I Florida
Police Depts Sheriffs Depts
Loading Map ...
Sheriff's Department * Hendry County
38% SCORE
* An asterisk indicates that this location has not provided enough data to be included in our rankings. We are still working to obtain comprehensive data from every jurisdiction in the nation.
Average for 4 Sections: 38%
Scores range from 0-100% comparing counties with under 50k population. Counties with higher scores spend less on policing, use less force, are more likely to hold officers accountable and make fewer arrests for low-level offenses.
Worse
50th Percentile
Better
Police Funding: 36% | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Police Budget Cost per Person | ||||
Misconduct Settlements | ||||
Fines/Forfeitures | ||||
Police Presence/Over-Policing (Officers per Population) |
Police Violence: 45% | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Force Used per Arrest | ||||
Deadly Force per Arrest | ||||
Unarmed Victims of Deadly Force per Arrest | ||||
Racial Disparities in Deadly Force |
Worse
50th Percentile
Better
Police Accountability: 32% | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Misconduct Complaints Upheld | ||||
Excessive Force Complaints Upheld | ||||
Discrimination Complaints Upheld | ||||
Criminal Misconduct Complaints Upheld |
Approach to Law Enforcement: 39% | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Arrest Rate for Low Level Offenses | ||||
Homicides Solved | ||||
Racial Disparities in Drug Arrests | ||||
Jail Incarceration Rate | ||||
Jail Deaths per 1,000 |
1 Killings by Police
Hendry County Sheriff Department killed 1 person from 2013-21.
N/A civilian complaints of police misconduct
No civilian complaints data obtained for this agency.
18,838 arrests made
80% of all arrests were for low-level, non-violent offenses from 2013-21.
Section Score: 36% ▶-2%
Police Funding By Year
$10.93M | 34,125 Residents | $343 per Resident
More Police Funding per Capita than 83% of Depts
Source: US Census Bureau
Number of officers per 1k population
126 Officers | 36.9 per 10k Residents
More Officers per Population than 90% of Depts
Source: Federal LEOKA Database
Section Score: 45% ▶+22%
Deadly Force
1 Killings by Police from 2013-21 | 0.5 every 10k arrests
^ More Killings by Police per Arrest than 69% of Depts
Source: Mapping Police Violence
Deadly Force by Armed Status
N/A Unarmed | N/A Did Not Allegedly Have a Gun
Unarmed Other Alleged Gun Vehicle
^ More Unarmed People Killed per Arrest than N/A of Depts
Police Violence by Race
Black Latinx N.Am API Other White
Population of Hendry County
10%
51%
33%
Hendry County Sheriff's Dept Demographics
People Arrested
People Killed
100%
Source: Uniform Crime Report, Mapping Police Violence, LEMAS
Section Score: 32%
Section Score: 39% ▶+7%
Source: Uniform Crime Report
Arrests By Year
18,838 Arrests Reported from 2013-2021
Low Level Arrests Other Arrests
More Info
Arrests for Low Level Offenses
14,985 Arrests | 62 per 1k residents
^ Higher Arrest Rate for Low Level Offenses than 96% of Depts
Percent of total arrests by type
All Arrests for Low Level Offenses ( 80% )
Drug Possession ( N/A )
Violent Crime ( 4% )
Homicides Unsolved
26 Homicides from 2013-21 | 8 Unsolved
^ Solved Fewer Homicides than 48% of Depts
Jail Incarceration rate
237 Avg Daily Jail Population | 7 per 1k residents
^ More than 66% of Sheriff's Depts
People in Jail Without Being Convicted
79 % of People in Jail
Rankings are based upon a 0 to 100 percentage scale. Departments with higher scores use less force, make fewer arrests for low level offenses, solve murder cases more often, hold officers more accountable and spend less on policing overall.
Overall Scores for Depts where We Have Obtained the Most Data.
