2025 Annual Executive Summary

In 2025, the San Francisco Department of Police Accountability (DPA) received 899 complaints — a 22% increase over 2024 — while simultaneously reducing average case processing time from 116 days to 93 days, well below the 180-day department target. Out of 938 cases closed, DPA sustained findings in 35 cases. The top three sustained allegation categories were Neglect of Duty, Conduct Unbecoming an Officer, and Use of Force. Since the 1980s, DPA has provided independent oversight of the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD). In 2018, DPA also began providing independent oversight of the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office (SFSO). In 2025, DPA investigated 40 new SFSO cases, continuing its work to ensure accountability across both SFPD and SFSO.

Full Year 2025 Overview

2025 Key Investigation Achievements

  • Processing Efficiency: Reduced average processing time from 116 days (Q4 2024) to 93 days annual average (19.8% efficiency gain)
  • Fastest Quarter: Q4 2025 achieved the fastest average processing time of the year at 85 days, 52.8% below the 180-day department target
  • Complaint Volume Growth: Processed 899 complaints, a 22.0% increase over 2024, demonstrating expanded community engagement
  • Sustained Data: 35 sustained cases across 79 sustained allegations
  • 100% Government Code 3304 Compliance: Every investigation was completed within the statutory one-year deadline, ensuring all sustained findings could proceed to discipline

Quarterly Highlights

  • Q1 2025: 228 complaints, 447 allegations, 229 cases closed, 6 sustained (92-day avg)
  • Q2 2025: 233 complaints, 565 allegations, 238 cases closed, 15 sustained (101-day avg)
  • Q3 2025: 247 complaints, 521 allegations, 251 cases closed, 8 sustained (94-day avg)
  • Q4 2025: 191 complaints, 479 allegations, 220 cases closed, 6 sustained (85-day avg)

2025 Department Achievements

  • Knighton Award: DPA received its third consecutive Knighton Award from the Association of Local Government Auditors (ALGA) for its audit of SFPD stop data under the Racial and Identity Profiling Act
  • NACOLE Conference: As a founding member of the California Civilian Oversight Alliance (CCOA), DPA partnered with the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) to co-host a regional two-day conference on AI and emerging technologies in law enforcement oversight, drawing over 100 leaders from across the country

2025 Year-in-Review Dashboard

Complete 2025 Quarterly Breakdown

Complete 2025 quarterly breakdown: Complaints, allegations, cases closed, sustained cases, sustained rate, and average processing days by quarter
Metric Q1 2025 Q2 2025 Q3 2025 Q4 2025 Annual Total
Complaints 228 233 247 191 899
Allegations 447 565 521 479 2,012
Cases Closed 229 238 251 220 938
Sustained Cases 6 15 8 6 35
Sustained Rate 2.6% 6.3% 3.2% 2.7% 3.7%
Avg Processing Days 92 101 94 85 93

2025 Annual Allegations by Category

Distribution of all allegations investigated by DPA in 2025, categorized by type:

2025 allegations by category and quarter: Quarterly breakdown of all 2,012 allegations across seven allegation types
Allegation Type Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2025 Total
Conduct Unbecoming 108 96 102 115 421
Neglect of Duty 172 231 220 185 808
Policy/Procedure 0 3 1 2 6
Unwarranted Action 61 108 93 71 333
Use of Force 38 50 36 36 160
Informational 16 20 21 19 76
Referral/Other 52 57 48 51 208
TOTAL 447 565 521 479 2,012

Annual SFPD Investigation Outcomes - 2025

Distribution of how all allegations were resolved throughout 2025:

2025 Annual SFPD Investigation Outcomes
Proper Conduct
830 (41.3%)
No Finding*
641 (31.9%)
Unfounded
270 (13.4%)
Insufficient Evidence
158 (7.9%)
Sustained
79 (3.9%)
Mediated
18 (0.9%)
Policy Failure
14 (0.7%)
Training Failure
2 (0.1%)

Total: 2,012 allegations resolved

*"No Finding" includes: No Finding, Referral to Other Agency, Withdrawn, and Information Only. Full definitions of each finding type appear in the Glossary of Terms at the end of this report.

2025 Outcomes Summary

2025 SFPD investigation outcomes summary: Distribution of 2,012 allegations by finding type with counts and percentages
Finding Allegations % of Total
Proper Conduct 830 41.3%
Sustained 79 3.9%
Unfounded 270 13.4%
Insufficient Evidence 158 7.9%
Mediated 18 0.9%
Policy Failure 14 0.7%
Training Failure 2 0.1%
No Finding / Referral / Informational / Other 641 31.9%
TOTAL 2,012 100%

Processing Efficiency - 2025 Year in Review

Note: Processing time is measured from the date a case is received by DPA until the date the investigator submits the case for closure.

