Of course they did, look who’s on the committee! (Seriously, great committee members!) They came to the obvious conclusions that they need more time and money.
The meeting would make for a very, very, very boring blog. Since they kind of went in circles saying the same things and asked a lot of questions to clarify things. It was very much a working meeting.
The committee delayed acting on the RFP until more committee members were present, they will get a presentation from Greg Gulembiek on the Community Response Team’s recommendations for the RFP.
2.5.1. The outcomes sought are the following:
2.5.1.1. Current policing best practices should be implemented and adhered to. Best practices shall be understood to include the recommendations of the Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing and the Police Executive Research Forum report Use of Force: Taking Policing to a Higher Standard – 30 Guiding Principles. Furthermore, the recommendations of the Special Community/Police Task Force Regarding “Use of Force” and relevant recommendations of the Dane County Resolution 556 workgroup report should be implemented and adhered to.
2.5.1.2. Use of force, particularly use of deadly force and fatalities from use of deadly force, should be reduced to the maximum extent possible. Preservation of life should be the highest priority. Causal analysis of officer involved shooting incidents should be used on an ongoing basis to inform training and practice, to decrease risk of further incidents.
2.5.1.3. Racial equity in treatment of residents should be achieved. Insofar as possible, racial disparities in police contacts, diversion access, citations, and arrests (including arrests for Department of Corrections community supervision violations), including disproportionate contact with youth of color, should be eliminated. Explicit bias should be eliminated and maximally effective training and policy interventions should be used to curtail implicit bias. Racial equity should also be achieved within MPD itself.
2.5.1.4. People with mental health issues, or who are under the influence of alcohol or other drugs, should be dealt with optimally, ensuring their wellbeing to the greatest extent possible. In dealing with such individuals, use of force should be reduced through de-escalation and other techniques, and all means possible should be used to avoid deadly force. Proactive approaches should be employed to avoid crisis situations. Diversion to mental health providers, rather than intake into the criminal justice system, should be utilized whenever appropriate.
2.5.1.5. Ideals of community-oriented and, particularly, neighborhood policing should be followed fully. For the purpose of this review, the concept of community policing should be understood as defined by Robert Trojanowicz and Bonnie Bucqueroux: “Community policing is a philosophy of full service personalized policing, where the same officer patrols and works in the same area on a permanent basis, from a decentralized place, working in a proactive partnership with citizens to identify and solve problems.”
2.5.1.6. Problem-oriented policing should be utilized wherever appropriate.
2.5.1.7. Evidence-based practices should be followed wherever possible.
2.5.1.8. Overly aggressive policing should be avoided and instances of contacts, citations, and arrests (including arrests for Department of Corrections community supervision violations) in which harms may outweigh societal benefits should be eliminated. Potential negative impacts should be considered in making enforcement decisions. Diversion to restorative justice or treatment-based approaches, especially those that do not require further justice system involvement, should be used as extensively as possible.
2.5.1.9. The rights of civilian witnesses should be fully recognized and respected.
2.5.1.10. People who are homeless should be dealt with in a manner that, insofar as possible, seeks to ensure their wellbeing and autonomy, and that minimizes harm and criminalization.
2.5.1.11. Complaints against officers or other MPD employees should be investigated in a transparent, timely, and entirely unbiased manner, and a “preponderance of the evidence” standard should be used in proper fashion in determining whether to sustain complaints.
2.5.1.12. After an MPD officer has used lethal force, MPD should treat the deceased person’s family and friends with sensitivity, compassion, and respect, should keep them fully informed of developments (without delays) as the case unfolds, and should not take actions that potentially endanger their privacy or safety.
2.5.1.13. Outcomes averse to community members should be reduced by providing optimal initial and ongoing training in understanding the communities being policed, implicit bias, conflict resolution, nonviolent communication, de‐escalating situations, community dynamics, adolescent development, and other such forms of training that foster wise, equitable, and minimally-coercive approaches.
2.5.1.14. Training and practices should result in understanding of and optimal sensitivity and responses to culturally-related behavioral variations.
2.5.1.15. Strengthening the community’s own capacity to reduce violence and serious crime should be a priority.
2.5.1.16. Accountability of the MPD to the community, and the degree of control of the community over the policies and practices of the MPD, should be maximized.
2.5.1.17. The above outcomes should be accomplished in a manner that reduces or maintains stability of measures of serious and especially violent crime, and that maintains adequate officer safety.
