Executive Director's Message

In the first quarter of 2026, our department received 269 complaints about San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) officers, alongside 13 complaints about San Francisco Sheriff's Office (SFSO) deputies. Complaint volume is up 19 percent over Q1 2025 and 64 percent over Q1 2024. We read this as a sign that residents know where to bring their public safety concerns and that they trust DPA to take them seriously. That trust is earned every day by the careful work of our investigators.

This quarter, the DPA closed 266 SFPD cases involving 489 allegations and sustained 15 allegations across 8 cases. The average processing time was 94 days, which is under our 180-day target and in 100 percent compliance with the one-year completion deadline set by California Government Code §3304. Proper Conduct was the most common finding, accounting for 198 closed allegations (about 40 percent of the total). A Proper Conduct finding is itself a substantive accountability outcome, determined on the evidence. Body-worn camera (BWC) footage continues to be a valuable evidentiary resource across these investigations, supporting findings across the full range of outcomes — both Proper Conduct and Improper Conduct (Sustained). As San Francisco's independent civilian oversight body, objectivity is central to our work.

I want to recognize the investigators behind this work. The DPA's investigators carry both SFPD and SFSO matters on the same caseload. That dual responsibility has expanded steadily as our mandate has grown, with the addition of in-custody death oversight, expanded jurisdiction over the Sheriff's Office, and rising complaint volume in both departments. Our team has continued to meet our deadlines and our quality standards, and the workload required to do that is significant. Sustained high caseloads carry real costs in staff well-being and retention risk. In Q1 2026, the DPA welcomed three new investigators — two assigned to SFSO matters and one to SFPD matters — along with a new Policy Director, who joined near the close of the quarter. While these additions strengthen the team, DPA will request additional investigative positions in the next fiscal year to preserve the quality of our work, ensure the well-being of our staff, and remain in compliance with staffing ratios mandated by the San Francisco charter.

Looking ahead, the DPA will continue to invest in the partnerships that make this work possible — with the Mayor's Office, the San Francisco Police Department, the San Francisco Sheriff's Office, the Police Commission, the Sheriff's Department Oversight Board, and the communities we serve in common. I am grateful for the constructive working relationships we maintain with each of them, and for the opportunity to keep building on that foundation in the quarters ahead.

Paul David Henderson
Paul David Henderson
Executive Director, San Francisco Department of Police Accountability

Executive Summary

SFPD San Francisco Police Department

Key Findings: In Q1 2026, the San Francisco Department of Police Accountability (DPA) received 269 SFPD complaints involving 550 allegations. The DPA closed 266 SFPD cases involving 489 allegations during the quarter, with an average processing time of 94 days. The largest share of SFPD complaints (43.5%) were submitted online, with Neglect of Duty being the most common allegation type (46.9%). The DPA sustained 8 cases involving 15 allegations of improper conduct, for a sustained rate of 3.07% (15 of 489 closed allegations).

269
SFPD COMPLAINTS RECEIVED
↑ 19.0% increase from Q1 2025 (226 complaints)
489
Allegations Investigated (Closed)
SFPD - Q1 2026
266
Cases Closed
SFPD - Q1 2026
15
Sustained Allegations
3.07% sustained rate
94
Avg Processing Days
Under 180-day target

SFSO San Francisco Sheriff's Office

SFSO Key Findings: In Q1 2026, the DPA received 13 SFSO complaints involving 56 allegations, and closed 9 SFSO cases during the quarter. The majority of SFSO allegations (91.1%) involved claims of misconduct by SFSO personnel, and there were no findings of improper conduct against SFSO personnel.

13
SFSO COMPLAINTS RECEIVED
Cases within DPA's SFSO oversight authority - Q1 2026
13
Allegations Investigated (Closed)
SFSO - Q1 2026
9
Cases Closed
SFSO - Q1 2026
0
Sustained Allegations
0.0% sustained rate

DPA Performance Metrics - SFPD Focus

This section compares Q1 SFPD data across three consecutive years (2024, 2025, 2026) for complaint volume, investigation outcomes, and DPA performance.

