

7902

5940

6225

6887

6083

7553

7329

8028

7546

8155

8144

2003

2004

8276

9890

9155

9581

1027

187

6968

4296

1487

8289

4978

1490

8383

3820

0420

0582

2775

8181

32T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

1998

-199

934

9511

773

6736

8697

7785

6975

5010

7070

7135

5540

5852

6423

7568

1999

-200

065

4367

9764

6361

5759

1060

9762

8166

1154

4167

2869

8655

4872

3020

00-2

001

6765

2884

665

1361

8370

6472

8756

8870

1376

4186

8688

9076

1483

8820

01-2

002

8149

8974

8627

8356

9493

7516

7931

8523

8028

6767

7198

7388

7955

2002

-200

368

3782

3962

6156

0364

8760

0865

0562

0862

2672

1678

8069

5583

9520

03-2

004

7201

7242

7157

7513

7780

7138

7340

8524

8316

7600

7096

7545

6813

2004

-200

571

4679

8089

23T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

930

0510

367

7450

9695

7234

6082

8073

7551

7466

6462

6485

6686

6273

1999

2000

7101

6651

7323

8015

8079

7342

7063

9646

8029

8268

7736

8555

1106

620

00-2

001

9637

2137

871

9577

1879

3171

9664

0879

2672

7988

0281

1781

7789

5920

01 ~

2002

9335

1111

389

2910

201

1027

089

0786

2292

2496

3797

0874

9369

2485

9820

0220

0389

6679

9472

6671

3471

0771

9167

5182

8080

4793

0884

6996

4910

418

2003

-200

498

1510

456

1076

911

522

1055

410

273

8856

1240

713

256

1163

312

548

1236

911

851

2004

-200

512

050

1028

299

75T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

939

0210

994

8533

1143

788

6774

8175

6610

244

8823

8779

1000

682

2110

670

1999

-200

091

1410

124

8700

8421

8521

6695

6854

1046

785

7392

1894

1180

1593

1320

00-2

001

8667

2260

581

5677

0278

9680

1067

2390

8985

4887

6895

3997

3810

666

2001

-200

210

293

1070

710

811

1048

195

7395

2487

0911

620

1014

798

3411

038

6913

7048

2002

-200

368

9473

0859

4456

7756

1763

9053

3156

6759

1663

5567

7474

0083

4420

03-2

004

7836

8106

8008

8034

6924

6654

5740

7494

7564

6410

6794

8294

7158

2004

-200

575

5983

6575

26TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

914

328

4254

630

633

3946

432

458

2770

428

372

3360

830

582

2709

729

454

2898

132

655

1999

-200

029

753

2993

428

590

2876

329

095

2614

826

215

3333

127

942

3156

331

969

2953

636

478

2000

-200

132

670

9956

629

235

2994

331

406

2940

725

466

3218

831

313

3567

235

194

3412

838

491

2001

2002

3687

341

161

3819

137

903

3814

333

232

3260

137

914

3413

532

939

3316

227

864

3069

920

0220

0329

958

3210

527

373

2435

426

436

2647

624

670

2870

827

518

3090

730

669

3216

035

301

2003

2004

3312

735

692

3508

736

651

3552

832

833

2877

838

038

3791

836

592

3425

337

292

3416

02004 2005

3498

234

208

3455

6

Ave

rage

EO

W O

vert

ime

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

elio

d. B

y F

isca

l Yea

r

4000

0

3500

0

3000

0

2500

0

~ 20000

i15

000

1000

0

5000

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03-2

004

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg

.C

hang

eI

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(PerOP) (From Base)

(Avg

Per

DP)

7575

(Bas

e)67

87-1

0.4%

9636

27.2

%

I

Bef

ore

8130

8019

5.9%

Aft

er79

1373

55-2

,9%

Cha

nge

-2,7

%88

7417

2%79

805.

3%

7005

(Bas

el63

69-9

,1%

8968

28,0

%

I

Bef

ore.

7608

8070

15.2

%A

fter

:72

7168

32-2

.5%

Cha

nge.

--.4

%74

826,

8%80

1614

.4%

7141

(Bas

e)80

6713

,0%

8979

25,7

%

I

Bef

ore

8347

9151

28,2

%A

fter

:96

3481

9914

,8%

Cha

nge.

15.4

%11

254

57,6

%10

769

508%

8886

(Bas

e)87

25-1

.8%

9701

92%

I

8efo

re93

5697

469.

7%A

fter

7098

6586

-25,

9%C

hang

e-2

4.1%

7463

-16,

0%78

17-1

2,0%

3060

6(B

asel

2994

7-2

,2%

3728

321

,8%

3498

614

,3%

2897

2-5

,3%

3507

314

,6%

3458

213

,0%

Bef

ore

Aft

er:

Cha

nge.

3347

131

990

--.4

%

Ave

rage

EO

W O

vert

ime

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

enod

-B

efor

e an

d A

fter

FW

S

4000

0

3500

0

3000

0

2500

0

~ 20000

i 1000

0

5000

Bef

ore

Aft

er

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

F: C

OS

T -

SIC

K T

IME

HO

UR

S

""''"

'' '"'

"'' n

vu,,,

V""

"'U ."

', ...

. IU

",..

". ,"

'iVU

- D

ri::"

,.'"

'.....

IDU

re.a

!:~0

;?FU

l'"1,

,,I,,'

OP.

81'.0l'9: IUP10Iut",11 hUt' 121_ Ut",13.1 CP.1

I 'U

t"2

1'..'

Ut"

J 1'

,;':'u

P;4

'I;;;U

t'.5.

I O

P6

IT

OT

AL

CE

NT

RA

L B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

6437

5882

6235

7261

6632

7429

7975

7597

8052

6767

7837

6749

7214

1999

2000

7167

6423

7236

7639

7834

9018

8417

6470

8875

7901

7708

7916

8233

2000

2001

7019

5887

6840

8438

8444

9277

9415

8529

9984

7691

7101

7841

6498

2001

2002

7727

6997

7760

7904

7627

8239

7858

8928

6253

7058

7210

7774

8886

2002

2003

7193

6916

5647

7371

7311

8048

8274

6456

7297

6002

5895

6611

7717

2003

2004

7499

7464

8489

8341

8905

9928

1091

562

2070

4870

8281

9076

3485

4620

04-2

005

7664

7588

7575

9052

9359

9003

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

968

0762

2065

5074

5871

2286

8870

8661

5867

0962

6158

0154

4852

9219

99-2

000

7968

7720

8755

9090

9875

1128

296

1870

8683

7484

9774

1375

2876

8020

0020

0169

2063

0267

6775

3277

3176

5770

9084

6872

3885

9668

7473

1468

9520

0120

0258

8476

2264

4370

9368

6375

5966

6461

9769

7960

7664

8157

4269

6820

02-2

003

5728

6394

6911

7105

5949

6414

7383

5666

6078

6662

7469

7451

7718

2003

2004

6493

7774

8132

8068

8240

8885

9707

7015

7628

8789

8641

7471

8146

2004

-200

566

4769

0376

9990

6175

9794

21T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

962

4055

3657

8866

5968

0156

4764

0771

3464

9765

5975

5572

8566

3419

99-2

000

6520

5771

7490

6856

6593

9107

9581

7968

7685

7587

8036

7365

6622

2000

-200

170

1360

2267

9878

6074

9470

5776

4569

0766

2962

9254

7462

0959

1820

01-2

002

6193

5712

5296

6596

6168

6363

7197

5861

6255

4525

6123

5863

6490

2002

2003

508

5341

5339

6088

6568

7223

9151

5681

6922

6568

7271

7860

8024

2003

-200

471

7171

3871

4378

9372

0110

170

9343

7424

7657

7289

7585

7645

8476

2004

2005

7169

6416

7978

8291

9568

9527

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9977

9270

5457

7758

7868

2767

7775

3382

7863

1966

5573

0969

3178

6219

99-2

000

6838

6250

4582

7269

7841

9434

9432

8208

8359

9217

7169

8141

7053

2000

-200

170

9259

4773

7879

0089

5995

6695

0082

9582

4581

2486

9174

0066

6720

0120

0271

1866

1675

10B

647

8660

8886

9197

7995

6666

8151

7407

7168

8158

2002

-200

377

2974

6472

7076

4988

2810

171

9033

8345

9713

8911

8734

8048

9378

2003

-200

466

3494

6288

4094

1291

9711

533

1222

993

7490

8797

9180

0284

1310

152

2004

-200

597

8597

1199

0011

065

1035

810

877

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1999

2727

624

692

2435

027

256

2738

228

541

2900

129

167

2757

726

242

2850

226

413

2700

219

99-2

000

2849

326

164

2806

330

854

3214

338

841

3704

829

732

3329

333

202

3032

630

950

2958

820

0020

0128

044

2415

827

783

3173

032

628

3355

733

650

3219

932

096

3070

328

140

2876

425

978

2001

2002

2692

226

947

2700

930

140

2931

831

047

3091

628

981

2615

325

810

2622

126

547

2950

220

02-2

003

2569

826

115

2506

728

113

2865

631

856

3384

126

448

3001

028

143

2936

929

970

3283

720

0320

0429

797

3182

832

604

3371

433

543

4051

642

194

3003

331

420

3295

132

318

3116

335

320

2004

-200

531

155

3261

833

152

3746

936

882

3882

8

IA

vera

ge S

;cl T

ime

Hou

rs P

er D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

- B

y F

isca

l Yea

r

4000

0

3501

735

000

3000

0

2500

0

~ 20000

i 1500

0

1000

0

5000

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

Fisc

al

Yea

r

2002

-200

320

03-2

004

2004

-200

5

Avg

.C

hang

eI

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(PerDP) (From Base)

(Avg

Per

DP)

7082

(Bas

e)77

579.

5%79

2011

.8%

I

Bef

ore

7636

7709

8,9%

Aft

er76

8469

72-1

.6%

Cha

nge

0.6%

8173

15.4

%83

7218

.2%

6585

(Bas

el85

3029

,5%

7337

11.4

%

I

Bef

ore

7332

6582

0.0%

Aft

er73

5867

1019

%C

hang

e0.

4%80

6822

.5%

7871

19.5

%

6519

(Bas

e)74

7514

.7%

6717

3.0%

I

Bef

ore

6768

5972

-8.4

%A

fter

:72

8266

992.

8%C

hang

e.7.

6%78

5720

,5%

6492

30.3

%

6999

(Bas

e)76

769.

7%79

8214

.0%

I

Bef

ore

7626

7852

12.2

%A

fter

:91

8685

5222

.2%

Cha

nge

20.5

%95

4836

.4%

1028

346

.9%

2718

5(B

ase)

3143

815

.6%

2995

610

.2%

2811

63.

4%28

933

6.4%

3364

623

.8%

3501

728

.8%

~'~verage.s;c: Time Hours Per

Dep

loym

ent P

erio

dB

efor

e an

d A

fter

FW

S

3500

0 .-

3000

0

3144

6

, o I

2500

0

2000

0

1500

0

10000 ~--

5000

Bef

ore:

Aft

er

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

G: C

OS

T -

SIC

K T

IME

INC

IDE

NT

S

,....,

..,..

.. ''''

''' ".

..,.."

'.....

....

. ...

"...,

... "

"....

-..

.."..u

"....

.

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

812

741

783

920

831

936

1002

952

1014

850

985

848

905

1999

-200

090

380

790

896

199

011

3610

5781

811

2199

496

899

410

3420

0020

0189

174

485

910

6410

7911

7411

8610

7312

5596

789

399

181

620

01-2

002

969

882

977

993

963

1070

1037

1179

1023

798

846

850

983

2002

-200

387

479

365

381

979

186

887

171

277

646

633

730

856

2003

-200

481

080

091

391

698

910

8511

8366

773

674

885

782

293

420

04-2

005

858

820

832

997

992

940

1214

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

986

378

482

694

089

310

9388

777

584

278

673

368

366

919

99-2

000

1001

970

1099

1145

1238

1423

1209

889

1051

1072

945

950

978

2000

-200

186

879

385

594

897

396

889

610

6790

810

7786

892

186

720

01-2

002

739

9£8

810

894

870

954

843

798

918

808

928

675

804

2002

.200

368

474

584

183

068

069

579

£84

566

472

822

843

837

2003

2004

705

854

892

880

893

958

1093

755

834

950

944

846

896

2004

2005

770

783

863

1002

854

1014

1151

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9978

869

473

183

886

071

480

589

782

783

095

292

484

319

9920

0083

372

996

787

284

011

5712

0810

1196

795

910

1992

783

520

00-2

001

886

765

864

994

952

891

969

872

834

799

703

793

750

2001

2002

7772

466

783

678

083

095

679

084

172

072

167

362

020

0220

0357

159

981

568

974

680

498

663

774

871

679

486

990

620

0320

0478

677

479

485

479

011

2010

4784

082

680

883

284

093

520

0420

0579

789

284

190

010

4310

4914

42T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

982

899

734

743

863

855

945

1041

793

844

922

872

989

1999

2000

850

793

582

917

992

1187

1183

1033

1055

1167

913

1028

885

2000

-200

189

775

593

310

0111

3112

0711

9910

4710

4910

2711

0393

483

920

0120

0290

284

194

910

8411

0011

3211

7010

5691

111

2298

911

3491

820

0220

0386

185

578

581

897

811

1110

0991

710

697

798

889

010

3620

0320

0494

110

2794

510

3897

512

2712

6910

2410

3810

4684

188

511

0720

04-2

005

1072

1064

1062

1171

1110

1172

1479

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

934

4531

1830

7434

4134

4735

9936

3936

6534

7633

1035

9233

2734

0619

99-2

000

3597

3299

3556

3895

4060

4903

4657

3751

4194

4192

3845

3899

3733

2000

-200

135

4230

5735

1140

0741

3542

4042

5040

5940

4638

7035

6736

3932

7220

0120

0233

8734

1534

0338

0737

1339

8640

0638

2336

9334

4834

8433

3233

2520

02-2

003

2990

2992

2894

3156

3195

3478

3662

2911

3253

306

3237

3332

3635

2003

-200

432

4234

5535

436

8836

4743

9045

9232

8634

3435

5234

7433

9438

7220

04-2

005

3497

3559

3598

4070

3999

4175

5286

Ave

rage

Sic

k T

ime

Inci

dent

s P

er D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

- B

y F

isca

l Yea

r

4500

4000

3500

3000

2500

" \ z 2000

1500

1000

ÓC

C

4026

1998

.199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03-2

004

2004

-200

5

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg

.C

h¡m

ge

I

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(Per DP) (From Base)

(Avg

. Per

DP

)89

1(B

ase)

976

9.6%

999

12.2

%

I

Bef

ore

965

957

8.6%

Aft

er85

977

-13.

4%C

hang

e-1

1.0%

882

-1,0

%95

06.

7%

829

(Bas

e)10

7529

.7%

924

11.5

%

I

Bef

ore

926

847

2.2%

Aft

er83

875

5-9

.0%

Cha

nge

.9,5

%88

56.

7%92

011

.0%

823

(Bas

e)94

815

.1%

852

3.4%

Bef

ore

850

764

-7.2

%A

fter

:82

874

5-9

.6%

Cha

nge:

-3.8

%86

55.

1%99

520

,8%

883

(Bas

e)9£

99.

7%10

0914

.3%

I

Bef

ore

9£9

1024

15.9

%A

fter

:10

2494

57.

0%C

hang

e5.

6%10

2816

.4%

1161

31.5

%

3426

(Bas

e)39

6815

.8%

3764

10.5

%36

025.

1%32

15--

.1%

3659

6.8%

4026

17.5

%

Before. 3720

After 3541

Chariqe -4.8%

Ave

rage

Sic

k T

ime

Indd

ents

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

erio

d-B

efor

e an

d A

fter

FWS

4000

3500

3000

2500

o " ~ 2000

z15

00

1000 50

0

Bef

ore

Aft

er

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

H: S

ER

VIC

E -

PA

RT

I C

RIM

E

. ....

, -...

.....

... ,.

._...

.-

. .~

-...

.....'

u"

uu

.0

,..,.

ec;..

;.n

.0

".,.

.un

e':;'

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

3776

3789

3536

3613

3360

3301

3854

3180

3355

3229

3565

3461

1999

2000

3384

3522

3367

3406

3255

3441

3596

3304

3580

3701

3840

3821

2000

2001

3931

3937

3747

3809

3662

3917

3751

3323

3832

3764

4165

3978

2001

-200

242

5741

4039

5939

5338

1540

1640

6133

8939

6939

2739

0740

0120

0220

0343

3639

4637

8740

1136

2234

6336

8832

3837

3236

4738

2438

0120

03-2

004

3907

3758

3513

3581

3469

3190

3602

3254

3850

3481

3735

3492

2004

-200

533

2933

3532

1834

0029

5332

1030

7426

9829

7429

4229

7030

09T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9933

8035

8532

6431

7830

5332

6335

3428

6732

4029

5932

4529

7019

9920

0033

2031

2030

0032

2031

2330

8531

5729

1931

7632

6834

9834

7520

0020

0135

1634

5732

8933

1032

2935

2735

2929

5932

6732

2434

7533

882001 2002

3615

3625

3307

3787

3422

3644

3668

3304

3604

3493

3772

3707

2002

2003

3833

3763

3584

3785

3581

3384

3684

3127

3670

3579

3813

3488

2003

2004

347

3449

3191

3407

3165

3043

3365

2954

3442

3173

3254

3162

2004

2005

3255

3179

2999

3229

3083

2935

2839

2577

2884

2641

2701

2691

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

3783

4172

3720

3611

3696

3594

3356

2947

3217

2930

3014

2851

1999

-200

028

8330

3128

0328

4228

0229

5733

0931

4331

9931

7334

2834

8920

00-2

001

3673

3679

3320

3534

3307

3592

3684

3232

3684

3364

3474

3477

2001

-200

237

6335

4633

9837

7536

0735

4636

0630

2635

5535

7935

2734

6120

0220

0334

7137

4734

9635

9533

1234

8935

7830

4836

1136

4936

2434

8520

0320

0435

0134

9932

5733

9930

6229

6733

2631

6232

9129

2131

2129

4920

04-2

005

3258

3122

3059

3072

2827

2910

3042

2629

2818

2780

2860

2784

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9950

1946

7244

5445

6244

2445

5247

9942

3643

9242

4540

7943

3619

99-2

000

4369

4025

3979

4205

3997

3896

4407

4244

4435

4331

4637

4494

2000

-200

146

4350

1045

1246

6843

5846

8248

0042

9246

4243

2448

0148

6720

01-2

002

5157

5321

4719

5025

4954

5296

5244

4537

4838

4841

4491

4482

2002

-200

348

6851

6748

9649

5952

4252

5150

2443

6751

1748

0749

2748

2620

03-2

004

4803

4123

4496

4372

4382

4626

4994

4491

4726

4017

4288

4323

2004

-200

542

0243

5739

9940

7241

0441

7340

8534

2537

5833

3733

2932

70TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

915

958

1621

814

974

1496

414

533

1471

015

543

1323

014

204

1336

313

903

1361

819

99-2

000

1395

613

698

1314

913

673

1317

713

379

1446

913

610

1439

014

473

1540

315

279

2000

2001

1576

316

083

1486

815

321

1455

615

718

1576

413

806

1542

514

676

1591

515

710

2001

2002

1679

216

632

1538

316

540

1579

816

502

1657

914

256

1596

615

840

1569

715

651

2002

2003

1650

816

623

1576

316

350

1575

715

587

1597

413

780

1613

015

682

1618

815

600

2003

2004

1566

315

429

1445

714

759

1407

813

826

1530

713

861

1530

913

642

1439

813

926

2004

-200

514

044

1399

313

275

1377

312

967

1322

813

040

1132

912

434

1170

011

860

1175

4

IA

vera

ge P

art I

Crim

es P

er M

onth

. By

Fis

cal Y

ear

1800

0

1S00

015970 15829

1400

0

1200

0

1000

0

BO

DO

6000

4000

2000

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03-2

004

2004

-200

5

F;sc

alY

ear

Avg

.

(Per

M

on.)

3502

3518

3818

3950

3758

3569

3093

Cha

nge

(Fro

m B

ase)

(Bas

e)0.

5%9.

0%12

.8%

7.3%

1,9%

-11.

7%

3212

(Bas

e)31

97-0

.5%

3348

42%

3579

11.4

%36

0812

.3%

3256

1.4%

2918

~9.1

%

3408

(Bas

e)30

88-9

.4%

3502

2.8%

3532

3,7%

3509

3.0%

3205

-5.9

%29

30-1

4.0%

4481

¡Bas

e)42

52-5

.1%

4633

3.4%

4909

9.5%

4954

10.6

%45

2410

%38

43-1

4.2%

1460

2(B

asel

1405

5-3

,7%

1530

04.

8%15

970

9.4%

1582

98.

4%14

555

-0.3

%12

783

-12.

5%

Avg

.

(Per

Man

.)

Bef

oreF

WS

Afte

r F

WS

Unt

il R

ept.

Cha

nge.

Aft

er

Rep

L. C

hang

e.C

hang

e (P

re -

Pos

t FW

S, to

Rep

Cha

nge)

:

3674

3623

2945

-1.4

%

Bef

oreF

WS

3316

Afte

r F

WS

Unt

il R

ept.

Cha

nge.

