fourteenth-report.pdf

Independent Monitoring Team Fourteenth Status Report of the Independent Monitor Delphine Allen, et al., v. City of Oakland, et al. July 31, 2009 to January 13, 2010 Page 71 appeared to understand Task 33’s requirement to report misconduct and the consequences for failing to report it, they did not appear to understand the difference between confidential and anonymous reporting. Commendably, OPD developed a “refresher” lesson plan including instruction on the requirements of this task. According to OPD, during the ninth reporting period, it completed training of over 95% of personnel on this lesson plan. During the sixth reporting period, the IMT conducted an audit of OPD’s compliance with Task 33 in actual practice. A complete discussion of our audit findings is included in our sixth status report. The IMT determined that OPD is informing members/employees of its confidential reporting procedures. OPD training logs confirmed that OPD informed at least 95% of current employees and 100% of new recruits and lateral hires about OPD’s confidential reporting procedures during the period covered by this review. The IMT was also able to confirm that OPD is committed to a confidential reporting system that includes the components required by the Settlement Agreement. The IMT was unable to determine whether this confidential reporting system functions properly or whether cases reported confidentially are maintained confidentially because no cases were reported confidentially during the period covered by this review. Our review indicated that OPD personnel frequently were not reporting misconduct and that OPD only rarely assessed whether misconduct was properly reported. In addition, we found that, with rare exceptions, OPD did not hold members/employees accountable for failing to report misconduct even where the internal investigation clearly established that the member/employee encountered apparent misconduct and failed to report it. Our audit made several recommendations for improving Task 33 compliance, including: clarifying OPD’s misconduct reporting requirements; clarifying for officers how OPD’s confidential reporting system works; requiring that all sustained cases be reviewed within IAD to ensure that all potential reporting violations were addressed and resolved; and including the consideration of misconduct reporting issues in the investigation checklist. OPD implemented many of these recommendations and others they developed, including retraining officers about their reporting obligations and the consequences for failing to meet them. During the ninth reporting period, OPD published Training Bulletin V-T.3, Reporting Misconduct, designed to give personnel concrete examples of their reporting responsibilities. The training bulletin appropriately discusses reporting misconduct as an act of integrity, not betrayal. Additionally, during the ninth reporting period, OPD published an informational bulletin instructing personnel on the differences between anonymous and confidential reporting. The bulletin was accompanied by a quiz that was administered to IAD staff to test their understanding. During the tenth reporting period, one of the compliance standards for this task was modified to include a more subjective pass/fail assessment.