DPA Performance Metrics - 3-Year Trends

Core SFPD performance metrics comparison: Q1 2024-2026 showing complaint volume, allegations, cases closed, sustained cases, and processing times
Metric Trend Q1 2024 Q1 2025 Q1 2026 YoY Change
(2026 vs. 2025)*
Complaints Opened* 164 226 269 +19.0%
Allegations Received 306 391 550 +40.7%
Cases Closed 195 229 266 +16.2%
Sustained Allegations 44 15 15 0.0%
Sustained Rate 7.60% 3.36% 3.07% -8.6%
Avg Processing Days 98 92 94 +2.2%
Cases Pending 278 228 239 +4.8%
Identified Complainant Rate 98.0% 80.5% 84.0% +4.3%

*All changes shown as year-over-year percent change. "Complaints Opened" refers to SFPD-related complaints filed with DPA. The sustained rate fell year over year even though the sustained count held steady, because the total number of closed allegations grew.

Trend Analysis: Q1 2026 shows 269 complaints, a 19.0% change from Q1 2025 (226 complaints) and a 64.0% change from Q1 2024 (164 complaints). Q1 cases closed across the three years: 195 (2024), 229 (2025), 266 (2026).
DPA Quarterly Trends - 3-Year Comparison (2024-2026)
737
2024 Total
899
2025 Total
269
2026 Total (Q1)
659
3-Year Q1 Total
SFPD complaint trends by quarter: 2024-2026 showing quarterly and annual totals
Quarter 2024 2025 2026 Q Avg
Q1 (Jan-Mar) 164 226 269 220
Q2 (Apr-Jun) 204 231 218
Q3 (Jul-Sep) 175 246 211
Q4 (Oct-Dec) 194 196 195
Year Total 737 899 269 635

Trend Analysis: Key Insights

Complaint Volume Changes: Q1 SFPD complaints by year: Q1 2024 = 164; Q1 2025 = 226 (+37.8%); Q1 2026 = 269 (+19.0% YoY, +64.0% from 2024). Q1 cases closed: 195 (2024) → 229 (2025) → 266 (2026).

Complaint and Investigation Analysis

Complaint Submission Methods - Combined Analysis

SFPD complaints favor online and phone submissions (77.3%), while SFSO complaints in Q1 2026 were primarily received through referrals (53.8%) and online/phone (38.5% combined).

Complaint submission methods by department: SFPD and SFSO Q1 2026 showing distribution across online, phone, referral, and other channels
Submission Method SFPD SFSO Combined Total
Online 117 (43.5%) 3 (23.1%) 120 (42.6%)
Phone 91 (33.8%) 2 (15.4%) 93 (33.0%)
In Person 24 (8.9%) 0 (0.0%) 24 (8.5%)
Other 21 (7.8%) 1 (7.7%) 22 (7.8%)
Referral 8 (3.0%) 7 (53.8%) 15 (5.3%)
SFPD Referral 5 (1.9%) 0 (0.0%) 5 (1.8%)
Mail 3 (1.1%) 0 (0.0%) 3 (1.1%)
Letter 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)
Total 269 (100.0%) 13 (100.0%) 282 (100.0%)

Complainant Submission Method Analysis

SFPD Patterns: Online 43.5%, phone 33.8%, in-person 8.9%, other 7.8%, referrals 3.0%, SFPD referral 1.9%, mail 1.1%, letter 0.0%.

SFSO Patterns: With 13 complaints, SFSO submissions came primarily through referrals (53.8%), online (23.1%), and phone (15.4%), with one complaint via other methods (7.7%).

Combined Total: The DPA received 282 complaints across both departments in Q1 2026.

Complainant Demographics

Identified and Anonymous Complaints - Combined

Of the 282 complaints received across both departments, 239 (84.8%) were filed by identified complainants, while 43 (15.2%) were submitted anonymously. SFPD: 226 identified (84.0%), 43 anonymous (16.0%). SFSO: 13 identified (100.0%), 0 anonymous (0.0%).

Gender Demographics - Combined Data

Gender demographics of complainants: SFPD and SFSO Q1 2026 showing distribution by gender identity
Gender SFPD SFSO Combined Total
Male 86 (32.0%) 7 (53.8%) 93 (33.0%)
Declined to State 122 (45.4%) 3 (23.1%) 125 (44.3%)
Female 58 (21.6%) 3 (23.1%) 61 (21.6%)
Genderqueer/Non-binary 1 (0.4%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (0.4%)
Transgender 2 (0.7%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (0.7%)
Total 269 (100.0%) 13 (100.0%) 282 (100.0%)