339

1A

fter

Rep

!. C

hang

e. 2

722

Cha

nge

(Pre

- P

ast F

WS,

to R

ep C

hang

e) 2

.3%

Bef

oreF

WS

3373

Afte

r F

WS

Unt

il R

ep! C

hang

e 33

15A

fter

R

ept.

Cha

nge:

281

9C

hang

e (P

re -

Pos

t FW

S, 1

0 R

ep. C

hang

e) -

1.7%

BefareFWS 4570

Afte

r F

WS

Unt

il R

ept C

hang

e 46

17A

flerR

epL.

Cha

nge.

353

4C

hang

e (P

re -

Pos

t FW

S, to

Rep

Cha

nge)

1.0

%

Bef

areF

WS

Afte

r F

WS

Unt

il R

ept.

Cha

nge

Aft

er Rept Change

Cha

nÇJe

(P

re -

Pas

t FW

S, t

o R

ep C

hanç

¡e)

1496

215

216

1202

01.

7%

i.A

vera

ge P

art i

Crim

e P

er M

onth

-Bef

ore

and

Aft

er

FWS

1400

0

1200

0

1000

0

. ~ 8000

z60

00

4000

2000 o

Bef

ore

FW

S. A

fter

FW

S U

ntil

Rep

!Cha

nge

Aft

er

Rep

tC

hang

e:

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

I: S

ER

VIC

E -

RE

PR

ES

SIB

LE V

IOLE

NT

CR

IME

S

".. .

.."".

.....

VI..

.....L

..'''.

'.."

r...

iv...

..ui -

cy

rl""'e

il T

"öf

"U

,:"

".

,O

V.

ec.

.n.

.a.

.,.,

c..

une;

-T

OT

AL

CE

NT

RA

L B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

926

981

813

791

7273

987

564

870

169

874

979

919

9920

0083

684

382

576

465

878

069

067

678

883

186

188

620

00-2

001

1033

1042

877

847

801

785

709

681

757

826

989

933

2001

-200

210

4510

7510

1590

797

491

686

585

489

084

086

995

320

02-2

003

1049

959

913

889

856

781

830

745

912

818

905

943

2003

"200

491

490

B82

277

750

691

780

567

776

702

815

7220

04-2

005

713

739

7771

766

973

272

547

679

597

693

669

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

885

983

870

794

1464

827

765

650

726

726

864

765

1999

2000

926

817

760

822

807

813

814

687

823

903

974

952

2000

-200

110

2495

195

194

986

191

685

674

379

384

287

895

120

0120

0210

7511

0810

1911

3889

293

394

591

310

0999

210

6710

4120

0220

0311

1310

1599

910

3898

284

893

775

499

895

996

992

220

03-2

004

984

971

770

941

762

759

835

725

838

836

938

857

2004

.200

592

588

791

279

979

876

877

768

680

281

380

181

0T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

"199

953

263

546

749

849

651

854

342

348

148

647

752

319

9920

0053

049

344

846

743

649

645

844

843

645

549

453

120

00-2

001

556

580

502

475

503

562

506

451

554

479

560

586

2001

-200

260

661

063

557

160

354

156

251

553

551

357

358

120

0220

0353

954

552

858

355

453

257

442

554

759

863

455

920

0320

0459

254

349

944

844

550

249

443

444

340

343

539

420

0420

0548

543

943

545

136

932

539

235

837

442

739

840

7T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

707

673

694

618

608

636

704

547

584

541

514

588

1999

-200

060

659

158

567

553

850

259

349

960

063

465

665

420

00-2

001

642

690

602

601

542

640

607

558

631

601

725

742

2001

-200

274

279

571

716

662

747

727

643

681

692

632

675

2002

-200

369

870

268

060

364

360

970

B53

668

460

164

769

120

03-2

004

715

701

708

653

500

639

610

488

550

521

541

511

2004

2005

556

560

528

513

489

460

490

370

460

360

408

345

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1999

3050

3272

2844

2701

3290

2720

2887

2268

2492

2451

2604

2575

1999

2000

2898

2744

2518

2728

2439

2591

2555

2310

2647

2823

2985

3023

2000

-200

132

5532

6329

3228

7227

0729

0325

7824

3327

3527

4831

5232

1220

0120

0234

6835

8833

8133

3231

3131

3730

9929

2531

1530

3731

4132

5020

0220

0333

9932

2131

2030

9330

3527

7030

4724

6031

4129

7631

5531

1520

03-2

004

3205

3121

2799

2819

2457

2591

2719

2214

2507

2462

2729

2475

2004

-200

526

7926

2526

4924

8023

2522

8523

8619

6123

1521

9723

0022

31

Ave

rage

Rep

ress

ible

Vio

lent

Crim

es P

er M

onth

_ B

y F

isca

l Yea

r

3500

3217

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

1999

.200

020

00-2

001

2001

.200

220

02-2

003

2003

.200

420

04-2

005

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg

.C

hang

eA

vg.

(Per

M

on,)

(F

rom

Bas

el(P

er

Mon

,)

787

(Bas

e)78

70,

0%8e

fore

FWS

837

857

8.9%

Aft

er

FWS:

79

093

418

.7%

Cha

nge

-5,5

%88

212

,1%

769

-2,3

%68

8-1

2.6%

860

(Bas

e)84

2-2

.1%

I

Bef

oreF

WS

895

893

3,8%

Aft

erFW

S88

510

1117

,6%

Cha

nge

-11%

961

11,8

%85

1-1

,0%

815

-5,2

%

507

(Bas

e)47

4-B

A%

I

Bef

oreF

WS

517

526

3,9%

Aft

erFW

S48

157

012

.6%

Cha

nge.

-6,9

%55

28,

9%46

9-7

5%40

5-2

0,1%

618

(Bas

e)59

4-3

,8%

I

Bef

ore

FWS:

63

663

22.

3%A

fter

FW

S.

572

702

13,6

%C

hang

e-1

0,1%

650

5,2%

595

-3.7

%46

2-2

5,3%

2771

(Bas

e)26

97-2

,7%

2908

4.9%

3217

16,1

%30

449.

9%26

83-3

,2%

2369

-14.

5%

BefareFWS 2881

Aft

er FW

S. 2

732

Cha

nqe

-5.2

%

Ave

rage

Rep

ress

ble

Vio

lent

Cnm

es P

er M

onJ

Bel

orea

ndA

fter

FWS

'""

----

--I

'"3000

2881

_

2500

2000

1500

1000

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

J: S

ER

VIC

E -

RE

PR

ES

SIB

LE P

RO

PE

RT

Y C

RIM

E

.,.. ,

,,,,,,

.,...,

,. 'v

".,

..,,,,

,,,~

re. ,

nui,,

,,.c

rl::.

."",

..",.

Ittur

eau

1 ,J

uly'

cl'A

u!i.

I ,~

pL' l

' oct

.I

NO

v. f

, lJC

:\ i

Jan:

I~e

D.

I' Mar. 1

AP.

IM

ay -

'I' J

une

IT

OT

AL

CE

NT

RA

L B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

1779

1777

1791

1767

1656

1641

1935

1670

1680

1607

1798

1635

1999

-200

015

2515

2915

9116

0015

9417

1419

3216

5117

2717

8818

3518

4920

0020

0118

3618

1926

9419

2319

1720

6321

3624

2020

8619

7720

6020

1820

01-2

002

2031

1946

1961

2029

1927

2141

2239

1876

2051

2141

2057

2027

2002

2003

2204

1989

1931

2102

1758

1763

1908

1662

1882

1909

1917

1862

2003

-200

419

1118

5919

1419

3019

0117

1919

5117

6320

9618

2919

8618

3920

04.2

005

1648

1671

1648

1780

1515

1679

1655

1531

1665

1698

1684

1697

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

915

3516

0814

7214

7015

6215

5117

8114

3715

9013

6614

2913

6619

9920

0014

4614

4513

4114

2414

6214

8514

6714

4715

0814

3916

2616

6220

00-2

001

1590

1567

1919

1452

1563

1682

1799

2189

1574

1516

1616

1495

2001

2002

1605

1538

1432

1716

1651

1839

1747

1537

1693

1612

1714

1680

2002

-200

317

7618

1816

8918

2417

4116

6417

8515

7217

7217

6419

3516

2920

03-2

004

1600

1561

1597

1575

1593

1562

1728

1503

1784

1508

1455

1514

2004

.200

515

4214

8512

5215

6015

1114

5414

7613

6514

6612

9313

4513

16T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

1865

2066

1986

1833

1866

1817

1938

1577

1850

1578

1657

1608

1999

2000

1826

1668

1597

1620

1591

1582

1722

1589

1666

1663

1799

1838

2000

2001

2077

1896

2211

1838

1809

1931

1967

2230

1877

1724

1732

1705

2001

2002

2039

1723

1715

2022

1899

1932

1871

1578

1893

2054

1916

1815

2002

-200

316

6721

1919

0219

3517

8519

0719

9217

6120

1319

3919

1818

9220

03-2

004

1878

1917

1822

1951

1739

1577

1851

1744

1847

1601

1641

1604

2004

-200

517

3816

7916

3316

2£15

7417

0818

3415

3416

4615

3416

4515

99T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

2515

2522

2399

2475

2481

2450

2698

2336

2399

2433

2250

2376

1999

2000

2313

2071

2115

2200

2191

2121

2342

2463

2480

2372

2598

2447

2000

2001

2568

2773

3171

2650

2548

2687

2905

3199

2722

2388

2561

2633

2001

2002

2905

3037

2692

2854

2877

3131

3190

2681

2831

2803

2518

2450

2002

2003

2832

3085

2843

3026

3310

3248

3083

2747

3279

2949

2871

2826

2003

-200

427

4827

3026

5526

6828

2929

3631

7029

0228

9923

0724

4426

1320

04-2

005

2386

2484

2301

2439

2468

2516

2596

2216

2426

2122

2131

2017

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1999

7694

7973

7648

7545

7565

7459

8352

7020

7519

6984

7134

6985

1999

-200

071

1067

1366

4468

4468

3869

0274

6371

5073

8172

6278

5877

9620

0020

0180

7180

5599

9578

6378

3783

6388

0710

038

8259

7605

7969

7851

2001

-200

285

8082

4478

0086

2183

5490

4390

4776

7284

6886

1082

0579

7220

02-2

003

6679

9011

8365

8887

8594

8572

8768

7742

8946

8561

8641

8209

2003

-200

481

3780

6779

8881

2480

6277

9487

0079

1286

2672

4575

2675

7020

04-2

005

7314

7319

6734

7405

7068

7357

7561

6646

7203

6647

6805

6629

Ave

rage

Rep

ress

ible

Pro

pert

y C

limes

Per

Mon

th _

By

Fis

cal Y

ear

2000

1000

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03-2

004

2004

-200

5

I "-Fi

scal

Y

ear

Avg

.(P

er

Mon

.)

1728

1695

2079

2036

1907

1892

1648

Cha

nge

(Fro

m B

ase)

(Bas

e).1

,9%

20.3

%17

,8%

10,4

%9,

5%-4

.7%

1514

¡Bas

e)14

79-2

3%16

649,

9%16

478,

8%17

4715

.4%

1582

4.5%

1422

--,1

%

1803

¡Bas

e)16

80--

.8%

1916

6,3%

1871

3,8%

1919

6,4%

1764

-2,2

%16

46--

,7%

2445

(Bas

e)23

09-5

5%27

3411

,8%

2831

15.8

%30

0823

.1%

2742

12.2

%23

42-4

,2%

7490

(Bas

e)71

63--

,4%

8393

12.1

%83

8511

.9%

8581

14.6

%79

796.

5%70

57-5

,8%

Avg

.(P

erM

on)

Bef

ore

FWS:

Afte

r F

WS

Unt

il R

ept C

hang

eA

fter

R

ept.

Cha

nge:

Cha

nge

(Pre

-Pos

t FW

S,

to

Rep

1868

1874

1655

Change) 0.3%

Bef

ore FW

S: 1

571

Afte

r F

WS

Unt

il R

ept C

hang

e 16

29A

fter

Rep

t. C

hang

e: 1

377

Cha

nge

(Pre

- P

ost F

WS

, to

Rep

Cha

nge)

3.7

%

Bef

oreF

WS

1810

Afte

r F

WS

Unt

il R

ept.

Cha

nge

1817

Aft

er R

ept.

Cha

nge'

163

2C

hang

e (P

re -

Pas

l FW

S, t

o R

ep C

hang

e) 0

.3%

Bef

ore

FW

S: 2

582

Afte

r F

WS

Unt

il R

ept C

hang

e 27

76A

fter

R

ept C

hang

e 22

51C

hang

e (P

re -

Pos

t FW

S, t

o R

ep C

hang

e) 7

.5%

Bef

ore FW

S' 7

852

Afte

r F

WS

Unt

il R

ept C

hang

e 83

36A

fter

R

ept.

Cha

nge'

691

5C

hang

e (P

re -

Pos

t FW

S, t

o R

ep C

hang

e) 6

.2%

r-A

Ver

ageR

epre

ssib

lepr

oper

tClim

espe

rM~

Bef

ore

and A

fterF

WS

I90

00

BO

OO

7000

6000

1:50

00, z 4

000

3000

2000

1000

~-

,"oc

~~)

IC

h"9,

JB

efor

e F

WS

: Afte

r F

WS

Unt

ilR

ept.

Cha

nge

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

K: S

ER

VIC

E -

TO

TA

L A

RR

ES

TS

'ULd

' ,'1

uriu

o:r

""''0

:::\:

rt'r

mur

iiii -

cy

ri~çe

l, re

arU

Uav

.ec

;.am

'".

M.

..a'

y,un

.T

OT

AL

CE

NT

RA

L B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

4957

4800

4499

4683

4388

4000

4775

4469

5150

4775

5000

4307

1999

-200

051

9544

4741

8342

1837

2633

8340

8633

6736

1831

9836

3332

2620

00-2

001

2991

2749

3462

3735

3346

3091

3256

3230

3731

3088

3264

2780

2001

-200

231

5230

9026

6130

1427

2828

3531

4731

0532

6230

8930

8228

9620

02-2

003

3283

3279

2930

3275

3123

3160

3629

3273

3390

3458

3840

3583

2003

2004

3760

3758

3696

3794

3291

3283

3944

3324

4176

4125

3825

3892

2004

-200

541

3239

9041

8045

1042

6840

0539

6036

5943

7343

70T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

3500

3232

3773

3716

3376

2970

3392

3439

3601

3423

3641

3324

1999

-200

032

3732

7631

0633

4530

3428

1830

5430

8134

1529

5129

4528

1920

00-2

001

2620

2521

2689

2883

2587

2605

2764

2900

3470

3058

2837

2445

2001

-200

224

6727

1525

8226

2923

3423

1023

7023

4324

7331

9824

7721

3320

02-2

003

2189

2189

2053

2235

2222

2245

2344

2223

2230

2412

2526

2578

2003

-200

425

0725

9427

1424

9222

0520

4523

9222

9728

6128

4128

2827

9320

04-2

005

2694

2582

2700

2734

2649

2688

2920

2791

3372

3118

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9944

4444

0038

8339

6634

4630

8141

0933

7436

8939

5938

6140

7319

9920

0039

6340

8233

7636

0229

9329

9031

8127

9030

1926

1927

4726

5420

00-2

001

2660

2688

2752

2756

2497

2380

2796

2686

3254

2582

2733

2670

2001

-200

228

1028

4622

0022

0920

9321

8426

0223

7525

4023

9228

8024

3720

02-2

003

2607

3035

2497

2434

2289

2419

2601

2522

3021

2698

3017

2682

2003

-200

429

1530

9929

5029

6626

6923

9028

7126

2629

4729

3034

2731

8220

04-2

005

3042

2952

2954

2947

2656

2517

2519

2542

2960

2953

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

5659

5473

4999

5491

4776

4513

4586

4784

5184

5080

5291

4926

1999

2000

4433

4499

4435

4560

3933

3820

4059

3525

3962

3487

3644

3035

2000

2001

2995

2894

3392

3594

3139

3182

3151

3056

3926

3303

3431

3231

2001

-200

231

6032

7330

5432

0129

4127

5230

5930

7532

7732

2132

0029

0420

0220

0329

9532

5729

3431

2427

5629

3035

0529

3634

2535

0338

4336

2820

0320

0434

1034

8432

2033

1628

1229

3633

6534

0740

5033

8934

3534

9520

0420

0535

3636

6735

3433

1232

9131

6732

3131

8935

0630

75TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

918

560

1790

517

154

1785

615

986

1456

416

862

1606

617

624

1723

717

793

1663

019

99-2

000

1682

816

304

1510

015

725

1368

613

011

1438

012

763

1401

412

255

1296

911

734

2000

2001

1126

610

852

1229

512

968

1156

911

258

1196

711

872

1438

112

031

1225

511

125

2001

-200

211

589

1192

410

497

1105

310

096

1008

111

178

1089

811

552

1190

011

639

1037

020

02-2

003

1107

411

760

1041

411

068

1039

010

754

1207

910

954

1206

612

071

1302

612

471

2003

2004

1259

212

935

1258

012

568

1097

710

654

1257

211

654

1403

413

285

1351

513

362

2004

-200

513

404

1319

113

368

1350

312

864

1237

712

630

1218

114

211

1351

6

L--

----

- I

Ave

rage

A

rsts

Pe

rMan

th-8

yFis

cal

Yea

r

-170

20

1000

0

8000

6000

4000

2000

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

,:;W

Ol

2001

-200

220

02-2

003

2003

-200

420

04-2

005

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg. Change I

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(Per

Mon

) (F

rom

Bas

e)(Avg Per

Mon

,)

4650

(Bas

e)38

57-1

7.1%

3227

-30.

6%

I

Bef

ore

3740

3005

-35.

4%A

fter

3654

3352

-279

%C

hang

e-2

,3%

3739

-196

%41

45-1

0.9%

3449

(Bas

e)30

90.1

0.4%

2782

-19.

3%

I

Bef

ore

2984

2503

-27.

4%A

fter

:25

2422

87-3

3.7%

Cha

nge

-15.

4%25

47-2

61%

2825

-18.

1%

3857

(Bas

e)31

68-1

7.9%

2705

-29.

9%

I

Bef

ore

3080

2464

-36.

1%A

fter

2771

2652

-31.

2%C

hang

e-1

0.0%

2914

-24.

4%28

04-2

7.3%

5064

(Bas

e)39

49-2

2.0%

3275

-35.

3%

I

Bef

ore:

3865

3093

-38.

9%A

fter

3296

3220

-36.

4%C

hang

e-1

4.7%

3360

-33.

6%33

51-3

3,8%

1702

0(B

ase)

1406

-17.

4%11

988

-29,

6%11

065

-35.

0%11

511

-32.

4%12

561

-26.

2%13

125

-22.

9%

8"""

"d.~ --, I

. o § 8000

z60

00

4000

2000

8efa

reA

fter

:

--

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

L: S

ER

VIC

E -

PA

RT

I A

RR

EST

S

''IU

II'U

''' U

, "-"

'il' .

.""'

.... .

."',

",'U

llLII

- C

r'....

..' ,"

'..'

1!=

,!J,

rl!a

U;"

,i, JUIV'_',F'AuQ. I Sept. I

UÇ

t.,:)

ldt,N

oV; A

Dee

;, I,

' Jan

.I

toeD

.I

Mar

. 1.,A

pr.

IM

ayi June' i

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

933

911

817

808

762

790

822

710

791

759

836

791

1999

-200

083

184

778

480

371

769

679

565

873

278

679

469

320

00-2

001

775

733

681

695

650

7164

459

871

064

579

167

820

0120

0278

074

566

463

863

466

868

364

866

664

258

764

820

02-2

003

726

689

629

654

594

633

632

591

670

660

704

659

2003

2004

709

698

605

730

667

641

681

580

720

706

699

633

2004

-200

569

267

570

968

260

961

662

756

562

859

2T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9990

593

092

483

875

884

184

673

388

972

886

366

719

9920

0083

479

074

076

367

173

474

371

578

773

075

070

920

00-2

001

701

711

680

709

607

731

658

655

763

676

735

669

2001

-200

271

767

962

369

863

569

369

960

764

962

166

863

820

02-2

003

670

686

570

592

568

612

662

606

596

633

7274

120

03-2

004

677

693

648

657

638

569

674

587

687

618

692

674

2004

-200

560

959

062

763

364

856

560

157

368

665

3T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

971

767

765

463

160

759

970

656

156

761

558

059

719

9920

0058

551

752

357

551

360

655

348

955

748

355

751

320

0020

0151

054

847

249

048

249

651

746

955

252

351

953

220

01-2

002

575

551

442

507

496

530

537

439

541

397

4746

120

0220

0346

750

540

849

044

146

043

936

946

545

447

346

420

0320

0445

348

247

245

549

746

948

949

448

444

250

042

120

0420

0546

845

044

844

038

934

841

037

442

538

7T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

910

8710

0295

010

2497

710

6010

3597

510

0597

496

692

219

99-2

000

965

979

981

979

855

952

961

834

852

856

889

817

2000

-200

181

384

787

990

575

585

479

877

085

977

834

856

2001

-200

283

086

679

684

373

483

080

373

076

580

080

178

320

02-2

003

691

753

682

751

698

769

781

638

786

794

818

855

2003

-200

480

079

877

675

872

7784

274

686

472

746

796

2004

2005

829

811

742

747

758

818

761

634

790

671

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1999

3642

3520

3345

3301

3104

3290

3409

2979

3252

3076

3245

2977

1999

-200

032

1531

3330

2831

2027

5629

8830

5226

9629

2828

5529

9027

3220

0020

0127

9928

3927

1227

9924

9427

9326

1724

9228

8426

2328

7927

3520

0120

0229

0228

4125

2526

8624

9927

2127

2224

2426

2124

6025

2925

3020

02-2

003

2554

2633

2289

2487

2301

2474

2514

2204

2517

2541

2716

2719

2003

2004

2639

2671

2501

2600

2525

2458

2686

2407

2755

2495

2637

2524

2004

-200

525

9825

2625

2625

0224

0423

4723

9921

4625

2923

03

Ave

rage

Pa

rt

I Arr

sts

PerM

anth

-ByF

isca

lYea

r

----

-li

2001

-200

220

02-2

003

2003

-200

4

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg. Change I

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(Per

Mon,) (From Base)

(Avg

Per

Mon

)81

1(B

ase)

761

-6.1

%69

3-1

4,6%

I

Bef

ore:

742

667

-17,

7%A

fter

'65

465

3-1

9.4%

Cha

nge

-11,

8%67

-17_

1%64

0-2

1_1%

827

(Bas

e)74

7-9

_6%

691

-16.

