July 8, 2015 Rashidah J. Ogeltree Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Special Litigations Section 950 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington DC, 20530 Barbara A. Langhenry Director of Law City of Cleveland Department of Law 601 Lakeside Avenue, Suite 106 Cleveland, Ohio 44114 Carole S. Rendon First Assistant United States Attorney U.S. Attorney’s Office Northern District of Ohio 801 West Superior Lane Suite 400 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Dear Ms. Ogeltree, Ms. Langhenry and Ms. Rendon, First and foremost, I would like to congratulate the parties in their reaching this historic settlement agreement. Perhaps never before in the history of our country has the issue of police conduct been more at the forefront of our domestic national dialogue. Our credibility as a nation of laws, and our commitment to constitutionally serve the common good of our communities is at stake in this project, and throughout the nation. The City of Cleveland need not be a headline of controversy. My experience tells me that Cleveland will emerge as a highlight, a success story,----an example to other police agencies that excellence is attainable. The process of collaboration between the parties, the Monitor, and the Court will facilitate the City’s determination to be all that it can be and will meet the Government’s commitment to assure the civil rights of all. I am a late entry to this process. After careful thought and reflection, I concluded that an experienced, mature, and diverse team of professionals would assist the parties and the good people of Cleveland to transform the agency and the community through the creation of a partnership unprecedented in American policing. The Mayor is committed. Chief Williams and the men and women of the Cleveland Police Department are ready. And the United States Government, in the form of the Justice Department’s Special Litigations Section and the local sensitivities of the United States Attorney’s Office are not simply plaintiffs. They, 1 and others, are the impetus for change. The ingredients for success are in place and that is indisputable. I have been the Monitor of four consent decrees and have been a team member on additional others. In the seventeen years I have been doing this kind of work, I have never seen a “defendant” agency fail to become a center of excellence; an institution to where I can send other agencies to learn new practices, innovative technologies, and tales of good, not woe. Gone are the days when mere statistical compliance determined a police agency’s compliance with a settlement agreement. Also gone is the role of a community as a mere pedestrian witness to the process of monitoring and an agency’s technical compliance. Outcome measures, community engagement, and trust building---these are foundations for sustainable reform. The Settlement’s defined active role of the elected Mayor of Cleveland, whose daily oversight of the police department is essential----this alone is one of the most important ingredients for the changes the parties want and the community demands. My team is diverse in terms of race, gender, and ethnicity. But its diversity should also be measured in its orientation and experiences. Amongst the team members is a former General Counsel to a defendant agency that is currently going through the same process as Cleveland. She was a principal leader in that agency’s “Implementation Unit.” I, and twelve expert consultants who work with me, continue to serve as an expert consultant to that defendant agency. I point this out so the City, and particularly the Chief and his staff, understand that we understand the magnitude of the work that the men and women of the Cleveland Police Department have before them. We also have an experienced social worker, who lives in Cleveland, who has worked with police agencies in Los Angeles and has specific expertise in crisis intervention and mental health issues. We have the former Mayor of Rochester, New York, who also had a distinguished career as the President of the Urban League of Rochester. In both these roles, his commitment to police reform as both a Mayor and an external critic of the police, uniquely gives us the requisite skill sets to help the Cleveland community become better engaged in this process. In our ranks, is the current Police Chief of Sanford, Florida; a seasoned professional who was chosen to lead an agency, and a community, that was torn apart in the aftermath of the death of Trayvon Martin and the trial of George Zimmerman. Chief Charles Gruber, a former President of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) is currently the Monitor of a Consent Decree, and has been the coMonitor of another. He has a wealth of experience with the United States Department of Justice, as well as countless agencies and forums to where he has brought his knowledge and experience in the furtherance of improving the profession. Along with Commander John Girvin, whose monitoring and consulting experience is extensive, Chief Gruber will serve as a Deputy Monitor. 2 The team I have assembled has had experience in police operational, administrative, technical, and training matters, as well as community engagement and municipal management. In fact, I would offer, that we have experience like no other assemblage of professionals. We understand the issues, we understand the role of the parties, and we are committed to learning more about the diverse communities of one of America’s great cities. In my role as the “Monitor of Record” in four similar projects, I believe I can bring to this project my experience in interacting with the parties, the community, the collective bargaining units and of course, the Court. This experience, coupled with that of the two deputy monitors, and our entire team, will facilitate a “running start” in this undertaking. We fully understand that our early departure would be the success story for which we are all striving. I want to thank you for the opportunity to apply for this position. Whatever the outcome of your selection process might be, please know that my colleagues and I wish you all the very best of luck. There can be nothing more important than this project. Failure is not an option. The role of the police in a democratic society must always be defined and refined. I have little doubt, that working together, success shall not elude you. Sincerely, Chief (Ret) Robert S. Warshaw President 3 Proposal to Serve as Independent Monitor of the Cleveland Division of Police Submitted by: Warshaw and Associates, Inc. 348 Wabash Drive, Sylva, NC 28779 Telephone (828) 586-1843 Facsimile (828) 586-1853 Email: rochtopcop@aol.com Submitted to: For the United States Department of Justice: Carole S. Rendon First Assistant U.S. Attorney U.S. Attorney’s Office Northern District of Ohio 801 West Superior Avenue Suite 400 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Carole.Rendon@usdoj.gov Rashida J. Ogletree Trial Attorney U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20530 Rashida.Ogletree@usdoj.gov For the City of Cleveland: Barbara A. Langhenry Director of Law City of Cleveland Department of Law 601 Lakeside Avenue. Suite 106 Cleveland, Ohio 44114 Blanghenry@city.cleveland.oh.us I. Executive Summary Chief Robert S. Warshaw is honored to submit for consideration this proposal to serve as Independent Monitor of the Cleveland Division of Police. He has assembled an extremely experienced and diverse team, specifically chosen to address the unique requirements of the Settlement Agreement between the United States Department of Justice and the City of Cleveland. Our team is comprised of experienced and well respected chiefs of police and other high ranking police officials; a former mayor who was elected in the wake of serious breaches of public trust by his city’s police department, and who went on to successfully restore the community’s faith and confidence in its law enforcement; an attorney who represented, and was instrumental in shepherding the reform efforts of a police agency involved in a similar agreement; experienced academics who also possess a great deal of practical field experience in matters central to the Page 1 Agreement; and those with expertise in data analysis, outcome measures, and technology solutions to present information in an easily understood and usable format. The country is replete with countless “law enforcement experts.” We believe that what makes us unique is that that no other group can equal our experience in monitoring consent decrees and court orders. Chief Warshaw and Chief Gruber serve as Monitors in other jurisdictions. Five of our other team members serve on monitoring teams. Four of our team members have been involved in the negotiation and writing of settlement agreements. Five of our team members have experience working directly for a defendant agency, assisting with their compliance efforts. By virtue of the Agreement, change is now Court-ordered, but we fully recognize that simply mandating change will not bring it to fruition. We have a proven track record of successfully working with all parties to collaboratively bring about the improvements required by the Agreement. In all of our projects, past or on-going, the common theme has been the steady march towards successful compliance with the provisions of the underlying Court mandate. II. Personnel Chief Robert Warshaw will serve as Monitor. Chief Warshaw has had extensive experience as a police executive. He rose through the ranks of the Miami Police Department to become Assistant Chief. He served as Chief of Police in Rochester, NY and Statesville, NC. Chief Warshaw was also the Director of Administration of the DeKalb County (Atlanta GA) Department of Public Safety, which included oversight of the Police Academy. He was nominated by President Clinton and unanimously confirmed by the Senate, to serve as Associate Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), the Deputy Drug Czar of the United States. Chief Warshaw has been retained on numerous occasions as an expert consultant for the United States Department of Justice. For the past five years, Chief Warshaw has lead a team of consultants in assisting the Puerto Rico Police Department comply with the provisions of its consent decree, the “Agreement for the Sustainable Reform” of the Puerto Rico Police Department. Chief Warshaw also has extensive experience in monitoring. He has worked on the monitoring teams of Consent Decrees of the New Jersey State Police; the Prince George’s County, MD, Police Department; and the Oversight Commission for Policing Reform in Northern Ireland. More recently, he served as Monitor in the two Detroit Police Department Consent Decrees. Chief Warshaw currently serves as Monitor in Oakland, CA (where he is also the Courtappointed Compliance Director); Niagara Falls, NY; and Maricopa County, AZ. Chief Warshaw holds a master’s degree in Human Resources Administration from Biscayne College, and a bachelor’s degree in sociology from Temple University. He is a graduate of the FBI’s National Executive Institute. He is fluent in Spanish. Page 2 Chief Charles A. Gruber will serve as Deputy Monitor. Chief Gruber’s career in law enforcement spans four decades with 32 years as a Chief of Police. He served as Chief of Police in South Barrington, Illinois (1999-2008), Elgin, Illinois (1990-1998), Shreveport, Louisiana (1986-1990), and Quincy, Illinois (1976-1986). He is a Past President of International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police. Chief Gruber works as a consultant and expert witness for law enforcement issues at the local, regional and national levels. He has been retained by the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division since 2001, consulting on several pattern and practice cases involving police agencies throughout the Country. Mr. Gruber also consults on a variety of policing issues including all police use of force issues, policy development, implementation, and compliance monitoring. From 2003 thru 2010, Mr. Gruber was appointed by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California