CM-07-06-105CITY OF ROUND ROCK
ROUND ROCK POLICE DEPARTMENT
REACCREDITATION PLAN
2007
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. AUTHORITY 3
II. PURPOSE 3
III. SITUATION AND ASSUMPTIONS 3
III. CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS 5
IV. ORGANIZATION AND ASSIGNMENT OF
RESPONSIBILITIES 6
V. PLAN DEVELOPMENT, MAINTENANCE
AND IMPLEMENTATION 9
VII APPENDICES
A. ACCREDITATION ASSESSMENT
B. ACCREDITATION GUIDE
C. TIME PHASED ACTIONS
2
REACCREDITATION PLAN
L AUTHORITY
This plan applies to the City of Round Rock Police Department and has been
approved by the Chief, Round Rock Police Department.
The procedures, responsibilities and operational concepts contained in this plan
have been developed in concert with the following authorities and professional
organizations:
A. State
1. Texas Local Government Code, Section 341.003
2. Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 2.13
B. Local
1. City of Round Rock Code of Ordinances, Section 9.301
2. City of Round Rock Police Department Policy Manual
C. Professional
1. Standards For Law Enforcement Agencies, The Standards Manual of the
Law Enforcement Agency Accreditation Program, 4th Edition. Commission
on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc. (CALEA) Jan. 1999
2. Accreditation Process Book, CALEA, Jan. 1995
II PURPOSE
The purpose of this plan is to facilitate continued accreditation of the Round
Rock Police Department. The plan describes the accreditation process, defines the
responsibilities of key department and city personnel, and establishes time
parameters within which all tasks essential to accreditation will be accomplished.
VI. SITUATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS
A. Situation
The Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc.
( CALEA) was established to develop a set of law enforcement standards and
to establish and administer an accreditation process through which law
enforcement agencies can demonstrate voluntarily that they meet profess-
ionally recognized criteria for excellence in management and service delivery.
3
Achievement of accredited status is highly advantageous for law enforcement
agencies. In addition to the recognition associated with attainment of inter-
national excellence, there are numerous other internal, community and
financial benefits. These include improved administrative management,
improved service delivery, increased governmental and community support,
and liability reduction and insurance discounts.
An accreditation assessment to determine the current status of the Round
Rock Police Department with regard to the CALEA standards for law enforce-
ment agencies was completed in June, 2001. This study resulted in a deter-
mination that the department should proceed with the formal process of
attaining initial accreditation. On Dec. 4, 2004, the Department was awarded
initial accreditation by CALEA. ( Appendix A )
B. Assumptions
1. The Round Rock Police Department can maintain accredited status in
accordance with CALEA requirements.
2. Sufficient personnel, material and financial resources are available to
maintain the accreditation process
3. Accreditation is strongly endorsed and supported by Police Department
personnel.
4. City of Round Rock public officials will cooperate with the department in
ensuring compliance with all CALEA standards falling within their areas
of responsibility.
5. There will be an on-going commitment within the department to maintain
accredited status.
6. Standards adopted or modified by CALEA in the future will not create
major compliance issues for the department.
7. Continuing compliance with applicable CALEA standards will not impose
an excessive workload on department personnel in future years.
8. The Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc.
will continue to establish and maintain standards for law enforcement
agencies and represent law enforcement's major membership associations.
9. Attainment and maintenance of accredited status will establish the Round
Rock Police Department as one of the premier law enforcement agencies
in the state.
4
IV Concept Of Operations
A. General
Accreditation is widely viewed within law enforcement circles as being the
premier symbol of departmental excellence. 26% of police departments in
cities with populations exceeding 10,000 are presently accredited by CALEA.
An additional 15% are currently pursuing accredited status.
Accreditation is a voluntary process, and joining the "CALEA Community"
is an attitude, not a singular action. It is attainable by any law enforcement
agency willing to strive for enhanced performance levels.