4%

I

Bef

ore

735

661

-20,

1%A

fter

638

638

-228

%C

hang

e-1

3,2%

651

-21.

2%61

9-2

5.2%

626

(Bas

e)53

9-1

38%

509

-18,

7%

I

Bef

ore

549

496

-20,

8%A

fter

448

453

-27,

6%C

hang

e-1

8.5%

47-2

4.7%

414

-33,

9%

998

(Bas

e)91

0-8

,8%

829

-16_

9%

I

Bef

ore

886

798

-20_

0%A

fter

763

751

-24_

7%C

hang

e-1

3_8%

780

-21_

9%75

6-2

4,2%

3262

(Bas

e)29

58-9

_3%

2722

-16,

5%26

22-1

9,6%

2496

-23,

5%25

75-2

1,1%

2428

-25_

6%

Bef

ore

Aft

erC

hanq

e

2919

2496

-14,

5%

Ave

rage

Pa

rt

I Arr

ests

Pe

rMar

ith-B

efar

e an

d A

fter

PN

S

"OC

t

3000

-2~

_

iT Z 1500 _ ,10

00 500 0

Bef

ore

Aft

er

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

M: S

ER

VIC

E -

AV

AIL

AB

LE T

IME

rt:.(

;t:"l

. t: u

l O:õ

i(;1

I nu

u. U

ät:U

õlä

~Y

õlri

õllJ

tt: 1

1I1t

: rt:.

uep

iuym

ern

reri

uu .

oy r

-ISC

õlt T

ea.

uU

"

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1995

1999

40.3

409

41.4

44.1

45,0

44,1

41.4

44.4

45,1

43,S

41.9

40,3

38.0

1999

2000

38.3

39.1

39,S

38.7

41,0

42.7

40,9

42,S

41,9

41,3

37.9

359

34.0

2000

2001

34,6

31.3

37,1

37,9

39,1

40.2

3S,2

42,2

45,5

42,9

38.1

35.7

32.4

2001

-200

235

,634

.135

,837

,837

,840

435

,S40

,841

,036

.736

,234

,832

.120

02-2

003

34.8

33.0

32.3

33.4

35,0

34,8

36,6

35.9

33.7

30.5

30,2

32,0

31,8

2003

-200

431

,030

.030

.929

,830

.531

,032

,833

.832

.729

.930

,228

.529

,220

04-2

005

319

32,3

30.8

30,6

33.9

35,8

33,S

364

36.7

34 5

34,6

30.8

31,9

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

42.3

40.7

39,0

40.2

44.3

44.7

43.3

45.0

45,3

44,1

43,S

39,6

40,3

1999

2000

37.3

37,7

38,S

38,8

40,5

40.7

394

41,7

40,6

41,8

37.7

374

342

2000

-200

134

.735

,334

,736

435

,736

,S39

.343

,844

,742

,540

.137

535

.320

0120

0236

.035

,135

,S34

.636

,939

,633

,937

,S37

,032

634

.629

,929

420

0220

0329

.329

.328

,930

.632

,233

.631

.934

,332

,629

.630

.829

,232

.720

0320

0429

.227

.531

829

.730

,033

.135

,030

.730

.730

.231

.929

,030

.720

0420

0528

.828

.428

.833

.634

838

.035

,737

,236

.034

.633

.632

.128

.9T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

936

,S36

,S38

.743

,141

,841

.542

,942

.841

.41

.043

,341

641

,219

99"2

000

39,6

39,9

41.2

38,8

41,9

41,6

41.4

41,9

42,6

41.6

3S.2

36,0

36,0

2000

-200

136

,936

,S37

438

,339

439

,541

,044

.343

.545

,140

.740

.838

,120

01-2

002

37,9

37,9

36.3

35,S

38.9

41,6

41,S

43,3

40.7

42,1

41,8

41.5

37,2

2002

-200

338

,838

,936

.839

,038

.139

,039

,140

.237

.137

,537

.936

.035

,020

0320

0434

.233

,935

.935

,336

.935

436

,337

.937

,836

436

,935

,637

,120

04-2

005

364

36.8

34.5

34.9

39.0

37,9

384

36.8

34 9

35,9

34.3

32.7

29,6

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9938

.237

.236

,641

.542

,942

439

.043

,845

,343

.242

.141

,338

.319

9920

0039

.837

,S38

.738

.741

,242

.741

.342

,340

,138

,835

.834

,134

.820

0020

0134

.035

.335

,236

438

,236

.836

,839

,039

.738

,334

.332

,832

.520

01-2

002

33.2

31.6

33,0

32.1

34,3

354

33,3

39,3

37,1

35.2

33,6

36.1

33.5

2002

2003

34.1

344

33,S

33.5

33.7

34.9

35.9

37,3

35,8

32.8

33.8

31,S

31.7

2003

2004

30.8

30.6

31,1

30.9

31,6

33.6

31,9

33,3

33,5

33.3

324

31,2

34.6

2004

-200

532

.134

.334

.138

.736

.739

.735

,335

,836

633

.332

,334

.732

,6TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

938

,938

439

.643

,243

,643

,241

,544

444

.643

,042

,640

.739

,319

99-2

000

38,9

38,S

39,5

39,1

41.2

42,1

40,8

42.2

41.2

40,8

37,3

35.7

34 8

2000

-200

135

,034

,736

,137

,238

438

,338

.742

.243

.342

,138

,136

.534

.520

01-2

002

35,6

34.5

35.1

35,2

36.8

39,1

36,2

40.2

38.9

36,7

364

35.7

33,1

2002

2003

34,3

34,0

33.0

341

34.7

35,S

35.9

36.9

34.8

32.7

33,2

32.1

32,7

2003

2004

31.2

30,S

32.3

31.4

32.3

33,6

33.9

33.9

33.7

32,6

32.8

31.1

33.0

2004

-200

532

.333

,132

.234

.536

.137

,835

.636

.836

134

433

.632

,730

,9

i=-

~A

vera

ge A

vaila

ble

Tim

e P

er D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

- B

y F

isca

l Yea

r

41,8

40.0

35.0

30,0

f25,

O~ 20.0

"15

.0

10.0 ,c co

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03-2

004

2004

-200

5

Fjsc

alY

ear

AV

Q_

Cha

nge

I

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(Per

DP)

(Fro

m

Bas

e)

(AvQ

. Per

DP

)42

4(B

ase)

39.6

--,6

%38

.1-1

0,1%

I

Bef

ore'

39.6

36.9

-12.

9%A

fter

32.9

334

-21.

2%C

hang

e-1

6,8%

30,8

-27.

3%33

4-2

1,3%

42,6

(Bas

e)38

,9-8

.6%

38,3

-10,

2%

I

Bef

ore

39.1

34,8

-18,

3%A

fter

31.5

31.1

-26,

9%C

hang

e-1

9,1%

30.7

-27.

9%33

.1-2

2.3%

40,9

(Bas

e)40

,0-2

1%40

.1-2

,0%

I

Bef

ore

40,2

39,8

-2.8

%A

fter

36,9

37,9

-7.3

%C

hang

e'-8

,1%

36,1

-11,

7%35

,S-1

3,1%

40,9

(Bas

e)38

.9-4

,9%

36.1

-11.

7%

I

Bef

ore

37.7

344

-15,

8%A

fter

33,8

34.1

-16.

7%C

hang

e-1

0.2%

32.2

-21.

2%35

.1-1

4.2%

41,8

(Bas

e)39

4-5

,7%

38,1

--.8

%36

4-1

2,8%

34,1

-18,

3%32

,S-2

2,2%

34,3

-17,

8%

Ave

rage

Ava

ilabl

e T

ime

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

erio

d-E

lefo

re a

nd

Aft

erFW

S

45.0

40.0

39.1

35.0

30.0

o 125.

0(¡

20.0

"15

.0

10.0 5.0

0.0

Bef

ore

Aft

er'

Total Traffc Citti

IY,

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

N: S

ER

VIC

E. T

RA

FFIC

CIT

AT

ION

S IS

SUE

D

'd P

er M

onth

- B

v F

",..

".. .

......

""'

....,'

....,

u, "

,u:\:

:("

uu

OV

..n

.e

ar.'

".

une

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

6930

6282

6115

NA

NA

NA

9978

1062

410

499

9326

9633

8996

1999

,200

093

0810

653

1130

513

095

1354

713

595

1382

110

520

1369

610

431

9703

8802

2000

-200

176

1567

3010

001

1169

811

963

1010

310

468

8450

1200

998

5510

651

8377

2001

-200

295

1210

439

7263

9348

9009

8679

1027

611

077

1107

186

2882

1877

2320

02-2

003

8588

9085

7624

8083

4268

9288

8988

7207

7085

7316

9074

9725

2003

2004

9834

5740

7290

8184

7438

4375

7819

7921

5292

5846

4601

7168

2004 2005

7561

4337

4494

8601

9905

9130

9267

9301

1041

811

702

1175

812

141

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

948

6342

8341

95N

AN

AN

A73

1474

6473

8892

2994

7488

9819

99"2

000

8567

8889

8504

9478

8730

6591

8180

7462

8314

6365

6130

5882

2000

-200

151

1053

2765

9259

2657

6161

8177

0567

2580

9066

3081

9461

7020

0120

0267

6982

8257

9173

6361

2352

1365

8559

0965

5866

9561

6257

8320

02-2

003

5690

7075

5317

4979

2827

5951

9343

6224

6541

7885

7218

8735

2003

2004

8897

4377

7013

6806

4888

2860

6013

6307

4975

6596

3622

9082

2004

-200

574

1243

5346

3185

3510

385

9231

9027

8255

8637

8211

1061

1192

2T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

973

4853

0257

00N

AN

AN

A11

714

1092

911

377

1195

714

775

1566

719

99-2

000

1642

215

523

1336

816

411

1475

612

561

1351

412

176

1687

813

343

1487

412

972

2000

-200

110

360

8493

1113

992

3992

6593

5811

133

9832

1033

798

2813

756

9877

2001

2002

1125

714

623

7073

1061

410

909

1236

516

168

1106

815

190

1222

814

055

1270

120

0220

0312

811

1436

411

283

9283

4819

9179

1088

098

9711

809

1165

011

561

1176

220

03-2

004

1206

710

219

1387

611

522

9237

5072

1320

214

628

1253

614

628

1274

117

594

2004

200

518

4810

131

6515

1147

511

603

9845

8945

8218

1053

311

073

1176

512

177

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

9512

5060

6700

NA

NA

NA

1419

515

329

1579

914

660

1600

015

943

1999

.200

016

710

1471

114

878

1504

015

344

1543

015

753

1354

415

842

1114

712

869

1164

220

00-2

001

9580

1081

811

805

1155

112

059

1149

411

308

8935

9720

8242

1502

210

108

2001

2002

1250

516

826

1189

214

122

1273

711

701

1641

013

135

1508

612

290

1316

810

833

2002

2003

1047

810

827

9470

1003

536

689

7410

880

9897

1180

911

650

1156

111

762

2003

-200

412

067

1021

913

876

1152

292

3750

7213

202

1462

812

536

1462

812

741

1759

420

0420

0518

4810

131

6515

1147

511

603

9845

8945

8218

1053

311

073

1176

512

177

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

928

653

2092

722

710

NA

NA

NA

4320

144

346

4506

345

172

4988

249

504

1999

-200

051

007

4977

648

055

5402

452

377

4817

751

268

4370

254

730

4128

643

576

3929

820

00-2

001

3266

531

368

3953

738

414

3904

837

136

4061

433

942

4015

634

555

4762

334

532

2001

2002

4004

350

170

3201

941

447

3877

837

958

4943

941

189

4790

539

841

4160

337

040

2002

2003

3756

741

351

3369

432

380

1556

033

392

4009

133

225

3724

438

501

3941

441

984

2003

2004

4286

530

555

4205

538

034

3080

017

379

4023

643

484

3533

941

698

3370

551

438

2004

2005

5186

928

952

2215

540

086

4349

638

051

3618

433

992

4012

142

059

4592

948

417

=i

_I ii--I

Ave

rage

Tra

ffc C

itatio

ns Is

sued

Per

Mon

th -

By

Fis

cal Y

ear

6000

0

5000

0

4000

0

. ~ 30000

z

2000

0

1000

0 o

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03.2

004

2004

-200

5

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg

.C

hang

e I

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(Per

Man

)(F

rom

Bas

e)(A

vg. P

erM

an)

8709

(Bas

e)11

540

32,5

%98

2712

,8%

I

Bef

ore

1000

992

706.

4%A

fter

8052

8028

-7,8

%C

hang

e-1

9,6%

6792

-22.

0%90

513,

9%

7012

(Bas

e)77

5810

.6%

6534

--,8

%

,

Bef

ore

6974

6436

--,2

%A

fter

6905

6482

-76%

Cha

nge

-1.0

%59

53-1

5.1%

8437

20.3

%

1053

0(B

ase)

1440

036

.6%

1021

8-3

.0%

I

Bef

ore

1189

212

354

17.3

%A

fter

1144

410

775

2.3%

Cha

nge

-3.8

%12

277

16.6

%10

894

3.5%

1257

8(B

ase)

1440

914

.6%

1088

7-1

3.4%

I

Bef

ore

1287

813

392

6.5%

Aft

er11

078

1008

2-1

9.8%

Cha

nge

-14.

0%12

277

-2.4

%10

894

-13.

4%

3882

9(B

asel

4810

623

.9%

3746

6-3

5%41

453

6.8%

3536

7-8

.9%

3729

9-3

.9%

3927

61.

2%

Before 41797

After 37421

Cha

nqe

-10.

5%

4500

0

4000

0

3500

0

3000

0

Q¡

2500

0~ E ~ 20000

1500

0

1000

0

5000 0A

vera

ge T

raff

c C

itatio

ns I

ssue

d Pe

r M

onth

-B

efor

e an

d A

fter

FW

S

Bef

ore

Aft

er:

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

0: S

ER

VIC

E -

CR

OS

S-O

UT

RA

TE

,v..,

n.."

'....,

v, v

,,,,,

u"',,

, ""v

:::: V

UiU

' ",..

" ,.'

.... .

.... u

i:..iu

yii..

'il...

.riu

u -

Uy

r-1:

;i:¡U

Tca

rIl

jure

u,,'

I,U

I"I',

I':"-

01"8

I U

P9l/u

t'Ä1Q

,¿I"

1lJt

','"i,

I O

P";

.'I U

t',JL

ut't

,i/C

' IU

PZ

'I'O

P,J

IUt'4 ¡

Ut'b

I D

P6 I

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

913

518

513

511

710

012

514

192

7988

105

158

203

1999

-200

016

215

317

815

914

812

317

112

110

202

254

358

450

2000

-200

137

145

229

933

327

125

023

317

140

210

270

321

445

2001

-200

235

854

655

057

848

234

846

331

833

547

451

579

555

2002

2003

652

594

553

5463

950

747

350

961

780

167

453

362

320

03-2

004

509

731

627

638

529

552

528

438

499

544

509

598

518

2004

2005

491

397

466

398

288

231

251

266

253

321

277

419

347

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

101

125

7279

5480

104

5555

8098

112

115

1999

2000

140

135

114

109

127

101

106

8562

123

148

170

282

2000

-200

121

225

422

422

017

115

916

713

911

511

312

720

428

020

01-2

002

233

353

333

300

233

193

241

212

250

321

337

335

378

2002

-200

338

839

648

539

941

434

838

336

641

145

048

840

942

720

03-2

004

438

450

381

415

424

368

292

378

322

317

358

372

362

2004

-200

534

129

030

729

221

020

719

419

918

524

922

528

221

1T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

5512

558

5459

7555

4754

4455

7173

1999

2000

9988

8582

9158

7659

4974

117

1719

420

0020

0115

118

516

615

111

415

312

177

7512

314

714

322

520

0120

0221

521

830

032

325

318

417

717

418

923

520

825

431

820

02-2

003

317

281

427

384

353

313

295

253

361

529

420

268

343

2003

-200

438

140

532

330

134

530

729

723

625

324

231

533

834

320

04-2

005

277

244

251

275

221

141

157

138

155

171

191

251

201

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

105

1215

511

784

7312

859

5372

7578

105

1999

2000

112

145

182

101

101

7950

8388

9318

024

823

720

00-2

001

231

189

210

155

131

181

147

115

129

158

2222

034

120

0120

0224

533

936

639

823

822

422

254

221

193

212

208

283

2002

2003

242

289

285

284

301

407

241

214

237

2723

025

526

620

0320

0433

542

733

130

235

528

825

433

628

829

928

431

021

92004 2005

259

250

252

153

145

125

143

185

212

188

177

291

297

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

939

855

843

037

317

354

4225

325

228

433

541

949

719

99-2

000

513

522

559

451

457

371

413

354

3249

259

995

911

7320

00-2

001

975

1080

889

859

687

753

558

504

460

614

7788

812

9220

0120

0210

5214

6615

4915

9912

0694

911

0395

810

0512

2612

0813

7716

3420

02-2

003

1599

1560

1851

1691

1717

1575

1392

1332

1626

2067

1812

1465

1549

2003

-200

417

6320

2316

6216

5617

6315

1513

7113

8813

7214

0214

6616

1814

6220

0420

0513

6811

8112

8611

1985

470

575

578

882

592

987

012

4310

66

Ave

rage

Cro

ss a

iit R

ate

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

erio

d _

By

Fis

cal Y

ear

1800

1600

1400

1200

¡¡10

00

ï Z8C

O

6CO

4CO

200

1641

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03-2

004

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg

.C

hang

e

I

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(PerDP) (From Base)

(Avg

Per

DP)

128

IBas

e)20

157

,0%

290

1262

%

I

Bef

ore

249

4726

8,5%

Aft

er50

660

937

5,3%

Cha

nge:

103,

3%57

134

5.4%

340

165,

0%

88(B

ase)

133

51,0

%18

310

9,0%

I

Bef

ore

162

288

227,

8%A

fter

346

4137

0,1%

Cha

nge

113,

3%37

733

0,1%

246

179,

8%

66(B

ase)

9747

,4%

142

114_

7%

I

Bef

ore

125

234

255,

2%A

fter

288

350

430,

8%C

hang

e13

0,2%

315

3774

%20

821

5,2%

96(B

ase)

131

35,8

%18

895

,9%

I

Bef

ore

166

262

1725

%A

fter

261

269

180,

1%C

hang

e57

_0%

311

2233

%20

611

4.4%

378

(Bas

e)56

248

8%80

311

2,5%

1256

232.

4%16

4133

4.2%

1574

316.

4%99

916

4,3%

Bef

ore

Aft

erC

hano

e

700

1408

101.

2%

i-~erage-cross Qiit Rate Per Deployment Period -

, 8eforeandAfterFWS

::::r

1.

12Q

O

¡; W

OO

--

ï z80

0

800

'00

200

8efo

re:

Aft

er

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

P: S

ER

VIC

E -

CR

OS

S-I

N R

AT

E

Tot

al N

umb,

IfU

nits

that

CIn

tiD

iffi

tAPe

rDtP

d -

bv F

"IY

,--

-,..

"'..-

",...

.. ...

,'..'.

.".,.

"....

.-..,

....

'u ,.

..,.i.

r"",

uu -

U.-

"....

., ,"

'..'