as part of a team of legal and policing experts to monitor compliance with the negotiated settlement agreement between the City of Oakland, California and private plaintiffs pertaining to pattern and practice claims filed against the Oakland Police Department. In 2010 he served in a similar capacity to monitor compliance with the consent decree between the United States Department of Justice and the Virgin Islands Government. In 2014, he was appointed, and currently serves, as Monitor of the Virgin Islands consent decree. The agreement required reform of the police practices of the Virgin Islands Police Department including training, supervision, use of force investigation, reporting and accountability systems, and internal investigations including citizen complaints. Mr. Gruber holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Psychology from Elmhurst College, and a Master’s Degree in Police Administration from the University of Illinois, Springfield. He is also a graduate of the FBI’s National Academy, FBI’s LEEDS, and the FBI’s National Executive Institute as well as a graduate of the University of Louisville Administration Officers Course, Southern Police Institute. Commander John M. Girvin will serve as Deputy Monitor. Commander Girvin retired from the Rochester, NY Police Department after 25 years of service, during which he held several operational and administrative assignments. As Commander, he served as Chief of Staff to Police Chief (and former Lt. Governor) Robert Duffy and commanded the Inspectional Services Division. His responsibilities included oversight of the Research and Evaluation Section, the Information Systems Unit, the Professional Standards Section (Internal Affairs), the Budget Section, and the Special Events Section. He handled labor relations for the department, interacting and negotiating with the bargaining units for both sworn and civilian employees. He continued to assist the department with labor relations on a contract basis after his retirement, and has been retained by other municipalities to negotiate collective bargaining agreements with their sworn workforce. Commander Girvin served as an assessor and team leader for the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA) and the New York State Law Enforcement Accreditation Program. He has also performed administrative and consolidation studies for the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. Page 3 He currently serves as the Deputy Monitor in Maricopa County, AZ, and Niagara Falls, NY; and is Chief of Staff of the monitoring team in Oakland, CA. He also served on the monitoring team in Detroit, and is part of the team assisting the Puerto Rico Police Department with its reform efforts. He holds a bachelor’s degree in organizational management from Roberts Wesleyan College. Jerome Needle served the International Association of Chiefs of Police for 27 years, 20 of those years as Director of Programs & Research. In this capacity, he had principal responsibility for IACP’s contractual, fee-for-service field consulting operations and leadership for policy-oriented government and foundation grants, training, national summits, and IACP Annual Conference plenary sessions and education workshops. He has directed/conducted leadership, policy, practice, and organizational culture evaluations of over 200 law enforcement agencies. He directed the IACP Training & Education Division. Notable national scope policy, best practice, and justice research, training, and technical assistance engagements, mainly USDOJ funded, include the National Law enforcement Policy Center, the Community Policing Consortium, the IACP Center for Social Media in Law Enforcement, Police Response to Violence Against Women, and Cutting Edge Technology, and a number of public trust and internal affairs projects. He served as liaison for a series of IACP Sections and Committees including Community Policing, Investigations, Police Administration, and Mid-Size Cities. Special projects for the Board and Executive Committee included Race & Police, which culminated in major publications and conference plenaries (two). Since leaving the IACP in 2013, he has consulted independently, conducting six management studies to date. Since April of 2014 he has served as Project Manager for the Independent Monitor of the Territory of Virgin Islands Police Department Consent Decree. He has been/is a principal writer of mandatory documents and has fashioned the Monitor’s outcome measurements program, Metrics-Centered Auditing. He received his Bachelor’s Degree in Political Science from Temple University and Master’s from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. Doctoral work was done in Criminal Justice at the State University of New York at Albany (part-time). Chief Sherry Kiyler has more than 40 years of municipal law enforcement experience. She spent more than 31 years with the Phoenix Police Department, in a community with more than 1.5 million residents, retiring at the rank of Commander in 2004. During her tenure, she worked in nearly every area of the department; and spent nine years commanding the Homicide Unit, where she oversaw all criminal investigations related to homicide, suicide, in-custody prisoner deaths, and police-involved use of force incidents resulting in critical injury or death to civilian or police personnel. At the time of her retirement, she commanded the Violent Crime Bureau. From 2004 until 2013, Chief Kiyler served as Chief for the Chandler, AZ Police Department, leading and managing a staff of 350 sworn and nearly 150 civilian personnel, in a community of 250,000 residents on the outskirts of Phoenix. Throughout her tenure, the Chandler Police Department was nationally accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA). Page 4 Chief Kiyler currently serves on the monitoring team in Maricopa County, AZ. She holds a master’s degree in educational leadership from Northern Arizona University, and a bachelor’s degree in business management from the University of Phoenix. Palmer Wilson has in excess of 40 years working in the Criminal Justice and Law Enforcement fields, which has been characterized by development of innovative approaches to identified problems. During his 25 years of service with the Montgomery County (Maryland) Department of Police, he developed management solutions ranging from a complex and definitive written directive system, intra-local agreements on a range of law enforcement problems such as long range planning initiatives, among a variety of other issues. He was assigned to lead the department’s initial efforts to develop a comprehensive implementation plan for problem based, community policing. He helped implement programs in the early 1990s to collect data on and monitor the use of force and conduct of pursuits, providing the department with both useable analytic data as well as the basis for changes in departmental training, policy, and management oversight. This was a precursor to an Early Intervention Program. After retiring from the Department of Police, as a Lieutenant and Commander of the Office of Staff Inspections, he spent five years working for the Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice, working on law enforcement and criminal justice issues world-wide. While at DOJ he developed numerous training programs and initiatives, subsequently sponsored by the Department of State in emerging democracies. Working with FLETC, he participated in developing the international assistance programs under the concept of “Democratic Policing”, which is very closely equivalent to “Constitutional Policing”, both being focused on fair and objective, non-biased delivery of policing services. More recently, Mr. Wilson has participated in the monitoring of the Consent Decree with the U.S. Virgin Island Police Department providing technical assistance and management solutions to monitoring, auditing, inspections, data collection, and other areas responsive to the Consent Decree’s controlling paragraphs. Of special significance has been his development of a comprehensive computer program that provides the monitoring team with an extensive array of data focused programs upon which to conduct analysis of the agency progress and comply with court reporting responsibilities. Mr. Wilson holds a BA degree from the University of Maryland, and graduate work at both the American University and Hood College. He is a retired Lieutenant Colonel, US Army Military Police Corps with numerous decorations and extensive military specialized and management training. Chief Billy Riggs served 23 years in the Miami Police Department rising through the ranks from police officer to Colonel. He has extensive experience in patrol operations, personnel and training as the commanding officer of those sections. In 1987 he was selected as the police chief of West Palm Beach, FL through a national search process and remained there for 10 years. During his tenure in West Palm Beach his agency was selected by the International Association of Chiefs of Police for the prestigious Webber Seavey award signifying quality in policing. In 1990 the department successfully completed the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies best practices requirements. While in West Palm Beach Chief Riggs was Page 5 one of six law enforcement leaders selected by the State to create the Florida Criminal Justice Executive Institute which provides executive training to heads of criminal justice agencies. In 1997 Chief Riggs was appointed Director of the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office where his responsibilities included all financial affairs, information technology, human resources, records, training for both law enforcement and corrections, quality and professional standards, planning and research, communications, risk management, facility management and fleet management. Chief Riggs has served as a law enforcement expert for the United States Department of Justice. He has also served as an expert witness in state and federal courts involving use of force, police pursuits and jail deaths. He has served in Haiti assessing the capabilities of the Haitian National Police and in South Africa assessing security issues for a multi-national corporation. Chief Riggs served on the monitoring team in Detroit through its completion and currently serves on the monitoring teams in Maricopa County, Arizona and Niagara Falls, New York. He is also a member of the expert consulting team in Puerto Rico, which is assisting the agency in its compliance with their Consent Decree. Mayor William A. Johnson, Jr. has served as President and CEO of the Urban League of Rochester (1972-1993), as Mayor of the City of Rochester (NY) (1994-2005), and as the founder and CEO of Strategic Community Intervention LLC (SCI) (2013-present), a consulting firm that practices in the areas of community engagement, governmental reform, and strategic planning/design. Believing that problems are most effectively resolved with the concurrence and involvement of all stakeholders, Mayor Johnson has searched for innovative and collaborative ways to resolve longstanding problems. This approach is exemplified by his extensive oversight of and engagement with the Rochester Police Department (RPD) over the course of his career. While with the Urban League, he played a leading role in advocating for police reforms after a string of deadly force incidents involving African Americans. The need for better policecommunity relations became a major goal of his time in office, during which he systematically restored order and integrity to the RPD. Working with a series of chiefs of police, Mr. Johnson oversaw the implementation of several new programs and planned collaboratively with the department and citizens. These programs include: establishing formal Neighborhood Empowerment Teams (NETs), staffed by a Lieutenant, two Patrol Officers, and civilian code enforcement personnel and focused on customer service and “quality of life” issues, as prioritized by neighborhood residents; the establishment of Sector Planning Committees as the governing arm of the