The standards promulgated by CALEA are focused primarily on the manage-
ment aspects of departmental operations. Accordingly, there will be minimum
disruption to the day to day activities of the individual patrol officers. Thus,
the accreditation effort will not have an adverse impact on the continuity of
operations. All process and precedural changes will be fully coordinated and
implemented within the chain of command structure. Successful maintenance
of the accreditation process, however, will impose an on-going additional
workload on the Command Staff.
B. Phases of Accreditation
The voluntary accreditation program can generally be divided into two parts:
the standards and the process. The "standards" discussed in the Standards
Manual are the building blocks from which everything else evolves. The
"process" provides the steps that transforms the standards into operational
practices and procedures. there are five phases in the accreditation process:
application, self-assessment, on-site compliance, Commission review and
reaccreditation.
1. Application
Application includes the preparation of an application form, completion of
the Agency Profile Questionaire, and the submission of the Accreditation
Agreement. The thirty-six months allowed for completion of the agency
self-assessment begins with the Commission approval of the accreditation
agreement.
2. Self-assessment
Self-assessment involves a through examination by the department to
5
determine the extent of compliance with the applicable standards.
Directives, processes and procedures are implemented as necessary to
ensure effective implementation of the standards. "Proofs of compliance"
are assembled for review by Commission assessors.
3. On-site Assessment
During the on-site visit, trained assessors, acting as representatives of the
Commission, review all standards and verify the department's compliance
with all applicable standards. The assessors submit a formal report of their
findings to the Commission.
4. Commission Review
The Commission reviews the assessor's report and, if satisfied that all
requirements of compliance have been met, awards the department
accredited status. Accreditation is for a period of three years.
5. Reaccreditation
To maintain accredited status, the department must remain in compliance
with the letter and spirit of all applicable standards. At the conclusion of the
three year period, the Commission offers the department an opportunity to
repeat the process and continue accredited status.
V. ORGANIZATION AND ASSIGNMENT OF RESPONSIBILITIES
A. General
The Chief of Police retains ultimate responsibility for the implementation
of this plan and the successful completion of the accreditation process.
Division Commanders are responsible for ensuring that all elements of
accreditation, falling within their respective areas of responsibility, are
effectively accomplished. All department supervisors are responsible for
accomplishing those tasks assigned by senior leadership and for
communicating and supporting the objectives of accreditation.
B. Organization
The Chief of Police, working through the Command Staff, will exercise
overall control of the accreditation process. The Accreditation Manager,
as primary point of contact, will be responsible for day-to-day manage-
ment of all aspects of accreditation and will function as the sole point of
contact between the department and CALEA. All communications regarding
the various aspects of accreditation will be channeled in accordance with the
established departmental chain of command and organizational chart.
6
C. Department Responsibilities
1. The Chief of Police is responsible for:
a. Exercising overall direction and control of the accreditation process.
b. Ensuring that maintenance of accreditation is a top priority within the
department.
c. Providing all personnel, logistical and financial support necessary to
support the accreditation effort.
d. Regularly reviewing progress made toward compliance with
applicable standards.
e. Providing periodic progress reports to city officials as required.
2. The Accreditation Manager is responsible for:
a. Preparing an Accreditation Plan and managing all aspects of the
accreditation process.
b. Providing accreditation training for department personnel.
c. Monitoring progress made toward compliance with standards
throughout the department.
d. Assigning suspenses, facilitating solutions to problems, clarifying
standards, and responding to questions/concerns regarding
accreditation issues.
e. Keeping the Chief of police and senior staff informed as to progress
made toward accreditation goals.
f. Providing liaison to the Commission for all accreditation matters.
g. Maintaining the master set of accreditation files.
h. Preparing an Accreditation Guide for use by all department personnel.
( Appendix B)
3. Division Commanders are responsible for:
a. Supporting and facilitating the accreditation process.
b. Designating points of contact (POC) to coordinate with the Accredi-
tation Manager on all standards and accreditation issues pertaining to
their respective divisions.
c. Ensuring compliance with taskings and established suspense dates.
d. Accomplishing all accreditation related duties as assigned by the
Chief of Police.