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

911

613

911

310

611

311

012

395

7993

107

155

215

1999

2000

1714

216

116

813

612

713

610

£10

318

124

538

841

620

00-2

001

319

519

280

300

225

242

251

179

122

215

243

342

491

2001

2002

322

449

467

511

438

333

470

289

259

264

327

396

414

2002

2003

446

527

576

500

4752

133

239

753

565

053

544

146

920

0320

0454

555

959

155

459

045

840

332

346

853

744

548

947

820

04-2

005

398

335

474

425

392

243

295

289

342

340

323

405

273

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

998

157

9810

774

8210

545

6274

9711

610

719

99-2

000

153

167

1311

714

998

147

125

9813

517

919

737

120

0020

0128

221

924

927

522

521

218

915

415

417

220

722

934

620

01-2

002

348

521

463

475

357

266

303

318

340

564

488

523

640

2002

2003

723

545

720

548

673

526

562

490

578

765

744

539

626

2003

2004

568

677

410

485

529

463

447

676

598

570

717

734

763

2004

2005

717

566

517

487

307

315

288

275

269

373

333

443

37T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

979

138

6446

4489

6752

5048

5872

7019

99-2

000

7166

8467

7756

7454

4182

9812

314

620

00-2

001

144

154

150

129

103

118

8354

6156

9594

109

2001

-200

213

615

525

618

517

411

910

993

181

203

1722

829

520

0220

0318

920

525

438

425

826

125

023

527

383

306

226

304

2003

2004

311

360

305

315

282

309

292

2225

419

323

029

024

120

0420

0523

624

326

427

225

517

020

318

918

617

323

627

274

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9910

512

415

511

884

7313

472

6978

8679

108

1999

-200

011

514

718

710

711

583

6184

8995

180

251

240

2000

-200

123

018

821

015

713

518

314

511

712

517

123

122

347

2001

-200

224

734

136

542

823

723

122

258

225

195

218

231

286

2002

-200

324

126

430

125

930

826

824

921

024

027

022

259

251

2003

-200

434

042

835

630

336

928

625

737

531

533

833

434

926

820

04-2

005

320

309

309

221

189

163

189

185

255

220

212

287

276

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

939

855

843

037

731

535

442

264

260

293

348

422

500

1999

2000

516

522

569

459

477

364

418

369

331

493

702

959

1173

2000

2001

975

1080

889

861

688

755

668

504

462

614

776

888

1293

2001

-200

210

5314

6615

5115

9912

0694

911

0495

810

0512

2612

0813

7816

3520

02-2

003

1599

1561

1851

1691

1718

1576

1393

1332

1626

2068

1812

1465

1650

2003

-200

417

6420

2416

6216

5717

7015

1613

9915

9616

3516

3817

2618

6217

5020

04-2

005

1671

1453

1564

1405

1143

891

975

938

1052

1106

1104

1412

1200

Ave

rage

Cro

ss-I

n R

ate

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

erio

d -

By

Fis

cal Y

ear

'"'"

(---

-

1600

-..-

1400

1200

-

l"'"

~-Z

BO

O -

--60

0 .-

i 381

''" 2'"

1692

-

LFi

scal

Y

ear

Avg

.C

hang

e

I

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(PerDP) (From Base)

(Avg

. Per

DP

)12

0(B

ase)

191

59.0

%28

713

84%

I

Bef

ore

235

380

215,

8%A

fter

.43

349

330

9.7%

Cha

nge:

84.0

%49

531

1.8%

349

189.

9%

94(B

ase)

159

69.6

%22

1384

%

I

Bef

ore

207

431

358,

8%A

fter

:53

861

855

7.9%

Cha

nge

1594

%58

752

5.0%

405

331.

0%

67(B

ase)

8018

.5%

104

53.9

%

I

Bef

ore

9717

816

3,3%

Aft

er:

256

271

302,

3%C

hang

e.16

3,0%

2731

0.9%

229

239.

6%

99(B

asel

135

36.5

%18

991

.6%

I

Bef

ore

169

268

171,

1%A

fter

277

259

162,

0%C

hang

e:63

.3%

332

236,

0%24

114

4.0%

381

¡Bas

e)56

648

,6%

804

111,

3%12

5723

0,2%

1642

331,

3%16

9234

4,6%

1224

221,

6%

Bef

ore

Aft

erC

hanq

e:

708

1506

112,

5%

Ave

r3ge

Cro

ss-I

n R

ate

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

erio

d _

Bef

ore

and

Afl

e,

FWS

1600

1400

1200

1000

" "eo

c§ z

6CC

,"C

2CC

Bef

ore

Aft

er.

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

Q: R

ES

PO

NS

E T

IME

- C

OD

E T

HR

EE

CA

LLS

..~,..

~w, ~

. _~~

.. . "

.....

....,,

,, ...

. .."

"y,..

",. "

" ,,,

..,,..

, _..

....,0

;"...

."".

.,iu

eau

an.'

.ar

.'r.

'-a

un.

u.

0'.

ec.'

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

412

322

376

366

453

426

474

522

401

343

326

353

1999

374

289

293

351

341

414

430

435

388

382

348

344

2000

362

294

370

407

421

4244

480

421

340

370

338

2001

303

259

356

360

429

439

477

470

502

462

416

454

2002

390

351

383

393

479

452

517

505

468

412

412

405

2003

460

386

408

347

443

420

504

457

438

388

383

377

2004

355

344

441

436

1746

2829

3044

3054

2926

3130

2730

3023

2005

3297

2741

2958

2956

3149

2984

3151

3008

2979

3163

2781

2760

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

391

333

411

366

438

457

552

567

438

413

376

381

1999

352

283

335

429

448

390

489

472

385

416

363

406

2000

443

362

422

455

522

504

557

480

495

508

402

458

2001

368

341

390

395

450

523

539

538

521

531

435

456

2002

439

443

510

484

580

563

592

552

546

562

491

443

2003

538

439

556

439

520

521

637

546

507

545

451

439

2004

484

469

510

568

1955

3016

3361

3369

3428

3280

3079

3007

2005

3367

2825

3084

3176

3251

3289

3410

3183

2959

3138

2900

2922

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

9826

422

427

723

425

228

530

632

825

624

122

205

1999

241

204

237

262

246

268

240

283

203

255

219

236

2000

239

234

239

249

286

256

248

257

285

238

181

193

2001

214

192

234

246

230

266

246

279

281

236

255

256

2002

244

213

272

281

256

279

284

266

274

261

255

235

2003

286

237

248

241

253

252

2729

529

425

126

625

520

0424

220

523

922

212

3620

3222

7722

3823

1626

2722

1423

2220

0527

0423

1224

1623

9321

5320

4921

0821

8819

8121

5818

2918

62T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

303

292

300

308

336

358

408

351

319

283

301

303

1999

293

2728

427

129

731

935

434

632

736

828

225

720

0027

926

534

628

231

734

336

033

329

330

225

428

920

0129

126

028

531

732

634

536

837

037

133

230

133

620

0231

231

832

435

432

236

739

335

138

536

439

132

720

0340

230

633

029

834

534

138

538

237

540

430

330

420

0434

633

740

434

617

1227

8829

8429

2927

6329

825

7130

2120

0536

4234

0631

5528

7128

4827

2528

5927

5826

7427

4825

0223

93TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1370

1171

1364

1274

1479

1526

1740

1768

1414

1280

1232

1242

1999

1260

1048

1149

1313

1332

1391

1513

1536

1303

1421

1212

1243

2000

1323

1155

1377

1393

1546

1530

1609

1550

1494

1388

1207

1278

2001

1176

1052

1265

1318

1435

1573

1630

1657

1675

1561

1407

1502

2002

1385

1325

1489

1512

1637

1661

1786

1674

1673

1599

1549

1410

2003

1686

1368

1542

1325

1561

1534

1805

1680

1614

1588

1403

1375

2004

1427

1355

1594

1572

669

1066

511

646

1159

011

433

1200

110

594

1137

320

0513

210

1128

411

613

1139

611

401

1104

711

528

1113

710

593

1120

710

012

9937

,-A

vera

ge N

urnb

er o

t C

ode

Thr

ee C

alls

Pe(

Mon

t/-B

yCal

enda

(Yea

r

1200

0

1000

0

8000

~ 6000

Z

4000

2000

- 131G __--

1998

1999

2000

2001 2002

2003

2004

2005

Fisc

al Y

ea,

"Thisdata reflects Ihe

peri

od

follo

win

g Ih

e A

pril

2004

po

licy

chan

ge

Avg

.C

hang

e(P

erM

on,)

(Fro

m B

ase)

Ave Per

Mon

th

398

(Bas

e)36

6-8

,1%

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)39

139

0-2

.1%

Posl

-FW

S(2/

02-4

104)

421 Pre-4104 Policy Cha

nge

411

3,2%

Post

-FW

S(5/

04-1

2/05

)2920 Post-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

431

8.2%

418

5,0%

2005

403,

9%29

9465

2,6%

427

(Bas

e)39

7-6

,9%

I

Pre-

FWS

(1/9

8 -1

/02)

439

467

9,5%

Post

-FW

S (4

/02-

4/04

)519 Pre-4/04 P

olic

y C

hang

e 45

77,

1%Po

st-F

WS(

5/04

-12/

05)

3100 Post-4/04 P

olic

y C

hang

e 51

721

.1%

512

19.8

%22

1141

7.8%

3125

632.

1%

258

IBas

e)24

1-6

.7%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)24

624

2--

3%P

osl-F

WS

(3/

02 -

4/0

4)259 Pre-4/04 P

olic

y C

hang

e 24

5-5

.4%

Post

-FW

S(5/

04-1

2/05

)2171 Post-4/04 P

olic

y C

hang

e 26

00.

6%26

31.

8%15

1448

5.9%

2179

743.

4%

322

(Bas

e)30

6-5

.0%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)31

530

5-5

.2%

Post

-FW

S(5/

02-4

/04)

355 Pre-4/04 P

olic

y C

hang

e 32

51.

0%Po

st-F

WS(

5/04

-12/

05)

2825 Post-4!04 P

olic

y C

hang

e 35

19.

0%34

88.

1%19

2949

9.3%

2898

800.

6%

1405

(Bas

e)13

10-6

.8%

1404

-0.1

%14

382.

3%15

5810

.9%

1540

9.6%

7658

445.

1%11

197

696.

9%

---

Pre-FWS 1391

Post

-FW

S (T

hrou

gh 4

/04)

155

2 Pr

e-4/

04 P

olic

y C

hang

ePo

sl-F

WS

(5/0

4 -

12/0

5) 1

1016

Pos

t-4/

04 P

olic

y C

hanq

e"

Ave

,age

Nur

nbC

fOfC

odeT

hree

Cal

i.Pcr

Mon

t/

1200

0

1000

0

8000

~60

00

4000

2000

1~-

--Pr

e-FW

SPo

!'-FW

SfT

hrou

gh P

ost-

FWS(

5104

_41

04)

12/0

5)L

_

u.~~~~.~

. ~~ 0o .. ££ UU ~lJ2?'- 0~~ClQ-~~ -.0" 0~ ~

. .~ 0C.. £BUi:g~ 0o ~~ ~~ 00_- ~~ -e, ~~~

¡gg,o .. ££UU ~i:g'- ao ~~~3e-~~ -.0c 0~ ~

. ~~ 0c.. ££UU ~~o'- '-'- 0~~~ 30_- ~~ -.0" 0~~

. ~~ 0c.. ££uU ~i:g~ 0o ~~ ~~ 00_- ~~ -.0" 0~~

o rn ~crU" 0

_N in~in in ~~o

~ in~ "" rnwr-r- ~ ~ 0llinr-~~~~~~~ooi.~¡;w.c"-c ~ '~ 0 ~00

J:Lñ~ --~in~~~i; ~o ~~

~3~~ ~ ~" ~ '~ 0 ~

E' e£ ~~ --inin~~~i; ~o ~~

in~~~ ~ ~~ DOi. ;;ÑQiJ:"-" ~ '~ o~00

l:Lñ~--inin~~~i; ~O~~

in~~~ ~ in~ 0 0w,;¡¡:. £-c ~ '~ 0 ~00

l:Lñ~--inin~~ ~

i; 2o ~~

CI;;Lf:: e ed; ¡; ~" ~ .~ 0 ~

2Q£in~-inin~~~i; 2o ~~

",oc

U

~ ~h~ .ic.l ~.!!'õ. in,~~,¡~

E-00~ '

~

~"

L.; ~ ~ ~., ~ ~

sa¡nulV\~ q

Jw"¡:w'"zo"-'"w'"ww'";ii-w"oU

w"¡:w'"zo"-'"w'"0:~zw";iU"t:"