Race/Ethnicity Demographics - Combined Data

Race and ethnicity demographics of complainants: SFPD and SFSO Q1 2026 showing diversity of complaints
Race/Ethnicity SFPD SFSO Combined Total
Declined to State 140 (52.0%) 4 (30.8%) 144 (51.1%)
White 49 (18.2%) 3 (23.1%) 52 (18.4%)
Black or African American 22 (8.2%) 4 (30.8%) 26 (9.2%)
Other 23 (8.6%) 0 (0.0%) 23 (8.2%)
Asian 18 (6.7%) 1 (7.7%) 19 (6.7%)
Hispanic or Latinx 17 (6.3%) 1 (7.7%) 18 (6.4%)
Total 269 (100.0%) 13 (100.0%) 282 (100.0%)

Categories reflect the SFPD/DPA intake form options. "Other" includes complainants who selected categories outside those shown (such as Native American/Indigenous, Pacific Islander, Multiracial, or Middle Eastern/North African) or who provided a self-described identity.

Age Demographics - Combined Data

Age demographics of complainants: SFPD and SFSO Q1 2026 showing distribution by age range
Age Range SFPD SFSO Combined Total
Declined to State 137 (50.9%) 5 (38.5%) 142 (50.4%)
41-50 51 (19.0%) 3 (23.1%) 54 (19.1%)
31-40 22 (8.2%) 1 (7.7%) 23 (8.2%)
51-60 21 (7.8%) 1 (7.7%) 22 (7.8%)
20-30 15 (5.6%) 2 (15.4%) 17 (6.0%)
71-80 13 (4.8%) 0 (0.0%) 13 (4.6%)
61-70 10 (3.7%) 1 (7.7%) 11 (3.9%)
Total 269 (100.0%) 13 (100.0%) 282 (100.0%)

No complaints were received from minors (under 20) or persons over 80 in Q1 2026; those age categories are omitted from the table.

Demographic Analysis

Key Observations: Q1 2026 SFSO complaints (n=13): 53.8% male, 23.1% female, 23.1% declined to state gender; 30.8% identified as Black or African American and 23.1% as White. Approximately half of complainants declined to provide demographic information (52.0% of SFPD; 30.8% of SFSO). Because nearly half of complainants declined to provide gender data, distributions among those who responded should not be read as representative of all complainants. Note: "Identified" complainants are individuals who provided their name when filing a complaint, as opposed to "anonymous" complaints where no identifying information was provided.

SFPD Allegation Types and Investigation Outcomes

Key Findings Analysis

Investigation Findings: 198 of 489 closed allegations (40.5%) were Proper Conduct. Sustained Findings: 15 allegations (3.07% of 489 closed) were sustained as "Improper Conduct," broken down as: Neglect of Duty (7), Conduct Unbecoming (3), Unwarranted Action (3), Use of Force (2). Policy Failure: 6 allegations. See the Glossary of Terms at the end of this report for finding definitions.

489
Total Allegations
Closed in Q1 2026
198
Proper Conduct
40.5% of closed allegations
15
Sustained Allegations
Improper conduct findings
6
Policy Failures
Policy failure findings

SFPD Processing Time Achievement

Performance: The DPA's average SFPD case processing time in Q1 2026 was 94 days, compared to a 180-day target (47.8% below the target). The DPA maintained 100% compliance with the Government Code 3304 one-year deadline for completing investigations.

SFPD Allegation Types and Findings

During Q1 2026, the DPA received 550 allegations. Neglect of Duty was the most frequent allegation type, accounting for 46.9% of all allegations received.

Policy/Procedure is an additional allegation type, tracked alongside the seven shown above. No Policy/Procedure allegations were received in Q1 2026; one — carried over from a prior quarter — was closed during the quarter and appears in the Investigation Outcomes cross-tab below. This allegation type is distinct from the Policy Failure finding: in Q1 2026 a Policy Failure finding was reached on 6 closed allegations (5 Neglect of Duty and 1 Policy/Procedure).

Investigation Outcomes by Allegation Type

The DPA closed 489 allegations during Q1 2026, with findings ranging from "Proper Conduct" to "Improper Conduct" (sustained). The overall sustained rate was 3.07% (15 of 489 closed allegations), and Neglect of Duty was the most frequent allegation type among sustained allegations. The table below shows how each type of allegation was resolved, providing transparency into the investigative process and outcomes. Closed allegations include cases opened in prior quarters, so the closed counts in this table are not directly comparable to the received counts in the chart above.