Significant Processing Efficiency Gains

DPA consistently processed cases efficiently during 2025:

Average case processing days by quarter in 2025 compared to the 180-day department target
Quarter Avg Days vs. Target (180) vs. Prior Quarter
Q1 2025 92 -48.9%
Q2 2025 101 -43.9% +9.8%
Q3 2025 94 -47.8% -6.9%
Q4 2025 85 -52.8% -9.6%

Key Achievement: Q4 2025 achieved the fastest average processing time of the year at 85 days — 52.8% below the 180-day department target.

Average Processing Days by Quarter (Target: 180 days)
Q1 2025
92 days (-48.9%)
Q2 2025
101 days (-43.9%)
Q3 2025
94 days (-47.8%)
Q4 2025
85 days (-52.8%)

Bar width represents percentage of 180-day department target. All quarters well below target.

Sustained Cases - 2025 Quarterly Trend

Tracking sustained allegations across all four quarters of 2025:

Sustained Cases by Quarter - 2025
Q1 2025
6 cases (2.6% rate)
Q2 2025
15 cases (6.3% rate)
Q3 2025
8 cases (3.2% rate)
Q4 2025
6 cases (2.7% rate)

Annual total: 35 sustained cases across 79 sustained allegations (3.7% overall rate)

Top Sustained Allegation Categories

Across the 79 sustained allegations in 2025, the leading categories were:

  • Neglect of Duty
  • Conduct Unbecoming an Officer
  • Use of Force

See the Glossary of Terms for definitions of each allegation category.

DPA Highlights & Achievements

In 2025, DPA achieved several notable milestones beyond its core investigative and oversight work — hosting a national conference on emerging technologies in law enforcement oversight and facilitating learning opportunities for over 30 undergraduate and law students.

Regional Conference

In summer 2025, DPA — as a founding member of the California Civilian Oversight Alliance (CCOA) — partnered with the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) to co-host a landmark regional two-day conference in San Francisco on the evolving role of artificial intelligence and emerging technologies in law enforcement and oversight. The event drew over 100 oversight and law enforcement leaders and technology experts from across the country. Key topics included:

  • The use of drones and advanced technologies in law enforcement monitoring and investigations
  • Development and deployment of AI tools in policing and oversight
  • Ethical considerations and safeguards for responsible implementation

San Francisco Police Commission Vice-President Kevin Benedicto, SFPD's Real-Time Information Center (RTIC) leadership, and the City's Strategic Implementation of AI and Emerging Technologies team participated and contributed to the event.

DPA's 2025 Law & Justice Reform Internship Program

DPA's Law & Justice Reform Internship Program continued to grow in 2025, engaging students year-round across three semesters.

2025 Internship Program at a Glance

30
Total Interns (Spring 3 + Summer 22 + Fall 5)
9
Students from HBCUs
7
Law Clerks
8
City Agencies Served

In the spring, three interns contributed directly to casework, assisting with body-worn camera footage summaries, reviewing incident reports and Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD) records, and drafting sustained reports. The summer cohort brought together 22 interns from universities and law schools across the country, including nine students from Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and seven law clerks. Interns were placed in eight city agencies, including the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, the Office of Community Investment and Infrastructure, SFPD Legal, the Department of the Environment, the Office of Cannabis, the Board of Supervisors, and the San Francisco District Attorney's Office. The cohort's final policy project focused on an update to DGO 8.10, SFPD's guidelines for First Amendment activities, addressing five key areas: defining vague terms, modernizing surveillance technology guidance, improving oversight mechanisms, expanding training requirements, and strengthening tracking and reporting.

In the fall, five interns—three undergraduates and two tech interns—continued DPA's year-round commitment to developing the next generation of public servants through hands-on casework and research.

Government Code Section 3304(d) Compliance

100% Compliance with One-Year Investigation Deadline

California Government Code Section 3304(d), part of the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (POBRA), requires that investigations of alleged officer misconduct be completed within one year of the Department's discovery of the allegation. If an investigation is not completed within this statutory timeframe, the Department is prohibited from imposing any disciplinary action against the officer, regardless of the merits of the case.

In 2025, DPA maintained a 100% compliance rate with Government Code Section 3304(d) deadlines. Every investigation was completed within the statutory one-year period, ensuring that all sustained findings could proceed to the disciplinary process.

Community Access & Complaint Referral

In 2025, DPA collaborated with the City's 311 Customer Service Center, the Mayor’s Office, and the Mayor’s Office of Victim Rights to strengthen complaint referral procedures and ensure community members can file a complaint 24 hours a day, seven days a week. As part of this effort, DPA developed and provided a training guide for 311 staff to ensure they understand DPA's complaint process and can accurately direct members of the public seeking to file a complaint.