2.5.2. The primary criteria for evaluation shall be the objectives delineated in section 2.5.1 (above). The review should evaluate the following specific components of MPD.
2.5.2.1. A full assessment should be performed of MPD Standard Operating Procedures and Code of Conduct. Any topics or areas not covered by current written policies and procedures should be identified. Informal (non-written) policies, procedures, or practices that may enhance or inhibit compliance with written policies and procedures should be identified.2.5.2.2 All MPD training curricula and procedures of training should be assessed, including for preservice training, in-service training, specialized training, and any field training. This will include meeting with training staff to review all curriculum and procedures, observing training, obtaining information from officers about the training they’ve received, and any other means necessary to obtain desired information. Particular attention should be paid to training surrounding use of force, implicit bias, mental health, alcohol/drug abuse, and other forms of training for working with people from vulnerable or marginalized communities. The assessment should include identification of any areas where new training or changes in the existing training are needed.
2.5.2.3. MPD’s current recruitment, hiring, promotion, and retention processes should be assessed, both internally and in relation to the Police and Fire Commission. There should be assessment of the capacity of MPD’s current processes to properly screen candidates to determine those who would or would not be suitable. This should include assessment of the choice of screening instruments for optimality. The promotion process should be assessed to insure that quality and suitability, rather than embrace of existing culture or cultivation of superiors, forms the basis for promotion, and that those raising unpopular critiques are not penalized. The criteria used by the department for evaluation of performance of officers should be assessed to insure that the criteria incentivize community trustbuilding and minimization of negative impacts, and to ensure that high citation and arrest rates are not being incentivized.
2.5.2.4. A detailed assessment of the internal culture of MPD should be performed through surveys, interviews of staff, interviews of community members interacting with police, and any other means necessary to obtain desired information. The assessment of MPD culture should include all members of the department, civilian and sworn. The assessment should include internal MPD groups, including but not limited to Association of Madison Police Supervisors and Madison Professional Police Officers Association, and any other groups, including non-profit support groups and partners, that impact the working culture.
2.5.2.5. Actual MPD field practices should be examined using field observation, interviews with officers, analysis of MPD records, interviews of community members interacting with police, and any other means necessary to obtain desired information.
2.5.2.6. Analyze MPD’s efforts toward community policing and problem-oriented policing. The analysis should include information on whether the culture, structure, and staffing support the goals of community-oriented policing and problem-oriented policing efforts.
2.5.2.7. All accountability mechanisms within MPD should be thoroughly evaluated, including but not limited to supervision, disciplinary process, complaints, and commendations. There should be assessment of the adequacy of supervisory oversight and supervisory monitoring of performance to ensure that officers are properly carrying out their responsibilities. There should be assessment of the validity and use of all supervisory oversight practices that allow for the identification of officers who are outliers in performance. The disciplinary process should be reviewed to determine if the process is appropriately followed, and whether it results in effective, efficient, and equitable outcomes. The complaint process used by MPD should be reviewed to determine its effectiveness and equity for both officers and residents.
2.5.2.8. There should be a thorough assessment of all MPD data collection, data usage, data records, automation, and communication systems. Dispatch and communication systems should be assessed for efficiency and reliability, and particularly whether all information necessary for optimal responses is being conveyed without error and in an adequate timeframe. Communication errors should be analyzed (including those involving the 911 Center). Determination should be made of the extent to which the current data collection system and information captured is consistent and reliable, with data stored and retrieved in a manner that facilitates its use and analysis. There should be an assessment of whether there are more efficient means of data processing and records management that would allow MPD staff to better understand patterns related to incidents, officers, victims, use of force, and particularly the desired outcomes listed in 2.5.1.
2.5.2.9. There should be assessment of equipment and technology used in the department, and how the equipment and technology is used, and particularly less lethal weapons and other technology that could help reduce use of force and civilian injuries and fatalities.
2.5.2.10. The following MPD special initiatives and programs should be evaluated:
2.5.2.10.1. Assess MPD’s efforts toward community engagement with representatives of communities such as but not limited to: African American, Asian, Latino, Native American, immigrant, LGBTQ, homeless, drug involved people, people living with mental illness, and people under Department of Corrections community supervision.
2.5.2.10.2. Evaluate efforts related to Amigos en Azul and the other youth academies.
2.5.2.10.3. Review past and present MPD Trust Based Policing Initiatives, the Racial Disparity Workgroup, and the work of the Diversity Inclusion Team.