4. Division Points of Contact (POC) are responsible for:
a. Functioning as liaison between the Accreditation Manager and their
respective divisions.
b. Ensuring full compliance with all CALEA standards pertaining to
their division.
c. Gathering and certifying the accuracy of "proofs" sufficient to demon-
strate compliance with applicable standards.
d. Coordinating all accreditation issues, questions and concerns with the
Accreditation Manager.
e. Serving as primary point of contact for CALEA assessors during both
mock and actual on-site assessments.
f. Ensuring that their division remains in compliance with applicable
standards following attainment of accredited status.
Ensuring that all new or revised directives contain a reference to the
applicable CALEA standards.
g.
5. Departmental supervisory personnel are responsible for:
a. Supporting and facilitating the accreditation effort.
b. Completing all accreditation related taskings within assigned suspense
dates.
c. Ensuring that any issues adversely impacting an applicable standard,
or the accreditation process in general, are referred to the proper
authority for necessary action.
6. Planning and Research Unit is responsible for:
a. Supporting and facilitating the accreditation process within assigned
areas of responsibility.
8
b. Providing necessary guidance to all divisions regarding the
preparation and publication of new and revised directives.
c. Ensuring that all revised or new departmental directives include a
reference to applicable CALEA standards prior to publication.
7. Public Affairs Officer is responsible for:
a. Supporting and facilitating the accreditation effort within areas of
responsibility.
b. Assisting the department with the creation and distribution of
accreditation program material to area media, as required.
c. Serving as public information point of contact for media information
involving CALEA and the accreditation process.
d. Preparing a Public Information Plan including media releases, a
public information session and an accreditation award ceremony,
as appropriate.
e) Arranging suitable facilities for required public information session,
Including recording capability.
D. Outside Agency Responsibilities
The full support and cooperation of various departments within the Round
Rock city government structure is essential to the successful maintenance of
accredited status. The departments and their responsibilities, as enumerated
below, is not necessarily an all inclusive list. Additional unanticipated
requirements that may arise during the accreditation process will be
coordinated with the appropriate city officials.
1. The City Manager is responsible for:
a. Supporting and facilitating the accreditation effort, as required, within
available resources.
b. Ensuring that all affected city departments are made aware of their
possible involvement in the effort of the Police Department to achieve
and maintain national accreditation.
2. Human Resources is responsible for:
9
a. Ensuring that human resources policies and practices adequately
address and do not conflict with applicable CALEA standards.
b. Coordinating, as required, with Police Department officials to clarify
and resolve specific areas of concern or apparent non-compliance.
c. Respond in a timely manner to any questions or issues that may arise
during the course of an on-site assessment..
VI. Plan Development, Maintenance and Implementation
A. Distribution
The Accreditation Manager will ensure that copies of this plan, and any
changes thereto, are distributed internally to all department activities and
externally to all other tasked agencies.
B. Support Actions
All tasked elements will be responsible for the development and maintenance
of plans, processes, checklists, etc., as required, to implement assigned
responsibilities.
C. Maintenance
This plan will be updated by the Accreditation Manager, as necessary, to
include additional requirements, modify existing taskings, or reflect
organizational /personnel changes.
D. Severability of Contents
If any portion of this plan is held invalid by administrative determination,
such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the
plan.
APPROVED.
i3,44fl103113J1)?
Brykn H. Williams Date
Chief of Police
10
es R. Nuse, P.E.
Manager
Oi1laaa7
Date
r'OMMISSION ON ACCREDITATION FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
Incorporated
10302 Eaton Place, Suite 100 • Fairfax, Virginia 22030-2215 • Local (703) 352.4225 •
December 4,
Mr. Bryan Williams
Chief of Police
Round Rock Police Department
615 East Palm Valley Boulevard
Round Rock, TX 78664
Dear Chief Williams:
Congratulations!