Neighbors Building Neighborhoods process. He ushered in an unprecedented level of shared governance, allowing citizens from the city sectors to plan and prioritize service requests from City Hall; the creation of youth empowerment programs that constructively engaged youth across the community in solutions and more positive interactions with the criminal justice infrastructure; a civilian complaint review process utilizing the Center for Dispute Services which deployed non-police citizens to review complaints against the RPD; the widespread use of Citizen-Police Academies, and created an Emotionally Disturbed Persons Response Team, which dispatched specially trained police officers to the scenes that required such skill sets. Page 6 With SCI, Mr. Johnson has provided behind-the-scenes advice to the City of Sanford, Florida, in the aftermath of the Trayvon Martin killing. First working with the Mayor and the Staff Assistant for the City Manager, he subsequently advised the commission that was established to work on improved community relations. Mr. Johnson holds B.A. and M.A. degrees in political science from Howard University in Washington, D.C. He is the retired Distinguished Professor of Public Policy and Urban Studies at the Rochester Institute of Technology (2006-2013). He is also trained as a mediator and fact finder. Ms. Janelle Duda-Banwar is currently in the Social Welfare PhD program at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. During her time in the program she continues to work on a number of projects, such as the Fugitive Safe Surrender Program for individuals with warrants; and Project Restore, which is an evaluation of an enhanced intervention for incarcerated males with serious mental illness. She recently taught the Social Work Direct Practice course in the online format and has previous experience teaching a similar course to criminal justice students. Immediately preceding her acceptance into the PhD program she was the Assistant Director of the Rochester Institute of Technology’s Department of Criminal Justice Center for Public Safety Initiatives. She conducted action research that involved partnerships with the office of juvenile probation, local youth organizations, a street outreach organization, the police department, the county jail, and the local trauma center. Topics covered included: restorative justice practices, a re-entry program for women, improving youth-police relations, creation of a shooting database for the local police department, evaluation of hospital-based violence intervention program, and developing a strategic plan to reduce violence. She was a member of the team assisting the Puerto Rico Police Department relevant to its implementation of the provisions of their consent decree. She was previously employed with Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services as a First Respondent to allegations of child abuse and neglect in the Compton service area. During her time with DCFS she was lead worker in her unit and was part of the co-location pilot program. She was stationed out of the Southeast LAPD station, the Compton Sheriff station, and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s station. She has experience in crisis counseling with survivors of sexual assault. Xiomara Colón-Rodríguez, Esq. received her Juris Doctor degree in 2005 from the Pontifical Catholic University of Puerto Rico School of Law, graduating Magna Cum Laude. She began her professional career as an associate attorney in different law firms where she developed trial experience in diverse areas of the law including, but not limited to, civil rights, discrimination cases, labor, employment, medical malpractice, contracts, torts, and monetary claims. For the last five (5) years, she was instrumental in leading the reform efforts of the Puerto Rico Police Department to comply with a settlement agreement that was negotiated with the United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) as part of their investigation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 14141. Her input and knowledge of Puerto Rico’s police practices was vital in the negotiation of the agreement. Ms. Colón-Rodríguez served as General Counsel to the Puerto Rico Police Department, the second largest police department in the United States. Among her most important Page 7 accomplishments is the creation of fourteen Citizen Interaction Committees, in which the police and representatives of the diverse communities they serve collaborate to mutually identify problems and solutions throughout the Island’s thirteen police regions. One also provides advice and support to the Superintendent. She also drafted training materials regarding the settlement agreement and provided training to instructors and more than six hundred police and government officials. Additionally, she served an important role in the development of collaborative efforts between the Puerto Rico Police, the USDOJ, the Monitor, and other government agencies. She is fully bilingual in English and Spanish. She is currently a consultant and lives in Massachusetts. Chief Cecil E. Smith was selected to lead the Sanford Police Department after serving 25 years with the Elgin Police Department in Elgin, Illinois. He retired at the rank of Deputy Chief. It should be noted that prior to his retirement from the Elgin Police Department, Chief Smith was the first and only African American to hold the position of Deputy Chief in the Police Department’s 175-year history. Chief Smith is an experienced Public Service Administrator with extensive knowledge of policies, special policing needs and quality-of-life issues. Recognized by the DOJ, COPS office, the FBI, and other State organizations, he has successfully combined proactive methods of supervision, problem solving, and motivational skills for officers to exceed objectives, while continuing to maintain the highest standards of law enforcement ethics and professionalism. Chief Smith was selected to lead the Sanford police Department during one of the most controversial and racially heightened times in law enforcement history (The Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman case). Under Chief Smith’s leadership, and with the collaboration of the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office, strategic plans were developed which prevented violence during and after the Zimmerman trial. Instead of violence, this collaboration resulted in multiple peaceful gatherings within the community. Chief Smith has overseen the Sanford “Blue Ribbon Panel” committee. The committee was established with community partners to review policies and practices within the Sanford Police Department. The Panel made recommendations for improving community relations, training, and funding. Nearly all of the recommendations were adopted within one year of presentation to the Department. Chief Smith helped develop, and continues to assist, the Sanford Pastor Connecting group. The group was formed prior to the Zimmerman trial to allow local pastors early and direct information regarding the circumstances related to the case, which allowed them to be the voice in the in community to their congregations with factual information. The program has spread throughout Seminole County are. Page 8 Team Organization Chief Warshaw will serve as Monitor. Chief Gruber and Commander Girvin will serve as Deputy Monitors. This management team will have oversight involvement with all areas of the Consent Decree. Additionally, primary responsibility for the substantive areas of the Consent Decree will belong to the following Team Members:  Community Engagement and Building Trust – Mayor Johnson, Chief Smith  Community and Problem-Oriented Policing – Mr. Needle, Chief Smith  Bias-Free Policing – Chief Kiyler, Ms. Colón-Rodríguez  Use of Force – Chief Riggs, Commander Girvin  Crisis Intervention – Ms. Duda-Banwar, Chief Gruber  Search and Seizure – Ms. Colón-Rodríguez, Chief Smith  Accountability – Chief Kiyler, Commander Girvin  Transparency and Oversight – Mr. Wilson, Mr. Needle  Officer Assistance and Support – Mr. Wilson, Mr. Needle, Ms. Colón-Rodríguez  Supervision – Chief Riggs, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Needle  Policies – Responsibility for reviewing policies will be shared by all Team Members, depending on topic and areas of expertise. All of our Team Members are experienced professionals with a wide variety of projects and professional undertakings; mostly in the monitoring of consent decrees or working as consultants to various government institutions. Some of these, which may involve the investigation of police agencies, are confidential. Unless individual commitments are required to be disclosed under Section VI – Potential Conflicts of Interest or Bias – we can unequivocally state that if selected as the Monitoring Team for this project, we have the time available to successfully meet our obligations and adhere to all deadlines contained within the Decree. III. Qualifications Monitoring, auditing, evaluating, or otherwise reviewing performance of organizations, including experience in monitoring settlements, consent decrees, or court orders; Chief Warshaw has extensive experience in monitoring, and currently serves as the Monitor in Oakland (CA), Niagara Falls (NY), and Maricopa County (AZ). He was the Monitor in Detroit (MI) until the successful conclusion of that engagement, and he has served on the monitoring teams for the New Jersey State Police, the Prince George’s County (MD) Police Department, and the Oversight Commission for Policing Reform in Northern Ireland. He has also participated in numerous pattern and practice investigations for the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice. Chief Gruber is the current monitor for the Virgin Islands Police Department Consent Decree, and was one of original Co-Monitors in the negotiated settlement agreement in Oakland (CA). He has also participated in numerous pattern and practice investigations nationwide on behalf of the United States Department of Justice. Page 9 Commander Girvin currently serves as the Deputy Monitor in Maricopa County (AZ) and Niagara Falls (NY), and serves as Chief of Staff of the Oakland (CA) Monitoring Team, a position he also held on the Detroit Monitoring Team. He has performed agency assessment and consolidation studies for the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. Chief Riggs serves on the Monitoring Teams for Maricopa County (AZ) and Niagara Falls (NY), and also served on the Detroit (MI) Monitoring Team until the successful conclusion of that project. Chief Kiyler currently serves on the Monitoring Team for Maricopa County (AZ). Mr. Needle currently serves on the Virgin Islands Monitoring Team, and has directed or conducted over 200 management and operations evaluations as part of his work with the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP). Mr. Wilson also serves on the Virgin Islands Monitoring Team, and has also performed numerous management studies as a contractor for IACP. Ms. Colón-Rodríguez has nearly five (5) years of experience in the Puerto Rico Police Department reform process, including the negotiation and implementation of the agency’s settlement Agreement pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 14141. Law enforcement practices, including training, community and problem-oriented policing, complaint and use of force investigations, and constitutional policing; All of the police chiefs on our team have had responsibility for overseeing the internal affairs functions of their respective police departments, as well as the investigation of high-profile use of force incidents. Additionally, nearly all of our monitoring projects have use of force and complaint investigation components. Chief Warshaw has served as a police executive in four cities in four different states. Each agency was challenged by a variety of issues that necessitated re-engaging the communities they served. In the aftermath of civil disturbances or civil rights investigations, Chief Warshaw was a recognized leader in strategies and policies that promoted and sustained