2.5.2.10.4 Review MPD programming that serves people suffering from mental illness and/or drug abuse issues. Review how MPD programming is connected to services provided by agencies that serve those populations. Assess the adequacy of such resources from a police perspective. Evaluate in particular how the MPD system does or does not adequately work towards the goal of preservation of life. In addition, evaluate MPD’s current system of working with members of its own department that have mental health issues or who are drug and alcohol dependent.2.5.3. Methodological requirements.
2.5.3.1. The comprehensive review should include a thorough analysis of police data, including: records of police deployments, contacts (including traffic stops), diversions, citations, arrests (including arrests for Department of Corrections community supervision violations), use of force, civilian injuries, and fatalities. This should include analysis of officer initiated activities or contacts and citizen calls for service. Training records, and records of complaints and discipline, should be analyzed. Data on officer involved shootings should be analyzed, examining frequency over time, circumstances, rounds fired, and any other relevant variables. Racial disparities in police contacts, diversions, citations, and arrests (including arrests for Department of Corrections community supervision violations) should be analyzed. Additional information for analysis of MPD culture and practices should be gathered from MPD officers and staff using interviews, surveys, field observations, and any other means needed. Analyze any data relevant to the evaluation of MPD components listed in section 2.5.2, given the objectives listed in section 2.5.1.2.5.3.2. Data to be analyzed should also include information from Madison residents, particularly from populations that have the most police contact and are most vulnerable and marginalized. Such information should be gathered using surveys, interviews, and any other means needed.
2.5.3.3. Systems analysis and, for quantitative data, statistical models should be used to deduce the causal factors most heavily influencing outcomes of interest, in order to develop appropriate recommendations for improvement. Such analyses, to determine the primary contributing causal factors, should facilitate design of more effective interventions.
2.5.3.4. Mixed methodologies are especially valued, where both qualitative and quantitative approaches are used to review MPD.
2.5.3.5. The review should be conducted using evidence-based approaches, both in drawing conclusions about current MPD status and in crafting recommendations for improvement. The best available research evidence should inform recommendations wherever possible. A general empirical approach should be considered where formal trial data are unavailable. For the specific objectives of interest (section 2.5.1), recommendations may draw from policing policies and practices in other cities in the U.S. or internationally that have demonstrated superior outcomes.
2.5.4. Report on the current status of MPD and recommendations for improvement.
2.5.4.1. The selected vendor will make a detailed report-out on the current status of MPD, focusing on the components of MPD listed in section 2.5.2, given the criteria listed in section 2.5.1. This should include identifying areas of high performance and areas of potential improvement. Best practices and innovations in law enforcement should be identified for the areas reviewed, with specific detail on best practices and innovations applicable to improvement. Gap analysis should be done and gaps or needs should be clearly identified. Reports of current MPD status should include how MPD performance relates to the City of Madison, Dane County, State of Wisconsin, and policing profession as a whole, both in the U.S. and internationally.2.5.4.2. For each of the components of MPD listed in section 2.5.2, wherever improvement might be possible in achieving the objectives listed in section 2.5.1, the report should provide actionable recommendations. Recommendations may include a wide array of forms, including program refinements, new strategies, resource modifications, etc. Innovative approaches are welcome. Recommendations high in expected efficacy, based on systems analysis and empirical evidence, are preferred. Recommendations should include identification of measures that can be taken that are not law-enforcement based or not purely law enforcement based, but that would help achieve desired outcomes (e.g. social service based antiviolence approaches complementary to law enforcement).
2.5.4.3. The vendor will send representatives to attend meetings of the City’s Committee for Review of MPD (Madison Police Department Policy & Procedure Ad Hoc Committee) to provide status updates.
2.5.4.4. The vendor will make presentations to the Madison Police Department Policy & Procedure Ad Hoc Committee, the Mayor, and the City Council on final recommendations.
They are also asking the alders to come back so they can talk to them about more money and perhaps more time to do their work.
The thing I noticed after my blog post yesterday about $50,000 not being enough is that is doesn’t say how the proposal will be scored. How many points to they get for what types of things. Seems critical to responding to the RFP and for the committee to place the correct priorities on issues that are most important to them.
Their next meeting isn’t until April 7th. It will be back at the Urban League and then they will have meetings on the 1st and 3rd Thursday in April and May, for the summer they just meet the first Thursday of the month.