(800) 368-3757 • FAX (703) 591-2206 • calea@calea.org
2004
It is a privilege to advise you that your agency has met the requirements of a highly
regarded and broadly recognized body of law enforcement standards, and on December 4, 2004,
was accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc.
Your agency's accreditation represents the satisfactory completion of a process of
thorough, agency wide self-evaluation, concluded by an exacting outside review by a team of
independent assessors.
It also represents your agency's acceptance of the obligation to continue the quest for
professional excellence by working toward fulfillment of any remaining applicable other -than -
mandatory standards with which you chose not to comply during this accreditation activity, and
any future standards promulgated by the Commission that may be applicable to your department.
Accreditation of the Round Rock Police Department is for three years. During the period
of accreditation, December 4th will serve as the anniversary date for submission of yearly reports
verifying your agency's continuing compliance with standards under which you became
accredited.
On behalf of the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc., we
commend you and the Round Rock Police Department for demonstrating commitment to
professional law enforcement in policy and practice. Again, congratulations.
- 44-+-i
ames M. O'DeII Sylvester Daughtry,
hair Executive Director
Sincerely,
CITY OF ROUND ROCK
ROUND ROCK POLICE DEPARTMENT
ACCREDITATION GUIDE
PREPARED BY:
JOSEPH F. TEIBER JR.
ACCREDITATION MANAGER
ROUND ROCK POLICE DEPARTMENT
ACCREDITATION GUIDE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
Background 1
Benefits 1
THE STANDARDS 2
General 2
Nature And Scope 2
Applicability 3
Directives 4
GUIDING PRINCIPLES -4
PROCEDURES 5
Program Overview 5
Self -Assessment 5
Proofs 6
THE FUTURE
7
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this guide is to acquaint all department members with the concept and
requirements of the accreditation program for law enforcement agencies. The guide is not
intended to be an all-inclusive source document, but rather to serve as a general primer on
the background, policies and procedures that constitute the accreditation process in
general, and the specific manner in which it will be implemented within the Round Rock
Police Department. Undoubtedly questions will arise regarding concerns not covered in
this document. These issues will be addressed by the Accreditation Manager (A.M.) on a
case-by-case basis as we proceed through the accreditation process. The active
involvement of all department members is critical to the successful conclusion of our
accreditation effort. Accordingly, all ideas, suggestions and other constructive input will
be most welcome.
BACKGROUND
The Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc. (CALEA) was
founded in 1979 to establish a body of standards designed to (1) increase law
enforcement agency capabilities to pursue and control crime; (2) increase agency
effectiveness and efficiency in the delivery of law enforcement services; (3) increase
cooperation and coordination with other law enforcement agencies and with other
agencies of the criminal justice system; and (4) increase citizen and employee confidence
in the goals, objectives, policies and practices of the agency. In addition, the Commission
was formed to develop an accreditation process that provides law enforcement agencies
an opportunity to voluntarily demonstrate that they meet an established set of
professional standards.
There are five phases in the accreditation process: application, self-assessment, on-site
assessment, Commission review, and maintaining compliance and reaccreditation. Upon
acceptance of its application by the Commission, an agency has a maximum of 36
months to complete its self-assessment and request an on-site evaluation by a team of
trained assessors. The Commission reviews the evaluation report and, if all compliance
requirements have been met, awards the agency accredited status. Accreditation is for a
period of three years during which the accredited agency must remain in compliance with
applicable standards. A recertification evaluation takes place every three years.
BENEFITS
In addition to the recognition associated with the attainment of international
excellence, there are numerous other internal, community and financial benefits. These
include:
• Improved administrative management
• Clear, comprehensive, written directives and procedures
• Improved service delivery
• Training improvements
-1-
• Greater accountability from supervisors
• Increased governmental and community support
• Enhanced morale
• Increased support for requests for comparable pay and benefits
• Strong defense against lawsuits
• Liability reduction and insurance discounts
THE STANDARDS
GENERAL
The Commission has established and maintains standards for law enforcement
agencies that consider all administrative, management and service delivery aspects of the
organization, and reflect the best professional practices and procedures. The CALEA
Standards Manual currently contains 446 standards organized into 38 chapters. The
requirements of each standard provide a description of "what" must be accomplished by
the applicant agency, but allows that agency wide latitude in determining "how" it will
achieve its compliance with each applicable standard. The Commission expects
accredited agencies to maintain compliance and live by both the letter and spirit of the
standards. It is incumbent upon each agency to consider its mission , its legally mandated
responsibilities, and the demands of its service community in determining which
standards are applicable and the manner in which they will be implemented.