community policing, officer and supervisory accountability, and the management of investigative functions that addressed issues to include, but not limited to, the use of force. Chief Warshaw has worked for both the Special Litigations Section of the United States Department of Justice and the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties of the US Department of Homeland Security, addressing amongst other matters, instances of the use of force by law enforcement officers. Chief Gruber was an early innovator of community policing practices in the United States, and was the first Police Chief to implement a “Resident Officer Program”. He developed training programs designed to teach law enforcement supervisors, managers and leaders how to design effective tools to account for the reporting, investigation, review, oversight and accountability of Page 10 force incidents. He continues to teach these programs nationally, and he has trained over 5,000 students in the last 15 years. Chief Kiyler served as training instructor for the Arizona Peace Officers Standards and Training, teaching law enforcement leadership on a statewide level. She also taught criminal justice topics at the college level. As the Commander of the Phoenix (AZ) Police Department’s homicide unit, she was responsible for numerous criminal investigations of officer-involved shootings. By virtue of his work with IACP, Mr. Needle has been involved in the development, direction, and fiscal management of assorted projects including responsibility police and justice policy research, training and technical assistance grants and programs funded by the Office of Community Oriented Policing (COPS). He has performed dozens of Community Oriented Policing and Problem Oriented Policing audits in numerous jurisdictions. Mr. Wilson had responsibility for implementation of the Montgomery County (MD) Police Department’s community policing plan while serving with that agency. He served as a Senior Program Analyst for the U.S. Department of Justice, International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program (ICITAP), with responsibility for coordinating, reviewing, and approving all ICITAP training programs. Ms. Colón-Rodríguez had direct responsibility for the community engagement and community policing sections of Puerto Rico’s consent decree. She has also trained more than six hundred individuals including police officers, community stakeholders, and government officials, on the requirements of their agreement. Evaluating the breadth and depth of organizational change, including the development of outcome measures; The vast monitoring experience of our team members, enumerated above, speaks to our collective experience in evaluating the breadth and depth of organizational change. After retiring from his Miami position, Chief Warshaw has been hired by three Mayors, as an outside candidate, to bring about organizational change within police agencies. The sustainable reforms he brought about served as solid foundations for his successors. Chief Warshaw, in his capacity as an expert consultant for the defendant Puerto Rico Police Department was an active participant in the negotiation of the agreement, which included, amongst other things, outcome measures. Chief Gruber has been an industry leader in the implementation of constitutional policing practices. He has participated in content development and training delivery for leading law enforcement organizations such as the IACP and the Department of Justice’s “Excellence in Law Enforcement”. During Chief Kiyler’s tenure as the Chandler (AZ) Police Chief, she oversaw extensive changes in the organization. She instituted a review of current practices and solicited input from all stakeholders within the agency, city management, and the community. The department drafted a Page 11 5 year strategic plan which was reviewed quarterly for progress, reported on annually, and revised as community and organizational needs necessitated. Mr. Needle and Mr. Palmer have extensive experience in conducting management studies, all of which are tied to outcome measures. They have also developed an outcome measurement system tailored specifically to the requirements of the Virgin Islands consent decree. If selected as the Monitor, we will develop a similar system for the Cleveland Agreement. Mr. Wilson managed a significant part of the IACP’s deployment statistical analysis for the past 14 years, and has taught classes on organizational change for the COPS program. Additionally, Ms. DudaBanwar has experience in assisting agencies to develop outcome measures through the use of logic models. Commander Girvin was instrumental in developing the Rochester (NY) Police Department’s crime reduction strategy based on data collection and analysis to drive specific crime reduction outcomes. After his retirement from the police department, he was contracted to assist the Mayor in developing Rochester by the Numbers, a data driven process which established outcomes for every City Department and held Department heads responsible for achieving those outcomes. Development of effective quality improvement practices; Chief Warshaw’s career has been illuminated by modifications to police practices that better incorporate the active input of community members and other stakeholders. In the aftermath of several civil disturbances that were directly related to matters of police conduct, Chief Warshaw chaired several Blue-Ribbon Panels and Committees that were part of Countywide criminal justice planning institutions. He chaired, for the Assistant Attorney General, a special committee that gave counsel to the United States Department of Justice on police practices and policies and the funding needs of local and state governments to implement the requisite changes. Chief Gruber is one of the principal innovators in the current development of the practices used by the Department of Justice in reform of police departments nationwide, including “cooperative resolution practices with police departments”, and the implementation of “capacity building” before compliance monitoring. Mr. Wilson implemented his department’s first Inspectional Services program, which focused on data analysis and investigative approaches to ensure compliance with department policy and support organizational change. He is also certified in Total Quality Management (TQM) and initiated a department-wide TQM process. The Rochester (NY) Police Department’s CrimeStat process, as well as the City’s Rochester by the Numbers program addressed crime, quality of life, and service issues across all City Departments. Commander Girvin played a key role in the development of both. Page 12 Mediation and dispute resolution; Chief Warshaw was one of the architects of the Dispute Resolution Center in Miami and worked closely with the Dispute Center in Rochester, New York. As Assistant Chief of Police in Miami, Chief Warshaw oversaw labor relations and regularly interacted with the sworn and non-sworn collective bargaining units. In his capacity as a consultant, Chief Warshaw was retained by the City of Albany, New York, to help create a dispute resolution and civilian oversight process for New York’s Capitol City. Mayor Johnson has served as a mediator and fact finder for public sector contracts. During her tenure with the Phoenix Police Department, Chief Kiyler was trained and certified as a conflict resolution mediator. Chief Gruber participated in and managed numerous mediation and dispute resolutions over the span of his career, including the development, implementation, oversight and monitoring of citizen compliant resolution processes. While the Chief of Police in Shreveport LA, he mediated the de-escalation of a serious civil disorder situation. Commander Girvin has extensive experience in contract negotiations, handling the Rochester Police Department’s labor relations functions for 10 years (including 4 years as a contractor after his retirement). He has also been hired by other municipalities to negotiate their law enforcement labor contracts. While with the Elgin Police Department, Chief Smith served as both a union representative and ultimately union president, and mediated a number of contracts and internal disputes. His management positions of Deputy Chief and Chief give him a unique perspective of both sides of the labor relations process. Ms. Duda-Banwar has extensive evaluation experience in the area of street dispute mediation. She has also participated in an evaluation of a New York statewide gun violence reduction program that used dispute mediation as one of its components. Statistical and data analysis; Mr. Needle has completed over 200 management studies. Statistical and data analysis is at the core of this process. Mr. Wilson ran almost all of IACP’s computer-aided-dispatch (CAD) based deployment analysis. He also produced the majority of crime data and related items for IACP management studies. He currently has responsibility for data management and analysis for the Virgin Islands monitoring team. Ms. Duda-Banwar is competent in managing data in SPSS format. She can conduct basic statistical analyses (chi-square, t-test, etc.) in addition to more complex analyses, such as multiple regression and factor analysis. Page 13 Information technology; All team members are competent with commonly used basic information technology programs. In addition, Mr. Wilson has developed and written computer programs since the early 1990s and has extensive understanding of information technology options and current practices. He developed a program to cover all facets of the Virgin Islands monitoring process, and manages a website for that project. Data management; Both Mr. Wilson and Mr. Needle have identified, collected, and analyzed data as a result of their vast experience in performing management studies. Mr. Wilson handles all data management for the Virgin Islands Monitoring Team. While with the Montgomery County (MD) Police Department, he lead the county effort at consolidation of separate criminal justice and law enforcement systems into one large and coordinated Criminal Justice Information System. He has experience in creating numerous specialized data collection systems for specific programs and inquiries. Working with government agencies, municipalities, and collective bargaining units; As Mayor of Rochester (NY) from 1994 through 2005, Mayor Johnson has extensive experience in working with county, state, and federal agencies. He was also ultimately responsible for approving and implementing the collective bargaining agreements for multiple labor organizations which represented the City of Rochester Workforce. During Chief Warshaw’s tenure as Associate Director of the Office of National Drug Control policy, he was primarily responsible for liaison between the federal government and state and local jurisdictions as it pertained to prevention and interdiction strategies. In that capacity, he traveled the country interacting with all levels of state and local government. His interaction with collective bargaining units is extensive, both in his role as a Chief of Police and in his role as a Monitor. With over 38 years as a police chief, Chief Gruber has managed and participated in numerous agreements, MOU’s, and contracts with multiple police and civilian unions. Commander Girvin has extensive experience in contract negotiations, handling the Rochester Police Department’s labor relations functions for 10 years (including 4 years as a contractor after his retirement). He has also been hired by other municipalities to negotiate their law enforcement labor contracts. While with the Elgin Police Department, Chief Smith served as both a union representative and ultimately union president, and mediated a number of contracts and internal disputes. His management positions of Deputy Chief and Chief I give him a unique perspective of both sides of the labor relations process. Chief Smith is the current director for the Central Florida Criminal Justice Association, which is comprised of local, state and federal law enforcement agencies. It also includes the State Attorney’s Office, the