~

G. "'_ 0 0 0 0oi~ "';, ~ ~ d" à' 01;;

~ EÆ~~~~~~~u E' ~ NN"'v~

~~~:~q;g~~'l 000~cicici ¡;g¡;?a

'¡:.~iI ;i*~~i:åC!OODQO~ciggg~~~

¡~~~~~~~.00!!ci ci;e ~ ~ ~~

¡",~~~~~~l' 0 0 . , .!!ciög¡;~~~

~.

" 0CU::ll'lllllwu:r-1'~ ".~ll ll.. ll \D W win llllWCDWI' r-r- to W W r'r- a: row llllllininr-I'I'

ô ll in llll ininwr- ll L!llllr-u:wr- ~~ in wr-evr-r- ooloW.. r-a:r-co LOll llWI'I'I'I'.

; co ll ll "'.. CD 1'1' ll ll ll ll I' W (01, W CD il r- ro I' rou:0 in~~ wr- in "''' llllilu:r-IOr-r-

0 in llllll llW "-W en llllll cow 1'1' ~ inin w W il r-r- w to w r- 1'1' I'r- in ll ww in inr-t-

. 'lllllllll((..r- ll ll ll(!\D wr-I' ininin w (¡Wl'I' oou:..r-r-a:cor- llll llWWW r'r-

0 ll en W en ll in 00.. ll WUJ inu:w ...'- ininin ((w.. r-r- inininr-..r-mi, ll mw to u:r-r-r-

0 ll llllin inr-wr- ll ll illl inr-r-r- ~ in ~ iltOr-..r- r-w in r-r-r- a:a: llll inwlD ..r-r-

~.,. .0 "'L!ll LOW u:r-I' coco co woo 001'00 ~~ in 001'1'1'1' 00 1'001'1' CO coco co co 00 00 00 I' 1'1'. ,"0..~

. ..LOLO co woo WI' LO COCOLO 00001'00 in ~~ 1'00001'1' woo 00 1'00 a: a:a: LO co cow 00 001'1'... "E coco co coinwww coco LOLO\O www in~ in cow I'Wl' 00 \0 00 W I' I' I'a: LOtJ co coww inl';:..0gli tJ co V lO tJ '" "'I' COCOtJCOWI'W'" ~~~ "'''1'001' I' '" I' '" I' co I'W co LO tJ co W I' WI'

~ ;s~.. " ~U ~ ~tJ LOtJco COI'tJ1' ~tJ co coco coinww ~co co co tJWI'WI';5WWWl'wrol'ro co co en co w I' WI'. '" " "~ ~ ~ ~. ~.c " ~ '" . w

~ ¿~encocoentJwwl' ~COCOCOLOtJI'WW ~encotJ cow I' WI' ~ W "'inw I' rol'CO ~ LOCOtJ LOWI' WI'~ ~ ~ ~o z :: CIi~~ ~ 8 0 ~ 8 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 0 ~ 8 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ 8

08 ~ g~ §~ ~ 8088 g~ u ~ ~g 0 88 g~c mmODDDoo~mmDDoooo~mmD 000 00 ~m in DODO 00 ~ m moo 0 000~ ~~~~~~~~C~-~~~~~~C~-~ ~~ ~ ~~ C- ~ ~~~~ ~~ C ~ -~~ ~ ~~~" ~ ~ ~ ~. 0 0 o 0" ~ ~ ~ ~

IN

N

,N

.U..U N

. ~0"

u 1i£ ,0e N 0" u

l~00N

" "~

,, N~, ~0

, ~ ,E~

- u0,U~0"

, .

L W-.

-~... U0

'~lnui~~ E~

sBv C

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

S: R

ES

PO

NS

E T

IME

. CO

DE

TW

O H

IGH

CA

LLS

Num

cerO

Ti.o

ae I

WO

HI

n L

;aiis

Tor

"".

.'v,..

.. ...

.. Il

Ulll

i . D

"'öl

t:llu

iU T

t:ilr

ure.

auan

.:,Y

KD

..ear

.'.

une"

""

.,

OV

.::'

c;T

OT

AL

CE

NT

RA

L B

UR

EA

U19

9833

3632

0037

7535

1538

2135

8641

2342

8138

0535

1134

3834

0619

9934

7629

4232

0034

6636

1335

7540

3639

3735

9438

8333

6934

8620

0035

0834

6339

3539

2439

5039

3942

4445

9541

4239

5334

5738

0320

0137

1134

7438

5138

6542

4240

6745

1346

6743

8040

4640

2341

4720

0239

3136

9142

2040

4144

7344

0944

9847

1845

9246

2141

4041

5520

0341

9838

1543

2940

6141

8943

2243

6443

8040

4041

1540

4642

4420

0440

9637

7642

3638

9019

6620

05T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

9832

5231

1136

6833

4136

3336

4741

0844

5839

9S35

8134

3532

8119

9934

1630

6333

2036

1238

9235

2242

9642

7437

3537

4134

5034

3520

0036

4334

9139

0640

0339

2339

9842

2843

0039

6840

6535

8038

4120

0138

3834

5141

2739

7541

8841

0244

5645

5143

0942

2538

1041

0820

0240

0337

4243

6440

3247

1344

8347

0549

1047

5545

2441

8540

9120

0343

8639

6044

9442

2144

6944

6246

4446

3741

6344

5240

5941

4420

0442

2639

7443

4739

1722

7420

05T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

3037

2979

3285

3004

3199

3219

3532

3659

3170

3037

2934

2908

1999

2836

2530

2973

2942

2896

2870

3282

3449

2957

3117

2905

2843

2000

3050

2927

3261

3063

3142

3022

3102

3317

3140

3162

2776

2979

2001

3192

2835

3263

2902

2865

3028

3126

3243

3383

3297

3059

3174

2002

3015

2705

3139

3154

3333

3321

3260

3562

3400

3383

3264

3317

2003

3508

3179

3572

3171

3435

3504

3422

3370

3199

3275

3172

3371

2004

3217

3069

3242

2903

1518

2005

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

9839

8737

8243

3739

8241

0140

9843

1944

7639

6637

6738

2136

8619

9938

4131

9536

7437

4837

6737

9442

1041

5538

7338

9035

7835

6520

0037

8238

1640

9240

5038

1638

5540

4441

9741

3842

0736

4440

0220

0142

1240

6842

8638

5441

8040

9044

7445

2844

3543

2440

6443

9320

0240

2538

8941

8441

1242

9844

8745

7144

5042

6442

3045

7244

9620

0343

3044

5346

4543

1544

4945

0445

1644

5342

4643

7042

3143

9520

0442

2238

4141

1038

1921

2720

05TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1361

213

072

1506

513

842

1475

414

650

1608

216

874

1493

913

896

1362

813

281

1999

1356

911

730

1316

713

768

1416

813

761

1582

415

815

1425

914

631

1331

213

329

2000

1398

313

697

1519

415

040

1483

114

815

1561

816

409

1538

815

387

1345

714

625

2001

1495

313

828

1552

714

596

1547

515

287

1656

915

989

1650

815

893

1497

615

822

2002

1497

414

027

1590

715

339

1681

716

700

1703

417

640

1703

116

758

1616

116

059

2003

1642

215

407

1704

015

768

1654

216

792

1694

616

840

1564

816

212

1550

816

154

2004

1576

114

660

1593

514

529

7885

2005

Avg

.C

hang

e(P

erM

an,)

(Fm

m8"

,1 I

Ave PerMonth

3658

(Bas

e)35

56-2

8%Pr

e-FW

S(1/

98-1

/02)

3804

3909

69%

Post

-FW

S (2

/02-

4/04

)4210 Pre-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

4082

11.6

%42

9117

.3%

4175

14,1

%40

009.

3%

3626

(Bas

e)36

470,

6%

I

Pre-

FWS

(1/9

8-1/

02)

3833

3912

7,9%

Post

-FW

S(4/

02-4

/04)

4358 Pre-4!04 P

olic

y C

hang

e 40

9512

.9%

4376

207%

4341

197%

4116

13,5

%

3164

(Bas

e)29

67--

.2%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)30

7230

78-2

7%Po

st-F

WS

(3/0

2-4/

04)

3298 Pre--/04 P

olic

y C

hang

e 31

14-1

.6%

3238

2.3%

3348

5.8%

3108

-1,8

%

4027

(Bas

e)37

74--

.3%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1I0

2)40

0839

70-1

4%P

ost-

FW

S (

5102

- 4

/04)

4345 Pre-4104 Policy Cha

nge

4244

54%

4300

6.8%

4409

9.5%

3998

-0.7

%

1447

5(B

ase)

1394

4-3

,7%

II i P"FWS

1473

014

870

2.7%

Pos

t-F

WS

(T

hrou

çih

4/04

)16

182

Pre

--/0

4 P

olic

vCha

noe

1553

57.

3%16

204

11,9

%16

273

124%

1522

15.

2%

Cod

e T

wo

Hig

h cl

assi

ficaH

on w

as e

limin

ated

afte

r M

ay 2

004.

Ave

rage

s do

not

incl

ude

May

200

4 be

caus

e it

was

a p

artia

l mon

th.

-----,. u, AVerageNUmbCrofcodeTWOHigh-CaIlSP~';Month_BYCaICndarYear----. - -. -l

1600

0

1600

0

1400

0

1200

0

.010

000

~80

00

6000

4000

2000

0, L

1998

1999

2000

2001 2002

2003

2004

2005

Fisc

al Y

ear

i-erage Number of Code Two High Call~ Per Montl

I 18000r 16182

1600

0

1400

0

1200

0

1000

0

8000

SOD

D

Pre-

FWS

LMy

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

T: R

ES

PO

NS

E T

IME

- C

OD

E T

WO

HIG

H R

ES

PO

NS

E T

IME

c

Cod

e. T

'l0 H

igh

clas

sifi

catio

n w

as e

limin

ated

aft

er M

ay 2

004.

1- ---- AnnuaIMedi~-nRe:ponseTimetoCDdCTWOHighCaIIS

0""''

''''''

\,oae

IWO

Hia

n li3

11 K

es o

nse

lime~

-I:

t,3le

ndar

Tt:i

:1ur

eau

.".

,.ar

;.,''-

r;.

.un

e'u

ue

OV

.o.

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

77

77

77

77

77

77

1999

77

77

78

87

88

77

2000

77

88

88

99

88

88

2001

88

89

99

99

109

99

2002

109

910

1010

1010

1110

1111

2003

1111

1111

1111

1111

1212

1111

2004

1011

1111

2005

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

77

77

77

77

77

77

1999

77

77

78

88

88

88

2000

78

88

89

99

99

99

2001

88

99

99

910

1010

99

2002

910

1010

1111

1111

1111

1212

2003

1212

1212

1011

1111

1010

1010

2004

1010

1111

2005

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

988

98

88

88

98

88

819

998

88

88

88

88

88

820

008

88

88

88

89

99

920

019

89

99

99

1010

1010

920

0210

910

1010

1010

1111

1111

1120

0311

1211

1211

1111

1212

1212

1220

0411

1111

1120

05T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

88

98

89

99

99

99

1999

98

89

89

99

99

98

2000

89

99

109

99

109

109

2001

1010

1010

1010

1011

1111

1111

2002

1010

1011

1011

1111

1111

1212

2003

1212

1212

1212

1213

1313

1212

2004

1212

1212

2005

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

88

88

78

88

88

88

1999

88

88

88

88

88

88

2000

88

88

99

99

99

99

2001

99

99

910

910

1010

1010

2002

1010

1010

1011

1011

1111

1211

2003

1112

1212

1111

1112

1212

1111

2004

1111

1111

2005

By

Cal

enda

r Y

ear

"

l¡¡'~

).. J

~. '

it':,'i.ll~ - I

i

.~2003 2004 2005

"

~ 6

,

1998

1999

2000

2001 2002

Fisc

al Y

ear

Med

Cha

nge

(Per

Mon

)IFcom B",I I

Ave

. M

onth

ly

Med

. 7

(Bas

e)7

00%

Pre-

FWS

7.B

B14

.3%

Posl

-FW

S (T

hrou

gh

4/04

) 10

,7Pre-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

928

.6%

1042

,9%

1157

,1%

1157

1%

7(B

ase)

814

.3%

I

Pre-

FWS

818

14.3

%P

ost-

FW

S (

Thr

ough

4/0

4)10

,9Pre-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

928

.6%

1157

.1%

1157

.1%

1157

,1%

8(B

ase)

80,

0%

I

Pre-

FWS

8.5

B0.

0%P

ost-

FW

S (

Thr

ough

4/0

4)11

.1Pre-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

912

,5%

1025

,0%

1250

.0%

1137

.5%

9(B

ase)

90.

0%

I

Pre-

FWS

939

0.0%

Pos

t-F

WS

(T

hrou

gh 4

/04)

11,8

Pre-

4/04

Pol

icy

Cha

nge

1011

1%11

22,2

%12

33,3

%12

33,3

%

8(B

ase)

80,

0%9

12.5

%9

12.5

%11

37.5

%11

37.5

%11

37,5

%

Pre-

FWS

8.5

Posl

-FW

S (T

hrou

qh

4/04) 11,1 Pre-4/04PolicvChanqe

Ave

rage

Mon

thly

Mcd

ian

Res

pons

e T

ime

to C

od~

Tw

o H

.gh

ca:l"

Bef

ore

and

Afl

crFW

S

120,

- !

100 "' 0.0 '" " 0.0

Pre-

FWS

Post

-FW

S (T

hrou

gh 4

/04)

bP

er M

onth

- B

v C

alen

dar

Yi

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

U: R

ES

PO

NS

E T

IME

- C

OD

E T

WO

CA

LLS

f C

ode

Tw

o C

alls

for

S...

.,,,..

,,.'"

~, .,

.."=

dl0"

i;ëU

;'n

.e

aú10

j!.

c:+

.un

.u

u.

ct:

",.

ec:

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

3363

3134

3768

3590

3854

3776

4133

4301

3819

3712

3558

3580

1999

3558

3146

3648

3592

3886

3802

4251

4011

3618

4012

3458

3579

2000

3619

3495

3860

4180

4542

4294

4465

4602

4339

4185

3603

4018

2001

3753

3550

4211

4147

4535

4593

4860

4773

4649

4705

4208

4098

2002

4017

3748

4268

4233

4554

4630

4683

4670

4381

4256

4039

3872

2003

4215

3728

4334

4173

4540

454

5102

4764

4471

4698

4208

4168

2004

4100

4113

4518

4391

5412

6096

6104

6061

5919

5688

5066

5401

2005

5260

4929

5525

5809

5772

5757

6013

6234

5543

5906

5415

5320

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

3527

3079

3742

3374

3894

3912

4058

4241

3773

3717

3493

3518

1999

3719

3096

3633

3667

3975

3808

4241

4060

3672

3911

3517

3724

2000

3690

3412

3856

4008

4109

4235

4274

4463

4249

4020

3716

3976

2001

3783

3327

4184

4192

4430

4703

4737

4688

4523

4408

4035

4032

2002

4108

3971

4432

4177

4621

4847

4915

4788

4434

4276

4081

4004

2003

4029

3760

4375

4420

4810

4724

5171

5151

4465

4746

4133

3990

2004

4154

3905

4513

4468

5631

6073

6531

6468

6113

5784

5257

5207

2005

5360

4969

5744

5772

5844

5940

6364

6302

5518

5923

5407

5300

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

9831

1929

5735

3331

8232

3434

3135

6336

3632

8632

1732

3831

3519

9931

1129

4332

6231

8532

6832

1334

7335

5130

6534

4231

5531

7320

0032

0030

1933

8333

1035

9933

8736

0036

4933

9533

5030

3531

6920

0133

0330

0234

5532

7334

9036

2736

7938

0037

9139

8135

2434

2120

0233

0031

4834

3333

3035

9536

3137

6137

1234

7736

1432

8732

4820

0334

6531

0935

4732

8836

8536

0237

1537

4136

1837

6934

0533

5020

0434

0632

6134

7534

1840

3844

7648

9448

4244

3246

4742

2140

7720

0543

7640

4144

9447

5044

7244

8245

1347

1841

3543

6240

4642

28T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

4350

3799

4741

4417

4638

4696

4818

4883

4480

4639

4245

4342

1999

4308

3924

4163

4322

4564

4607

4879

4911

4442

4797

4301

4220

2000

4267

4053

4668

4596

5015

4511

5108

5002

4812

4777

4299

4516

2001

4362

4002

4801

4752

5034

5290

5298

5403

5350

5419

4939

4806

2002

4659

4540

4793

4821

5015

5222

5249

5199

4971

4767

4550

4398

2003

4839

4164

4772

4626

5301

5101

5402

5307

5148

5211

4478

4506

2004

4785

4329

5150

4871

5732

6173

6896

6567

6126

6025

5585

5820

2005

5971

5350

5871

6242

5896

5962

6109

6102

5649

5979

5609

5522

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1435

912

969

1578

414

563

1562

015

815

1657

217

061

1535

815

285

1453

414

575

1999

1469

613

109

1470

614

766

1569

315

430

1684

416

533

1479

716

162

1443

114

696

2000

1477

613

979

1576

716

094

1726

616

527

1744

717

716

1679

616

332

1465

315

679

2001

1520

113

881

1665

116

364

1748

918

213

1857

418

654

1831

318

513

1670

616

357

2002

1608

415

407

1692

616

561

1778

518

330

1860

818

369

1726

316

913

1595

715

522

2003

1654

814

781

1702

816

507

1833

617

971

1939

018

963

1770

218

424

1622

416

014

2004

1644

515

608

1765

617

148

2081

322

818

2441

523

938

2259

022

144

2012

920

505

2005

2096

719

289

2163

422

573

2198

422

141

2299

923

356

2084

522

170

2047

720

370

Ave

rage

Num

ber

of C

ode

Tw

o C

all.

Per

Mon

th -

By

Cal

enda

r Y

.ar

2500

0

2156

7'

2000

0

1500

0

1000

0

5000

1998

1999

2000

2001 2002

2003

2004

2005

Fiso

alY

.af

'ThisdalarefleCisthe period fo

llow

ing

the

Apr

il 20

04

palic

y ch

ange

Avg

.C

hang

e(P

erM

an.)

(Fro

m

Bas

e)

Ave. Per M

anlh

37

16(B

ase)

3713

-0.1

%Pr

e-FW

S(1/

98-1

/02)

3958

4100

10.3

%Pa

si-F

WS

(2/0

2-4/

04)

4348 Pre-4/04 P

olic

y C

hang

e 43

4016

.8%

Posl

-FW

S(5/

04-1

2/05

)5662 Posl-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

4279

15.2

%44

1218

.7%

5239

41.0

%56

2451

.3%

3594

(Bas

e)37

521.

6%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)39

3940

018.

3%Po

st-F

WS(

4102

-4/0

4)4438 Pre-4/04 P

olic

y C

hang

e 42

5415

.1%

Pasl

"FW

S(5/

04-1

2/D

5)57

75 P

asl-4

/04

Pol

icy

Cha

nge

4388

18.8

%44

8121

.3%

5342

44.6

%57

0454

.4%

3294

(Bas

e)32

37-1

.7%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1I98

-1/0

2)33

4533

411.

4%Po

st-F

WS(

3/02

-4/0

4)34

98 P

re-4

/04

Pol

icy

Cha

nge

3529

7.1%

Pasl

-FW

S(5/

04-1

2/05

)44

12 P

asl-4

/04

Pol

icy

Cha

nge

3461

5.1%

3525

7.0%

4099

24.4

%43

8533

.1%

4504

(Bas

e)44

53-1

.1%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)46

4446

443.

1%P

ost-

FW

S (

5/02

- 4

/04)

4891

Pre

-4/0

4 P

olic

y C

hang

e49

5510

.0%

Pasl

-FW

S (5

/04

-12/

05)

5959 Posl-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

4849

7.7%

4906

8.9%

5671

25.9

%58

5530

.0%

1520

8(B

ase)

1515

5-0

.3%

1608

65.

8%17

077

12.3

%16

977

11.6

%17

324

13.9

%20

351

33.8

%21

567

41.8

%

Pre-FWS(1f98-1/02) 15923

Post

-FW

S (5

/02

- 4/

04)

1712

5 Pr

e-4/

04 P

olic

y C

hang

ePo

sl-F

WS

(5/0

4 -1

2/05

) 21

808

Post

-4/0

4 Po

licy

Cha

nae~

2500

0

,,---

,---

~-

,"..

-I i i

2000

0

1500

0

1000

0

5000

: Pr~-

FWS

(119

B _

110

2) P

ost-

FWS

(510

2_41

04)

Posl

-FW

S(51

04-

1205

)

Tda

rYI

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

V: R

ES

PO

NS

E T

IME

- C

OD

e T

WO

RE

SP

ON

SE

TIM

E

..,1;

......

. .."

.... '

rYU

...."

1'1

;'" ..

11::.

. ,...

._~

~~

'..".

.... ,

.....

ureau ,'/yian;

e ;-

ar:

l.;ii

.un

e,/

""

.O

V."

ee.'"

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

1212

1212

1314

1314

1313

1314

1999

1414

1414

1516

1516

1615

1515

2000

1415

1515

1718

1718

1817

1617

2001

1615

1617

1819

1919

2019

1919

2002

1918

1719

1919

2021

2119

2019

2003

1920

2221

2122

2121

2222

2019

2004

1919

2120

2020

1919

2120

1817

2005

1718

1919

2019

2020

2119

2120

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

1212

1313

1313

1314

1413

1314

1999

1413

1414

1514

1616

1615

1515

2000

1514

1515

1618

1818

1818

1717

2001

1516

1717

1719

1920

2021

1818

2002

1820

2121

2222

2221

2221

2321

2003

2121

2323

2222

2222

1919

1818

2004

1921

2121

2020

2020

2018

1617

2005

1617

1919

2019

2020

2021

2120

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

9814

1515

1514

1516

1615

1414

1419

9914

1414

1415

1515

1514

1414

1420

0014

1414

1516

1716

1616

1715

1520

0114

1514

1616

1717

1718

1818

1720

0217

1817

1718

1918

1819

1919

1820

0318

1919

1920

2120

2019

1918

1920

0418

1818

1818

1717

1718

1716

1620

0517

1718

1719

1919

1818

1818

18T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

1514

1514

1516

1616

1717

1516

1999

1515

1515

1516

1617

1716

1615

2000

1516

1717

1818

1818

1918

1817

2001

1718

1818

2021

2021

2121

1919

2002

1919

1820

1819

1919

2019

2119

2003

1919

2020

2021

2221

2121

2020

2004

2020

2020

1918

1919

1918

1717

2005

1717

1919

1919

1919

1819

1918

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1314

1414

1414

1515

1514

1414

1999

1414

1414

1515

1516

1615

1515

2000

1515

1516

1718

1718

1818

1717

2001

1616

1617

1819

1920

2020

1918

2002

1819

1919

1920

2020

2020

2119

2003

1920

2121

2121

2121

2020

1919

2004

1920

2020

1919

1919

2018

1717

2005

1717

1919

2019

2019

1919

2019

I

Ann

uaIM

edia

nRes

pons

eTom

etoC

odeT

woC

al¡;

_SyC

alen

darY

caf

" '" "

"10

'"

Fisc

al Y

ear

'Thisdata reflec1sthe period

follo

win

g th

aApr

il 20

04

polic

y ch

ange

Me'

Cha

nge

(Per

M

on,)

(F

rom

Bas

e)A

ve, M

onlh

lyM

ed13

(Bas

e)15

15.4

%Pr

e-FW

S15

,717

30_8

%Po

si-F

WS

(Thr

ough

4/

04)

20.0

Pre-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

1838

.5%

Posl

~FW

S (5

/04-

12/0

5)19

.4Post-4/04 Policy

Cha

nge

1946

.2%

2161

.5%

1946

,2%

1946

.2%

13(B

ase)

1515

.4%

I

Pre"

FWS

15.9

1730

.8%

Post

-FW

S(T

hrou

gh41

04)

21.1

Pre-

4/04

Po

licy

Cha

nge

1838

.5%

Posl

-FW

S(51

04-1

2/05

)19

2Po

st-4

104

Polic