Tap "show more" to see extended list
0-29% 30-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80-89% 90-100% Incomplete
Sheriff's Department | Score | 5YR |
---|---|---|
40. Broward County 29% | ▶+4% | |
39. Alachua County 31% | ▶+5% | |
38. Monroe County 34% | ▶+11% | |
37. Seminole County 34% | ▶+7% | |
36. Pinellas County 34% | ▶-6% | |
35. Jacksonville City Cnty 35% | ▶-2% | |
34. St. Lucie County 36% | ▶-1% | |
33. Indian River County 37% | ▶-6% | |
32. Bay County 38% | ▶+1% | |
31. Putnam County 39% | ▶+4% | |
30. Charlotte County 39% | ▶+4% | |
29. Martin County 39% | ▶-3% | |
28. Brevard County 40% | ||
27. Walton County 40% | ▶+1% | |
26. Palm Beach County 41% | ▶+10% | |
25. Marion County 42% | ▶+3% | |
24. Hillsborough County 42% | ▶+3% | |
23. Nassau County 42% | ▶+22% | |
22. Manatee County 42% | ▶+1% | |
21. Leon County 43% | ▶+5% | |
20. Santa Rosa County 43% | ▶+7% | |
19. Sumter County 44% | ▶-4% | |
18. Highlands County 45% | ||
17. Okaloosa County 45% | ▶+1% | |
16. Collier County 46% | ▶+2% | |
15. Flagler County 47% | ▶-4% | |
14. Escambia County 47% | ▶-1% | |
13. Orange County 48% | ▶+7% | |
12. Citrus County 48% | ▶+11% | |
11. Volusia County 48% | ▶+12% | |
10. Sarasota County 48% | ▶-9% | |
9. Pasco County 48% | ▶-7% | |
8. Hernando County 49% | ▶+9% |
Sheriff's Department | Score | 5YR |
---|---|---|
7. Polk County 50% | ▶+5% | |
6. Lake County 51% | ▶+7% | |
5. Lee County 52% | ▶-13% | |
4. Columbia County 52% | ▶+9% | |
3. Clay County 54% | ▶-1% | |
2. Osceola County 56% | ▶+7% | |
1. St. Johns County 57% | ▶+4% | |
* Bradford County 36% | ▶-5% | |
* Hendry County 38% | ▶+7% | |
* Okeechobee County 38% | ▶+1% | |
* Hardee County 39% | ||
* Baker County 39% | ▶-1% | |
* Holmes County 40% | ▶+2% | |
* Gulf County 40% | ▶-3% | |
* Hamilton County 40% | ▶-3% | |
* Taylor County 40% | ▶+3% | |
* Dixie County 41% | ▶+1% | |
* Glades County 42% | ▶-4% | |
* Franklin County 42% | ▶+1% | |
* Jefferson County 43% | ▶-3% | |
* Levy County 44% | ▶-1% | |
* Washington County 45% | ▶+14% | |
* Madison County 45% | ||
* Calhoun County 47% | ▶-8% | |
* Jackson County 47% | ▶-7% | |
* Liberty County 47% | ▶-11% | |
* Wakulla County 47% | ▶-6% | |
* Gadsden County 48% | ▶-7% | |
* Desoto County 48% | ▶-4% | |
* Suwannee County 49% | ▶+1% | |
* Lafayette County 49% | ▶-2% | |
* Gilchrist County 51% | ▶+2% | |
* Union County 53% | ▶-5% |
* An asterisk indicates this location did not publish enough data to evaluate. Click below to add data to the Scorecard.
This is the first nationwide evaluation of policing in the United States. It was built using data from state and federal databases, public records requests to local police departments, and media reports. While police data is never perfect, and there are additional indicators that still need to be tracked, the Police Scorecard is designed to provide insight into many important issues in policing.
Police Scorecard is an independent 501(c)(3) organization, learn more about our team here. If you have feedback, questions about the project, or need support with an advocacy campaign, contact our Founder, Samuel Sinyangwe.
methodology Source Data
Use this Scorecard to identify issues within police departments that require the most urgent interventions and hold officials accountable for implementing solutions. For example, cities with higher rates of low level arrests could benefit most from solutions that create alternatives to policing and arrest for these offenses. In cities where police make fewer arrests overall but use more force when making arrests, communities could benefit significantly from policies designed to hold police accountable for excessive force. And cities where complaints of police misconduct are rarely ruled in favor of civilians could benefit from creating an oversight structure to independently investigate these complaints.
Here's how to start pushing for change
- Contact Your County Sheriff, share your scorecard with them and urge them to enact policies to address the issues you've identified:
- Look up your state and federal representatives below, then tell them to take action to hold police accountable in your community.
Step 1: COMPLETED
Obtain data on 100 California cities. Refine methodology in response to feedback from communities, researchers and local officials.
Step 2: COMPLETED
Expand to every major law enforcement agency in America and include additional indicators such as police budgets and jail incarceration.
Step 3: IN PROGRESS
Inform data-driven solutions nationwide. Update as new federal, state and local data are collected. Track progress and hold cities accountable to results.