Airport Authority and the Coroner’s Office. Page 14 Chief Kiyler served as the inaugural chairperson of the East Valley Police Chief’s Association and worked with both state and federal agencies in that capacity. She also started a labormanagement process at the Chandler Police Department – Relationship by Objective – to improve the focus of the relationship between labor and management. The several hundred management studies conducted by Mr. Needle and Mr. Wilson by necessity required strong working relationships with the jurisdictions which were the subjects of the studies. Additionally, Mr. Wilson’s work with the Department of Justice required integration with all other federal law enforcement agencies for the completion of joint missions. Ms. Colón-Rodríguez has extensive experience in working with federal agencies, as well as the numerous Commonwealth of Puerto Rico governmental agencies and the various municipalities across the Island. Language skills and experience working with limited English proficient persons and communities, in particular communities whose primary language is Spanish; Chief Warshaw is fluent in Spanish. Given the large Hispanic population in Maricopa County, he will frequently conduct portions of the community meetings he presides over in Spanish. He routinely converses in Spanish while consulting for the Puerto Rico Police Department as he assists them in their efforts to comply with their consent decree. Ms. Colón-Rodríguez is fully proficient in both Spanish and English. She served as an interpreter for nearly five years during training sessions, and communications among government officials, police officers, and community stakeholders. She has translated hundreds of documents, including policies, training materials, and media releases from English to Spanish and Spanish to English. She has a working knowledge of Italian. Familiarity and understanding of local issues and conditions; As mayor of a northeastern unionized city with economic and social challenges, Mayor Johnson has a unique understanding and appreciation for the issues at the core of the Cleveland Agreement. He has also closely analyzed public policy issues as a college professor. Ms. Duda-Banwar lives in Cleveland. Her criminal justice and social welfare background, coupled with her physical presence in Cleveland, affords her great familiarity with the local conditions. While she is our only team member who resides in Cleveland, our prior monitoring projects and management studies require that we achieve a significant level of understanding of the local issues in order to complete the mission. We have a strong track record of doing so in each case where it is required. Effective engagement with diverse communities; Chief Warshaw’s career has been highlighted by his interaction with diverse communities. Each jurisdiction in which he has served had suffered from long-standing issues with the police. Chief Page 15 Warshaw’s regular interaction with the faith communities, civil rights organizations, and personal engagement with individual community members played a role in his Presidential nomination to his White House position and his selection as Monitor in multiple consent decrees. When Chief Kiyler took over as the Chief in Chandler, AZ, there was a very negative relationship with the Hispanic community due to events that had previously occurred in the city. She and her staff met with leaders in the Hispanic community, created outreach opportunities, conducted community meetings in Spanish, and started a Spanish citizen’s police academy. She also funded a Spanish immersion training opportunity for interested Chandler Officers. Ms. Duda-Banwar has worked with many diverse populations, specifically those involved with the criminal justice system. In her previous work with the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services, she worked with at-risk minority families living in poverty. Ms. Colón-Rodríguez has extensive experience in community engagement with stakeholders of different backgrounds, denominations, sexual orientation, and beliefs. She developed excellent collaborative relationships with members of the ACLU of Puerto Rico, as well as LGBTTQ, homeless, and religious communities as she engaged them to work with the Puerto Rico Police in its reform efforts. During his work at the Urban League and as Mayor of Rochester, Mayor Johnson designed, implemented and evaluated several innovative community engagement processes. During his tenure in multiple departments, Chief Gruber developed several programs and policing strategies to engage the diverse communities in his service jurisdictions. These include a program in Elgin (IL) to move police officers directly into high crime neighborhoods to live and work directly for the people of those neighborhoods; and a program in Shreveport (LA) to integrate the police force with people of color, especially in command and positions of authority. Creation and evaluation of meaningful civilian oversight; During his tenure, Mayor Johnson and Chief Warshaw designed and implemented a civilian review process in which community members, sitting side by side with command officers, reviewed the findings and dispositions of internal affairs investigations. Chief Warshaw also started Police-Citizen Interaction Committees (PCICs) for the Office of the Chief and each of the patrol sections. In addition to regular meetings, the citizen representatives on each of these committees had direct access to the Chief or their respective section commanding officers. Chief Warshaw was retained by the City of Albany New York for the purposes of creating a civilian oversight process. Similarly, he helped create the oversight function in the City of Miami while serving as the Assistant Chief of police. Ms. Colón-Rodríguez created and led fourteen Citizen Interaction Committees with the Puerto Rico Police Department across the Commonwealth. These Committees provide assistance and oversight to the Puerto Rico Police Department in the implementation of its settlement Agreement with USDOJ. Page 16 Familiarity with federal, Ohio, and local laws, including civil rights laws and policies and rules governing police practices; Chief Warshaw and Chief Gruber have extensive experience with Federal Statute 42 USC 14141 – the Civil Rights Pattern and Practice statute. Both have served as Police Practice Experts in numerous investigations throughout the country. As highlighted throughout, the extensive monitoring experience of this team by necessity requires familiarity with civil rights laws and policies and rules governing police practices, as all of the cases we monitor originate from allegations of civil rights violations. As President of the IACP, Chief Gruber started the IACP’s first Civil Rights Committee, and he served as the Chairman of the Professional Standards Committee, developing model polices, practices and procedures for the law enforcement profession. Mr. Needle conducted several management studies for jurisdictions in Ohio, including Cleveland, Lorraine, Akron, and Oxford. Ms. Colón-Rodríguez was intimately involved with Puerto Rico’s Settlement Agreement and the implementation of its provisions. She was also responsible for policy development, insuring that the Puerto Rico Police Department’s policies were constitutionally sound and in accord with best practices and the provisions of the agreement. Completing projects within anticipated deadlines and budget; Our proposed team consists of a former Mayor, five police chiefs, and other police command officers and professionals. Simply put, one does not rise to the level of achievement and responsibility, as evidenced by our team, without the ability to function within budget and deadlines. In addition to completed individual projects within anticipated deadlines and budgets, all of our police chiefs had responsibility for overseeing their departments’ entire budgets, and of course, Mayor Johnson was responsible for balanced budget oversight during his 12 years as mayor. Preparing for and participating in court proceedings; and Chief Warshaw has been the “Monitor of Record” in four consent decrees and has served as a team member in several others. As the “Monitor of Record” and as a sworn agent of the Court, Chief Warshaw has had extensive interactions with the Federal Judges for whom he serves and the judicial proceedings that are commensurate with these projects. All of our police personnel have experience in participating in court proceedings, and those on our team have collectively provided testimony at every court level, from local court through and including federal court. Chief Warshaw, Chief Gruber, and Chief Riggs have been retained as expert witnesses in several court cases. Chief Warshaw and Chief Gruber have also provided testimony in their capacity as Monitors, in both open court and in numerous status conferences. Page 17 As an experienced attorney, Ms. Colón-Rodríguez has participated in numerous court proceedings, including serving as co-counsel in federal cases and lead counsel in Commonwealth (state) cases. Report writing for a broad variety of stakeholders. All of our current monitoring projects require the production of reports on a frequent, regular basis. Mr. Needle and Mr. Wilson have written hundreds of management studies for the IACP. In addition, Ms. Duda-Banwar and Mr. Wilson have extensive grant writing experience, including preparing reports for the grantors as well as the populations served by the grants. Ms. Colón-Rodríguez has extensive experience in report writing for different stakeholders, including clients, the courts, media, the Governor of Puerto Rico, the Puerto Rico Secretary of Justice, the Legislature, other government officials, and police officers and community stakeholders. IV. Prior Experience and References Prior to being named Monitor in the Detroit case, Chief Warshaw was a member of the monitoring teams for the New Jersey State Police; the Prince George’s County, MD, Police Department; and the Oversight Commission for Policing Reform in Northern Ireland. United States of America v. City of Detroit, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division. 2009 – 2014: Chief Warshaw, Monitor; Commander Girvin; Chief of Staff; Chief Riggs, Team Member References: The Honorable Julian Abele Cook, Jr. United States District Judge (Retired), Eastern District of Michigan The Honorable Judith E. Levy United States District Judge, Eastern District of Michigan (Formerly Assistant United States Attorney in the Eastern District of Michigan, and Plaintiffs’ Attorney in the Detroit case) Federal Building 200 E. Liberty Street, Suite 300 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 Courtroom: 100 (734) 887-4700 The Honorable Dave Bing, Retired Mayor, City of Detroit Page 18 Delphine Allen, et al., vs. City of Oakland, et al, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 2010 – Present: Chief Warshaw, Monitor; Commander Girvin, Chief of Staff 2003 – 2010: Chief Gruber, Co-Monitor, Original Oakland Monitoring Team References: The Honorable Thelton E. Henderson Senior United States District Judge, Northern District of California San Francisco Courthouse, Courtroom 12 - 19th Floor 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102 415-522-3630 James B. Chanin, Esq., Plaintiffs’ Attorney 3050 Shattuck Avenue Berkeley, CA 94705 510-501-6975 jbcofc@aol.com John L. Burris, Esq., Plaintiffs’ Attorney Airport Corporate Centre 7677 Oakport Street, Suite 1120 Oakland, CA 94621 510-379-7215 burris@lmi.net The Honorable Jean Quan, Retired Mayor, City of Oakland Ms. Kelli Evans, Esq. Co-Monitor – Original Oakland Monitoring Team evans.m.kelli@gmail.com People of the State of New York vs. The City of Niagara Falls and the Niagara Falls Police Department, in New York State Supreme Court, 8th Judicial District. 2011 – Present: Chief Warshaw, Monitor; Commander Girvin; Deputy Monitor; Chief Riggs, Team Member Reference: Anjana Samant, Esq., Plaintiffs’ Attorney Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Bureau 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 212-416-8286 Anjana.Samant@ag.ny.gov Page 19 Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres, et al., vs. Joseph M. Arpaio, in his individual and official capacity as Sheriff of Maricopa County, AZ; et al., in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. 