l'Cha

nge

2161

.5%

2161

.5%

1946

.2%

1946

.2%

15¡B

asel

14--

.7%

I

Pre-

FWS

15.3

166.

7%Po

sl-F

WS(

Thr

ough

4/04

)18

7Pr

e-4/

04

Polic

y C

hang

e 17

13.3

%Po

st-F

WS

(5/0

4 -1

2/05

)17

.6Po

sl-4

/04

Polic

y C

hang

e 18

20.0

%19

26.7

%17

13.3

%18

20.0

%

15(B

ase)

166.

7%

I

Pre-

FWS

17.2

1713

.3%

Pos

t-F

WS

(T

hrou

gh 4

/04)

19.9

Pre-4f04 Policy Cha

nge

2033

.3%

Post

-FW

S(5f

04-1

2/05

)18

.4Po

sl-4

/04

Polic

y C

hang

e 19

26.7

%20

33.3

%19

26.7

%19

26,7

%

14¡B

ase)

157.

1%17

21.4

%18

28.6

%19

35.7

%20

42.9

%19

35.7

%19

35.7

%

Pre-

FWS

16.0

Posl

-FW

S (T

hrou

gh 4

/04)

19.

9 Pr

e-4/

04 P

olic

y C

hang

ePost-FWS (5/04 -12/05) 18.8 Posl-4/04 Policy Chanqe*

IA

vera

ge M

ontll

y M

edia

n R

espo

nse

Tim

e to

Cod

e T

wo

Cal

l, B

~for

~an

dAft

~rFW

S

20.0

15.0

:'10,

0 ;0 00Pr

e-FW

SPost-FWS(Thruugh Post-FWS(5104-

4104

) 12

/05)

cc

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

W: R

ES

PO

NS

E T

IME

- N

ON

-CO

DE

D H

IGH

CA

LLS

to's

Avg

.C

hang

e(P

erM

an)

(Fco

B"e

J I

Ave PerMonth

3127

(Bas

e)28

27-9

6%Pr

e-FW

S(1/

98-1

/02)

2859

2791

-10.

7%Po

st-F

WS(

2/02

-410

4)2301 Pre-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

2727

-12.

8%25

70-1

7.8%

2208

-29.

4%18

02-4

2.4%

2301

(Bas

e)20

51-1

0.4%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)20

8320

10-1

2_7%

Post

-FW

S(4/

02-4

/04)

1723 Pre-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

2009

-12_

7%19

19-1

6.6%

1673

-27_

3%14

12-3

8.6%

3058

(Bas

e)27

94-8

.6%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)27

7926

93-1

1.9%

Posl

-FW

S(3/

02-4

/04)

2400 Pre-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

2641

-13.

6%26

12-1

46%

2332

-23.

8%19

39-3

6.6%

4752

(Bas

e)44

60--

.1%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)43

2141

45-1

2_8%

Pos

t-F

WS

(5/

02 -

4/0

4)35

22 P

re-4

/04P

olic

yCha

nge

4087

-14.

0%40

06-1

5.7%

3423

-28.

0%26

96-4

3.3%

1323

7(B

ase)

1214

1-8

_3%

1163

9-1

2.1%

1146

4-1

3.4%

1110

7-1

6.1%

9635

-27.

2%78

49-4

0_7%

Non

-Cod

e H

igh

clas

si~c

ali~

n w

as e

limin

ated

afl

er M

_ay

20-':

i-~~

!era

ges

do n

ot in

i:!~d

_e M

ay_2

()04

bec

ause

it w

as a

par

tial m

onth

Ave

,age

N

umbe

r of

Non

-Cod

ed

Hig

h C

afls

Per

Mon

th-B

y C

alen

dafY

ea

r

Num

oer

or N

On-

l,oae

a H

In

....n

" iv

i .;"

'..Y

I....

....,

IYIV

lIllI

- C

..el

ItHllI

¡U H

ielr

urea

u:¿

an;

';.

M.

,.a

u"'

uu.

,.0'

.,.

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

2990

3060

3266

3076

3162

2928

3449

3540

3124

2998

2754

3172

1999

2934

2601

2652

2964

2901

2963

3042

2836

2576

3046

2642

2762

2000

2568

2596

2951

2760

2890

2957

3044

2941

2885

2634

2650

2615

2001

2672

2383

2494

2697

2768

2961

3247

2916

2772

2548

2607

2657

2002

2428

2279

2630

2500

2697

2717

2889

2854

2640

2446

2531

2330

2003

2290

2237

2382

2079

2408

2196

2469

2288

2113

1973

2023

2034

2004

1918

1855

1643

1793

BB

920

05T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9022

2223

4122

3423

0922

8525

0826

8223

0022

1821

3423

8519

9919

3517

9620

4722

3921

3621

3224

2921

1718

7620

4419

4720

3220

0018

8319

8421

3820

4521

0620

2119

9621

0519

7620

1719

0719

3620

0119

4618

6718

4919

9421

9122

3024

1719

4519

0619

2718

4719

8520

0218

2917

3221

0618

7519

2621

9120

6520

2418

5018

0017

9718

3220

0315

9515

9117

1116

6817

2917

1719

4018

7215

5915

4716

0415

4120

0414

7313

6413

5014

5967

320

05T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

2941

2983

3121

2945

3081

2904

3278

3402

3063

2820

2809

3352

1999

2671

2612

2598

3003

2730

2724

3168

2925

2583

2950

2674

2888

2000

2654

2536

2744

2767

2889

2768

2745

2788

2643

2714

2485

2586

2001

2581

2259

2346

2631

2522

2942

2920

2813

2597

2510

2680

2895

2002

2443

2249

2935

2525

2600

2618

2811

2704

2489

2455

2780

2737

2003

2457

2294

2464

2378

2311

2336

2503

2528

2113

2068

2140

2366

2004

2063

1881

1853

1960

893

2005

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

9843

4144

8347

1346

9547

4947

0153

9154

1144

5443

9944

0352

7919

9944

1341

1141

5247

1846

1746

4049

1844

8140

1248

2640

4445

8620

0039

1139

2742

5043

9744

3140

9043

2843

1939

8040

0938

9542

0220

0139

8836

6038

5140

4443

4044

4645

0243

6138

8037

9639

2542

5220

0236

7237

4040

1839

6641

0841

3945

6243

0939

7936

0540

2739

4520

0337

0832

9436

6433

6436

0934

3937

3236

3032

1030

1631

3732

5820

0428

8125

0127

0027

0013

4320

05TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1226

212

748

1344

112

950

1330

112

818

1462

615

035

1294

112

435

1210

014

188

1999

1195

311

120

1144

912

924

1238

412

459

1355

712

359

1104

712

866

1130

712

268

2000

1101

611

043

1208

311

969

1231

611

836

1211

312

153

1148

411

374

1093

711

339

2001

1118

710

169

1054

011

366

1182

112

579

1308

612

035

1115

510

781

1105

911

789

2002

1037

210

000

1168

910

866

1133

111

665

1232

711

891

1085

810

306

1113

510

844

2003

1005

094

1610

241

9509

1005

796

B8

1064

410

318

8995

8604

8904

9199

2004

8335

7601

754

7912

3798

2005

Ld14

000

-- -

---_

....-

-.

---

.78

49

1200

0

1000

0

~ 8000

~ Z 6000

4000

2000

'--

1998

'j19

9920

002001 2002

2003

2004

Fisc

al Y

ear

Pre-FWS 12078

Post

-FW

S (T

hrou

Gh

4/04

) 98

87 P

re-4

/04

Polic

y C

hanç

¡e

L

-l i ,

Ave

rage

Num

b~ro

fNon

-Cod

edH

igh

Cal

l, Pe

r M

ont/

1400

0

1207

812

000

1000

0

8000

, z60

00

4000

2000

Pre-

FWS

Post

-FW

S(T

tirou

gti4

m4)

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

X: R

ES

PO

NS

E T

IME

- N

ON

-CO

OE

D H

IGH

RE

SP

ON

SE

TIM

E

Med

ian

Non

-Cod

ed H

iQh

Cal

l Res

pons

e T

ime*

- B

Cal

enda

r Y

ear

urea

uan

:"iG

:i'i'

,ear

,,,,',

.""

eu

"e

!0by; ,~

ec.,'

"

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

1515

1616

1718

1920

1918

1517

1999

1818

1821

2325

2827

2524

2021

2000

2121

2227

3134

3332

3026

2627

2001

2522

2528

3136

3537

3732

3130

2002

3129

3134

3638

3943

4237

3929

2003

3438

4143

4247

4543

4445

3937

2004

3338

4341

4220

05T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

9817

1717

1918

2019

2024

2221

1819

9919

1819

2224

2628

2827

2725

2320

0024

2626

2830

3737

3239

3433

2920

0124

2629

3135

4138

4942

4134

3420

0236

4344

4848

5457

4850

4647

4120

0343

4451

5446

5352

5546

4938

3220

0437

4046

4348

2005

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

9820

2021

2222

2225

2523

2322

2019

9920

2322

2122

2424

2323

2422

2220

0021

2022

2627

2930

2831

2724

2620

0122

2223

2327

3030

3233

3230

2520

0226

3028

3030

3432

3233

3136

3020

0331

3341

3838

4237

4139

3434

3520

0432

3236

3536

2005

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

9823

2224

2323

2526

2827

2523

2519

9924

2222

2424

2626

3030

2826

2420

0024

2527

2833

3536

3437

3129

2920

0128

2831

3436

4442

4445

4134

3720

0232

3434

4035

4037

3742

3841

3320

0336

3439

3841

4448

4445

4536

3920

0436

3842

4044

2005

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1919

2020

2122

2324

2322

2021

1999

2121

2122

2426

2627

2626

2323

2000

2223

2428

3033

3432

3430

2828

2001

2525

2729

3238

3740

4037

3232

2002

3133

3337

3640

3939

4137

4033

2003

3536

4242

4146

4544

4443

3636

2004

3437

4139

4220

05"-

¡i,fo

n-C

oded

Hig

h cl

assi

ficat

ion

was

elim

inat

ed a

fter

May

200

4

I Annual Median Response Time to-~G-n--CGded Higli Calls

By

Cal

enda

, Y

ear

""

" ;; ;0

~ 25

:=20 " w

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Fisc

al Y

ear

Me'

Cha

nge

(Per

M

on,)

(F

mm

B.,,

1 I

Ave

, Mon

lhly

Med

17(B

ase)

2229

.4%

Pre-

FWS

24,6

2758

.8%

Pos

t-F

WS

(T

hrou

gh 4

/04)

38,9

Pre

-4I0

4 P

olic

y C

hang

e31

82.4

%35

105,

9%41

141,

2%39

1294

%

20(B

asel

2420

,0%

I

Pre-

FWS

28.2

3155

,0%

Post-FWS (Through

4/04

) 46

.7Pre-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

3470

,0%

4613

0,0%

4713

5,0%

4211

0,0%

22(B

ase)

234.

5%

I

Pre-

FWS

24.6

2618

,2%

Pos

t-F

WS

(T

hrou

gh 4

/04)

34.4

Pre-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

2722

,7%

3140

,9%

3768

,2%

3454

,5%

24(B

ase)

254.

2%

I

Pre-

FWS

29.8

3025

,0%

Post

-FW

S (T

hrou

gh

4104

) 39

,5Pr

e-4/

04

Polic

y C

hang

e 37

54,2

%37

54.2

%40

66.7

%39

62,5

%

21(B

ase)

2414

.3%

2833

.3%

3252

.4%

3671

.4%

4195

.2%

3881

.0%

Pre-

FWS

26,9

Posl

-FW

S (T

hrou

oh 4

/04)

39,

8 Pr

e-4/

04 P

olic

v C

hano

e

Ave

rage

Mon

thly

Med

ian

Res

pons

e T

ime

to N

on-C

oded

Hig

li C

alls

-8ef

ofea

ndA

1ter

FWS

45.0

40.0

35,0

30,0

25,0

20,0

15.0

10.0 '.0 00

Pre-

FWS

Posi

-FW

S (T

hrau

gli

4104

)

Num

bP

er M

onth

- B

v C

alen

dar

Yi

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

Y: R

ES

PO

NS

E T

IME

- N

ON

-CO

DE

D C

ALL

S

if N

on-C

oded

Cal

ls fo

r S

l'uir

ut:'

~~,

....~

..,ur

eau.

;,,,

an.'.

,Ce

ar.

,.a

une.

.;"

(:.u

.e

,ov

;,.

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

5548

4481

5773

6044

6951

7083

7808

7878

7074

6074

5552

5171

1999

5824

4915

5332

5401

6635

6735

7779

7208

6295

7127

5591

5427

2000

5849

5186

6006

6806

7290

7285

8116

7370

7231

6734

5658

6212

2001

5900

5064

6405

6520

7594

8251

8242

6977

6806

6238

5743

5528

2002

5096

5304

596

5851

6913

8059

7567

7022

6297

5813

4982

4978

2003

5343

4535

4907

5184

6366

7212

6750

6695

6587

5885

5329

4732

2004

5843

5098

5996

6053

8399

9374

9997

9659

8423

8144

6505

6740

2005

8451

6355

7317

7931

7826

8179

8585

8088

7325

7355

6626

6414

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

4592

3568

4708

4566

5511

5529

6533

6341

5637

4816

4451

4075

1999

4675

3958

4527

4487

5345

5326

6272

5423

4879

5251

4356

4469

2000

4733

4025

4565

5206

5507

5867

6203

5987

5767

5233

4588

5008

2001

4977

4082

5283

5307

6141

6833

6746

5346

5148

5007

4348

4217

2002

4163

4117

4722

4822

5568

7149

6230

5732

4656

4364

3825

3800

2003

4231

3593

4033

4062

5213

5809

5473

5264

5363

5083

4179

3903

2004

4364

3796

4583

4792

6458

7572

8278

7769

6981

6048

5755

5314

2005

5413

5353

6066

6571

6648

6823

6885

6633

5980

6029

5373

5080

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

9855

0045

5857

9957

3665

1764

9975

5974

6066

1859

5752

1247

0319

9953

2944

1249

5549

1460

1859

3458

1165

4355

4261

2750

0246

1020

0053

4250

4152

5560

6164

0165

8673

5568

7168

2865

0350

0255

7420

0157

7750

1459

8556

9568

8068

9873

4665

4962

7958

3251

0548

9420

0249

4148

3553

1655

9060

4268

5669

8963

0854

9753

1247

1943

4720

0346

642

0246

4247

1055

2556

4162

8759

6059

2054

1545

2644

0620

0452

4146

7652

6352

1670

4587

0492

1681

6876

4775

1862

9663

5420

0562

5161

8967

1967

4367

7368

3773

8575

1067

6872

6863

3361

72T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

5990

4771

6313

6278

7277

7502

8063

7557

7076

6279

5775

5204

1999

5869

5078

5514

5760

7097

6859

7602

7351

6502

7038

5749

5172

2000

6050

5504

6588

7287

7279

7300

8288

7666

7575

7344

5644

6518

2001

6270

5532

7033

7164

8450

8146

8689

7432

7484

6871

5851

5506

2002

5308

5495

6049

6338

6866

7953

8115

7349

6570

6368

5375

4910

2003

5803

5151

5723

5460

7018

7370

7099

6946

6968

6627

5574

5012

2004

5788

5185

6178

6075

8820

1086

411

172

1023

392

6494

7175

9376

2520

0589

1973

8878

5484

3192

3494

3310

153

9574

8535

8929

7731

7527

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

2153

017

378

2259

322

624

2625

626

613

2997

329

236

2640

523

136

2099

019

153

1999

2169

718

363

2032

920

562

2509

524

854

2846

426

525

2321

825

543

2069

819

678

2000

2197

419

756

2241

425

360

2647

727

038

2996

227

894

2740

125

814

2089

223

412

2001

2292

419

592

2470

624

686

2905

530

128

3102

326

304

2571

723

948

2104

720

145

2002

1950

819

751

2205

122

601

2538

930

017

2890

126

411

2302

021

857

1890

118

035

2003

2004

317

481

1930

519

415

2411

226

232

2560

924

865

2483

823

010

1960

818

053

2004

2123

618

755

2202

022

136

3072

236

514

3866

335

829

3253

531

181

2614

926

033

2005

2703

425

285

2795

629

676

3048

131

272

3300

831

805

2860

829

581

2606

325

193

IA

ve,a

ge N

umbE

r of

Non

-Cod

ed C

alls

Per

Mon

lh-8

y C

alon

dafY

ear

3500

0

3000

0

2500

0

2000

0

1500

0

1000

0

5000

Fisc

al Y

ea,

.Thi

s da

la

refl

ects

th

e pe

riod

fo

llow

ing

the

Apr

il 20

04

polic

y ch

a ng

e

Avg

.C

hang

e(P

er

Mon

.)

(Fro

m B

ase)

Ave PerMonlh

6286

(Bas

e)61

89.1

.5%

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)64

0466

455.

7%Po

sl-F

WS

(2/0

2-4/

04)

5972

Pre

--/0

4Pol

icy

Cha

nge

6606

5.1%

Post

-FW

S(5/

04-1

2/05

)77

85 P

osl-4

/04

Pol

icy

Cha

nge

6154

~2,1

%57

93-7

.9%

7519

19.6

%73

7117

.3%

5027

(Bas

e)49

14-2

,3%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)50

6752

243.

9%P

ost-

FW

S (

4/02

- 4

104)

4795 Pre--f04 Policy Cha

nge

5286

5.2%

Post

-FW

S(5/

04-1

2105

)6351 Post--/04 Policy Cha

nge

4929

-2,0

%46

84--

.8%

5976

18.9

%60

7120

.8%

6012

(Bas

e)55

17-8

.2%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)58

6660

7711

%Po

st-F

WS

(3/0

2 -4

/04)

5364 Pre--/04 Policy Cha

nge

6021

0.2%

Posl

-FW

S(5/

04-1

2105

)7105 Post--/04 Policy Cha

nge

5563

-7.5

%51

75-1

3.9%

6795

13.0

%67

4612

.2%

6507

(Bas

e)62

99-3

,2%

I

Pre-

FWS(

1/98

-1/0

2)66

2269

206.

3%P

ost-

FW

S (

5/02

- 4

/04)

6312

Pre

--/0

4 P

olic

y C

hang

e70

368.

1%P

osi-F

WS

(5/

04 -

1210

5)89

39 P

osl--

104

Pol

icyC

hang

e63

91-1

.8%

6229

--.3

%81

9125

.9%

8642

32.8

%

2383

2(B

ase)

2291

9-3

.8%

2486

64.

3%24

949

47%

2303

7-3

.3%

2188

1--

.2%

2848

119

.5%

2883

021

.0%

Pre-

FWS

Pos

t-F

WS

(T

hrou

gh 4

/04)

Posl

-FW

S(51

04-1

2/05

)

2395

822435 Pre--/04 Policy C

hang

e30

179

Pos

t--1

04 P

olic

vCha

noe'

Ave

,age

Non

-Coo

ed C

alls

Per

Mon

ll

3500

0

3017

9-30

000

2500

0

2000

0

1500

0

1000

0

5000

Pre-

FWS

Post

-FW

S(T

lirou

gh P

ost-

FWS(

5i04

4/04) 12/05)

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

Z: R

ES

PO

NS

E T

IME

- N

ON

-CO

DE

D R

ES

PO

NS

E T

IME

'.'''U

'dll

"'UII-

"UU

""U

"eI

II ~

"ä~

Ullä

t: ,im

e -

l3y

l.aie

naar

fear

"ure

aa'~

an,'

'.;..e

.kiJ

.at

.';''',

,.a

UM

UU

.e

cO

V._

ec~

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

2422

2324

2829

2931

2927

2526

1999

2827

2628

3435

3636

3334

2829

2000

2828

2733

3741

4142

4039

3334

2001

3028

3033

4045

4248

4844

4141

2002

3935

3541

4346

4648

4743

4540

2003

3843

4849

4652

5251

5350

4541

2004

3941

4844

4948

4947

5247

3938

2005

3639

4045

5045

4849

4745

4746

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

2423

2624

2628

2830

2826

2324

1999

2425

2425

2930

3336

3433

2827

2000

2726

2831

3642

4440

4340

3433

2001

2728

3335

3846

4650

5147

4038

2002

4046

4648

5356

5855

5349

4944

2003

4351

5153

4954

5658

5152

4638

2004

4344

4748

4845

5053

5340

3635

2005

3637

4343

4847

5349

4850

4947

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

9827

2727

2828

3031

3331

2829

2819

9926

2728

2829

3031

3029

2926

2620

0025

2425

2932

3535

3533

3328

2820

0125

2325

2832

3635

3840

3937

3320

0231

3433

3738

4240

4141

3940

3720

0334

3942

4042

4847

4746

4338

3620

0436

3639

3941

3840

4041

3532

3120

0535

3536

3842

4241

4239

4240

38T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

2926

3028

3034

3737

3633

3032

1999

3129

2828

3033

3238

3836

3028

2000

2827

2933

4039

4139

4037

3232

2001

3128

3337

4249

4650

5449

4243

2002

3639

4046

4044

4743

4442

4237

2003

3735

4142

4348

4846

4945

3840

2004

3838

4242

4240

4443

4138

3234

2005

2931

3839

3840

4239

3840

3836

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

2624

2626

2830

3133

3128

2728

1999

2727

2727

3032

3335

3433

2828

2000

2726

2732

3639

4039

3937

3131

2001

2827

3033

3844

4246

4844

4039

2002

3738

3843

4347

4746

4643

4439

2003

3841

4546

4550

5050

5047

4139

2004

3939

4443

4543

4645

4640

3534

2005

3335

3942

4443

4544

4243

4341 I i !

Ann

ual M

~di~

n R

~5po

n.e

Tim

e 10

Non

.Cod

od C

all.

_ B

y C

alen

dar

YE

ar

" " " ;;

!!30

~ 25

, " " '"

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Fisc

al Y

ear

* T

his

data reflecls

the

peri

od

follo

win

g th

e A

pril

2004

po

licy

chan

ge

Med

Cha

nge

(Per

Man

,)(F

rom

Bas

e)A

ve. M

onth

lyM

ed27

(Bas

e)32

18.5

%Pr

e-FW

S33

.135

29.6

%Po

si-F

WS

(Thr

ough

4/

04)

44.8

Pre-4/04 Policy Cha

nge

3944

.4%

Post

-FW

S (5

/04-

1210

5)45

.3Post-4/04 Policy

Cha

nge

4359

.3%

4877

.8%

4670

.4%

4463

,0%

26(B

ase)

2911

,5%

I

Pre-

FWS

33.2

3534

.6%

Post

-FW

S(T

hrou

gh41

04)

50.0

Pre-

4104

Po

licy

Cha

nge

4053

.8%

Posl

-FW

S(5/

04-1

2/05

)45

.5P

ost-

4/04

Pol

icy

Cha

nge

5092

3%51

96.2

%46

76.9

%44

69,2

%

29(B

ase)

28-3

.4%

I

Pre-

FWS

30,1

303.

4%Po

st-F

WS(

Thr

ough

4/04

)40

.0Pr

e-4/

04

Polic

y C

hang

e 32

10.3

%Po

st.F

WS

(5/0

4-12

/05)

38.4

Posl

-4/0

4 Po

licy

Cha

nge

3831

0%42

44.8

%38

31.0

%38

31.0

%

32(B

ase)

320.

0%

I

Pre-

FWS

35.5

359.

4%P

ost-

FW

S (

Thr

ough

4/0

4)42

.1Pr

e-4/

04

Polic

y C

hang

e 42

31.3

%Po

st-F

WS(

5104

-12f

05)

38.1

Posl

-4/0