DPA Divisions – 2025 Year in Review

Investigations Division

Investigations are a key part of DPA's commitment to accountability. Investigators thoroughly examine incidents using a collaborative team model where senior investigators, attorneys, and line investigators work together to examine evidence—allowing investigators to support one another while maintaining DPA's commitment to impartiality. DPA had a 22% increase in new complaints compared to last year yet successfully met the challenges of the growing caseload. Through dedicated effort, DPA closed nearly 10% more cases while maintaining 100% compliance with all statutory and Charter-mandated timelines. As of December 19, 2025, DPA opened 887 cases and closed 938 cases, including completing three officer-involved shooting investigations.

Ongoing negotiations with SFPD on corrective actions, policy development, training, and best investigation practices have contributed to an incremental year-over-year decline in sustained violations—reflecting meaningful improvements in policing. Additionally, at the request of the San Francisco Sheriff and pursuant to a letter of agreement, DPA provides independent investigations into select serious complaints involving sheriff's deputies.

Legal Division

DPA's Legal Division plays a critical role in overseeing legal issues throughout the investigative process, negotiating disciplinary dispositions, representing DPA at Chief's Hearings and Police Commission trials, developing training in partnership with SFPD, contributing to policy development, and reviewing public records disclosures as mandated by Senate Bills 1421 and 16. The Legal Division is organized into two specialized teams — the Public Records Team and the Policy Team — whose work is summarized in the sub-sections that follow.

2025 Legal Division Key Metrics

Including public records review under Senate Bills 1421 & 16

74
Cases resolved through the disciplinary process
10 of 11
DGOs passed at Police Commission
1,153
Cases evaluated for public release under SB 1421 & SB 16

The legal team's participation included two working groups, and DPA investigations resulted in two Department Notices issued to immediately close policy gaps impacting crime victims.

Public Records Team

The year 2025 marked the sixth year of California's police transparency laws, reflecting a continued shift toward greater public access to law enforcement records. Since these laws took effect, the public has gained access to records across critical policing areas: officer-involved shootings, in-custody deaths, great bodily injury incidents, sexual assaults, instances of dishonesty, unlawful search and seizure, biased or discriminatory conduct, excessive force, and failure to intervene in excessive force incidents. Many of these records require a sustained finding by DPA and must undergo an appeals process before disclosure.

These legislative changes prompted DPA to launch an extensive review of nearly 40 years of archived cases to identify records that may now be eligible for disclosure. Throughout 2025, DPA remained committed to this large-scale effort while continuing to manage its regular volume of independent records requests. As transparency laws change, the Department's work to ensure public access to qualifying records remains a priority.

2025 Public Records Disclosure Totals

Senate Bills 1421 & 16 — California's Police Transparency Laws

89
Cases Disclosed
54,086
Total Pages Disclosed
3,636
Exempt Case Determinations
36,036 Officer-Involved Shooting pages
12,107 Great Bodily Injury pages
3,071 Dishonesty pages
1,697 Unlawful Arrest or Search pages
1,071 Unreasonable or Excessive Force pages
104 Biased Policing pages

Policy Team

In 2025, DPA's policy team continued to review and collaborate on revisions to SFPD’s policies, incorporating current law, training, technology, and lessons learned. This included participation in working groups for the following Department General Orders (DGO): DGO 5.20 on Language Access Services for Limited English Proficient (LEP) Persons, DGO 5.23 Interactions with the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals, 6.16 on Sexual Assaults and DGO 6.09 on Domestic Violence. In revisions to the Domestic Violence DGO, the Department simplified the DGO by narrowing the scope and transferring some sections to an updated Domestic Violence manual. DPA was provided with the opportunity to review the updated manual to ensure the many deleted sections were included in the manual. The Domestic Violence manual will be issued to SFPD staff along with the new DGO.

On DGO 5.23 responding to the needs of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, DPA initially recommended that the DGO be expanded to include other groups which may require accessibility. While this was not included in the revised DGO, SFPD indicated they would be open to initiating new DGOs in the future based on the identification of need for other groups requiring disability access. The working group for DGO 5.20 Limited English Proficiency (LEP) continued throughout the year. Significant changes from the working group draft and the proposed draft presented to the Police Commission caused the Commission to request that SFPD reengage with the community to create a draft with better compromise. DPA continues to work with SFPD and the community to help create a DGO that is useful and acceptable to both officers and community members.

In addition to participation in working groups, the policy team has continued to track policy failures from our sustained cases, allowing us to look at trends SFPD can address across different DGOs. This included takeaways on DGO 6.16 for sexual assault cases, where DPA recommended updating a Bureau Order on fugitive apprehension to prioritize SVU cases. The policy team also worked on revisions to SFPD’s draft Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) policy, as well as the use of social media in investigations. DPA also reviewed several additional DGOs including DGO 6.05 – Death cases; DGO 6.15 – Property Processing and DGO 8.11 – Investigations of Officer Involved Shootings and Firearms Discharges. DPA provided recommendations to those DGOs.

