This paper draws from critical data studies and related fields to investigate police officer-involved homicide data for Los Angeles County. We frame police officer-involved homicide data as a rhetorical tool that can reify certain assumptions about the world and extend regimes of power. We highlight the possibility that this type of sensitive civic data can be investigated and employed within local communities through creative practice. Community involvement with data can create a countervailing force to powerful dominant narratives and supplement activist projects that hold local officials accountable for their actions. Our analysis examines four Los Angeles County police officer-involved homicide data sets. First, we provide accounts of the semantics, granularity, scale and transparency of this local data. Then, we describe a “counter data action,” an event that invited members of the community to identify the limits and challenges present in police officer-involved homicide data and to propose new methods for deriving meaning from these indicators and statistics.

No abstract

To explore facilitators and barriers to developing and sustaining collaboration among New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene's Neighborhood Health Action Centers and co-located partners, who share information and decisionmaking through a Governance Council structure of representative members. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in 2018 with 43 Governance Council members across the three Action Centers of East Harlem (13), Tremont (15), and Brownsville (15), New York City. Governance Council members identified collaboration through information-and resourcesharing, consistent meetings and continuous communication as valuable for fostering a culture of health in their communities. Immediate benefits included building relationships, increased access to resources, and increased reach and access to community members. Challenges included difficulty building community trust, insufficient advertisement of services, and navigation of government bureaucracy. The Governance Councils forged collaborative relationships among local government, community-based organizations and clinical providers to improve health and well-being in their neighborhoods. Sharing space, resources and information is feasible with a movement towards shared leadership and decision-making. This may result in community-driven and tailored solutions to historical inequities. In shared leadership models, some internal reform by Government partners may be required.

Data-centered participatory design research projects-wherein researchers collaborate with community members for the purpose of gathering, generating, or communicating data about the community or their causes-can place epistemic burdens on minoritized or racialized groups, even in projects focused on social justice outcomes. Analysis of epistemic burden encourages researchers to rethink the purpose and value of data in community organizing and activism more generally. This paper describes three varieties of epistemic burden drawn from two case studies based on the authors' previous work with anti-police brutality community organizations. The authors conclude with a discussion of ways to alleviate and avoid these issues through a series of questions about participatory research design. Ultimately, we call for a reorientation of knowledge production away from putative design solutions to community problems and toward a more robust interrogation of the power dynamics of research itself.