Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Accreditation Chief Robert C. Dillard University of Richmond Police Department June 2005.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Accreditation Chief Robert C. Dillard University of Richmond Police Department June 2005."— Presentation transcript:

1 Accreditation Chief Robert C. Dillard University of Richmond Police Department June 2005

2 Presentation Topics History of IACLEA Accreditation Progress To Date Standards CALEA/IACLEA Partnership Process Pilot Programs Availability of Program to General Membership Benefits To Department

3 Overview of Accreditation History for IACLEA First IACLEA Standards Manual written in Written permission was obtained from CALEA to use the standards that had already been developed as a basis for the IACLEA standards. The Standards Manual was intended to act as a guide to campus police and security agencies to improve the professionalism of their operations.

4 Overview of Accreditation History for IACLEA The Standards are also utilized by LEMAP Teams to conduct agency surveys. In 1999, a needs survey was conducted of the membership and as a result, accreditation became recognized by IACLEA as a process and a priority.

5 Accreditation Committee An IACLEA accreditation committee was appointed. This committee was charged with the review and revision of the then current standards and the development of an accreditation process. The Accreditation Committee, as well as all other committees, reports to the Board.

6 Dolores Stafford: George Washington University (Chair) Robert Cowper: University of Windsor Suzanne Dugan: Minnesota State University, Mankato Tom Evans: Drew University Anne Glavin: California State University - Northridge Aaron Graves: University of Southern California Scott Shelton: University of Missouri at Kansas City Bill Taylor: Rice University Paul Verrecchia: College of Charleston Jack Leonard: IACLEA Staff

7 Progress to Date Every standard has been individually reviewed and approved by the Committee. The Standards Manual has been published and made available to the membership. IACLEA felt that it was very important to include all of its’ members, both sworn and non-sworn, in the accreditation process. All member agencies, sworn and non-sworn, will be eligible for IACLEA accreditation. An Accreditation Process Manual has been written, reviewed and approved by the Committee. IACLEA has applied to be a CALEA Alliance Partner.

8 The Standards Manual This manual contains: Table of Contents Standards and Commentary, which are divided into chapters by subject area. Glossary Guiding Principles, which set general parameters for the interpretation and administration of the program. Cross-Reference Table, which lists the standards, their source (CALEA or IACLEA), and compliance considerations.

9 The Process Manual This manual contains: Description of the basic step-by-step process a department will follow to become IACLEA accredited. Based on the procedures utilized in the CALEA process. Contains instructions and forms for the development of a filing system used to demonstrate compliance with the standards.

10 The Standards There are currently 305 standards in the IACLEA process. These standards are mandatory if applicable to the department. Applicability of the standards to the department is determined by the functions that the department performs or should perform (as determined by IACLEA). Traffic Chapter - By Function; Clery Chapter - All Standards denoted by an “-A” were developed for non-sworn agency compliance in specific areas. Standards define WHAT an agency should do; they do not dictate HOW it is done.

11 Example: Sworn and Non-Sworn Agencies The agency’s organizational structure is depicted graphically on an organizational chart that is reviewed and updated as needed. The chart is accessible to all personnel. Commentary: The chart should coincide with the written description and reflect the formal lines of authority and communication within the agency.

12 Example: Sworn Agency A medical examination is conducted, prior to appointment to probationary status, to certify the general health of each candidate for a sworn position. Commentary: None.

13 Example: Non-Sworn Agency A A medical examination is conducted, prior to appointment to probationary status, to certify the general health of each candidate for a non-sworn position. Commentary: None. Non-Sworn positions are deemed to be first responders to emergency or general calls for service.

14 Chapter 1 Agency Role and Authority 1.1 Campus Law Enforcement, Public Safety and Security Role 1.2 Limits of Authority 1.3 Use of Force Chapter 2 Agency Jurisdiction and Mutual Aid 2.1 Agency Jurisdiction and Mutual Aid Chapter 11 Organization and Administration 11.1 Organizational Structure 11.2 Unity of Command 11.3 Authority and Responsibility 11.5 Goals and Objectives Each chapter is divided into chapter sections

15 Chapter 11 Organization and Administration 11.3 Authority and Responsibility A written directive requires that: *a. Responsibility is accompanied by commensurate authority; and *b. Each employee is accountable for the use of delegated authority. Commentary: The intent of the directive should be to establish a policy guide- line for the delegation of authority. At every level within the agency, personnel should be given the authority to make decisions necessary for the effective execution of their responsibilities. The delegation of authority should be consistent with the agency’s organizational values and mission statement A written directive states that supervisory personnel are accountable for the activities of employees under their immediate control. Commentary: None. * Bullets Multiple standards may be grouped in these chapter sections depending upon a similar subject matter of the standard.

16

17 Building Partnerships IACLEA and CALEA are developing a partnership. CALEA’s Alliance Program Designed for states (Florida, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Mississippi and Oregon) Contractual authority to use CALEA standards.

18 Alliance Programs There are currently 97 core CALEA standards (Recognition Program) in IACLEA’s standards manual. Of the 97 standards, which address critical life/health/safety issues, 32 refer only to agencies with holding facilities. There are 18 “-A” standards in the IACLEA manual. There are 11 unique IACLEA standards, mostly concerning Clery Act compliance.

19 Standards Manual$230 Application Fee$350 Contract FeeBased on Full Time Equivalent's Assessor Costs $6,500 (estimated) Initial costs of the IACLEA Accreditation Process are as follows: The agency is accredited by IACLEA for a period of 3 years.