Audit Division

The Audit Division continued conducting independent, objective audits of the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) to promote effectiveness, efficiency, and accountability.

In May, DPA received its third consecutive Knighton Award from the Association of Local Government Auditors (ALGA) for the completeness and accuracy of SFPD stop data reported under RIPA. ALGA judges praised the report for its thorough documentation, strong use of visuals, and well-structured presentation.

In December, DPA issued an audit on SFPD’s use of force. This audit evaluated the effectiveness of SFPD’s processes for monitoring use of force incidents, including supervisors’ evaluations for policy compliance and how SFPD uses data to inform training. DPA made 14 recommendations to strengthen SFPD’s use-of-force oversight.

Mediation Division

DPA's mediation program offers an alternative to formal investigation for complaints where direct dialogue between the complainant and the involved officer is more likely to produce a meaningful resolution than a finding of misconduct. With the consent of both parties, trained volunteer mediators facilitate a confidential conversation in which the complainant and officer describe their experience of the encounter and work toward shared understanding. Mediation does not result in discipline and is generally reserved for complaints involving communication, demeanor, or other interpersonal concerns rather than serious misconduct. By creating space for direct dialogue, the program promotes accountability while strengthening the relationship between SFPD members and the communities they serve. In 2025, the Mediation Division completed 18 sessions.

Throughout the year, we interviewed and on-boarded many new volunteer mediators and included them as shadow observers in mediation sessions as they became familiar with our program. In January, our mediation director and one of our long-time volunteers completed SFPD’s 40-hour Crisis Intervention Training Course.

Mediations Completed by Quarter
Q1 2025
5
Q2 2025
1
Q3 2025
6
Q4 2025
6

Scale: 0–10 mediations per quarter

2025 Total: 18 mediations completed

Sheriff's Office Investigations Division

Since 2018, DPA has provided independent investigative services for administrative investigations into serious misconduct allegations involving San Francisco Sheriff's Office (SFSO) sworn staff pursuant to written agreements between the departments. The Sheriff initially conferred jurisdiction to DPA to investigate complaints about use of force causing injury, use of weapons or control devices, sexual misconduct, reckless disregard for health and safety, and patterns and practices of harassment, retaliation, and bias. Subsequent agreements reaffirmed DPA’s role and expanded DPA’s jurisdiction to include all in-custody deaths and complaints about SFSO’s use or deployment of military equipment as defined by Assembly Bill 481. In 2025, DPA opened 40 new cases, closed 41 cases, and completed investigations into 106 allegations.

2025 Sheriff's Office Investigations

40
New Cases Opened
41
Cases Closed
106
Allegations Investigated

DPA also responded to and initiated an investigation into one in-custody death.

Following rising community concerns about strip searches at County Jail #2 on May 22, 2025, and at the request of the Sheriff's Office, DPA launched a special independent investigation. To strengthen this effort, DPA joined an interagency collaboration with the Human Rights Commission and the Department on the Status of Women, applying a multidisciplinary approach to human and gender rights issues.

For the first time since initiating this work nearly eight years ago, the Mayor's Office approved two dedicated investigator positions for Sheriff's investigations. In December, DPA began the recruitment process and onboarded these two investigators in March 2026, improving DPA's capacity to take on more cases.

Q4 2025 Overview

SFPD San Francisco Police Department

Key Findings: During Q4 2025, DPA received 191 SFPD complaints generating 479 allegations. DPA closed 220 cases with an average processing time of 85 days. The majority of complaints (47.6%) were submitted online, with Neglect of Duty being the most common allegation type (38.6%). DPA sustained 11 allegations across 6 cases, with a sustained rate of 2.7%.

191
SFPD COMPLAINTS RECEIVED
Q4 2025 — October through December
479
Allegations
SFPD - Q4 2025
220
Cases Closed
SFPD - Q4 2025
6
Sustained Cases
11 allegations sustained
190
Cases Pending
End of Q4 2025

SFSO San Francisco Sheriff's Office

SFSO Key Findings: During Q4 2025, DPA received 7 SFSO complaints involving 33 allegations and 7 complainants. DPA closed 11 SFSO cases during the quarter. The majority of SFSO allegations (84.8%) involved claims of misconduct by SFSO personnel. Following investigation, 1 finding was sustained (3.7%) and 66.7% resulted in exoneration. See the Glossary of Terms for SFSO finding definitions.

7
SFSO COMPLAINTS RECEIVED
Select cases under DPA jurisdiction - Q4 2025
33
Allegations
SFSO - Q4 2025
11
Cases Closed
SFSO - Q4 2025
1
Sustained Cases
SFSO - Q4 2025
40
Cases Pending
End of Q4 2025

3-Year Comparison and Trends

Tracking Progress Over Time - SFPD Focus

This section compares Q4 SFPD data across three consecutive years (2023, 2024, 2025), revealing important trends in complaint volume, investigation outcomes, and department performance.