2014 – Present: Chief Warshaw, Monitor; Commander Girvin, Deputy Monitor; Chief Riggs and Chief Kiyler, Team Members References: The Honorable G. Murray Snow United States District Judge, District of Arizona Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse, Suite 622 401 West Washington Street, SPC 80 Phoenix, AZ 85003 Phone: (602) 322-7650 Cecillia D. Wang, Esq., Plaintiffs’ Attorney Director, Immigrants’ Rights Project American Civil Liberties Union Foundation California Office 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, Ca 94111-4805 415-343-0775 Cwang@Aclu.Org United States of America vs. The Territory of the Virgin Islands and The Virgin Islands Police Department, in The United States District Court for the District of the Virgin Islands. 2010 – Present: Chief Gruber, Team Member – appointed Monitor in 2014; Mr. Needle and Mr. Wilson, Team Members References: Jack Morse, Esq., Assistant United States Attorney. U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Special Litigation Section 601 D Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20004 202-305-4039 jack.morse@usdoj.gov Marina Mazor, Assistant United States Attorney 1316 New Hampshire Ave NW Washington, Dc, 20036 202 305 3347 Marina.Mazor@usdoj.gov Curtis A. Griffin, JD Deputy Commissioner United States Virgin Islands Police Department Alexander Farrelly Justice Complex Page 20 5400 Veterans Drive St. Thomas, VI 00802 340.774.2211 Examples of our work product from other projects are included as appendices. V. Proposed Activities This Section describes our intended approach to fulfill the Monitoring Team duties as set forth under Scope of Work in the June 17, 2015 request for proposal (paragraphs 1 and 2). We address each of the duties, in sequence, incorporating, and in some cases treating separately, the considerations specified on page 4 under Proposed Activities. As this initial plan takes shape and based upon the proposed introductory management study, the collection of documents, the review of agency operations, and further the metrics-based requirements of the paragraphs, these “Scope of Work” components will be expanded, modified, and re-prioritized as the CDP moves toward compliance with the Consent Decree. A. Develop and implement an organizational plan, including appropriate staffing and scheduling, for auditing and reviewing CDP’s compliance with the requirements and purpose of the Decree. 1. Methods of Obtaining Information The Organizational Plan will be composed of the several components noted in the RFP, which include staffing, scheduling, auditing and reviewing CDP compliance. The first two will be developed from a proposed management study of existing structure and infrastructure of the CDP. The second two require baselines developed from the same management study, a review of existing CDP documentation, functioning internal systems and sub-systems, data sources, and policies. We propose to conduct the management study at the beginning of the monitoring project and couple it with comprehensive organizational culture study of agency members, to develop understanding of existing systems, the environment in which the CDP functions, and areas where disconnects appear. This information will help us build both an annual and long range compliance monitoring plan to both monitor and evaluate compliance and provide any needed technical assistance to enable the CDP to enhance its ability to meet compliance thresholds which will be established through statistically sound data analysis and a supporting work program. 2. Methods to Analyze Information Analytical methods will vary, and be dependent upon whether the focus of analysis is subject to qualitative or quantitative methods, or both. First and foremost, analysis will focus on the degree to which paragraph compliance is being achieved, and thereafter, upon constitutional and public trust impacts and Page 21 outcomes. For paragraph compliance, we will establish, in concert with the Parties, compliance thresholds, which normally range between 90% and 95%. The CDP, in order to meet compliance is required to clearly understand the thresholds for each and every compliance paragraph within the Consent Decree. Issues noted in the Consent Decree, an understanding of the methods by which compliance with each paragraph will be evaluated, and identifying the documentation, source data, and the process for this evaluation by the monitors, become the basis for analysis and evaluation. 3. Methods of Reporting Information The monitors will issue formal reports periodically as required by the Consent Decree – semi-annually to the Court, at least annually on outcome measurements, for example. It would be our hope to also deploy a reporting protocol based on a continually updated live-data system that can display the current status of every paragraph of the Consent Decree at any time, accessible to both the Court and the CDP. This information, so important to the parties, and the CDP in particular can be accessed at any time. This system will facilitate rapid modifications that are essential to the annual, and long range plan, and will help identify challenges and impediments to compliance for the CDP. While we have concentrated on the CDP, this plan will also monitor the required community interaction, external Inspector General operations as indicated by the Consent Decree, and the various boards identified within the Decree. B. Develop methodologies to conduct reliable audits and reviews of CDP’s compliance with the Consent Decree. 1. Methods to Obtaining Information The Consent Decree consists of 336 substantive paragraphs which the Monitor must "…review and audit as necessary to determine whether the City and CDP have complied…" Compliance, broadly defined, entails satisfying Consent Decree-tailored Constitutional police practices, training requirements and principles, and CDP policy requirements, training, and sustained implementation (practice). Compliance reviews and audits will contain elements necessary for reliability and comprehensiveness (¶360). The impressive number of paragraphs and subparagraphs to be reviewed and audited, coupled with the policy-trainingpractice construct requirement, presents a compliance review obligation that is formidable. 2. Methods to Analyze Information Analysis will focus on three major elements of change, (1) policy review, modification, or creation, (2) training to transfer policy guidance into individual Page 22 performance by CDP personnel, and finally, (3) monitoring sustained implementation of changes to conform to Consent Decree thresholds for compliance. Each step requires that data be sourced in consistent format to document the achievement. An example of a threshold is a numeric value for each step in the use of force reporting or citizen complaint process (e.g., =>95% of all citizen complaints are completed within the time limits specified in the policy). In cases which do not lend themselves to quantitative evaluation, a level of compliance criterion could activities such as establishing a policy, or creating of a unit, or implementing an initiative. Levels of compliance will be developed by the Monitoring Team in cooperative meetings with the Parties and will, whenever possible, be metric based. While the monitoring focus will be on compliance with these thresholds, as the project develops and outcome measures are established against paragraph themes of the Consent Decree, more focus will be addressed to these outcome measures, which in the end will demonstrate the changes in the policing environment within the City, the ultimate goal of the Consent Decree. 3. Methods To Report Information Both paper and electronic reports will be produced by the Monitoring Team. These reports will be based upon sound analytical methods using CDP generated data as well as Monitoring Team data system materials. Reports will include narrative and graphic representations of current status, based upon the agreed upon thresholds of compliance. These thresholds will be detailed in the first report of the Monitoring Team. 4. Frequency of Activity Auditing of compliance status will be a constant activity of the Monitoring Team and will be on-going until full compliance is achieved. While the reporting of compliance status may be seen as the written reports of the Monitoring Team, our proprietary data system maintains live and current status that is addressable at any time and at any level down to sub-paragraphs of the Consent Decree. This provides the Monitoring Team and the Parties with a wealth of knowledge about the progress of compliance as well as the problem areas, allowing for immediate redirection of effort by the CDP as well as the provision of any technical assistance that the Monitoring Team can supply to quickly address the problem before it gets worse. C. Recommend and review metrics to assess police practices and their efforts during the pendency of the Consent Decree. The potential of the CDP to achieve full compliance with Consent Decree mandates, and the pace at which this becomes possible, is a direct correlation of what we might call the “police environment” – the individual and collective sum of crime and services workload; policing style and philosophy; leadership and supervision; resources and other constants and variables. The Page 23 ability to assign resources to compliance programming, for example, depends on staff availability, appropriate skill sets, and competing department priorities. The sophistication of data production capacity, or its antithesis, will be an asset or barrier to achieving compliance and asserting it to the Monitor, the Department of Justice and the Court. To understand, assess, and manage police practices during the pendency of the Consent Decree, our Monitoring Team will conduct and periodically update at least two major initiatives. 1. Methods to Obtain Information Our Work Plan includes a limited, focused management study to quantitatively capture conditions of the CDP with regard to organization, staffing, community policing, agency practices and impact, training, and internal affairs, amongst others. Up to 20 broad classes of police conditions and practices will be examined. We will document factors and trends of the "policing environment," including crime and violence, services range and workload, arrest frequencies, clearance rates, officer experience and gender profiles, and resource capacity (fiscal and human). We will produce a portfolio of performance indicators, measuring what matters including newer non-traditional 21st Century measures of transparency and accountability. All of these data sets have implications for Consent Decree capacity and compliance "speed." (Will support Paragraph #350, identify and address barriers.) We will also conduct an Organizational Culture Assessment. Skillfully designed and insightfully interpreted, culture assessments provide approximations of an organization’s "readiness for change," overall and in "pockets" of the police culture – age groups, demographic (racial, gender) groups, units, ranks, classes, and shifts. The information will serve as valuable data and insight for the management of change. This exercise, we believe, will capture data on values, experiences, attitudes, and expectations of members of the workforce, toward Consent Decree issues and impending remedies. The end result will be an action plan that cites best potentials for positive change and how to address barriers. (Will support Paragraph #350, identify and address barriers.) We possess and would administer a field-tested e-survey methodology that examines four broad classes of perceptions: Public Trust & Officer Attitudes; Leadership & Role Definition; Policies & Practices; and Job Conditions. We can survey and diagnose over 20 sub-classes of perceptions, employing up to 175 items (questions). The instrument would be re-tailored to include/probe perceptions of core significance to Consent Decree issues, practices, and mandated remedies. Worthy of comment is that our standard instrument is already configured to reveal workforce perceptions regarding Consent Decreespecific considerations such as: leadership, monitoring, change management capacities of command officers and supervisors; fairness and equity of the citizen complaint process, internal investigations and discipline practices; training Page 24 quality; written directives (policies), content, dissemination, practices and training; and internal legitimacy and fairness. D. Conduct reliable assessments to determine whether the agreement has resulted in constitutional policing. 