ABOUT
Signal Cleveland and Cleveland Documenters created this tool to make Cleveland police discipline records easier to find, search and understand. Our goal is to help people understand how police discipline works and where it deserves a closer look.
Why we built it: This tool is a public service for Greater Clevelanders, including residents, police employees, attorneys, officials, journalists and others who want to understand how the department handles misconduct allegations. These records were mostly public, but scattered across thousands of pages. We collected and organized them so people could not only look up individual cases but also examine broader questions: How are discipline decisions made? Are employees treated consistently? What happens when misconduct repeats? We understand publishing these records could be viewed as unfair or anti-police. But our aim is broader accountability.
What’s here: As of October 2026, we gathered more than 1,800 discipline records involving more than 1,000 officers, dispatchers, supervisors and other staff from 2016 through mid-2026. A little over 1,700 cases are included in the search tool because some records do not identify the employee who was facing discipline. Cases range from poor attendance and body camera use violations to allegations of excessive force, dishonesty and other serious misconduct.
Where the information comes from: We gathered information from discipline hearing records, letters and available arbitration records. Cleveland Documenters entered each case into the database. We used AI models from OpenAI to write a short headline and a plain-language summary for each case based on the records. We also used it to label cases based on key facts such as whether the officer was found guilty, suspended or fired and to give users the “At a glance” information on each officer’s page. We validated large samples against the original records to ensure accuracy. Each case includes links to original documents.
How to read the records: A disciplinary charge is an accusation that an employee broke a department rule or is accused of other misconduct. It does not, by itself, mean the employee committed misconduct or a crime. Read the findings and outcome alongside the charges. To help readers, we created a glossary.
What’s missing: Some records are incomplete or lack hearing dates. For several months in 2022 and 2023, a public safety official removed employee names and badge numbers from discipline notices. These gaps limit what we can show about some cases and employees. Verbal warnings from the chief of police are not recorded as discipline in the records. Legal settlements negotiated between the city’s law department and police unions are not included in the data.
Why an outcome may have changed: Employees and their unions can challenge discipline through grievances and arbitration. A penalty listed here — including a firing — may later have been reduced or overturned. We do not have complete records of those changes, so a listed outcome may not be the final outcome.
How we’ve tried to fill the gaps: We requested arbitration records to fill the gaps in listed outcomes. The city initially denied our requests for arbitration records, saying it did not track discipline in a way that allowed those records to be provided. It later supplied about two dozen case outcomes, mostly involving discipline cases from 2021 and 2022. We’ve included those records and continue to request more. We shared our plans with unions representing police employees and sought their feedback. The Cleveland Police Patrolmen’s Association helped us understand some records and encouraged us to include outcomes from challenges to discipline. Neither the association nor the Fraternal Order of Police, which represents supervisors, agreed to provide those records, citing legal advice. They also declined to say whether any terminations were overturned.
Updates, corrections and your questions: We will add cases as the city releases records and update outcomes as we obtain and verify new information. Employees and other readers can suggest questions for our reporting or flag errors below. We want the information to be as accurate as possible.
How can I help? Your support of Signal Cleveland makes civic tools like this possible. As a nonprofit newsroom, we rely on readers to help us build transparency and accountability in policing and other systems. A donation today helps us continue this type of work — and keep it free for everyone.
Have questions or feedback for us? Contact us using the form below.
Credits:
Cleveland Documenters who captured data for this tool include: Emma Sedlak, Hails Hoyat, Dan McLaughlin and Rosie Palfy.
Glossary: Rosie Palfy and Emma Sedlak
Copy editing: Mary Ellen Crowley Huesken
Product development: David Eads, Cid Standifer
Database development: April Urban
Additional data analysis and reporting: Cid Standifer, Emma Sedlak, Frank W. Lewis and Rachel Dissell
Illustration: John G
Editing: Rachel Dissell
