SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA AND THE PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT

BACKGROUND

1. The parties to this Agreement are the United States of America and the City of Philadelphia (City) and the Philadelphia Police Department (PPD) (collectively, the Parties).

2. The United States Department of Justice (Department) is responsible for administering and enforcing Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12134, and its implementing regulation, 28 C.F.R. Part 35, which require that no qualified individual with a disability, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by a public entity.  42 U.S.C. § 12132; 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(a).

3. The City and PPD are public entities within the meaning of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12131(1)(A) & (B), and are therefore subject to Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-34, as amended, and its implementing regulation, 28 C.F.R. Part 35.

4. The U.S. Department of Justice initiated an investigation of PPD upon receiving a complaint alleging that PPD failed to provide effective communication to a deaf individual during his arrest and detainment.  In the course of this investigation, the United States interviewed deaf individuals—ranging from detainees to crime victims—who contend that PPD denied them effective communication.  The United States also interviewed PPD representatives and reviewed PPD’s policies and practices relating to the provision of auxiliary aids and services to individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing.  Following this investigation, the United States determined that PPD engages in discriminatory practices that deny individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing with full and equal opportunities to participate in and benefit from PPD’s programs, services, and activities, including by: 

   1. Failing to take appropriate steps to ensure that communication with individuals with disabilities is as effective as communication with others;

   2. Failing to provide auxiliary aids and services necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals who are deaf;

   3. Failing to give primary consideration to an individual’s requested auxiliary aid or service of choice and failing to provide an equally effective alternative;

   4. Inappropriately relying on a crime victim to interpret for the victim’s deaf roommates;

   5. Failing to sufficiently train PPD staff and officers on how to assess the need for auxiliary aids and services and to secure auxiliary aids and services; and

   6. Failing to notify courts that detainees are deaf prior to video arraignments held at PPD facilities.

The United States set forth its findings of fact and conclusions of law in a Letter of Findings issued on December 7, 2016.

5. The United States, the City, and PPD agree that it is in the Parties’ best interests, and the United States believes that it is in the public interest, to resolve this matter on mutually agreeable terms without litigation.