NATURE AND SCOPE
Each standard is composed of three parts: the standard statement, the commentary, and
the levels of compliance. The standard statement is a declarative sentence that places a
clear-cut requirement, or multiple requirements, on an agency. Many of the standards call
for the development and implementation of written directives such as general or special
orders, standard operating procedures, or other documented communications, either in
hard copy or electronic form, that articulate the agencies policies, procedures, rules and
regulations. Other standards require an activity, a report, an inspection, equipment or
other action. The standard statement is binding on the agency. This includes all sub-
paragraphs following the standard statement.
The commentary supports the standard, but is NOT binding. The purpose of the
commentary is to provide guidance to clarify the intent of the standard and to offer an
example of one possible way to comply with the standard's requirements. Since the
agency has the latitude to determine "how" it will comply with applicable standards, it
can choose to ignore the commentary and comply with the standard on its own terms.
The levels of compliance denote the relative importance assigned to each standard, if
applicable, based upon agency size. For each of four agency -size categories, the levels of
compliance indicate whether a given standard is mandatory (M), other than mandatory
(0), or not applicable due to size (N/A). Standards dealing with life, health, safety issues,
-2-
legal matters, or which are considered essential law enforcement requirements are
classified as mandatory. Standards dealing with important or desirable law enforcement
requirements or with exemplary activities are classified as other -than -mandatory. Agency
size is defined as the total number of authorized full-time personnel (sworn and
nonsworn) assigned to the agency. The four categories are as follows:
A) 1-24 personnel
B) 25-74 personnel
C) 75-299 personnel
D) 300 or more personnel
The levels of compliance appear at the end of the commentary as a series of bold letters,
corresponding to the four agency -size categories, left to right: (A B C D ). Levels of
compliance may be the same for all agencies, e.g., (M M M M ), or may vary according
to size, e.g., (N/A 0 0 M ). The Round Rock Police Department falls under compliance
level C. Following is an example of a typical standard as it appears in the CALEA
Standards Manual:
11.6.4 The agency has a current, multiyear plan
which includes the following:
a. long-term goals and operational objectives;
b. anticipated workload and population trends;
c. anticipated personnel levels;
d. anticipated capital improvements and equip-
ment needs; and
e. provisions for review and revision as needed.
Commentary: The planning process and its end
product are essential to effective agency manage-
ment. The agency should have a clear written artic-
ulation of goals and objectives and plans for achiev-
ing them. The plan should cover successive years
beyond the current budget year and should contain
provisions for frequent updating. (N/A 0 M M )
APPLICABILITY
Some standards may not be applicable to an agency because of its size. Others may or
may not be applicable depending on the functions performed by the agency. e.g., Holding
Facility ( Chapter 72). The remaining standards are all applicable and must be complied
with in order to achieve accreditation.
An agency applying for accreditation is expected to comply with all applicable
mandatory (M) standards, and with at least 80% of the applicable other -than -mandatory
(0) standards. The agency is free to select the applicable other -than -mandatory standards
to include in the 80% group. The goal, however, is to comply with all applicable
standards, whether they are mandatory or other -than -mandatory. The 20% "wiggle room"
in the "0" category is intended to allow agencies to non -comply with some standards for
which compliance would be costly in terms of either dollars or manpower, or are
-3-
otherwise deemed to be impractical. In our situation, we will have the latitude to non -
comply with a maximum of 17 other -than -mandatory standards.
