In a review of the NYPD’s database of people with suspected gang ties that was several months late, the city’s Department of Investigation said on Tuesday that it found no “evidence of harm” to individuals named in the sprawling list, but recommended a host of changes aimed at improving transparency about how names are added.

The list, which is officially called the Criminal Group Database, is heralded by police as a critical tool in preventing gang-related shootings. It includes some 16,000 names, according to the 91-page report summarizing the DOI's five-year investigation — the results of which were promised a year ago.

Activists have long panned the database as a digital dragnet that unfairly sweeps up Black and Hispanic residents who, according to the report, have comprised 99% of the list's names since its creation in 2013. Critics contend that inclusion in the database subjects individuals to additional surveillance and prosecution, with little transparency or recourse for having a name removed.

While the investigators found no "evidence of harm" was linked to the database, they acknowledged that they were working with limited information.

The report said that finding individual harm would require prospectively tracking people and determining if any negative outcomes – in their employment, housing, education or elsewhere – were the result of inclusion on the database or that person’s own personal history, such as their past convictions. Even if such an analysis were feasible, investigators concluded that it would be beyond the scope of the report.

The investigators also noted that information about gang affiliations exists in other NYPD forms and systems, making it difficult to directly tie any outcomes to the database. Additionally, individuals are typically unaware their names are in the database, making it unlikely they might come forward with objections.

But the report also found a lack of procedural issues that echoed activists’ longstanding concerns. These include a lack of formal, written policies on the use of the database, including guidance about what criteria warrants someone’s name being added. For social media posts, the use of certain emojis or being in photos with known gang members was enough by itself to get someone on the list, the report found. Kids as young as 11 or 12 were once on the database but have since been removed.

The report also noted that some names are included in the database even when records of their arrests have been sealed and should have been off limits.

Investigators offered 17 recommendations, including establishing clear, public guidelines on the purpose and process of adding people to the database and conducting a review of whether each name should still be included on the list within 180 days.

Josmar Trujillo, deputy director at the Police Reform Organizing Project and a former activist with the GANGS Coalition fighting the database, said he was surprised and alarmed by the finding of "no harm." That conclusion stands in stark contrast to similar audits on gang databases in California in 2016 and Chicago in 2019, which uncovered widespread inaccuracies and lack of oversight.

“That’s a big concern: that this report will whitewash what the NYPD is doing,” he said.

While being on the list might not itself lead to harm, a gang label could lead to higher bails, inclusion in gang conspiracy cases, and worse treatment in cop encounters and court appearances, Trujillo said.

Obi Afriyie, a criminal justice organizer with the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, echoed Trujillo's concerns, adding that despite finding racial disparities in who's on the list, the DOI's recommendations remain "soft," lacking in a direct call for stronger oversight of the NYPD.

However, both Afriye and Anthony Posada, supervising attorney in the Community Justice Unit at the Legal Aid Society, said the results bolster the need for Int. 0360, a city council bill that would abolish the database and prevent the NYPD from creating a replacement.

"It's clear that it makes the case that the database should be scrapped," Posada said. "The database right now as it stands, is overtly racist, procedurally indefensible and it makes little to no contribution to public safety."

The report recommended that the NYPD publish a statement on its website within 180 days about how the database helps the department improve public safety and reduce violent crime. It also said the department should revise its policies to clearly specify what evidence is necessary to add someone to the database and list the specific outside agencies the department may share the data with.

The report also recommended an extra layer of review for adding minors to the list, including a special review panel, notifying the minor's parents or guardians within 60 days, and creating a process for minors to appeal their inclusion in the list. Written policies should also require review of each entry every 12 months for minors and every 18 months for adults, according to the report.

Investigators also recommended that the NYPD increase staff in charge of administering the database, along with drafting a written policy to generally grant Freedom of Information requests from individuals requesting information about their placement on the database, among other recommendations.

This story has been updated with additional information.