4 Po

licy

Cha

nge

4231

,3%

4334

.4%

4025

.0%

3715

.6%

28(B

ase)

307.

1%34

21.4

%38

35,7

%43

53,6

%46

64.3

%42

50.0

%40

42.9

%

Pre-

FWS

Pos

i-FW

S (

Thr

ough

4/0

4)Po

st-F

WS(

5/04

-12/

05

33.0

44.2 Pre-4/04 Policy Change

41.4 Posl-4/04PolicvChanqe'

-1A

~era

ge M

onl!

ly M

edia

n R

espo

tlse

Tim

e to

Non

-ded

Cal

ls

'""r

=45

.0 _

__40

.0. .

_35

.0J_

___3

..3.J

L

15.0

30,0

~ 25.0

:;20

.0

10.0 '" 0"

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

AA

: DE

PLO

YM

EN

T -

EQ

UfV

AL

EN

TT

OT

AL

UN

ITS

I'UIIL

ltlr

L11

EQ

Ulv

ëlle

m i

Oti1

Uni

ts u

eplO

yea

l"er

uepl

a m

ent t

'err

oa -

I:i-

isea

i Yea

rU

u'T

OT

AL

CE

NT

RA

L B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

5991

6056

6095

6208

6157

5925

5653

6224

5968

5736

5952

5481

5353

1999

-200

054

4455

0556

2757

9058

1055

3654

6654

7352

0356

7049

8249

9949

5120

00-2

001

4736

3812

5007

5328

5421

5154

4792

5421

5672

5826

5283

5102

4880

2001

-200

250

7348

1649

5550

5951

5853

8651

0857

8662

2259

0057

2155

7454

2320

02-2

003

5828

5640

5297

5379

5513

5359

563

5975

5522

5510

5417

5912

5966

2003

-200

458

5459

1859

0861

2657

0258

5357

0363

8860

3961

6760

2357

5459

3820

0420

0559

3860

9160

0159

9862

0270

4857

6364

9961

7760

1462

0859

6459

74T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

5229

5111

5282

5170

5291

5178

5083

5547

5547

5326

5351

4888

4941

1999

-200

048

1545

9149

8749

6051

6349

3048

4448

4548

6254

3545

7346

3743

7920

00-2

001

4215

4262

4358

4333

4582

4650

4738

5368

5211

5308

4747

4816

4368

2001

"200

244

4043

4345

5742

3946

2845

2541

4547

3046

7043

0348

6144

1845

0520

0220

0345

0445

7843

5746

0746

0947

1147

1948

4850

6450

7950

3857

5959

2820

03-2

004

5633

5660

5807

5611

5466

5542

5182

6141

5894

5666

5322

5051

5275

2004 2005

5107

5411

5280

5637

6087

6049

5626

6378

6353

6144

6053

6441

6208

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

5756

5765

5719

6423

5885

5692

5548

5840

5695

5617

5798

5295

5497

1999

-200

055

0156

0553

8954

7657

0652

3050

9552

1950

9654

6347

2747

0748

9220

00-2

001

4761

4756

4989

4956

4881

4840

4790

5348

5205

5401

4924

5014

4901

2001

-200

247

4047

1446

4645

2448

2250

4146

1652

7350

5046

9245

9146

3954

2720

02-2

003

5422

5661

5272

5165

5116

5188

5111

5631

5437

5303

5195

5402

5575

2003

-200

455

6856

2556

5955

7656

8654

1451

7259

0458

4960

8457

8758

6560

332004 2005

5626

5813

5488

5710

5659

5515

4911

5412

5434

5312

5355

5200

5288

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

6635

8453

6396

6410

6846

6631

5994

6649

6692

6492

6548

6286

6508

1999

-200

062

7962

6161

7761

1164

1262

3462

5362

5858

1962

0252

7651

2352

0720

00-2

001

5002

5189

5364

5586

5773

5580

5458

5898

5965

5897

5610

5689

5531

2001

2002

5443

5330

5525

5634

5793

5597

5157

6240

6079

5649

5764

6522

6154

2002

-200

361

5961

7059

1858

3261

0060

8361

1165

463

2861

6060

5262

1863

0020

03-2

004

6251

6239

6416

6630

6204

6188

5994

6556

6795

7149

6511

6643

6991

2004

2005

5624

6756

6500

6918

6995

6881

6259

6855

6645

6441

6338

5352

5979

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

923

611

2338

523

492

2421

124

179

2342

622

278

2426

023

902

2317

123

649

2195

022

299

1999

2000

2203

921

962

2218

022

337

2309

121

930

2165

821

795

2098

022

770

1955

819

466

1942

920

00-2

001

1871

418

019

1971

820

203

2065

720

224

1977

822

035

2205

322

432

2056

420

621

1968

020

01-2

002

1969

619

203

1968

319

456

2040

120

549

1902

622

029

2202

120

544

2093

721

153

2150

920

02-2

003

2191

322

049

2084

420

983

2133

821

341

2158

423

000

2237

122

052

2170

223

301

2376

920

03-2

004

2330

623

4223

790

2394

323

058

2299

722

051

2498

924

577

2505

623

5323

313

2423

720

04-2

005

2329

524

071

2326

924

263

2494

325

493

2255

925

144

2461

023

911

2395

423

957

2344

9

i:=

i i

Equ

ival

ent T

otal

Uni

ts D

eplo

yed

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

erio

d -

By

Fis

cal Y

ear

2500

0

2000

0

. " ~ 15000

z

1000

0

5000

__--

4071

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01.2

002

2002

.200

320

03-2

004

2004

-200

5

Fjsc

alY

ear

Avg

.C

hang

e

I

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(PerDP) (From Base)

(Avg

. Per

DP

)59

08(B

ase)

5420

-83%

5110

-13.

5%

I

Bef

ore.

5426

5399

-8.6

%A

fter

5888

5512

-5.0

%C

hang

e8.

5%59

520.

7%61

444.

0%

5226

(Bas

e)48

48-7

.2%

4689

-10.

3%

I

Bef

ore.

4827

4490

-14.

1%A

fter

:53

9649

10--

.1%

Cha

nge

11.8

%55

576.

3%59

0613

.0%

5733

(Bas

e)52

39-8

.6%

4982

-13.

1%

I

Bef

ore

5226

4829

-15.

8%A

fter

5437

5344

--.8

%C

hang

e4.

0%57

09-0

.4%

5440

-5.1

%

6503

(Bas

e)59

70-8

.2%

5580

-14.

2%

I

Bef

ore

5938

5761

-11.

4%A

fter

6409

6152

-5.4

%C

hang

e7.

9%65

050.

0%65

801.

2%

2337

0(B

ase)

2147

7-8

.1%

2036

1-1

2.9%

2047

7-1

2.4%

2201

9-5

.8%

2372

31.

5%24

071

3.0%

Before 21428

After 23111

Cha

nQe

7.9%

i-~Ient Total Units Deployed Per Deployment Period

I -Before

and

Aft

erFW

S

2500

0r.-

--23

111

I 21428

2000

0

1500

0

. ~ z10

000

5000

LB

efor

eA

fter

:

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

SS:

DE

PLO

YM

EN

T -

EQ

UIV

AL

EN

T R

ESP

ON

SE U

NIT

S

I'wmoer OT EaUlvaient Kesoonse unit ueploved Per Deplovment Period. Bv Fiscal Year

~ll,~

uW"

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

3685

3751

3774

3705

3747

3704

3509

3941

3821

3710

3718

3436

3405

1999

2000

3418

3376

3606

3576

3832

3703

3646

3814

3720

4041

3636

3527

3382

2000

-200

132

1828

435

2935

6635

8036

3135

2538

9344

4545

0838

7438

2536

0020

01-2

002

3758

3402

3688

3662

3745

3565

3444

3844

4143

3957

3844

3833

3811

2002

-200

339

5539

1835

9037

1836

7034

8737

1237

3834

2432

2332

5134

2634

2120

03-2

004

3482

3428

3371

3453

3192

3329

3373

3491

3415

3429

3447

3230

3269

2004

2005

3306

3266

3111

3110

3196

3252

3165

3431

3303

3271

3102

2948

3147

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

3461

3359

3404

3514

3473

3394

3357

3630

3585

3606

3666

3349

3320

1999

-200

032

4331

7732

9633

3235

0234

1332

9434

4333

8639

1732

8833

3031

2720

00-2

001

3033

3042

3049

2939

3079

3167

3541

4150

4175

4242

3623

3735

3383

2001

-200

234

8533

1233

7230

7334

6933

8230

8035

3333

8630

5934

7032

0231

7920

02-2

003

3141

3314

2923

3073

3090

3131

3116

3292

3298

3035

3089

3346

3322

2003

2004

3262

3052

3291

3052

3158

3342

3259

3184

3107

3057

2934

2851

2913

2004

2005

279£

2881

2835

3007

3304

3316

3252

3333

3199

3125

2818

2933

2788

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9933

3633

5333

6034

6534

8833

9833

7134

1233

9035

0237

4334

9935

7819

99-2

000

3581

3592

3457

3524

3710

3609

3452

3712

3640

3975

3526

3333

3313

2000

-200

132

4131

6033

9534

2234

7735

2035

8539

1240

3941

2535

4535

3834

9620

01-2

002

3414

3350

3326

3139

3346

3465

3147

3510

3368

3667

3459

3512

3416

2002

-200

333

7635

1832

4330

4931

2532

2532

2633

3832

5832

3332

4832

4432

4520

0320

0432

4331

9232

9132

1732

6832

1531

8033

4632

8633

2431

0630

1332

0020

04-2

005

3093

3035

2958

3075

3043

2905

2852

2802

2763

2741

2652

2486

2465

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

4S01

4387

4329

4337

4473

4459

4227

4846

4964

4831

4851

4739

4736

1999

-200

047

1145

9745

6845

7747

7848

7347

0349

1045

8748

0943

6441

1441

7220

00-2

001

4127

4162

4217

4277

4310

4209

4286

4557

4652

4659

4221

4156

4037

2001

-200

240

3738

7240

4638

9740

6240

3237

5643

9740

8339

3640

1844

8342

9820

0220

0343

7543

5740

4239

2641

3841

1842

0543

5841

7240

4839

8539

8640

5220

0320

0441

0140

3641

5241

6440

8040

0139

7841

2941

3243

4240

0940

2342

082004 2005

4137

4132

3991

4071

4189

4141

3945

4180

4108

3988

384

3839

3633

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

915

083

1485

014

867

1502

115

181

1495

514

464

1582

915

760

1564

915

978

1502

315

040

1999

-200

014

953

1474

214

927

1500

915

822

1559

815

095

1587

915

333

1674

314

814

1430

413

994

2000

-200

113

619

1320

814

191

1420

414

446

1452

714

937

1651

217

321

1753

415

263

1535

414

516

2001

2002

1469

413

936

1443

213

771

1462

214

444

1342

715

284

1498

014

619

1479

115

030

1470

420

02-2

003

1484

715

107

1379

813

766

1402

313

961

1425

914

726

1415

213

539

1357

314

002

1404

020

0320

0414

088

1370

814

105

1388

613

698

1388

713

790

1415

013

940

1415

213

496

1311

713

590

2004

2005

1333

213

314

1289

513

263

1373

213

614

1321

413

746

1337

313

125

1241

612

206

1203

3

Cil)

ide

Equ

ival

ent R

espo

nse

Uni

ts D

eplo

yed

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

erio

d _

By

Fisc

al Y

ear

1600

0

1400

0

1200

0

1000

0

. ~80

00z

6000

4000

2000

La

1998

-199

9

- I

1999

-200

020

00-2

001

2001

-200

220

02-2

003

2003

-200

42C

0:.

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg

.C

hang

eI

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(PerDPl (From Base)

(AvQ

. Per

OP

)36

85(B

ase)

3637

-1.3

%36

950,

3%

I

Bef

ore

3667

3746

1,6%

Aft

er34

4635

79-2

,9%

Cha

nge

--.0

%33

78-8

.3%

3201

-13.

1%

3471

(Bas

e)33

65-3

.0%

3474

01%

I

Bef

ore

3412

3308

-4,7

%A

fter

3121

3167

-8.8

%C

hang

e-8

5%31

12-1

0.3%

3045

-12.

3%

3453

(Bas

e)35

713.

4%35

813.

7%

I

Bef

ore

3499

3394

-1,7

%A

fter

3143

3256

-5.7

%C

hang

e-1

0.2%

3222

-6.7

%28

36-1

7.9%

4598

(Bas

e)45

970.

0%42

98--

.5%

I

Bef

ore

4391

4071

-11.

5%A

fter

4100

4136

-10.

1%C

hang

e-6

.6%

4104

-10.

7%40

15-1

2,7%

1520

8(B

ase)

1517

0-0

.2%

1504

9-1

.0%

1451

8-4

.5%

1413

8"7

.0%

1381

6-9

.2%

1309

7-1

3.9%

r- Cityw,de

Eql

1lva

lent

R

espo

nse

Uni

ts D

ePIO

Y~d

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

enod

Bef

ore

and

Afte

r F

WS

16000, - ___ _ _

, '

i14

000

1200

0

1000

0

. "80

00\

U~'

j--

z"'

,"..~

:"

c I

6000

~L

)_,

-II

4000

I~L

~":'"

.,~,-

,20

00

Bef

ore

Aft

er:

--

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

CC

: DE

PLO

YM

EN

T -

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

OF

EQ

UIV

ALE

NT

UN

ITS

TH

AT

AR

E R

ES

PO

NS

E U

NIT

S

r-er

c:em

aae

or A

ll i:e

uiva

iem

unI

t ue

iove

e m

at a

re K

eSD

onse

Uni

ts P

er U

P -

By

Fisc

al Y

ear

uu

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

962

%62

%62

%60

%61

%63

%62

%63

%64

%65

%62

%63

%64

%19

99-2

000

63%

61%

64%

62%

66%

67%

67%

70%

71%

71%

73%

71%

68%

2000

-200

168

%75

%70

%67

%66

%70

%74

%72

%78

%77

%73

%75

%74

%20

0120

0274

%71

%74

%72

%73

%66

%67

%66

%67

%67

%67

%69

%70

%20

0220

0368

%69

%68

%69

%67

%65

%66

%63

%62

%58

%60

%58

%57

%20

0320

0459

%58

%57

%56

%56

%57

%59

%55

%57

%56

%57

%56

%55

%20

0420

0556

%54

%52

%52

%52

%46

%55

%53

%53

%54

%50

%49

%53

%T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9966

%66

%64

%68

%66

%66

%66

%65

%65

%68

%69

%69

%67

%19

99-2

000

67%

69%

66%

67%

68%

69%

68%

71%

70%

72%

72%

72%

71%

2000

-200

172

%71

%70

%68

%67

%68

%75

%77

%80

%80

%76

%78

%77

%20

0120

0278

%76

%74

%72

%75

%75

%74

%75

%73

%71

%71

%72

%71

%20

0220

0370

%72

%67

%67

%67

%66

%66

%68

%65

%60

%61

%58

%56

%20

03-2

004

58%

54%

57%

54%

58%

60%

63%

52%

53%

54%

55%

56%

55%

2004

2005

55%

53%

54%

53%

54%

55%

58%

52%

50%

51%

47%

46%

45%

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

98.1

999

58%

58%

59%

54%

59%

60%

61%

58%

60%

62%

65%

66%

65%

1999

-200

065

%64

%64

%64

%65

%69

%68

%71

%71

%73

%75

%71

%68

%20

00-2

001

68%

66%

68%

69%

71%

73%

75%

73%

78%

76%

72%

73%

71%

2001

-200

272

%71

%72

%69

%69

%69

%68

%67

%67

%78

%75

%76

%63

%20

0220

0362

%62

%62

%59

%61

%62

%63

%59

%60

%61

%63

%60

%58

%20

0320

0458

%57

%58

%58

%57

%59

%61

%57

%56

%55

%54

%51

%53

%20

0420

0555

%52

%54

%54

%54

%53

%58

%52

%51

%52

%50

%48

%47

%T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

969

%68

%68

%68

%65

%67

%71

%73

%74

%74

%74

%75

%73

%19

99-2

000

75%

73%

74%

75%

75%

78%

75%

78%

79%

78%

83%

80%

80%

2000

-200

183

%80

%79

%77

%75

%75

%79

%77

%78

%79

%75

%73

%73

%20

0120

0274

%73

%73

%69

%70

%72

%73

%70

%67

%70

%70

%69

%70

%20

0220

0371

%71

%68

%67

%68

%68

%69

%67

%66

%66

%66

%64

%64

%20

0320

M66

%65

%65

%63

%66

%65

%66

%63

%61

%61

%62

%61

%60

%20

0420

0562

%61

%61

%59

%60

%60

%63

%61

%62

%62

%61

%60

%61

%TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

1999

64%

64%

63%

62%

63%

64%

65%

65%

66%

68%

68%

68%

67%

1999

-200

068

%67

%67

%67

%69

%71

%70

%73

%73

%74

%76

%73

%72

%20

00-2

001

73%

73%

72%

70%

70%

72%

76%

75%

79%

78%

74%

74%

74%

2001

2002

75%

73%

73%

71%

72%

70%

71%

69%

68%

71%

71%

71%

68%

2002

.200

368

%69

%66

%66

%66

%65

%66

%64

%63

%61

%63

%60

%59

%20

0320

M60

%58

%59

%58

%59

%60

%63

%57

%57

%56

%57

%56

%56

%20

M 2

005

57%

55%

55%

55%

55%

53%

59%

55%

54%

55%

52%

51%

51%

IA

vera

ge P

erce

ntag

e of

All

Equ

ival

ent U

nits

that

are

Res

pons

e U

nits

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

erio

d _

By

Fis

cal Y

ear

80%

70%

60%

óO%

. ~ 40%

¡ "30

%

20%

10% C%

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03-2

004

2004

-200

5

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg

.C

hang

e

I

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(PerDP) (From Base)

(Avg

Per

DP)

62%

(Bas

e)67

%7.

7%72

%15

,8%

I

Bef

ore

68%

70%

11.4

%A

fter

59%

64%

2.3%

Cha

nge

-13.

4%57

%-9

,0%

52%

-16.

4%

66%

(Bas

e)69

%4.

5%74

%11

.2%

I

Bef

ore:

71%

74%

10,9

%A

fter

59%

65%

-2.3

%C

hang

e-1

73%

56%

-15.

5%52

%-2

2.1%

60%

(Bas

e)68

%13

.2%

72%

19.0

%

I

Bef

ore

67%

70%

16.7

%A

fter

58%

61%

10%

Cha

nge

-13.

7%57

%--

.3%

52%

-13.

6%

71%

(Bas

e)77

%9.

1%77

%9.

0%

I

Bef

ore

74%

71%

0.0%

Aft

er64

%67

%-4

.9%

Cha

nge

-13.

5%63

%-1

07%

61%

-13.

7%

65%

(Bas

e)71

%8.

6%74

%13

.4%

71%

9.0%

64%

-1.3

%58

%-1

0,5%

54%

-16.

4%

Before 70%

After 60%

Cha

nqe

-14.

6%

Perc

ntag

e of

All

Equ

ival

ent

Uni

ls

that

ar

e R

espo

nse

Uni

ts P

er D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

- B

efor

e an

d A

fter

FW

S

80%

70%

60%

50%

. . ~ 40%

¡ "30

%

20%

Bef

ore

Afte

r I

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

DD

: DE

PLO

YM

EN

T -

AC

TU

AL

TO

TA

L U

NIT

S

Num

ber

of A

ctua

l Uni

ts D

eplo

ed P

er D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

- B

yF

isca

l Yea

ru

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

.199

962

3059

7157

5059

3654

7453

5719

9920

0054

5255

1156

3557

9758

0855

4354

6559

6755

5957

0450

3750

3449

7620

0020

0147

8038

3750

0053

3354

2751

2547

8154

0856

4258

1852

5651

1549

2220

0120

0250

8748

2249

7050

5351

8450

0447

3354

2644

2542

1940

6639

5538

7520

0220

0341

3840

2338

8538

3139

2338

3139

8442

7939

2139

6838

5042

3142

4420

0320

0441

8242

5041

8144

1440

4942

0542

0446

7343

3044

0042

6540

7942

0720

0420

0541

8343

0842

3342

7544

0243

0840

9646

5744

1643

0245

2542

5742

76T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9955

4355

5553

4153

6248

9849

5419

9920

0048

2546

0649

9949

6251

8249

3048

3753

3551

5355

5545

3347

0444

4020

00-2

001

4253

4303

4406

4379

4585

4652

4732

5349

5215

5319

4746

4817

4415

2001

2002

4453

4343

4555

4242

4548

4531

4134

4288

4210

3877

3411

3072

3171

2002

2003

3208

3230

3136

3223

3240

3309

3298

3557

3583

3616

3561

4041

4212

2003

-200

439

7640

0541

1839

3738

6939

5237

7343

2139

5840

5637

9635

9837

8620

0420

0536

2638

6937

2440

0343

1643

2539

9245

4445

0643

7543

4545

9744

56T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

958

7956

9456

2758

1552

9955

1919

9920

0055

0656

0153

9654

8257

3652

5150

7654

9453

2355

2147

8347

6249

2520

0020

0148

1147

9050

1149

9749

1948

3848

1453

9752

2554

1649

6050

1149

1420

0120

0247

3547

1846

5845

0748

1247

5242

9449

6147

3839

5338

6239

1537

5720

02-2

003

3774

3930

3758

3575

3516

3612

3523

3917

3770

3687

3619

3801

3928

2003

2004

3909

3974

3970

3915

3983

3800

3670

4126

4113

4292

4027

4117

4240

2004

.200

539

5540

6838

0139

9939

3938

3333

8537

6637

7236

8637

4136

1736

63T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

966

4167

0264

9465

3562

8564

8619

9920

0062

9262

6161

8161

2164

2162

4862

4865

0960

7462

5153

1051

5052

0220

0020

0150

4152

0153

8655

9757

5555

8354

4358

9259

5959

1056

2957

0555

3720

0120

0254

5053

2555

3056

5457

8556

0251

1957

9056

1452

3553

7445

7343

0720

02-2

003

4306

4345

4258

4064

4262

4255

4249

4617

4431

4319

4264

4366

4455

2003

2004

4381

4421

4502

4683

4403

4398

4363

4669

4823

5062

4617

4704

4889

2004

-200

546

7647

7445

8748

7449

6748

9043

9548

3146

8745

4545

2044

8742

20TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

924

293

2392

223

212

2364

821

956

2231

619

9920

0022

085

2197

922

211

2236

223

147

2197

221

627

2330

622

109

2303

219

763

1965

019

543

2000

2001

1889

518

131

1980

320

306

2068

620

198

1977

022

046

2204

122

463

2059