SFPD Key Performance Metrics - 3-Year Trends

Core SFPD performance metrics comparison: Q4 2023-2025 showing complaint volume, allegations, cases closed, sustained cases, and processing times
Metric Trend Q4 2023 Q4 2024 Q4 2025 % Change
(2024 vs 2025)
Complaints Opened 206 194 191 -1.5%
Allegations 483 404 479 +18.6%
Cases Closed 195 181 220 +21.5%
Sustained Cases 17 3 6 +100%
Sustained Allegations 42 5 11 +120%
Sustained Rate 8.7% 1.6% 2.7% +68.8%
Avg Processing Days 135 116 85 -26.7%
Cases Pending 318 182 190 +4.4%
Identified Complainant Rate 98% 91% 87% -4.4%
SFPD Quarterly Trends - 3-Year Comparison (2023-2025)

Stacked view of quarterly complaint volumes across three years showing seasonal patterns and year-over-year growth

785
2023 Total
737
2024 Total
899
2025 Total
807
3-Year Avg Complaints Received
Trend Analysis: Q4 2025 shows 191 complaints, representing a 1.5% decrease from Q4 2024 (194 complaints) and a 7.3% decrease from Q4 2023 (206 complaints). This Q4 comparison across three years shows the highest Q4 volume occurred in 2023.

Complaint Submission Methods - Combined Analysis

SFPD complaints were led by online submissions (47.6%) and referrals (30.9%), while SFSO complaints in Q4 2025 were primarily received through referrals (42.9%) and split across online, phone, and other methods.

Complaint submission methods by department: SFPD compared to SFSO Q4 2025 showing distribution across online, phone, referral, and other channels
Submission Method SFPD SFSO Combined Total
Online 91 (47.6%) 1 (14.3%) 92 (46.5%)
Phone 21 (11.0%) 1 (14.3%) 22 (11.1%)
Referral 59 (30.9%) 3 (42.9%) 62 (31.3%)
Other 4 (2.1%) 2 (28.6%) 6 (3.0%)
In Person 9 (4.7%) 0 (0%) 9 (4.5%)
Mail 7 (3.7%) 0 (0%) 7 (3.5%)
Total 191 (100%) 7 (100%) 198 (100%)

Submission Method Analysis

SFPD Patterns: Online accessibility remains the primary channel at 47.6%, with referrals comprising 30.9% and phone at 11.0%. In person (4.7%) and other methods provide additional access channels.

SFSO Patterns: With only 7 complaints, SFSO submissions came primarily through referrals (42.9%), with the remainder split across online, phone, and other methods.

Combined Impact: DPA received 198 complaints through multiple channels, ensuring accessibility for both community members and individuals in custody.

Complainant Demographics

Identified vs. Anonymous Complaints - Combined

Of the 198 complaints received across both departments, 172 (86.9%) were filed by identified complainants, while 26 (13.1%) were submitted anonymously. SFPD: 165 identified (86.4%), 26 anonymous (13.6%). SFSO: 7 identified (100%), 0 anonymous (0%).

Gender Demographics - Combined Data

Gender demographics of complainants: SFPD vs SFSO Q4 2025 showing distribution by gender identity
Gender SFPD SFSO Combined Total
Male 64 (33.5%) 2 (28.6%) 66 (33.3%)
Declined to State 92 (48.2%) 5 (71.4%) 97 (49.0%)
Female 33 (17.3%) 0 (0%) 33 (16.7%)
Genderqueer/Non-binary 2 (1.0%) 0 (0%) 2 (1.0%)
Transgender 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Total 191 (100%) 7 (100%) 198 (100%)

Race/Ethnicity Demographics - Combined Data

Race and ethnicity demographics of complainants: SFPD vs SFSO Q4 2025 showing diversity of complaints
Race/Ethnicity SFPD SFSO Combined Total
Declined to State 99 (51.8%) 5 (71.4%) 104 (52.5%)
White 39 (20.4%) 1 (14.3%) 40 (20.2%)
Black or African American 22 (11.5%) 1 (14.3%) 23 (11.6%)
Other 10 (5.2%) 0 (0%) 10 (5.1%)
Asian 9 (4.7%) 0 (0%) 9 (4.5%)
Hispanic or Latinx 12 (6.3%) 0 (0%) 12 (6.1%)
Total 191 (100%) 7 (100%) 198 (100%)

Demographic Analysis

Key Observations: With a small sample size of 7 SFSO complaints in Q4, demographic patterns should be interpreted cautiously. SFSO complainants were 28.6% male and 71.4% declined to state gender, with 14.3% identifying as Black or African American and 14.3% identifying as White. SFPD complaints continue to show patterns consistent with broader community engagement. Both departments show privacy-conscious complainants, with approximately 50% declining to provide demographic information. Note: "Identified" complainants refer to individuals who provided their name when filing a complaint, as opposed to "anonymous" complaints where no identifying information was provided.