Investigation findings by allegation type in Q1 2026: Complete breakdown of 489 closed allegations showing outcomes across all allegation categories
DPA Finding Conduct Unbecoming Informational Neglect of Duty Policy/Procedure Referral Unwarranted Action Use of Force Total
Improper Conduct (Sustained) 3 0 7 0 0 3 2 15
Proper Conduct 25 0 86 0 0 57 30 198
Unfounded 38 0 34 0 0 12 3 87
Insufficient Evidence 17 0 18 0 0 1 4 40
Policy Failure 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 6
Mediated 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 5
Referral to Other Agency 1 0 5 0 45 1 0 52
Informational 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 18
No Finding 16 0 19 0 0 5 1 41
Withdrawal 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 6
Other 1 0 11 0 0 6 3 21
Total 105 18 192 1 45 85 43 489

Sustained findings indicate officer misconduct was determined. See the Sustained Cases section below for detailed case summaries and DPA recommendations.

Sustained Cases

Cases Where Improper Conduct Was Found

During Q1 2026, the DPA sustained 15 allegations of improper conduct. See the Glossary of Terms at the end of this report for the definition of "Improper Conduct (Sustained)." Each case summary below provides context while protecting privacy.

Sustained cases with detailed findings in Q1 2026: Eight cases (15 sustained allegations) with misconduct findings and DPA disciplinary recommendations
# Police Station Case Summary DPA Recommendations
1 Southern The officer conducted a self-initiated traffic stop and failed to complete the required Benchmark Stop Data entry, in violation of department policy. Admonishment and retraining.
2 Tenderloin Officers conducted a traffic stop without lights and siren, used excessive force, and issued a citation without cause. DPA recommended a seven-day suspension for one officer, a three-day suspension for another, and a written reprimand for a third.
3 Mission An officer improperly broadcast an emergency evacuation order when no emergency existed. 2-Day Suspension.
4 Southern The officers failed to activate their body-worn cameras as mandated by department policy. Written Reprimand and retraining.
5 Mission The officer failed to activate their body-worn camera as mandated by department policy. 1-Day Suspension.
6 Richmond An officer failed to investigate and prepare an incident report regarding an assault. 1-Day Suspension.
7 Tenderloin An officer inappropriately engaged in verbal banter with an individual and made inappropriate comments. 3-Day Suspension.
8 Tenderloin An officer made inappropriate comments. Written Reprimand and retraining.

SFPD Cases Closed and Pending by Quarter

Quarterly trend data for SFPD cases closed and cases pending at end of quarter, 2024-2026.

SFPD cases closed and pending by quarter, 2024-2026
Quarter 2024 2025 2026
Closed Pending Closed Pending Closed Pending
Q1 195 278 229 228 266 239
Q2 266 215 238 217
Q3 185 208 227 227
Q4 182 226 244 190
Year Total Closed 828 938 266

Mediation Division

DPA Mediation Division metrics for Q1 2026 showing case eligibility, offers, declines, and outcomes
Mediation Metric Q1 2026 YTD
Cases Referred 20 20
New Eligible Cases 20 20
Cases Mediated 4 4
Officer Ineligible 4 4
Officers Declined 1 1
Complainants Offered 20 20
Complainants Declined 7 7
Cases Returned 0 0
Mediations Pending 3 3

Activity counts reflect work performed during the quarter and do not necessarily map one-to-one to the new eligible cases referred. Mediations completed, declined, or pending in Q1 2026 may involve cases referred in earlier quarters.

Mediation Analysis

Q1 2026 Mediation Activity: 20 new eligible cases were referred to mediation. 4 cases were mediated. 20 complainants were offered mediation; 7 declined. 1 officer declined. 4 cases were officer-ineligible. 3 mediations were pending at quarter end.

Investigations Division

Q1 2026 Investigations Activity

The DPA's Investigations Division absorbed a significant influx of cases stemming from the March 22 incident at San Francisco International Airport involving federal immigration officials. The Department received 43 complaints related to the incident (counted within the 269 SFPD complaints reported for the quarter), each requiring intake, review, and investigative follow-up. This surge arrived alongside the Division's regular complaint volume and active caseload, materially increasing investigative workload during the quarter. Investigators triaged and advanced these matters while maintaining progress on existing cases.

