68,465 docs · 699,649 pages · 89,092 facts · as of 2026-07-30

Record D-4226 · nsa_report

combined-10th-11th-report.pdf

oaklandca · 3.7 MB · 94 pages extracted · 10 facts cite this document · retrieved 2026-07-15 · original location · open the PDF

Figures extracted from this document

NSA Task 12 compliance status0.5compliance_status2008-12-17p.49
NSA Task 2.1 compliance status0compliance_status2008-12-17p.34
NSA Task 25 compliance status0.5compliance_status2008-12-17p.18
NSA Task 25.2 compliance status1compliance_status2008-12-17p.61
NSA Task 26.2 compliance status1compliance_status2008-12-17p.62
NSA Task 31.3 compliance status1compliance_status2008-12-17p.69
NSA Task 35 compliance status0.5compliance_status2008-12-17p.18
NSA Task 35.4 compliance status1compliance_status2008-12-17p.74
NSA Task 48.1 compliance status1compliance_status2008-12-17p.87
NSA Task 48.2 compliance status1compliance_status2008-12-17p.88

Extracted text

· page 41 of 94 · · see this page in the PDF

Negotiated Settlement Agreement, Combined Tenth and Eleventh Semi-Annual Report December 2008 The ICR documentation, according to the Agreement, must include eight elements. Informal complaints will document 1) the receipt of the complaint; 2) the date of complaint; 3) the time of compliant; 4) the location of complaint; 5) the name of the person making the complaint; 6) the name of the person receiving the complaint; 7) how the matter was resolved; and, 8) that the person making the complaint was advised of the formal complaint process. For the eight required elements, the Department was 100% in compliance with all but one, the documentation of time. There were three incidents in which the time was not documented resulting in 94.3% compliance for that specific element. After averaging the compliance rate for all eight elements the Department was 99.3% in compliance with Task 4.2, well above the 85% compliance requirement. According to Task 4,10, the subject member/employee and violation must be eligible for the ICR process, In only one case, the ICR process was incorrectly applied to resolve a Class I allegation of misconduct, which is not eligible for the ICR process. Overall, the Department has shown significant strides towards full compliance with Task 4, especially with the ICR process, The Department’s complaint database, where complaints are assigned either an intake number or an IAD case number, has even been credited by the IMT as being a focal point of the improvements made to the IAD’s Complaint Control System. With only minor adjustments to the case tracking system the Department is well on its way to 100% compliance with Task 4. Task 05: Complaint Procedures for IAD ¢ Settlement Agreement Section III. E; page 8, line 18 — page 11, line 7 (lead-in page 6, line 24 — page 7, line 2) e Assigned Unit: BOS Settlement Agreement Language ¢ “By June 15, 2004, OPD must develop a policy to provide immediate access to a supervisor to all citizens seeking to file a complaint. The Settlement Agreement sets forth certain criteria to be followed if there is delay greater than three hours in providing access to a supervisor or if the complainant refuses to travel to or wait for a supervisor. ¢ By June 15, 2004, OPD must develop a policy to provide Oakland City Jail inmates the opportunity to file a complaint against OPD officers/employees. The Settlement Agreement sets forth certain criteria that must be included in this policy. e “By June 15, 2004, OPD must develop policies setting standards for IAD investigations and dispositions of citizen complaints, including that: OPD must consider all relevant evidence; make credibility determinations where feasible; attempt to resolve inconsistencies in witness statements; employ the “preponderance of evidence” standard; and permanently retain all notes related to the investigation. This provision also defines the five investigative dispositions (unfounded; sustained; exonerated; not sustained; and filed) and requires that each allegation in a complaint be resolved with one of these dispositions. 34