20 Initial Accreditation FeeAnnual Continuation Fee Option 1Option 2Option 3 Number of Full-Time Equivalents Enrolled Single Payment without On-Site Assessment Charge Two Installments without On-Site Assessment Charge Three Installments includes estimated On- Site Assessment Charge ($6,500) Reaccreditation Fee + estimated On- Site Assessment Charge Under 1,999$4,896$2,693$3,962$3,281/year 2,000 – 4,999$5,386$2,963$4,142$3,371/year 5,000 – 9,999$5,925$3,259$4,339$3,470/year 10,000 – 19,999$6,518$3,585$4,557$3,578/year Over 20,000$7,170$3,944$4,796$3,698/year

21 Assessor Costs Assessor costs are based on the actual costs of the assessment. Cost of travel, lodging, meals, and assessor incidentals will be included. Assessors will be paid the same as LEMAP assessors. Institutions will hopefully allow assessors to participate in on- sites for professional development. One assessor will be from a CALEA approved list of assessors.

22

23 The department requests information about the IACLEA accreditation process. Department purchases the IACLEA Standards Manual. IACLEA sends information to include welcome letter, application form, and Department Profile Questionnaire (DPQ).

24 Department makes decision to join process. Department submits application fee. Department submits completed forms - application and Departmental Profile Questionnaire (DPQ). After review, IACLEA sends applicant department accreditation contract, the Accreditation Process Manual, and an additional Standards Manual.

25 Applicant department completes accreditation contract and submits with fee. IACLEA forwards self-assessment materials (forms, logs) to the Department Accreditation Manager. Applicant department is now considered a Candidate department. Department must develop and implement directives and procedures that verifies agency compliance with IACLEA’s Standards (36 months).

26 Candidate department sets up files and compiles proofs of compliance for all applicable standards. Candidate department performs a mock on-site by knowledgeable assessors (recommended). Candidate department notifies IACLEA of readiness for on-site assessment.

27 *IACLEA selects assessors. (3 ½ day visit) Candidate department submits schedule of on-site review. IACLEA makes arrangements for assessors. * At least one assessor will be selected from CALEA’s approved list of assessors.

28 Assessors conduct review of standards to include observations, interviews, and file review. Assessor reviews are documented and collected by Team Leader. Assessors conduct exit interview with Department Head and related staff.

29 Final on-site report is submitted to Accreditation Committee. Accreditation Committee reviews findings of report at bi-annual meeting. Candidate Department may be present. Committee makes decision by vote. Department is recognized at Annual Conference and given letter acknowledging accredited status. Framed certificate is sent to department.

30 IACLEA Accreditation/CALEA Recognition is for a period of 3 years. Department must remain in compliance with all applicable standards. Department submits annual reports attesting to continuing compliance. Proofs of compliance are maintained as documentation for reaccreditation.

31 Compliance If an agency fails to meet any of the applicable standards, the agency is given 90 days to comply with standards found not to be in compliance. Agencies will submit an annual report to certify on-going compliance with the standards during the 3 year period. On-going compliance includes time sensitive reports and maintenance of files.

32 Benefits to the Agency Improved law enforcement, security or public safety services to the community. Improved level of professionalism and training to departmental employees. Authenticates the need for the department in the institutional setting. Documents formalizing guidelines of what you do and how you do it. Creates accepted, uniform practices, internationally, for campus law enforcement, public safety or security departments.

33 Benefits to the Agency Identify and legitimize the need for equipment. Accreditation encourages grant-funding sources to support program initiatives. Demonstrates a past history of departmental professionalism and the ability of the department to successfully and effectively administer the grant. Increased pride and morale within the department. Department expectations of employees are clear and consistent. Development of written policies and procedures that give clear guidance to departmental personnel.

34 Benefits to the Agency Reduction in liability issues. Increased level of recognized professionalism by peers, local law enforcement agencies and the community. Program support - model policies, procedures, etc. Allows the department to hire and retain a higher caliber of employee.

35 Benefits to the Agency Maintenance (reviews and revisions) of written policies and procedures. Improved record keeping. Written reporting requirements keep managers informed regarding departmental operations. Improved maintenance and tracking of evidence and property.

36 Benefits to the Agency Provides department and institution a checklist for Clery Act compliance. Provides a “yardstick” by which you can measure your department. The implementation of accreditation within a department creates a stable, well-organized and efficient operation.

37 Wake Forest Drexel San Jose State Kenyon College USC

38 IACLEA has begun its accreditation pilot programs, utilizing both sworn and non-sworn departments in the program. –Departments that are presently known to be professional and run accordingly. –Have appropriate staff and financial resources to devote to compliance with the standards. –A commitment to devote the resources to complete the process in a timely manner. –CALEA accredited agencies in close proximity that can advise and give assistance. Wake Forest : Private - Sworn Drexel: Private - Non-Sworn San Jose State: Public - Sworn Kenyon College: Private - Non-Sworn USC: Private - Non-Sworn

39 Availability of IACLEA Standards Manual Contact: Jack Leonard IACLEA Headquarters (860) ext. 558

40 Availability of the Process to the General Membership January 2006 Obtain an IACLEA Standards Manual. Begin compliance with standards. Join a Police Accreditation Coalition (PAC) for peer support and assistance.

41 We are evaluating the IACLEA process for not only the smooth flow of information to the pilot agencies, but also the standards we are requiring compliance with. This is a learning process for IACLEA as well as the pilot agencies. Avoid State Accreditation Organizations that do not include CALEA members.

42 Questions?

43 Robert C. Dillard Chief of Police University of Richmond Police Department (804)


Download ppt "Accreditation Chief Robert C. Dillard University of Richmond Police Department June 2005."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google