1. Professional Services for

2.  Desire to evaluate policies, procedures, and practices of LCPD  Hired Justice and Security Strategies (JSS) to: 1.Evaluate use-of-force incidents 2.Assess internal police investigations 3.Track community satisfaction with LCPD 4.Explore exposure to litigation 5.Identify best practices that promote accountability at all levels 6.Opine whether a community oversight agency is needed

4.  JSS returned 14 recommendations  Included hiring a Police Auditor  JSS Submitted a proposal to provide this service  The City is prohibited from accepting a proposal from JSS  NMSA 10-16-13. Prohibited bidding – “No state agency or political subdivision of the state shall accept a bid or proposal from a person who directly participated in the preparation of specifications, qualifications or evaluation criteria on which the specific competitive bid or proposal was based. A person accepting a bid or proposal on behalf of a state agency or political subdivision of this state shall exercise due diligence to ensure compliance with this section.”

5.  RFP Issued  Special SAC  City Attorney, City Auditor, HR Director, Police Chief, and ACM  QBS Procurement Method  Responses 1.Police Executive Research Forum, Washington, DC (PERF) 2.MGT of America, DC - Texas - CA – FL 3.Altegrity Security Consulting, CA – Nat’l – International 4.Elite Performance Auditing Consultants, KY

6.  Deliverables  Task 1: Evaluate all PSU / Citizen Complaints  Task 2: Risk Assessment and Audit Plan  Task 3: Policy Recommendations  Costs  Not to exceed $49,600, plus applicable tax  Includes Travel Expenses  Contract Term  One Year with up to Four Annual Renewals

7.  Evaluate LCPD/ PSU investigations as to accuracy and completeness for all citizen complaints  PERF will  Review all reports for accuracy and completeness and reply within five working days  Use federal confidentiality safeguards for all records  Provide quarterly reports to summarize its reviews, identify concerns and trends, and recommend appropriate corrections  PERF will not  Address disciplinary matters  Comment on potential civil or criminal liability of any employee, police officer, or citizen

8.  Perform a Risk Assessment of the LCPD and prepare an Audit Plan based on the high risk areas  Examine areas that potentially generate heightened risk  Assess progress toward implementing the JSS study  Areas to be examined and reported in the 1 st quarter: Early Intervention System Use of Force Practices Record Management Discipline Process Property and Evidence Review LCPD Officer Involved Shooting Investigations and protocols  Develop a prioritized Audit plan to guide the project team

9.  Make independent policy recommendations from an in-depth review of policies, procedures, and training that impact police accountability and the disciplinary system  Based on results from Task 1 and Task 2, review all areas and develop recommendations for:  Complaint Process and its accessibility to the community  Investigative Process for both general and specific methods  Citizen Complaint Investigation Process to ensure the accuracy, fairness, and completeness  Disciplinary System for sanctions imposed for officer misconduct  Reporting and Communicating disciplinary outcomes to the community

10.  Vote “Yes” and approve the contract with Police Executive Research Forum (PERF)  Contract Execution  Notice to Proceed  Start Work July 1st  Vote “No” and decline the contract with PERF  Provide alternative direction for staff

11.  Additional Information about PERF  http://www.policeforum.org

12. PROPOSAL EVALUATION REPORT Police Auditor Services TOTAL POINTS POSSIBL E POINTS DISTRIBUTION RFP No.: 09-10-486 Altegrity Security Consulting Elite Performance Auditing Consultants MGT of America Police Executive Research Forum CRITERIA 1. Technical Approach 500320340 420 2. Qualifications/Competence of Team Members 625425 500 3. Capacity/Capability of the firm 500360340400380 4. Management structure and approach 500360380340420 5. Prior performance with other clients 25015070160210 6. Clarity of the proposal 12595 8590 Rating Sheets Scores25001710165018252020