Allegation Types and Investigation Outcomes

SFPD Allegation Types and Findings

During Q4 2025, DPA investigated 479 allegations. Neglect of Duty was the most frequent allegation type, making up 38.6% of all investigated allegations. This was also the most common finding in sustained cases. The overall sustained rate of 2.3% reflects 11 sustained allegations out of 479 investigated.

Allegation Types - Q4 2025
Neglect of Duty
185 (38.6%)
Conduct Unbecoming
115 (24.0%)
Unwarranted Action
71 (14.8%)
Referral
51 (10.6%)
Use of Force
36 (7.5%)
Informational
19 (4.0%)
Policy/Procedure
2 (0.4%)
Allegations by type in Q4 2025 showing distribution of 479 allegations across complaint categories
Allegation Type Count %
Neglect of Duty 185 38.6%
Conduct Unbecoming 115 24.0%
Unwarranted Action 71 14.8%
Referral/Other 51 10.6%
Use of Force 36 7.5%
Informational 19 4.0%
Policy/Procedure 2 0.4%

Investigation Outcomes by Allegation Type

DPA completed investigations on 479 allegations during Q4 2025, with findings ranging from "Proper Conduct" to "Improper Conduct" (sustained). The table below shows how each type of allegation was resolved, providing transparency into the investigative process and outcomes.

Investigation findings by allegation type in Q4 2025: Complete breakdown of 479 allegations showing outcomes across all allegation categories
DPA Finding Conduct Unbecoming Neglect of Duty Policy/ Procedure Unwarranted Action Use of Force Info. Referral Other Total
Improper Conduct (Sustained) 2 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
Proper Conduct 33 93 1 55 25 0 0 0 207
Unfounded 38 17 0 8 5 0 0 0 68
Insufficient Evidence 20 10 0 0 2 0 0 0 32
Policy Failure 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2
Mediated 3 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 6
Referral to Other Agency 0 5 0 1 0 0 51 0 57
Informational 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 18
No Finding 15 32 0 6 4 1 0 0 58
Withdrawal 4 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 19
Training Failure 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Total 115 185 2 71 36 19 51 0 479

Note: Sustained findings indicate officer misconduct was determined. Full definitions of each finding type appear in the Glossary of Terms at the end of this report. See the Sustained Cases section below for detailed case summaries and DPA recommendations.

SFPD Q4 2025 — Findings Summary

207
Proper Conduct
43.2% of allegations
6
Sustained Cases
11 improper conduct allegations
2
Policy Failures
Q4 2025

Sustained Cases

Cases Where Improper Conduct Was Found

During Q4 2025, DPA sustained 11 allegations across 6 cases, meaning the investigation found sufficient evidence that misconduct occurred and violated SFPD policy. Each case summary provides context while protecting privacy.

Sustained cases with detailed findings in Q4 2025: Six cases with misconduct findings and DPA disciplinary recommendations
# Police Station Case Summary DPA Recommendations
1 Park The officer failed to activate his body-worn camera when attending a call regarding a petty theft, in violation of department policy. Written reprimand and retraining.
2 Richmond The officer punched a handcuffed man in the head during an arrest, and while the man was restrained, applied unnecessary pressure on the man's torso, causing difficulty breathing. 3-day suspension.
3 Tenderloin The officer violated Department standards of conduct by making belittling and demeaning statements. Admonishment.
4 Northern Two officers searched the car of a federal probationer without confirming if he had search conditions, or the scope of the search conditions. Admonishment.
5 Tenderloin An officer, while arresting an individual with two outstanding warrants, used profanity toward a bystander. Written reprimand and retraining.
6 Southern The officers failed to activate their body-worn cameras as mandated by department policy. Admonishment.

SFPD Station Distribution

Cases Opened by SFPD District — Q4 2025

The distribution of cases opened across SFPD Districts reflects where DPA complaints were received during Q4 2025. This data represents complaints filed, not case outcomes, and should not be interpreted as a measure of station or officer performance. Tenderloin District had the highest number of cases opened (33), followed by Mission District (27) and Southern District (23). Cases were distributed across all areas of the city.

