Accreditation Process

History of Accreditation 1960’s – Law Enforcement faced with riots and disturbances over race and the Vietnam War. 1960’s – Law Enforcement faced with riots and disturbances over race and the Vietnam War. Public lost confidence in law enforcement due to their inability to prepare for emergencies. Public lost confidence in law enforcement due to their inability to prepare for emergencies. Law Enforcement did not learn from other’s mistakes. Law Enforcement did not learn from other’s mistakes. No communication between agencies. No communication between agencies. Many LEOs under-trained. Many LEOs under-trained. Hiring/recruiting practices often discriminatory Hiring/recruiting practices often discriminatory SOPs not well written. SOPs not well written. Public did not respect LEOs as professionals. Public did not respect LEOs as professionals.

History of Accreditation October 1971 – Tasked to develop National Criminal Justice Standards October 1971 – Tasked to develop National Criminal Justice Standards Law Enforcement Assistance Administration provided $1.75 million in grant money to develop standards for law enforcement agencies. Law Enforcement Assistance Administration provided $1.75 million in grant money to develop standards for law enforcement agencies.

CALEA The Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies 1979 CALEA formed by: 1979 CALEA formed by: IACP-International Association of Chiefs of Police IACP-International Association of Chiefs of Police NOBLE-National Organization for Black Law Enforcement Executives NOBLE-National Organization for Black Law Enforcement Executives NSA-National Sheriff’s Association NSA-National Sheriff’s Association PERF-Police Executive Research Forum PERF-Police Executive Research Forum Accreditation became part of the answer to the problems of the past generation and is also part of the solution to issues confronting law enforcement today. Accreditation became part of the answer to the problems of the past generation and is also part of the solution to issues confronting law enforcement today.

Florida Statutory Consideration 1993 F.S F.S Encouraged FSA & FPCA to create an independent voluntary LEA accreditation program. Encouraged FSA & FPCA to create an independent voluntary LEA accreditation program. In response to a need to assure the public that quality services are delivered in accordance with recognized standards. In response to a need to assure the public that quality services are delivered in accordance with recognized standards.

CFA The Commission for Florida Law Enforcement Accreditation Developed a process for accreditation that required compliance with more than 250 professional standards designed specifically for Florida law enforcement agencies. Developed a process for accreditation that required compliance with more than 250 professional standards designed specifically for Florida law enforcement agencies. Comprised of four sheriffs, four chiefs, and one representative each from the Association of Counties, the League of Cities, and the Judiciary. Comprised of four sheriffs, four chiefs, and one representative each from the Association of Counties, the League of Cities, and the Judiciary.

Accredited vs. Non-Accredited 1993 – 1997 study by the Intergovernmental Risk Management Agency (IRMA) 1993 – 1997 study by the Intergovernmental Risk Management Agency (IRMA) Saves money in lawsuit defenses Saves money in lawsuit defenses 21% of state/local LEOs work for accredited agencies. 21% of state/local LEOs work for accredited agencies. 17% Accredited agencies had fewer lawsuits. 17% Accredited agencies had fewer lawsuits. Paid out 35% less in awards than non- accredited agencies. Paid out 35% less in awards than non- accredited agencies.

Accredited vs. Non-Accredited 10 agencies accredited October agencies accredited October agencies accredited to date agencies accredited to date 160 agencies in process 160 agencies in process

What is Accreditation? “… the bestowing of credentials symbolizing approval from a professional organization upon practitioners or specific institutions. It is a progressive and time-proven way of helping organizations evaluate and improve their overall performance.”

Goals and Objectives To establish and maintain standards that represent current professional law enforcement practices; To establish and maintain standards that represent current professional law enforcement practices; To increase effectiveness and efficiency in the delivery of law enforcement services; To increase effectiveness and efficiency in the delivery of law enforcement services; To establish standards that address and reduce liability for the agency and its members; To establish standards that address and reduce liability for the agency and its members; To establish standards that make an agency and its personnel accountable to the constituency they serve; To establish standards that make an agency and its personnel accountable to the constituency they serve;

Accreditation It is not mandatory! It is not mandatory! Does not dictate “how” you accomplish your goals, mission, or delivery of services. Does not dictate “how” you accomplish your goals, mission, or delivery of services. It does not tell you who to hire, fire, or promote. It does not tell you who to hire, fire, or promote. It is not a rubber stamp. It is not a rubber stamp.

