ninth-report.pdf

Independent Monitoring Team Ninth Status Report of the Independent Monitor Delphine Allen, et al., v. City of Oakland, et al. May 13, 2006, to November 30, 2006 Page 44 Personnel Division struggled to produce timely and reliable data responsive to our requests. Following lengthy delays, Personnel produced some information. However, based on our own knowledge of staff schedules, assignments, and personnel moves, we were able to quickly discern that much of the data provided was inaccurate and/or simply outdated. We spent a considerable amount of time working with Personnel, OIG, and other OPD units to assist them in compiling accurate staffing rosters. The Department has acknowledged the deficiencies in its management of basic personnel data and has reported that it is working on improving and modernizing its recordkeeping systems. As with Task 18 above, unless and until OPD is better able to manage data, including basic operational data, it will have a difficult time demonstrating compliance with this and other NSA provisions. During the upcoming reporting periods, the IMT will determine whether OPD has conducted appropriate training on the new policy, and whether OPD’s actual practices comply with this Settlement Agreement provision. 3. Span of Control for Supervisors (Task 20; S.A. IV.C.) a. Settlement Agreement Requirements • By August 14, 2003, OPD must, based on contemporary police standards and best practices, develop and implement a policy to ensure appropriate supervision of its Area Command Field Teams. The Settlement Agreement sets forth certain provisions that must be included in the policy. Most notably, the Settlement Agreement requires that, under normal conditions, OPD assign one primary sergeant to each Area Command Field Team. Additionally, a supervisor’s span of control cannot exceed eight members. b. Status of Compliance and Assessment The compliance deadline for this task occurred in August 2003. As previously reported, OPD achieved policy compliance with this task by publishing and distributing the following policies: General Order A-3, Department Organization; BFO Policy 03- 02, Supervisory Span of Control; and BOI Policy 04-02, Supervisory Span of Control. During the sixth reporting period, OPD attained training compliance on General Order A- 3 and BFO Policy 03-02. OPD, however, never completed training on BOI Policy 04-02. During this reporting period, OPD replaced BFO 03-02 and BOI 04-02 by publishing General Order A-19, Supervisory Span of Control. It also published Special Order 8435, Acting Sergeant Selection Process, establishing procedures for ensuring that those individuals who serve as acting sergeants have the necessary skills and training to function effectively as acting supervisors. The IMT determined that these policies