SFPD cases opened by district in Q4 2025: Geographic distribution of 191 complaints showing concentration in Tenderloin, Mission, and Southern districts
SFPD District Cases Opened % of Total
Tenderloin 33 17.3%
Mission 27 14.1%
Southern 23 12.0%
Central 20 10.5%
Not Applicable 18 9.4%
Bayview 12 6.3%
Taraval 12 6.3%
Airport Bureau 10 5.2%
Out of Town 8 4.2%
Unknown 8 4.2%
Northern 7 3.7%
Park 5 2.6%
Ingleside 5 2.6%
Richmond 3 1.6%
Total 191 100.0%

Geographic Pattern Analysis

Case Distribution: Tenderloin (33), Mission (27), and Southern (23) districts account for 43.5% of all cases opened, reflecting where complaints originated in Q4 2025. Not Applicable (18, 9.4%) and Out of Town/Unknown (16, 8.4%) cases account for complaints that cannot be tied to a specific district.

SFSO Oversight - Q4 2025

SFSO Oversight & DPA Authority

DPA has investigated selected serious complaints against deputies of the San Francisco Sheriff's Office (SFSO) since 2018, ensuring independent oversight, reinforcing transparency, and promoting accountability across jail operations, courthouse security, and broader SFSO activities. Through formal agreements and evolving mandates, including oversight of in-custody deaths and the use of military equipment, DPA has expanded its role to support investigations, critical incidents, and community engagement.

Under a Letter of Agreement (LOA) with the San Francisco Sheriff's Office, DPA investigates serious misconduct cases involving SFSO deputies. DPA's oversight authority includes independent investigations of:

  • In-custody deaths
  • Complaints of:
    • Use of force - injury or death
    • Use of a weapon or control device
    • Sexual misconduct
    • Reckless disregard for health or safety
    • Pattern or practice of harassment, bias, or retaliation by SFSO's Deputies
    • Additional misconduct at SFSO discretion

DPA submits investigative findings to SFSO and provides quarterly reports to SFSO's Oversight Board on complaint statistics and investigation status.

SFSO Allegations and Findings

SFSO complaints in Q4 2025 generated 33 total allegations across the 7 complaints received.

SFSO allegations by type in Q4 2025: Distribution of 33 allegations across misconduct and neglect of duty categories
Allegation Type Number Percentage
Misconduct 28 84.8%
Neglect of Duty 3 9.1%
Referral 2 6.1%
Total 33 100.0%
SFSO SFSO Allegations by Type - Q4 2025
Misconduct
28 (84.8%)
Neglect of Duty
3 (9.1%)

SFSO Case Findings

The disposition of SFSO allegations in Q4 2025 shows a majority of exonerated findings, with one sustained finding.

SFSO case findings breakdown in Q4 2025: Distribution of 27 findings across exonerated, unfounded, and sustained categories
Finding Type Number Percentage
Exonerated - SFSO 18 66.7%
Unfounded 8 29.6%
Sustained 1 3.7%
Total Findings 27 100.0%

SFSO Findings Analysis

Exoneration Rate: 66.7% of allegations were exonerated (18 of 27), meaning the alleged conduct occurred but was justified, lawful, and proper. Unfounded Rate: 29.6% of allegations were unfounded (8 of 27), meaning the alleged conduct did not occur. Sustained Findings: 1 finding was sustained (3.7%) in Q4 2025.

SFSO Cases by Facility

The 11 SFSO cases closed in Q4 2025 were distributed across detention and related facilities as follows:

SFSO cases closed by facility in Q4 2025: Eleven cases distributed across detention facilities and locations
Facility/Location Number Percentage
County Jail #3 3 27.3%
County Jail #2 4 36.4%
ZSFGH (Jail Hospital) 0 0.0%
City Hall 0 0.0%
County Jail #1 1 9.1%
Other 3 27.3%
Total 11 100.0%

SFSO Analysis

Facility Distribution: County Jail #2 had the highest number of closed cases (4, 36.4%), followed by County Jail #3 and Other locations each with 3 cases (27.3%), and County Jail #1 with 1 case (9.1%). The volume of closed cases was 11 in Q4 2025.

Allegation Patterns: The majority of SFSO allegations in Q4 2025 were categorized as "Misconduct" (84.8%, 28 of 33 allegations). With only 7 complaints generating 33 allegations, the small sample size limits broader pattern analysis. The exoneration rate was 66.7%.

Glossary of Terms

Definitions used throughout this report for agency acronyms, allegations, and findings.

Abbreviations & Acronyms

DPA
San Francisco Department of Police Accountability — the civilian oversight body that investigates complaints against SFPD and SFSO sworn members.
SFPD
San Francisco Police Department.
SFSO
San Francisco Sheriff's Office.
IAD
SFPD's Internal Affairs Division.
DGO
Department General Order — SFPD policy document.
DN
Department Notice — supplemental SFPD policy guidance.
BWC
Body-Worn Camera.
CAD
Computer-Aided Dispatch — SFPD records of calls for service.
POBRA
Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (California Government Code § 3300 et seq.).
SB 1421 / SB 16
California police-records transparency laws governing public release of certain peace-officer personnel records.
RIPA
California Racial and Identity Profiling Act stop-data reporting.
NACOLE
National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement.
CCOA
California Civilian Oversight Alliance.
ALGA
Association of Local Government Auditors.
SVU
Special Victims Unit.
UAV
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.
LEP
Limited English Proficient.
HBCU
Historically Black Colleges and Universities.
RTIC
SFPD Real-Time Information Center.