DIRECTIVES
The vast majority of standards require a "written directive" which imposes a
responsibility on the agency to describe the requirement in writing. The directive
specifies documentation, fixes accountability, and ensures standardization and
consistency in application. Written directives may exist internally, e.g., general orders,
SOPs, and manuals, or extemally, e.g., laws, judicial decrees, agreements, and city-wide
rules and procedures. It is not necessary to create a new directive simply to comply with
the exact wording of a specific standard if another written rule, policy or procedure
already exists that adequately addresses the requirements of the standard. Proof of
compliance in that case can simply be a cross-reference to the already existing directive.
As another alternative, the existing directive could simply be "tweaked" to include the
requirements specified in the standard. No single type of directive is "best", and any
written document, for which it is incumbent upon the reader to follow, can be used. When
preparing these documents, however, it will be very important to avoid redundancy and
conflict with other existing directives, state as well as local.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The following guiding principles, as promulgated by CALEA, should be kept in mind
as the individual standards are examined for compliance by the various divisions:
A) An agency for which functions are performed on its behalf by another entity is
held accountable to verify compliance with applicable standards governing those
functions ( City of Round Rock Human Resources, for example).
B) An agency can exceed the requirements of a standard. (A semi-annual reporting
requirement may be done quarterly, for example).
C) A standard may not be applicable if the agency does not have responsibility for the
functions addressed by the standard, providing the Commission concurs.
D) Unless otherwise indicated, standards related to personnel matters apply to all
agency personnel.
E) A written directive can be any policy, plan, procedure, rule, SOP, manual or other
document that is binding upon agency personnel.
-4-
F) An agency does not need to have an individual directive for each standard. A
single manual or directive may cover several standards.
G) A written directive presumes functional compliance with the directive. (If we say
we're doing something, we better be doing it!)
H) During the on-site assessment, the assessors will verify agency compliance with
every applicable standard.
PROCEDURES
PROGRAM OVERVIEW
Participation in the accreditation program is voluntary, and the Commission
discourages actions on the part of any person, group, or association to mandate law
enforcement agency accreditation at state or national levels of government. Agencies may
seek accreditation or not, as they wish,. Once an agency begins the accreditation process,
it may withdraw at any time, without prejudice.
The accreditation program can generally be divided into two parts: the standards and
the process. The standards are the building blocks from which everything else evolves.
Left to themselves, however, the standards would be nothing more than a pile of bricks.
The process provides the blueprint and mortar to shape the standards into forms that are
sturdy, useful, and lasting for the agency. The process provides order, guidance, and
stability to those going through the program and ensures that the Commission can
recognize professional achievement in a consistent, uniform manner.
Once an agency has decided to pursue accredited status, it completes an application
process during which the Commission makes a preliminary determination as to its
eligibility to participate in the accreditation program. Upon acceptance into the program,
the agencies next step is completion of the self-assessment phase of the process.
SELF-ASSESSMENT
Self-assessment involves a systematic analysis of each chapter, sub -chapter and
standard in the CALEA Standards Manual to determine the extent to which the
department meets or exceeds the requirements of the applicable standards. It also reveals
the areas wherein the department does not meet the standards, and identifies what must
be done to achieve and document compliance. Self-assessment has three basic purposes:
(1) To achieve compliance with applicable standards.
(2) To establish proofs of compliance with those standards.
(3) To facilitate the on-site review by the Commission's assessors.
-5-
While the accreditation manager will maintain overall program management
responsibility, we will employ a de -centralized approach to the actual accreditation
process. Copies of the standards, along with a copy of the initial standards review from
the feasibility study will be distributed to all divisions. Each Division Commander will
then determine the process to be employed to bring the division into full compliance with
the applicable standards. The accreditation manager will establish internal control
systems to monitor progress within the divisions, assign suspenses, resolve compliance
issues, and exercise overall program direction. All amendments, revisions, and/or
additions to the Round Rock Police Department Manual will be prepared and processed
in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Planning and Research unit. Also, all
directives that are prepared or amended in order to achieve compliance with a standard
should reference that standard in the directive header. This will greatly facilitate the
preparation of proof files and will also serve as an excellent cross-reference system.