Accreditation Is affordable, achievable and maintainable Is affordable, achievable and maintainable Provides guidelines for professional law enforcement practices Provides guidelines for professional law enforcement practices Is good business Is good business Reinforces federal, state, and local laws Reinforces federal, state, and local laws Standards are developed by peers Standards are developed by peers Is a vehicle for implementing change Is a vehicle for implementing change

Initial Steps CEO and agency commitment  CEO and agency commitment  Appoint/hire and Accreditation Manager  Appoint/hire and Accreditation Manager  Team Team Committee Committee Agency-wide  Agency-wide  Consult with Program Manager  Consult with Program Manager  Obtain a manual, purchase software  Obtain a manual, purchase software  Review Policies and Procedures  Review Policies and Procedures  Attend Accreditation Manager Training  Attend Accreditation Manager Training 

Initial Steps Self Assessment Visit accredited agencies  Visit accredited agencies  Become familiar with standards  Become familiar with standards  Evaluate facility Evaluate facility Update written directives Update written directives File construction  File construction 

Benefits to Agency Clearly defined lines of authority Clearly defined lines of authority Consistency in operational procedures Consistency in operational procedures Provides a quality work environment Provides a quality work environment Increases employee morale through statewide recognition Increases employee morale through statewide recognition

Benefits to Agency Strengthens the agency’s defense against lawsuits and complaints Strengthens the agency’s defense against lawsuits and complaints Review of agency status and readiness Review of agency status and readiness Possible reduction in insurance liability premiums and lawsuit settlements Possible reduction in insurance liability premiums and lawsuit settlements More efficient use of limited resources More efficient use of limited resources

Benefits to CEO Ensures that policies and procedures are documented and defendable Ensures that policies and procedures are documented and defendable Assurance personnel are trained according to CEO’s policies and procedures Assurance personnel are trained according to CEO’s policies and procedures Increased confidence in CEO’s ability to manage the organization Increased confidence in CEO’s ability to manage the organization Increases availability of decision-making information Increases availability of decision-making information

Benefits to Community Increased confidence in agency’s ability to deliver quality law enforcement services Increased confidence in agency’s ability to deliver quality law enforcement services Improved community and agency interaction Improved community and agency interaction Efficient use of law enforcement tax dollars Efficient use of law enforcement tax dollars Better trained officers Better trained officers

Accreditation Time Line Full Compliance – 24 months Full Compliance – 24 months Contract signed August 2004 Contract signed August 2004 Estimated Mock Assessment – May 2005 Estimated Mock Assessment – May 2005 Estimated Full Assessment – August 2005 Estimated Full Assessment – August 2005 Estimated Accreditation Meeting – October 2005 Estimated Accreditation Meeting – October 2005

Policy Review Standard identified by Accreditation Manager Standard identified by Accreditation Manager Determination made as whether a current Written Directive exists or a new Written Directive should be developed Determination made as whether a current Written Directive exists or a new Written Directive should be developed Personnel identified to review Written Directive’s/standard Personnel identified to review Written Directive’s/standard Assistance Request Assignment made/logged and sent to personnel Assistance Request Assignment made/logged and sent to personnel

Policy Review Assistance request will include; Assistance request will include; Standard # Standard # Date of request Date of request Due Date of request Due Date of request Attached to Assistance request Attached to Assistance request Quick print of standard; Quick print of standard; Standard# Standard# Topic of Standard Topic of Standard Text of Standard Text of Standard Bullets (each bullet MUST be addressed/may use multiple Written Directive’s) Bullets (each bullet MUST be addressed/may use multiple Written Directive’s) Compliance Keys Compliance Keys Indicates whether standard requires a written directive, observation, etc… Indicates whether standard requires a written directive, observation, etc…

Policy Review When Request for Assistance received; When Request for Assistance received; Note Due Date-Notify A/C. if cannot be met Note Due Date-Notify A/C. if cannot be met For current policies; For current policies; Ensure that all language is current and accurate Ensure that all language is current and accurate Ensure that Written Directive identifies practices in place Ensure that Written Directive identifies practices in place If Written Directive does not reflect practices, make suggestions for change (in writing) If Written Directive does not reflect practices, make suggestions for change (in writing)

Simply Put Accreditation helps to bring law enforcement up to the level that it should be at anyway. Accreditation helps to bring law enforcement up to the level that it should be at anyway.