Doc 295 – Monitor’s “298” Outcome Assessment

Doc 295:  Monitor's Para. 298 Outcome Report

The "Paragraph 298 Outcome Report" has been published by Monitor James Ginger, and the news is almost all bad.The first of the "outcome reports" focuses on the Monitor's frustration with the absence of valid, verifiable data.

Judge Brack ordered Dr. Ginger to produce his "Outcome Report" by August 1, or explain why he could not.  The Monitor explained on August 1 that the Parties needed time "to notify the Monitor of any issues..."and to ensure that the Independent Monitor would have adequate time to review any issues raised by the Parties," the Monitor would file the report by August 18, 2017.

The Settlement Agreement required that in addition to compliance reviews and audits, "the Monitor shall conduct qualitative and quantitative assessments" to measure results of the reform effort.

The desired result was set out in paragraph 294, which requires the Monitor to determine whether the implementation of the Settlement Agreement "is resulting in high-level, quality service; officer safety and accountability; effective constitutional policing; and increased community trust of APD."

Dr. Ginger is highly critical of APD's performance throughout the report:

We have major reservations about the system's ability to produce high-quality trustworthy data.

APD, at multiple levels and stages, missed significant opportunities to catch problems early remediate and resolve them quickly, reinforce good practice and provideinvaluable feedback to the policy and training functions.

The serious deficiencies revealed point to deeply rooted systemic probems... indicate a culture of low accountability is at work within APD, particularly in chain of command reviews. . .

Hiding officer's identification makes these reports virtually useless. . .

Use of Force Reporting

Use of force by APD is frequently not reported, and when reported is often under-reported. . .  APD is "flying blind" when it comes to assessing and controlling uses of force. . . Data tables "are virtually impossible to construct, given the ineffectual reporting modalities of APD...

Data Assessment

Data collected by APD's reporting system for Paragraph 298c are virtually unusable. . .  As currently delivered and used by APD, the CIT reporting "system" is not useable to identify successes, failures, liability exposures or any other meaningful management detail. . . we have noted frequent and sometimes chronic problems relating to the accuracy of data provided by APD. . .

Academy Recruitment and Training

No conclusions can be drawn from the provided data except to say that recruiting. . . is not routinized, and appears not to be guided by goals, objectives and operational milestones . . . the Academy functions in a highly reactive manner, and is not supported or guided by assertive data management and analysis practices that function in an organized, analytical way. 

Please like, comment, and share...:

Doc. 290: Report and Action Plan

Doc. 290:  City's "Action Plan"

Faced with serious issues of non-compliance when the Fifth Monitor's Report was presented in June, Judge Brack ordered the City to develop an "Action Plan" to address some of the concerns of the non-party "stakeholders." 

Development of the Report and Action Plan has taken most of two months. The Judge clarified, then extended the deadline for the Report, which as it turned out is more a set of disconnected issues and problems with a narrative about responsive projects and efforts either planned, completed or underway.

The City's Police Oversight Board, the Mental Health Advisory Committee, class counsel, and APD Forward reviewed a draft of the City's report early in June, and presented their concerns. The Community Policing Councils, considered an important aspect of community involvement, do not appear to have participated.  

The City's lawyers and the DOJ joined in a motion asking the Judge to clarify whether or not he intended the "stakeholders," those not parties to the lawsuit, but interested in it, to comment on the City's proposed "action plan." The answer was "yes."

After receiving what presumably was a lengthy listing of issues and concerns the City's lawyers asked for an additional two weeks to complete the action plan. That document was filed earlier this week. Doc. 290.  At the CPOB's monthly meeting Joanne Fine questioned whether the City would incorporate any of the Board member's proposals into the plan. 

Docket No. DateDescription
2826/2/17Joint Motion to Clarify
2836/5/17Order Clarifying
2876/30/17City Motion for Extension
2907/18/17City's Action Plan

Facebook
Twitter
Please like, comment, and share...: