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 91 During the twelfth reporting period, we observed the final inspection of the Santa Clara Academy students. Additionally, at the request of OPD, we reviewed training instructor files and provided OPD with feedback aimed at assisting OPD to ensure that its selection of Academy instructors is consistent with the NSA. During the thirteenth reporting period, we conducted another assessment of the three areas that were out of compliance during our last audit. We found that OPD was in compliance in each of the areas. OPD is in compliance with Task 43. The only portion of this task that will be actively monitored under the MOU is 43.1.1, which requires OPD to ensure that personnel are adequately trained for their positions. The Monitor will conduct the required audits, reviews or studies to assess whether OPD is complying with the substantive task requirements of this subtask. (MOU, paragraph 10.) F. Personnel Practices (Tasks 44–46; S.A. X.) Section X of the Settlement Agreement, Tasks 44–46, requires OPD to reform its personnel practices in three areas: Performance Appraisals; Consistency of Discipline; and Promotional Consideration. These provisions of the Settlement Agreement are particularly important because they are the underpinning of a system that treats OPD officers fairly and equitably while holding them accountable for their actions. The Settlement Agreement’s Performance Appraisal section, Task 44, requires OPD to write performance appraisals for each officer, documenting the officer’s conduct and performance in a variety of areas. Such appraisals had not occurred with regularity in the years preceding the NSA. If done consistently and fairly, performance appraisals can be a valuable management tool for identifying both excellent and substandard police work, and for holding supervisors accountable for the performance of their subordinates. OPD achieved policy compliance with this task ahead of schedule. During the sixth reporting period, OPD provided the IMT with sufficiently reliable training data to enable us to confirm that OPD had trained 95% or more of relevant personnel on this task. As discussed below, OPD is making progress in this area, but as of the last audit, its actual practice did not yet comply fully with the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement’s Consistency of Discipline section, Task 45, requires OPD to revise its disciplinary policy to ensure that discipline is imposed in a fair and consistent manner. The timely and fair imposition of discipline is essential to ensure accountability. The compliance deadline for this task occurred during the combined fourth and fifth reporting period. With the publication during the seventh reporting period of the Departmental Discipline Policy (Training Bulletin V-T), OPD attained policy compliance with this task. During the tenth reporting period, OPD revised its Discipline Policy and Discipline Matrix based on concerns that, as originally crafted, it was overly punitive. These changes were reviewed and approved by the Parties and the IMT. The IMT verified that the Department trained at least 95% of relevant personnel on the revised Discipline Policy and Discipline Matrix.