Overall, the DPA received 269 complaints during Q1 2026, involving 550 allegations against sworn members of the SFPD. The majority of these complaints (43.5%) were submitted online. The Division closed 266 SFPD cases involving 489 allegations during the quarter, with an average completion time of 94 days, and sustained 8 cases involving 15 sustained allegations.

SB 1421 / SB 16 Division

Q1 2026 SB 1421 / SB 16 Activity

The DPA continued its ongoing work to identify, review, and disclose records subject to California's police transparency laws while also managing its regular volume of public records requests. This work includes reviewing archived cases for potential disclosure and processing records related to incidents such as officer-involved shootings, in-custody deaths, dishonesty, unlawful searches, biased conduct, and excessive force. Some records cannot be released until sustained findings are finalized and any appeals are resolved. The DPA remains committed to ensuring timely public access to qualifying records as legal disclosure requirements continue to evolve.

90
Cases Disclosed
Across all qualifying categories, Q1 2026
56,536
Pages Disclosed
Total pages released, Q1 2026
3,986
Exempt Determinations
Reviewed and not subject to disclosure

Pages Disclosed by Category

SB 1421 / SB 16 pages disclosed by record category in Q1 2026
Category Pages Disclosed
Officer-Involved Shooting 38,122
Great Bodily Injury 12,107
Dishonesty 3,071
Unlawful Arrest or Search 1,697
Unreasonable or Excessive Force 1,071
Biased Policing 104
Other qualifying categories 364
Total 56,536

"Other qualifying categories" covers additional SB 1421 / SB 16 record types disclosed in smaller volumes during Q1 2026.

Audit Division

Q1 2026 Audit Activity

The Audit Division presented the DPA's use-of-force audit to the San Francisco Police Commission. The presentation provided an overview of key findings on limitations in SFPD's monitoring processes and outlined the DPA's recommendations to strengthen internal oversight and accountability.

During the same period, the DPA began planning a new audit on SFPD's use of automated license plate reader (ALPR) systems. The preliminary objective of the audit is to evaluate the extent to which SFPD complied with applicable requirements regarding the use of ALPR systems. The preliminary scope covers data and processes from March 2025 through March 2026.

Policy Division

Q1 2026 Policy Activity

The DPA welcomed Policy Director Jamal Anderson, who joined at the close of the quarter to lead the Policy Division. With that transition underway, the Division's Q1 work focused on its ongoing review of SFPD Department General Orders (DGOs), Bureau Orders, and Department Notices, and on providing recommendations to the Police Commission and the Chief of Police where appropriate. The Division also participated in working groups and convened stakeholders on a range of policy issues, including DGO 5.23 (Interactions with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals) and DGO 5.20 (Language Access Services for Limited English Proficient persons).

Training Division

Q1 2026 Training Activity

The DPA's Training Division delivered in-house trainings covering witness interview techniques, the statute of limitations and tolling provisions under California Government Code section 3304, de-escalation, and the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in investigative work. The Division also kept staff informed of external training opportunities offered by partner organizations, including the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) and the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council (PAC).

SFSO Oversight

SFSO Overview

The DPA has investigated certain types of 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, the DPA has expanded its role to support investigations, critical incidents, and community engagement.

SFSO DPA Current Jurisdiction

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 covers:

In-custody deaths, and complaints involving any of the following:

  • Use of force resulting in 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 deputies
  • Additional misconduct at SFSO discretion

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

SFSO Key Metrics - Q1 2026

13
Complaints Received
Q1 2026
9
Cases Closed
Q1 2026
43
Cases Pending
End of Q1 2026
13
Total Complainants
All identified (0 anonymous)

SFSO Allegations and Findings

SFSO complaints in Q1 2026 generated 56 total allegations across the 13 complaints received.

SFSO Case Findings

The disposition of SFSO cases closed in Q1 2026 is summarized below. There were 0 Improper Conduct (sustained) findings against SFSO personnel. The 13 allegations tabulated here are those within the 9 SFSO cases closed this quarter; remaining allegations from the 56 SFSO allegations received in Q1 are still pending.

