Compiex Investigations Forensic Accounting Polygraphy Mediation Security Assessment Internet Control Analysis Training Crisis Management Law Enforcement Liaison Background Investigations Statement Analysis Financial Analysis Triai Preparation Consulting Serviee to the Corporate and Legai Communities October 31, 2016 Mr. Mark S. enzel Attorney Middleton Reutlinger 401 South Fourth Street, Suite 2600 Louisville, KY 40202 Dear Mr. Fenzel, As you are aware, I was requested to review numerous investigations conducted by the Jefferson County Public School?s (J CPS) Office of Compliance and Investigations (OCI). In the last sixty days I have reviewed over thirty??ve investigative reports prepared by the OCI. These reports were prepared subsequent to OCI investigating matters primarily concerning allegations of teachers/ staff engaging in physical restraints of students. These reports span a timeframe in excess of five years. Among other things, I have been asked to provide you my evaluation of the quality of investigations. As a preface to my evaluation I want to point out that there is seldom a perfect investigation. I have personally conducted several thousand investigations and supervised thousands of investigations. It is not unusual to look back and in retrospect wish you had asked a witness an additional question or two, changed the order of witness interviews or obtained additional records/documentation. However, it should be rare that these modi?cations or omissions materially impact the investigative result. The review I conducted of over thirty-five OCI investigative reports depict a consistent pattern of a multitude of deficiencies. In many instances these investigative defects materially affected the conclusion drawn by the investigator. Therefore, in some instances CPS was unable to take appropriate disciplinary action due to the poor investigative effort. I offer the following observations and opinions with, on the one hand, some reticence in being so critical, yet on the other hand with the clear vision that the CPS investigative process is in dire need of change and improvement. These serious deficiencies include but are not limited to the following; 1. An apparent lack of a clear investigative objective when initiating an investigation. 2. Seldom if ever does OCI conduct an in depth interview of the person requesting the investigation in order to obtain a clear picture of the situation before commencing the investigation. 3. Conducting interviews in a sequence not ideal for optimal results. For example, interviewing the accused before interviewing witnesses is ill advised. PD. Box 6 Simpaenvitiegi?entneieya?iie?? a Elwin-ail: Aigd?n?i?Wt?Jmmn a wan 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Seldom re?interviewing a person even after obtaining critical additional information. Conducting interviews without critical analyses of an interviewees answers and without necessary follow?up questions. Allowing other parties to be present (other than JCTA reps) during an interview who may in?uence what the interviewees may have to say. Not asking pertinent questions that would be designed to clarify the issue. Not identifying all possible witnesses. OCI seldom asks a witness to identify other potential witnesses. . Inconsistency in investigative protocols. In some instances, OCI obtains written statements from witnesses and in some instance they do not require such statements. Oftentimes witnesses will provide a written statement without direction from the OCI investigator and the resulting statement does not adequately address the issue at hand. It is unclear why OCI oftentimes requires a written statement and subsequently interviews a witness and then does not resolve the differences between the two accounts. Allowing multiple witnesses to provide a written statement on the same sheet of paper, thereby potentially encouraging collusion. Not attempting to resolve discrepancies in witness statements. Not reviewing prior allegations and investigations that may shed light on the current allegation. In some instances, accepting the investigative results from CPS without conducting independent investigation. Seldom does OCI inquire whether a teacher/staff who engages in a student restraint is SCM certi?ed nor do they require documentation to prove whether a teacher/ staff is SCM certi?ed. Seldom did OCI request incident reports or SCM reports that should accompany their investigative report. conclusions are oftentimes nonsensical. For example, if the original allegation was a teacher slapped a student on his face but the evidence clearly indicates the teacher hit the student on the arm, OCI would determine the allegation to be unsubstantiated. They typically do not address the more important issue of whether the teacher actions were acceptable. Conclusions are sometimes inconsistent with the evidence or lack thereof. Oftentimes the language in the reports is dif?cult to follow and understand. Critical dates are missing and the sequence of events is not explained. The manner in which OCI documents its investigations is unknown and should be explored. The documentation is critical because in some instances employment decisions are made based on the investigation and future litigation is very possible. Proper documentation is critical. It is unlikely that OCI reports are reviewed by supervisory personnel since the reports contain many glaring de?ciencies. It is presumed that a properly trained supervisor would direct the investigators and ensure thorough investigations. Even a well?trained experienced investigator requires oversight and guidance. This guidance should occur during the investigative process and during the report writing process. There appears to be no follow up by OCI as to how their investigation was received and whether the OCI customer had any suggestions for improvement. Unfortunately, many OCI reports were so lacking in thoroughness and completeness that a decision maker would be irresponsible in relying on the reports in making critical decisions aimed at protecting both employees and students. In some instances, inability to draw a proper conclusion resulted in no or inadequate disciplinary action taken against employees who engaged in various violations concerning the verbal and/or physical abuse of students. Not only do the inadequate OCI reports impact on decisions made by CPS, but the EP SB also relies on the same reports. They make decisions regarding teacher certi?cations based on OCl?s investigative results. It is unquestionable that CPS needs to make maj or changes in the manner in which allegations concerning teachers abusing students are investigated and reported. Please let me know if you have any questions or need any additional information. Sincerely, Carl Christiansen