120

5819

788

2001

-200

219

725

1920

819

724

1945

620

429

1988

918

280

2046

518

987

1728

416

713

1551

515

110

2002

2003

1542

615

528

1503

714

713

1494

115

007

1505

416

370

1570

515

590

1529

416

439

1684

920

0320

0416

4816

650

1677

116

949

1630

416

355

1601

017

789

1722

417

810

1670

516

498

1712

220

0420

0516

4017

019

1634

517

151

1762

417

356

1586

817

798

1748

116

909

1713

216

958

1661

5

Ave

rage

Act

ual U

nits

Dep

loye

d Pe

r D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

- B

y Fj

scal

Yea

r

2500

0

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg

.C

hang

eI

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(Per DP) (From Base)

(Avg

. Per

DP

)57

86(B

ase)

5500

-4.9

%51

11-1

1.7%

I

Bef

ore

5324

4678

-191

%A

fter

4189

4008

-30.

7%C

hang

e.2

1.3%

4265

-26.

3%43

26-2

5.2%

5276

(Bas

e)49

36-6

.4%

4706

-10.

8%

I

Bef

ore

4769

4073

.22.

8%A

fter

3828

3478

-34,

1%C

hang

e-1

9.1%

3934

-25.

4%42

14-2

01%

5639

(Bas

e)52

97-6

.1%

5008

-11.

2%

I

Bef

ore

5121

4436

-21,

3%A

fter

3843

3724

-34.

0%C

hang

e-2

5.0%

4010

-28.

9%37

87-3

2.8%

6524

(Bas

e)60

21-7

.7%

5588

-14.

4%

I

Bef

ore

5826

5335

-18,

2%A

fter

4524

4325

-33.

1%C

hang

e-2

2.4%

4609

-29.

4%46

50-2

8.7%

2322

5(B

ase)

2175

3-6

.3%

2041

3-1

2,1%

1852

2-2

0.2%

1553

5-3

3.1%

1681

8-2

7,6%

1697

7-2

6.9%

Bef

ore

Aft

erC

hanq

e

2105

416

373

-22.

2%

Ave

rage

Act

ual U

nits

Dep

loye

d P

er D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod-

Bel

ore

and

Afl

erFW

S

2500

0

2105

4

2000

0

1500

0

" ~ z10

000

5000

Bef

ore

Aft

er

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

EE

: DE

PLO

YM

EN

T -

AC

TU

AL

RE

SP

ON

SE

UN

ITS

Numoer OJ ACtuai KeSDonse units ue lOyeCll-er DeDlo ment Period. Bv Fiscal Year

u u.

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

394

6 38

18 3

706

3723

342

8 34

031999-2000 3425 3379 3609 3581 3830 3707 3647 3813 3721 4038 3634 3520 3384

2000-2001 3227 2835 3524 3569 3563 3621 3512 3885 4420 4495 3872 3828 3615

20012002 3765 3576 3697 3654 3750 3607 3220 3611 2908 2793 2703 2670 2690

20022003 2764 2760 2569 2601 2556 2431 2599 2606 2376 2267 2257 2378 2377

20032004 2442 2415 2337 2417 2224 2327 2387 2466 2380 2360 2379 2211 2224

20042005 2235 2223 2116 2111 2166 2236 2162 2363 2270 2229 2188 2145 2226

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

9 36

30 3

596

3615

366

6 33

53 3

320

1999-2000 3252 3185 3284 3329 3503 3416 3289 3444 3391 3929 3291 3336 3134

2000-2001 3040 3045 3040 2941 3080 3163 3540 4129 4177 4256 3620 3734 3417

20012002 3492 3306 3372 3069 3484 3384 3079 3165 3040 2752 2411 2214 2212

2002-2003 2185 2210 2076 2122 2136 2169 2159 2290 2303 2124 2157 2329 2314

20032004 2273 2125 2266 2126 2191 2344 2306 2228 2181 2146 2047 1980 2024

2004-2005 1928 1995 1959 2071 2287 2303 2250 2309 2272 2166 2004 2024 2024

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

3414

339

1 35

08 3

745

3497

357

91999-2000 3578 3581 3461 3526 3702 3610 3440 3720 3642 3975 3525 3344 3310

20002001 3237 3163 3386 3423 3471 3516 3588 3921 4028 4120 3548 3638 3508

20012002 3422 3354 3323 3142 3340 3214 2911 3283 3129 2508 2366 2394 2332

20022003 2309 2406 2270 2190 2131 2214 2205 2284 2238 2223 2219 2230 2236

20032004 2232 2207 2257 2218 2253 2197 2214 2327 2318 2279 2197 2092 2203

2004-2005 2127 2110 2028 2117 2090 1978 1931 1937 1878 1852 1804 1681 1728

TO

TA

L V

AL

LE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

4850

497

2 48

24 4

854

4738

473

31999-2000 4720 4596 4566 4588 4777 4778 4697 4917 4589 4813 4367 4121 4176

20002001 4127 4165 4221 4275 4296 4207 4272 4543 4657 4659 4214 4158 4041

2001-2002 4032 3870 4048 3904 4065 4039 3745 4065 3948 3645 3735 3114 2981

20022003 3031 3030 2867 2793 2858 2846 2912 3024 2878 2792 2755 2769 2822

20032004 2840 2847 2881 2922 2836 2771 2808 2892 2900 3046 2812 2821 2927

2004-2005 2863 2894 2790 2847 2934 2895 2745 2913 2849 2788 2717 2684 2611

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998-1999 15840 15777 15653 15988 15016 15035

19992000 14975 14741 14920 15024 15812 15511 15073 15894 15343 16755 14817 14321 14004

2000-2001 13631 13208 14171 14208 14410 14507 14912 16478 17282 17530 15254 15358 14581

20012002 14711 14106 14440 13769 14639 14244 12955 14124 13025 11698 11215 10392 10215

20022003 10289 10406 9782 9706 9681 9660 9875 10204 9795 9406 9388 9706 9749

2003-2004 9787 9594 9741 9683 9504 9639 9715 9913 9779 9831 9435 9104 9378

20042005 9153 9222 8893 9146 9477 9412 9088 9522 9269 9035 8713 8534 8589

Ave

rage

Act

ual R

espo

nse

Uni

ts D

eplo

yed

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

enod

_ B

y F

isca

l Yea

r

1800

0

1600

0

1400

0

1200

0

1000

0" \ z

8000

6000

4000

2000 0

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03-2

004

2004

-200

5

Fisc

al

Yea

r

--

Avg

.C

hang

eI

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(PerDP) (From Base)

(Avg

Per

DP)

3671

(Bas

e)36

38-0

.9%

3690

0.5%

I

Bef

ore:

3654

3280

-10.

6%A

fter

.23

9925

03-3

1.8%

Cha

nge

-34.

4%23

51-3

5.9%

2205

-39.

9%

3530

(Bas

e)33

68-4

.6%

3476

-1.5

%

I

Bef

ore

3388

2998

-15.

1%A

fter

2172

2198

-37.

7%C

hang

e-3

59%

2172

-38.

5%21

22-3

9.9%

3522

(Bas

e)35

701.

4%35

811.

7%

I

Bef

ore

3493

2978

-15.

4%A

fter

2163

2243

-36.

3%C

hang

e-3

8.1%

2230

-36.

7%19

43-4

.8%

4829

(Bas

e)45

93-4

.9%

4295

-11.

0%

I

Bef

ore

4363

3784

-21.

6%A

fter

2861

2875

-40.

5%C

hang

e-3

4.4%

2869

-40.

6%28

10-4

1,8%

1555

2(B

ase)

1516

8-2

.5%

1504

1-3

.3%

1304

1-1

6.1%

9819

-36.

9%96

23-3

8,1%

9081

-41.

6%

Bef

ore

Aft

erC

hano

e

1492

295

7935

.8%

Ave

rage

Act

ual R

espo

nse

Uni

ts D

eplo

yed

Per

Dep

loym

ent P

erio

d -

Bef

ore

and

Afte

r F

WS

o ~ 8000

z60

00

4000

2000

--I ,

Bef

ore:

Aft

er:

dth

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

FF

: DE

PLO

YM

EN

T -

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

OF

AC

TU

AL

UN

ITS

TH

AT

AR

E R

ES

PO

NS

E U

NIT

S

OP

t"er

cenr

aae

aT A

Ctu

ai U

nits

ue

iove

u lll

ct. c

t,.. n

..."

u"".

. uiin

", ..

t:. u

.. -

grl

li\;iI

'T1:

iIr

~T

OT

AL

CE

NT

RA

L B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9963

%64

%64

%63

%63

%64

%19

9920

0063

%61

%64

%62

%66

%67

%67

%64

%67

%71

%72

%70

%68

%20

0020

0168

%74

%70

%67

%66

%71

%73

%72

%78

%77

%74

%75

%73

%20

0120

0274

%74

%74

%72

%72

%72

%68

%67

%66

%66

%66

%68

%69

%20

02-2

003

67%

69%

66%

68%

65%

63%

65%

61%

61%

57%

59%

56%

56%

2003

2004

58%

57%

56%

55%

55%

55%

57%

53%

55%

54%

56%

54%

53%

2004

-200

553

%52

%50

%49

%49

%52

%53

%51

%51

%52

%48

%50

%52

%T

OT

AL

SO

UT

H B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9965

%65

%68

%68

%68

%67

%19

9920

0067

%69

%66

%67

%68

%69

%68

%65

%66

%71

%71

%71

%71

%20

00-2

001

71%

71%

69%

67%

67%

68%

75%

77%

80%

80%

76%

78%

77%

2001

-200

278

%76

%74

%72

%75

%75

%74

%74

%72

%71

%71

%72

%70

%20

02-2

003

68%

68%

66%

66%

66%

66%

65%

64%

64%

59%

61%

58%

55%

2003

-200

457

%53

%55

%54

%57

%59

%61

%52

%55

%53

%54

%55

%53

%20

0420

0553

%52

%53

%52

%53

%53

%56

%51

%49

%50

%46

%44

%45

%T

OT

AL

WE

ST

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

58%

60%

62%

64%

66",

(,65

%19

9920

0065

%64

%64

%64

%65

%69

%68

%68

%68

%72

%74

%70

%67

%20

0020

0167

%66

%68

%69

%71

%73

%75

%73

%77

%76

%72

%73

%71

%20

01-2

002

72%

71%

71%

70%

69%

68%

68%

66%

66%

63%

61%

61%

62%

2002

-200

361

%61

%60

%61

%61

%61

%63

%58

%59

%60

%61

%59

%57

%20

03-2

004

57%

56%

57%

57%

57%

58%

60%

56%

56%

53%

55%

51%

52%

2004

-200

554

%52

%53

%53

%53

%52

%57

%51

%50

%50

%48

%46

%47

%T

OT

AL

VA

LL

EY

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

973

%74

%74

%74

%75

%73

%19

9920

0075

%73

%74

%75

%74

%76

%75

%76

%76

%77

%82

%80

%80

%20

0020

0182

%80

%78

%76

%75

%75

%78

%77

%78

%79

%75

%73

%73

%20

0120

0274

%73

%73

%69

%70

%72

%73

%70

%70

%70

%70

%68

%69

%20

02-2

003

70%

70%

67%

68%

67%

67%

69%

65%

65%

65%

65%

63%

63%

2003

-200

465

%64

%64

%62

%64

%63

%54

%62

%60

%60

%61

%60

%60

%20

04-2

005

61%

61%

61%

58%

59%

59%

62%

60%

61%

61%

60%

60%

62%

TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

965

%66

%67

%68

%68

%67

%19

99-2

000

68%

67%

67%

67%

68%

71%

70%

68%

69%

73%

75%

73%

72%

2000

2001

72%

73%

72%

70%

70%

72%

75%

75%

78%

78%

74%

74%

74%

2001

2002

75%

73%

73%

71%

72%

72%

71%

69%

69%

68%

67%

67%

68%

2002

-200

367

%67

%65

%66

%65

%64

%66

%62

%62

%60

%61

%59

%58

%20

0320

0460

%58

%58

%57

%58

%59

%61

%56

%57

%55

%56

%55

%55

%20

0420

0556

%54

%54

%53

%54

%54

%57

%54

%53

%53

%51

%50

%52

%

Ave

rage

Per

cent

age

of A

ctua

l Uni

ts th

at a

re R

espo

nse

Uni

ts P

er D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

_ B

y F

isca

l Yea

r

80%

70%

74%

60%

50%

. j 40%

30%

20%

10%

C%

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03-2

004

2004

-200

5

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg

.C

hang

eI

Bef

ore-

Aft

er F

WS

(Per

DP)

(Fro

m B

ase)

(Avg

Per

DP)

63%

(Bas

e)66

%4.

4%72

%13

.7%

I

Bef

ore

69%

70%

103%

Aft

er57

%63

%-1

.4%

Cha

nge

-16.

5%55

%-1

3.0%

51%

-19.

6%

67%

(Bas

e)68

%2.

0%74

%9.

9%

I

Bef

ore:

71%

73%

96%

Aft

er.

57%

64%

-5.1

%C

hang

e:-1

9.2%

55%

-17.

5%51

%-2

4.5%

63%

(Bas

e)68

%8.

0%71

%14

2%

I

Bef

ore

68%

67%

6.9%

Aft

er:

56%

60%

-3.6

%C

hang

e.-1

7.6%

56%

-10.

9%51

%-1

8.0%

74%

(Bas

e)76

%3.

3%77

%3.

9%

I

Bef

ore:

75%

71%

--2%

Aft

er63

%67

%-1

0.1%

Cha

nge.

-15.

4%62

%-1

58%

60%

-18.

3%

67%

(Bas

e)70

%4.

2%74

%9.

9%70

%4.

8%63

%-5

.5%

57%

-14.

5%54

%-2

0.1%

Before: 71%

After: 59%

Chanqe. -17.3%

Per

cent

age

of A

ctua

l Uni

ts th

at a

re R

espo

nse

Uni

ts P

erD

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

- B

efor

e an

d A

fter

FW

S

80%

71%

70%

60%

50%

. i 40%

"30

%

20%

10% 0%

8efo

reA

fter

:

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

GG

: DE

PLO

YM

EN

T -

OF

FIC

ER

S IN

AC

TU

AL

RE

SP

ON

SE

UN

ITS

Numoer OT unicers In ACtuai Kesoonse units ueciovea I"er ue

rovm

eni I

"erio

a -

t:V l-

isca

i Tea

ru

TO

TA

L C

EN

TR

AL

BU

RE

AU

1998

1999

7852

7605

7379

7389

6799

6721

1999

2000

6798

6698

7164

7117

7608

7366

7244

7575

7389

8024

7218

6986

6707

2000

-200

164

1256

3369

9570

5570

5071

5869

3176

3584

9187

1075

1974

4970

6620

0120

0273

0669

4471

8970

9472

4969

2961

8168

9856

2553

9252

8752

0852

5820

02-2

003

6424

5420

5055

5129

5043

4802

5135

5153

4673

4456

4465

4706

4695

2003

-200

448

447

7846

1647

5743

8845

9147

1648

8547

1446

7047

1443

8243

9720

04-2

005

4426

4423

4192

4185

4281

4432

4300

4686

4495

4410

4318

4239

4409

TO

TA

L S

OU

TH

BU

RE

AU

1998

-199

972

2271

6371

7872

7566

5465

7619

99-2

000

6454

6315

6516

6607

6967

6786

6549

6844

6745

7803

6534

6632

6215

2000

-200

160

3360

5760

4458

5061

1562

9670

3781

9482

4683

7771

2273

5267

4620

01-2

002

6904

6531

6672

6063

6885

6701

6091

6250

6018

5423

4754

4359

4357

2002

-200

343

2243

8341

0142

0342

2842

9442

9545

5745

9042

3942

9546

4646

1820

03-2

004

4540

4237

4529

4244

4377

4635

4573

4421

4288

4229

4041

3956

4039

2004

2005

3852

3987

3914

4139

4525

4602

4491

4618

4534

4329

4004

4046

4044

TO

TA

L W

ES

T B

UR

EA

U19

9819

9967

9667

5170

0074

5969

5971

0219

9920

0071

0270

8868

4169

7373

1471

5268

1073

7072

4178

8169

7866

2565

6220

00-2

001

6423

6284

6725

6797

6884

6921

7026

7699

7846

8035

6945

7101

6842

2001

-200

266

9765

4365

1861

5565

3663

2357

1564

1060

5947

9045

3646

3444

2920

02-2

003

4412

4610

4410

4239

4095

4250

4270

4438

4344

4288

4275

4317

4303

2003

-200

443

2842

1743

1342

6643

2842

4843

1645

1445

2244

2642

6140

5642

8720

04-2

005

4127

4108

3949

4159

4109

3862

3807

3811

3690

3649

3570

3337

3398

TO

TA

L V

AllE

Y B

UR

EA

U19

98-1

999

9573

9837

9517

9600

9346

9354

1999

-200

093

3790

9889

9490

0794

0494

1192

7496

5990

1894

5385

1880

5281

9820

00-2

001

8112

8203

8280

8399

8431

8262

8374

8884

9119

9145

8204

8150

7914

2001

2002

7906

7561

7929

7632

7966

7908

7351

7974

7731

7100

7318

6143

5871

2002

-200

359

3159

9856

0454

9556

5456

1357

7259

9856

9955

1754

454

8655

8620

03-2

004

5638

565

5695

5774

5623

5462

5555

5742

5758

6055

5581

5602

5807

2004

"200

556

8957

5655

3656

7258

3657

3454

4857

7556

5655

2953

7852

9851

65TOTAL CITYIDE

1998

-199

931

443

3135

631

074

3172

329

758

2975

319

99-2

000

2969

129

199

2951

529

704

3129

330

715

2987

731

448

3039

333

161

2924

828

295

2768

220

00-2

001

2698

026

177

2804

428

101

2848

028

637

2936

832

412

3370

234

267

2979

030

052

2856

820

01-2

002

2881

327

579

2830

826

944

2863

627

861

2533

827

532

2543

322

705

2189

520

344

1991

520

02-2

003

2008

920

411

1917

019

0619

020

1895

919

472

2014

619

306

1851

018

479

1915

519

202

2003

-200

419

350

1887

719

153

1904

118

716

1893

619

160

1956

219

282

1938

018

597

1799

618

530

2004

-200

518

094

1827

417

591

1815

518

751

1863

018

046

1889

018

375

1791

717

270

1692

017

016

Ave

rage

Offc

ers

in A

ctua

l Res

pons

e U

nits

Dep

loye

d P

er D

eplo

ymen

l Per

iod

- B

y F

isca

l Yea

r

3500

0-

I i i i

30B

51

3000

0

2500

0

2000

0~ \ z 15000

1000

0

5000

1998

-199

919

99-2

000

2000

-200

120

01-2

002

2002

-200

320

03-2

004

2004

-200

5

Fisc

al

Yea

r

Avg

.C

hang

eB

efor

e-A

fter

FW

S(PerDP) (From Base)

(Avg

. Per

DP

)72

91(B

ase)

7223

-0,9

%72

39-0

,7%

I

Bef

ore

7188

6351

-12,

9%A

fter

4731

4936

.323

%C

hang

e-3

4.2%

4650

.36,

2%43

69--

0,1%

7011

(Bas

e)66

90--

,6%

6882

-1,8

%

I

Bef

ore

6715

5924

-15,

5%A

fter

4320

4367

-37.

7%C

hang

e-3

5.7%

4316

-38.

4%42

37-3

9.6%

7011

(Bas

e)70

720.

9%70

410.

4%

I

Bef

ore:

6890

5796

-17.

3%A

fter

.41

9343

27-3

8.3%

Cha

nge

-39.

1%43

14-3

8.5%

3814

--5.

6%

9538

(Bas

e)90

33-5

.3%

8421

-11.

7%

I

Bef

ore

8570

7415

-22.

3%A

fter

5664

5677

--0.

5%C

hang

e.-3

3.9%

5687

--0.

4%55

75--

1.6%

3085

1(B

ase)

3001

7.2

.7%

2958

3-4

.1%

2548

5-1

7.4%

1930

7-3

7.4%

1896

8-3

8.5%

1799

5--

1.7%

Bef

ore

Aft

er:

Cha

nqe.

2941

118

874

.35.

8%

Ave

rage

Offc

ers

in A

ctua

l Res

pons

e U

nits

Dep

loye

dP

er D

eplo

ymen

t Per

iod

- B

efor

e an

d A

fter

FW

S

3500

0

3000

0129

411

¡

1 II !

25000 --- ----: . -.---------- --_

- . i

0;20

000

\ z 15000

1000

0

5000

~i~~ !E-=~

a :,' .:. ,.;!", :'M~';

Bef

ore

Aft

er

ATTACHMENT HH: DEPLOYMENT - OFFICERS ASSIGNED TO BUREAUSTtlOff A dB D I P"d6bB dYo a ieers ssigne to ureaus in epioyment eno - iy ureau an earTotal Number Assigned to Bureaus Percent

Year DP Officers AssignedCitywide Central South West Valley Total to Bureaus

1998 DP 6 9,852 1,832 1,645 1,615 1,881 6,973 70.8%

1999 DP 6 9,679 1,749 1,589 1,619 1,853 6,810 704%2000 DP 6 9,346 1,646 1,531 1,522 1,739 6,438 68.9%2001 DP 6 9,037 1,616 1,456 1,492 1,725 6,289 69.6%2002 DP 6 8,910 1,604 1,380 1,477 1,676 6,137 68.9%2003 DP 6 9,171 1,679 1,572 1,498 1,748 6,497 70.8%2004 DP 6 9,176 1,743 1,557 1,531 1,818 6,649 72.5%

2005 DP 6 9,206 1,718 1,621 1,435 1,818 6,592 71.6%

2006 DP 4 9,262 1,711 1,581 1,422 1,813 6,527 70.5%

Average Officers Cityide*Before FWS: 9,479

After FWS: 9,204Percent Change: -2.9%

Average Number Assigned to Bureaus*

Before FWS: 6,628After FWS: 6,566

Percent Change: -0.9%

Average Percent Assigned to Bureaus.Before FWS: 69.9%After FWS: 71.3%

- DP 6, 2002, was not included in the averages since it was just following full implementation of FWS.

Number of Officers Assigned to Bureaus, Deployment Period 6

8,0006,973

7,000

6,000

:;5,000

nE 4,0000Z 3,000

2,000

1,000

0

1998

6,810

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Percent of All Officers Assigned to Bureaus, Deployment Period 6

100%90% ---80% 70.8%-- 71.6%70%

~

60%50% - -.40%"-

30%20%10%

0%

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

ATTACHMENT II: DEPLOYMENT - OFFICER HARVESTING RATEDEPLOYMENT PERIOD 7 2005

Percentage of Patrol Percetage of All OfficersOfficers Harvested Harvested

Central Bureau Areas:Central 29% 13%Rampart 21% 14%Hollenbeck 19% 12%Northeast 20% 13%Newlon 26% 15%Total: Central Bureau 23% 14%

South Bureau Areas:Southwest 27% 16%Harbor 17% 11%77th 24% 13%Southeast 31% 17%Total: South Bureau 25% 14%

West Bureau Areas:Hollywood 30% 19%Wilshire 34% 21%West LA 15% 10%Pacific I LAX 28% 14%Total: West Bureau 27% 17%

Valley Bureau Areas:Van Nuys 20% 14%West Valley 15% 10%North Hollywood 21% 14%Foothill 32% 19%Devonshire 32% 21%Mission 22% 0.14Total: Valley Bureau 22% 15%

Total: Citywide 24% 15%

.. I ~ ,~

AT

TA

CH

ME

NT

JJ:

RE

CR

UIT

ME

NT

AN

D R

ET

EN

TIO

N -

PO

LIC

E O

FFIC

ER

APP

LIC

AT

ION

S

Num

ber

of P

olic

e O

ffce

App

licat

ions

Per

Mon

th -

By

Fisc

al Y

ear

Avg

.C

hang

e

(Per

Mon

th)

(From Base~

804

724

836

964

547

769

774

(Bas

e)72

478

975

610

5077

648

970

672

191

883

466

496

878

31.

2%10

6985

770

615

1460

646

163

748

341

837

336

159

567

3-1

3.0%

415

465

469

338

367

299

626

410

684

480

595

457

467

-39.

7%

1600

1400

1200

..10

00Q

) .. E80

0

:: Z60

0

400

200 0

Mon

thly

Pol

ice

Offi

cer

App

licat

ions

-January 2002 through June 2005

~~

~~

~~

~~

~~

~~

~ ~

~~

&~

& ~

~ ~

& &

~ d

d d

d~

d d

d d

dd~

d d

d d

d#~

####

# ~~

~~#~

#~#~

## ~

~#~#

~~~#

####

~~~

~#~~

~###

##