1. Methods to Obtain Information The Consent Decree specifies an obligation to assess, at least annually, 39 outcomes, trends, and patterns. With dimensional detail requirements – use of force by type, district, race, age, gender, for example, for most base measures, the number of assessments called for is many multiples of 39. Classes of measurements are: Use of Force; Individuals in Crisis; Stop, Search, & Arrest; Bias Free Policing & Community Engagement; Recruitment; Training; Officer Assistance & Support; Supervision; Civilian Complaints; Internal Investigations and Discipline. Working with the parties, we would propose a Measurement & Assessment Information System that will be constructed to yield outcome, pattern, and trend data to address the 39 core measures (measure groups) itemized in the Consent Decree. Because so much of the data required to populate the system must be generated, processed, and validated by the CDP, we expect to work in close collaboration with the Data Analysis and Collection Coordinator prescribed in the Consent Decree (¶258). E. Review and comment on policies, training, and initiatives developed pursuant to the Decree. 1. Methods of Obtaining Information Critical to positive change in any organization is provision of guidance to members regarding expected levels of performance and required steps in their execution. Given the findings in the Consent Decree, many of CDP policies and procedures will require updating, or the issuance of completely new policies. Policy development will be subject to review by the Monitoring Team as well as the Parties, with the Monitoring Team requesting and receiving draft copies for review and comment. Such review will also facilitate opportunities for technical assistance from the Monitoring Team. Once policy has been developed, CDP personnel will have to be trained on the new or changed policy. The Monitoring Team will take an active role in the oversight of this training, starting with design through the delivery and subsequent longitudinal evaluation of impact on CDP operations. In each case, documentation review, observation of delivery, and measurement of impact will be important roles for the Monitoring Team. Page 25 2. Methods of Analyzing Information Reviews of policy by the Monitoring Team will include comparisons to existing Constitutionally-based policies from well-regarded police agencies as well as those developed under other Consent Decrees. Issues detailed in the Consent Decree will form the basis for policy change and be used as guidelines for ensuring that adequate safeguards to ensure Constitutional Policing policies and practices are in place. In every case, the expected outcomes from policy change will be balanced against the compliance thresholds as well as the outcome measures developed for the area under review. After publication, the Monitoring Team, through its in-house data system, will monitor any required reviews of these polices as dictated by the Consent Decree. Further monitoring will take place during the development of training to support the policy, as well as subsequent evaluation of the training impact during the implementation phase. 3. Methods of Reporting Information The Monitoring Team’s formal reporting system will take notice of all recently published policies, updated procedures, and reorganized or newly created organizational elements resulting from the policy changes. The Monitoring Team will also periodically report to the CDP the current status of all polices logged into the system for comparison and compliance purposes, including the supported training. 4. Frequency of Activity Frequency of policy change will be great during the initial year of the monitoring. Accordingly, Monitoring Team members, based on paragraph groupings and expertise, will be continually engaged in both the identification of policy changes and the review of these polices. Because policy impacts Consent Decree compliance, the status of paragraph compliance and outcome measure impacts will also be assessed as policy moves through the development, training, and subsequent implementation phases. F. Conduct, analyze, and report methodologically sound surveys of community member and police officers regarding CPD police practices. Within 180 days of the Effective Date, and every two years thereafter, we will conduct a reliable, representative survey of members of the Cleveland community regarding their experiences with and perceptions of the CPD and public safety. Page 26 1. Methods to Obtain Data Building on findings and insights documents in the U.S.D.O.J./U.S.A. Investigation (12-4-2014) and conversations with Cleveland residents, and prior law enforcements surveys, we will design/tailor a survey to the requirements of the Consent Decree issues and potential remedies. Community survey content and methodology are well developed in law enforcement. Members of the Warshaw and Associates Monitoring Team have considerable experience in citizen survey design, analysis, reporting, and presentation. Our Monitoring Team has fluent Spanish language skills. Paragraph 363 sets forth the survey goals and design criteria for the expected approach. Most important is the goal/objective to convert findings into policy and practice to advance and sustain constitutional policing. The City and DOJ is mandated under the Consent Decree to seek private funding to support the survey. The City of Cleveland is home to many civic-minded foundations and has a robust commercial and industrial corporate base. We note that the New Orleans Monitors have partnered with the University of New Orleans, resulting in a favorable cost-structure. We may explore such an option as well. Regardless of the arrangements that may eventuate, we recognize that accountability for the quality and outcome of the process remains with us. 2. Methods to Analyze Information Our survey, e-based, and supplemented by a paper version, will produce results (data) which will be processed using a standard statistical software package. Findings will be organized to display results textually and graphically. Findings will be evaluated to yield "Action Implications." 3. Methods to Report Information Our report will, once reviewed by the Parties, will be posted on the Monitors’ Website and will be provided to the City and CDP for further dissemination. 4. Frequency of Activity The Community Survey is scheduled for every other year. G. Review use of force and misconduct investigations to assess their quality, reliability, and adherence to the requirements of the Decree. 1. Methods of Obtaining Information Use of Force monitoring is done most effectively by review of cases completed by the CDP and through data provided by the CDP Use of Force and Citizen Complaint monitoring data systems, and subsequent upgrades or replacements thereto. The data sources are overall case status and completeness, as well Page 27 individual components identified as a result or applying paragraph mandates to the process. An example of overall compliance is the number of cases completed in accordance with policy, while a specific element is the number of cases that correctly identified all CDP personnel on the scene of a reported Use of Force. Citizen complaint analysis might be based upon the individual elements of a case process, or the overall completeness or timeliness of the case handling. The internal CDP data will be reviewed and coupled with random victim follow-up to determine accuracy of data. The Monitoring Team will request remote access to the CPD Use of Force and Citizen Complaint databases, as well as the Early Warning databases, to facilitate monitoring activities. 2. Methods of Analyzing Information The in-house CDP Use of Force and Citizen Complaint data systems will be used as the base source data. Monitoring Team members will review completed cases, using a Monitoring Team-developed and computerized template that collects individual component data as well as overall case results. These data will be statistically analyzed and compared to the established compliance thresholds at the paragraph and sub-paragraph levels to determine compliance status. Data will be looked at in terms of the reporting period as well as longitudinally over the course of the monitoring effort, where trend analysis will be performed. Efforts by the CDP to correct deficiencies noted during the reporting period will also be taken into consideration in the output reports on compliance, so as not to paint a negative picture when there is positive progress being made. 3. Methods of Reporting Information The reports will be published as indicated in the Decree-required Workplan, but not less than semi-annually. Monthly updates will be provided to the parties (non-public documents) from the Monitoring Team data system to enhance corrective action without waiting for the semi-annual update. The status will also be reported out in monthly meetings with the Parties. 4. Frequency of Activity Semi-annually or monthly as noted above. H. Provide or facilitate technical assistance to CDP, including recommending strategies to improve CDP’s implementation of the Decree. 1. Methods of Obtaining Information It is anticipated that initially our provision of Technical Assistance (TA) might, if the parties agree, be considerable, but will dissipate, with time. In most cases it Page 28 will be identified by either the CDP or the Monitoring Team itself. It will be based upon problems that once identified, cannot be overcome by the CDP alone. In other areas, the TA may include design and structure of programs. 2. Methods of analyzing information In determining the source for the TA, Monitoring Team member expertise will be the first level response with those areas beyond the Monitoring Team capacity, referred to acceptable outside sources. Given the breath of Monitoring Team experience, we anticipate this outsourcing to be minimal. 3. Methods of reporting information TA will be reported in the various periodic reports and any special initiative based reports generated by the Monitoring Team. 4. Frequency of Activity As needed through monitoring efforts. I. Receipt from and provision of information to the Cleveland community, including civilian oversight entities, related to implementation of the Decree. 1. Methods of Obtaining Information This area requires extensive collaboration and interaction with the various citizen groups and newly created oversight boards as referenced in the Consent Decree. Information will be obtained in a variety of ways including on-site attendance at the various meetings, informal and formal mini-surveys targeted to both area of concern of the various entities, collection and review of documents and reports generated by these groups, and review of the impacts on the various compliance paragraphs of the Consent Decree. It is the intent of the Monitoring Team to provide on their website a place where community residents can complete a Citizen Satisfaction with Consent Decree monitored policing services they have been the recipient thereof. 