First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

12
First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012

Transcript of First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Page 1: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

First Report of Implementation Monitor

Richard E. Drooyan

December 18, 2012

Page 2: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Implementation Plan

• Policies and Procedures– Validate LASD’s implementation of policies

and procedures recommended by CCJV– Monitor LASD’s on-going adherence to new

policies and procedures

• Practices– Verify LASD’s acceptance of practices

recommended by CCJV– Final report on LASD’s implementation of

recommended practices

Page 3: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Timing Issues

• Appointment of Assistant Sheriff for Custody– Funding– Custody specific training– Custody supervision

• Funding Issues– Funding requests for 11 recommendations– Review by CEO and consultants

• Meet and Confer Issues– Custody Assistant/Deputy Sheriff ratio– Supervisory pay

Page 4: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Timing Issues (cont.)

• Consultants’ reviews– Use of force– Training– Supervision– Disciplinary system

Page 5: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Summary of Implementation of Recommendations (as of 12/12/12)• Completed* 2• Accepted** 6• In progress 44• Not started 8• Non-LASD recommendations 3• TOTAL 63

* Policies and procedures completed by LASD and validated by Monitor** Recommended practices accepted by LASD

Page 6: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Priorities

• Assistant Sheriff for Custody (funding)

• Use of force policy

• Personal Engagement by Sheriff

• Custody Career

• Custody Training (funding)

• Increased supervision (funding)

Page 7: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Timetable for Implementation

• Completed/accepted 8

• Within 30 days 20

• Within 90 days 18

• Within 180 days 6

• Longer 8

• Total 60

• Funding Requested 11

Page 8: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Next 30-day implementation

• Use of Force Policy

• Analyze Inmate Grievances

• Tracking of UOF

• Campaign Contribution policy

• Video review policy

• Separation of deputies

Page 9: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Implementation Issues

• Assistant Sheriff for Custody– Search– Vetting and Selection Process

• Timing Concerns– Additional time required– Delay in implementation

Page 10: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Timing Concerns

• Additional Time Required (1/1/13)– Assistant Sheriff for Custody*– Additional supervisors*– Dual track for custody– Ratio of Custody Assistants to Deputies**– Creation of internal investigations division*– Risk Managers for each jail*

*Funding Requested**Meet and Confer

Page 11: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Timing Concerns (cont.)

• Delay in implementation– Single data tracking system (6/1/15)– Grievances tracked in PPI (6/1/15)– Hold managers accountable (11/1/13)– Rotation policy (12/31/13)– Improve inmate grievance process (12/31/14)

Page 12: First Report of Implementation Monitor Richard E. Drooyan December 18, 2012.

Conclusion

• Cooperation by Sheriff and LASD

• Input from Advisory Team and Consultants

• Expect substantial progress within 90 days

• Most recommendations implemented by 7/1/13

• Future monitoring by Internal Audit unit and external OIG