SFPD Allegations & Findings

Allegation
A way to describe an individual act of potential misconduct. Complaints usually have more than one allegation to investigate. There are four categories of allegations: Unwarranted Action, Neglect of Duty, Use of Force, and Conduct Unbecoming.
Complaint
Complaints are also called cases or investigations.
Conduct Unbecoming an Officer
Type of allegation that an officer's rude or inappropriate behavior undermines public confidence or reflects poorly on the Police Department. (Replaced and combined the historical categories of conduct reflecting discredit, discourtesy, racial slurs, and sexual slurs.)
Findings
Investigative conclusions are called findings. Each allegation is resolved with a finding that indicates whether or not the allegation was proven.
Improper Conduct (Sustained)
Finding indicating that the evidence gathered during an investigation proved that an officer broke a rule or law by doing something improper or by failing to complete a task.
Informational
Finding indicating that the allegations were not rationally within DPA's investigative jurisdiction.
Insufficient Evidence
Finding indicating that there was not enough evidence to prove or disprove an allegation.
Mediated
Finding indicating that an allegation was voluntarily resolved through mediation.
Neglect of Duty
Type of allegation that an officer failed to complete a required task.
No Finding
A "No Finding" outcome occurs when an involved officer cannot reasonably be identified or is no longer employed by SFPD and therefore cannot be disciplined.
Policy Failure
Finding indicating that, although an officer's actions complied with police rules, DPA recommends that the rules be changed.
Proper Conduct
Finding indicating that an officer's actions complied with police rules, training, and applicable laws.
Referral
Finding indicating that an allegation was referred to an agency with jurisdiction.
Supervision or Training Failure
Finding indicating that an officer's improper actions or failure to complete a required task were the result of inadequate supervision or training.
Unfounded
Allegations are unfounded when a complaint is made about something that did not occur or when an officer specifically identified by the complainant was not actually involved.
Unwarranted Action
Type of allegation that an officer's actions were unnecessary or unrelated to a legitimate police purpose.
Use of Force
Type of allegation that an officer used more force than was reasonably needed to perform a necessary police action.
Withdrawal
A withdrawn finding indicates that DPA discontinued investigating a complaint that was voluntarily withdrawn.

SFSO Allegations & Findings

Misconduct
Violation of any department rule or regulation, policy or procedure, or law, or conduct unbecoming a sworn employee or reflecting adversely on the department.
Criminal Misconduct
Violation constituting a misdemeanor or felony crime. Criminal misconduct cases are also referred to the appropriate criminal prosecution agency.
Gratuities / Rewards
Improperly accepting or soliciting any gratuity, gift, loan, fee, or any other thing of value arising from or offered because of employment, or any activity connected with the department, without authorization.
Harassment / Discrimination
Harassment or discrimination on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, disability, medical condition, marital status, sexual orientation, sex, or age, including retaliation against a person for making a harassment complaint.
Impermissible Behavior
Any rude, insolent, impertinent, antagonistic, discourteous, or disrespectful conduct — written, oral, or by gesture — toward a supervisor of higher rank that is outside the definition of insubordination. Employees shall treat supervisors, subordinates, and peers with respect, and be courteous and civil at all times.
Insubordination
Failure or deliberate refusal of any employee to obey a lawful order given by a superior officer.
Neglect of Duty
Type of allegation that a deputy failed to complete a required task.
Truthfulness
Type of allegation that requires all deputies to be truthful at all times, whether under oath or not.
Unacceptable Job Performance
Type of allegation that a deputy failed to adhere to the job responsibilities set forth in the Department's objectives.
Use of Force
Type of allegation that a deputy used more force than was reasonably needed to perform a necessary law enforcement action.
Sustained
Finding indicating that evidence from the investigation supports a misconduct finding by a preponderance of the evidence.
Not Sustained
Finding indicating that evidence from the investigation is insufficient to support a misconduct finding.
Exonerated
Finding indicating that evidence from the investigation proves the complained conduct was justified, lawful, and proper within policy.
Unfounded
Finding indicating that evidence from the investigation proves the complained conduct did not occur.
Referral
Finding indicating that an allegation was referred to an agency with jurisdiction.
No Finding
Finding indicating that the complainant did not provide additional requested evidence, the complainant requested withdrawal of the complaint, the deputy could not reasonably be identified, or the deputy is no longer with SFSO and is therefore no longer subject to SFSO discipline.