SFSO findings by allegation type in Q1 2026: Cross-tabulation of 13 allegations by finding and allegation category
Allegation Type Exonerated - SFSO No Finding Referral to Other Agency Unfounded Withdrawal Total
Misconduct 3 1 0 4 1 9
Neglect of Duty 0 0 0 2 0 2
Referral 0 0 2 0 0 2
Grand Total 3 1 2 6 1 13

SFSO Findings Analysis

Sustained: 0 of 13 allegations. Unfounded: 6 of 13 (46.2%). Exonerated: 3 of 13 (23.1%). Referral to Other Agency: 2 (15.4%). No Finding: 1 (7.7%). Withdrawal: 1 (7.7%). See the Glossary of Terms at the end of this report for finding definitions.

SFSO Cases Closed by Year Filed

The 9 SFSO cases closed in Q1 2026 were originally filed across three different years. Most were filed in prior years (2023-2025), reflecting the longer investigative timelines characteristic of the serious-misconduct categories under DPA's SFSO oversight authority.

SFSO cases closed in Q1 2026 by year filed: Distribution showing how many of this quarter's closed cases were filed in each year
Year Filed Cases Closed % of Total
2024 6 66.7%
2025 2 22.2%
2023 1 11.1%
Total 9 100.0%

SFSO Complaints by Facility

The 13 SFSO complaints received in Q1 2026 originated from the following facilities and locations:

SFSO complaints received in Q1 2026 by facility: Distribution across detention facilities, court, and related locations
Facility/Location Complaints Percentage
County Jail #2 5 38.5%
County Jail #3 3 23.1%
County Jail #1 1 7.7%
Hall of Justice 1 7.7%
SF Superior Court 1 7.7%
SFPD Headquarters 1 7.7%
ZSF General Hospital 1 7.7%
Total 13 100.0%

SFSO Allegations by Facility

The 56 SFSO allegations received in Q1 2026 originated from the following facilities and locations:

SFSO allegations received in Q1 2026 by facility: Distribution across detention facilities and related locations
Facility/Location Allegations Percentage
County Jail #2 26 46.4%
County Jail #3 23 41.1%
County Jail #1 5 8.9%
SFPD Headquarters 1 1.8%
ZSF General Hospital 1 1.8%
Total 56 100.0%

The 13 SFSO complaints originated from seven facilities, but allegations are concentrated in five. Facilities such as Hall of Justice and SF Superior Court appear in the complaints table but not the allegations table because the underlying complaints fall outside the serious-misconduct categories that generate allegations under DPA's SFSO jurisdiction.

SFSO Cases Opened, Closed, and Pending - Q1 Comparison

Q1 SFSO complaint volume has grown year over year, with pending cases also increasing as the DPA's SFSO oversight role has expanded. SFSO cases opened have more than doubled since 2024 (6 to 13), while closing pace has not kept pace, driving the pending caseload up to 43.

SFSO cases opened, closed, and pending by Q1 across years 2024-2026
Year Q1 Cases Opened Q1 Cases Closed Q1 Cases Pending (End of Quarter)
2024 6 10 23
2025 10 6 42
2026 13 9 43

SFSO Analysis

Allegation Patterns: SFSO allegations in Q1 2026: Misconduct 91.1% (51 of 56), Neglect of Duty 7.1% (4), Referral 1.8% (1). 13 complaints generated 56 allegations.

Facility Distribution: County Jail #2 generated the most complaints (5, 38.5%), followed by County Jail #3 (3, 23.1%). The remaining complaints were spread across County Jail #1, Hall of Justice, SF Superior Court, SFPD Headquarters, and ZSF General Hospital (1 each).

More details for SFSO can be found at https://www.sf.gov/departments--office-sheriffs-inspector-general.

Glossary of Terms

Definitions used throughout this report for allegations and findings, separated by oversight jurisdiction.

SFPD Allegations & Findings

Allegation
A way to describe an individual act of potential misconduct. Complaints usually have more than one allegation to investigate. The primary categories of allegations tracked in this report are Unwarranted Action, Neglect of Duty, Use of Force, and Conduct Unbecoming, with additional administrative classifications for Referral, Informational, Failure to Intercede, and Policy/Procedure.
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.)
Failure to Intercede
Type of allegation that an officer failed to intervene to stop or prevent another officer's misconduct when the officer had the opportunity and duty to do so.
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.
Policy/Procedure
Administrative allegation type used when an allegation concerns a written department policy or procedure rather than an individual officer's conduct. Tracked separately from the primary allegation categories, and distinct from the Policy Failure finding.
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. Failure to treat supervisors, subordinates, and peers with respect, or to maintain courtesy and civility 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 Office'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.