2. Methods of Analyzing Information It is our intent to use a system where each and every document obtained or received is logged into the Monitoring Team server files. Each document, to the extent possible, will be linked to a specific paragraph or grouping of paragraphs and the content is analyzed as to its impact on compliance. In the end the content of these documents is fused with other information to form compliance decisions by the Monitoring Team as well as recommendations for remedies to the CDP. Page 29 3. Methods of Reporting Information In some cases, the results of these interactions and documents become part of scheduled Monitoring Team reporting, specialized initiative based reporting, or are integrated into the paragraph specific reporting or compliance status. In the latter case they may dictate immediate impact on compliance status and as such will be transmitted in monthly status reporting to the Parties. In most all cases, the activity will be reported out in the semi-monthly reports of the Monitoring Team. It is envisioned that open and reasonable information exchange will exist between the Monitoring Team and the community groups and boards that are enumerated in the Consent Decree, to the extent that ethical reporting and confidentiality is maintained. 4. Frequency of Activity Many reports may be ad hoc based on the status of the various boards and committee initiatives or reviews, resulting in either inclusion at a later date in a larger report or impacting immediately in compliance status. Regardless of that, the Monitoring Team intends to keep abreast of the various group’s schedules of work associated with them and ensure that all possible information is exchanged so as to have impact on moving compliance forward. J. Regularly communicate with the City and the United States regarding CDP’s progress implementing the Decree, any obstacles to implementation, and as otherwise necessary to facilitate effective implementation. The Monitoring Team is committed to establishing and preserving open lines of communication with all the Parties. The Monitoring Team has no desire to surprise the Parties with information gathered during the course of our work. All information that comes to the attention of the Monitoring Team during regular monitoring activities will be shared with the parties through our regular reporting practices. Items that come to the attention of the Monitoring Team which in the opinion of the Monitoring Team are impediments to progress toward compliance with the Consent Decree, will be brought concurrently to the attention of the City, and Chief of Police and the United States, as part of the informal communication process and then, if appropriate through our regular reporting systems. K. Regularly produce public reports on CDP’s progress implementing the Decree and any obstacles to implementation. 1. Methods of Obtaining Information Periodic reporting of progress on compliance is a central responsibility of the Monitoring Team and will be a focal point of its publications component. The data and analysis upon which these reports are based includes the totality of documents, data, observations, and interaction of the Monitoring Team members with the Parties and the Community. This can take the form of the data elements Page 30 in the Monitoring Team data system that measure compliance thresholds, which can vary depending upon the paragraph being measured, but which might include case processing information from the CDP systems, victim quality control assessments, policy based threshold compliance metrics, surveys, Monitoring Team analysis of initiative progress, and other items both quantitative and qualitative in nature. 2. Methods of Analyzing Information Where the data lends itself, statistical methods will be applied to determine compliance or progress. This may take the form of Use of Force case component reviews by Monitoring Team members to determine compliance with policy (e.g., percentages of cases that met specific standards), quantitative and qualitative analysis of initiative progress by the CDP by Monitoring Team members (e.g., is the initiative on schedule against the published timeline and/or if not, what roadblocks have represented themselves), to outcome measure reviews based on both statistical and subjective reporting on the impact of the progress to the longer term outcome measures of change within the policing environment. 3. Methods of Reporting Information Reports may be scheduled (semi-annual) or special (initiative based). However, given the monitoring capacity of the Monitoring Team data system, the status of these focal points is available at any time to the Monitoring Team and can be shared with the Parties during periodic monitoring meetings. What is shared publically will be determined in concert with the Parties. It is also anticipated that there will be scheduled meetings with the CDP and Parties to share progress, concerns, and status issues in a face-to-face environment. L. Maintain all documents related to this project in a confidential manner as required by the Decree. 1. Methods of Obtaining Information The Monitoring Team will rely heavily upon electronic transmission of documents between the Monitoring Team, the City, the CDP, and the DOJ. Documents received will be loaded into the Monitoring Team’s server and electronically indexed for fast retrieval by Monitoring Team members. Receipt of the documents will be appropriately documented. 2. Methods of Analyzing Information Upon receipt, the documents are sorted against paragraph groupings (see Section V, B, for additional descriptions). If they impact the paragraphs from a compliance standpoint, the documents are routed to the assigned Monitoring Team member and a request for review of compliance is noted. Based upon the Page 31 assigned Monitoring Team member response, the impacted paragraphs are either updated in terms of any compliance status change or annotated with the substance of the received information. Finally the information and copies of the documents are shared with all Monitoring Team members for any additional input. As noted in Section V. B., each of the paragraphs has an assigned compliance threshold, which is either quantitative or qualitative in design. These documents, coupled with on-site observations by Monitoring Team members and future statistical analysis and surveys, form the basis for compliance assessment by the Monitoring Team. 3. Methods of Reporting Information As noted in Section V. K, above, the activities of the CDP that move them toward compliance, be that policy, training, program initiation, or community interaction, along with specific documents supporting this activity, form the basis for paragraph compliance status evaluations by the Monitoring Team. The consolidation of this assessment on a scheduled basis (see Section V. A, above) will be reported out in court documents and hearings as well as other public record documents as established by either the annual or strategic plans. These documents will be produced with all due regard to ethical reporting and confidentiality as determined by the Monitor in joint agreements with the Parties. The intent of this reporting, however, is to not only keep the Parties up to date with CDP progress toward compliance, but to report to the Community as a whole on the changes taking place that are responsive to the Consent Decree. 4. Frequency of Activity The frequency of these reports will vary with the type of report being made. At a minimum the Monitoring Team will provide the court and the public with semiannual progress reports that provide an overview of the current status of compliance, statistical displays in various compliance areas, a discussion of the most recent efforts toward compliance, a detail listing of those paragraphs that are not incompliance, including notations regarding impediments facing the CDP to coming into compliance, and a summary listing of those paragraphs in compliance. M. Coordinate with the City and CDP to arrange visits, on site records reviews, interviews and coordination of monitoring activities, information gathering, and communications with the city, the United States, and members of the community. We have combined both of these coordination questions because they speak to the same issue of how the monitor will conduct business with the parties and the community. It is understood that the CDP is responsible for compliance with the Consent Decree and will provide the necessary personnel and support personnel to accomplish the agreement. In furtherance of that goal the Monitoring Team seeks to be as unobtrusive as possible in dealing with the City and its employees as they go about the people’s business and the Monitoring Team goes about its Page 32 business of compliance assessment. We fully understand the incontrovertible role and authority of the Mayor and the Police Chief. We take seriously the role that the Monitor will have as it pertains to interactions with the community. Accordingly, Chief Warshaw and the team’s efforts in this regard, will be enhanced by team member Mayor William A. Johnson Jr., whose distinguished career as a civil rights leader, elected Mayor, and academic, will bring to this endeavor a seasoned, sensitive practitioner whose first-hand experience with the very issues found in this project will be a point of differentiation in our candidacy for this role. That said, the City will appoint a Compliance Coordinator and such other personnel to a compliance unit as they deem necessary to carry out the functions and obligations outlined in the agreement. The Monitoring Team will work with the Compliance Coordinator and compliance unit to facilitate the transfer of the documents, interviews and other information necessary to support compliance goals accomplished by the City and CDP and are deemed necessary for the Monitoring Team to review, access and report to the parties, court and the public. A single point of data exchange will enable the City and CDP to always know what documents, personnel, or other data sources the Monitor has asked for and is reviewing for compliance assessment. The Monitor expects that the City and CDP will provide facilities and services necessary to carry out on site functions of the Monitor and its staff. It is the intent of this Monitoring Team to build a network system which will allow the parties including City and CDP remote access to a monitor website where real time information about what we are reviewing, our reports, and exchange of information can occur. This will include a portal for access by the judge, the parties and community members. VI. Potential Conflicts of Interest or Bias Chief Warshaw and Chief Gruber have done work, and continue to do work with the Special Litigations Section of the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice. Neither Chiefs Warshaw nor Gruber have in any capacity been involved, or are privy to matters relevant to the Cleveland matter. VII. Estimated Costs As a Monitor in several jurisdictions, I am well aware that fiscal austerity is essential to the management of the urban centers of our country. There are not only costs for monitoring, but there are additional commitments of financial and human resources for implementation, technology and organizational engagement. Reforming a police agency that is also bearing the financial burden of daily operational and administrative costs in its police service deliveries is costly. We are sensitive to this issue. There is also a provision that requires the Monitor to submit to the parties within 120 days, a plan for compliance reviews and outcome assessments. Accordingly, our estimated costs are limited to the facts known to us at this time. Should our candidacy be successful, and a more enlightened dialogue with the parties relevant to the specific Page 33 scope and methodologies of our work be undertaken, we are prepared to craft the numbers to the mutually agreed-upon level of effort that shall be undertaken by this team. NAME # TRIPS AIRFARE ANNUAL AIRFARE DAYS PER ANUM AVERAGE PER DIEM WARSHAW GRUBER GIRVIN NEEDLE WILSON RIGGS KIYLER JOHNSON BANWAR COLON 12 8 8 4 4 4 4 4 0 4 56 44 44 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 TOTALS 52 312 (LABOR HOURS) 3120X 10 hrs per day TOTAL PER DIEM per hour) Labor hours on-site, including TA Per Diem Airfare Lodging(@ er) Airport Mileage Airport Pkg Admin/Payroll Editing Rental Car ( @ 48 days) Misc Hrs Parties Mtg, Conf Calls etc. Off-site Work/Report Writing TOTAL Page 34