CALEA standard numbers will eventually be included in all departmental directives.
The self-assessment phase of accreditation also entails an in-depth analysis of all
existing policies, procedures and regulations to ascertain the actual level of compliance
with these directives and to initiate remedial action as required.
PROOFS
A key element of the accreditation process is the assembling of "proof' files for every
applicable standard. Essentially, this involves filling file folders with documentation that
will demonstrate to the on-site assessors that we are in full compliance with all of the
standards that apply to the department. Written directives are the primary proofs of
compliance. Keep in mind, however, that the mere existence of a directive will not
normally stand alone as sufficient proof, especially if the directive causes specific,
"documentable" activity to occur—such as a periodic report or management review. In
addition to a directive, proofs of compliance may include:
• Intemal and external department memoranda/correspondence
• E-mails
• Job descriptions
• State/city/county laws and policies
• Communications from citizens
• Photographs
• Rosters
• Forms
• Copies of reports
• Newspaper articles
• Budget documents
• Logs
• Staff meeting minutes
-6-
Whenever possible, actual working documents should be included in the proof files
rather than blank forms. Black markers can be used to censor privacy data as necessary.
Basically, there will be two sets of files for each standard: (1) the master files maintained
by the accreditation manager and (2) the division level files maintained by the various
division commanders. The division level and master files for each standard may vary in
format and content inasmuch as division commanders may assemble and maintain
whatever documentation they feel is appropriate and useful to the process.
As a final note on the subject of "proofs", it is appropriate to address the question of
how to estimate the necessary number of proofs needed to document compliance with
each standard. In other words, how much is enough? Aside from CALEA guidance in this
area, perhaps the best way to deal with this question is to apply the common sense test. If
you were a CALEA assessor, what would it take to convince you that the department is in
compliance with a specific standard? The answer to that question will determine the
contents of the folders. Each succeeding year, the proof folders are updated with
additional proofs in order to demonstrate continuing compliance with standards.
THE FUTURE
Accreditation is a dynamic process that will require the on-going attention and
consideration of all department managers and supervisors. Standards undergo continuous
review by the CALEA Commissioners. Additions and deletions occur periodically to
ensure that standards remain relevant and that they adequately reflect the collective
experience and best practices of all of the accredited law enforcement agencies across the
country. This will require us to change accordingly and to modify our practices and
procedures to ensure that we keep pace with our contemporaries. It will remain the
responsibility of the accreditation manager to facilitate this process.
Any future modification to existing directives, policies or procedures, whether
departmental or divisional, will have to take applicable CALEA standards into
consideration. ( This is part of the rationale for cross-referencing our directives to specific
standards). Benchmarking our processes with other accredited agencies will also become
a routine practice. Managers must continually review departmental practices to ensure
that they remain effective and meet both the spirit and letter of the CALEA standards. We
will incorporate accreditation familiarization and periodic refresher training into our
officer education and training programs.
Lastly, and most importantly, we will continue to refine, expand and improve the
quantity and quality of the law enforcement services that we provide to our community.
-7-
CALEA RE -CERTIFICATION TIMELINE
1) 30 SEP. 2006-----------90% OF STANDARD PROOF FILES UPDATED
FOR 2006.
2) 31 OCT. 2006-------------100% OF STANDARDS UPDATED FOR 2006
3) NOV. - DEC. 06-------A) IDENTIFY STANDARDS FOR JAN. 2007
UPDATE.
B) PREPARE MEMOS FOR OPR SIGNATURE
4) JAN. 2007_-------_-____-_A) COMPLETE 2007 UPDATE FOR ALL
STANDARDS IDENTIFIED ABOVE.
B) REVIEW 2004 ON-SITE PLAN.
5) 1 FEB. -30 APRIL, 07---A) MAXIMUM EFFORT TO UPDATE FILES.
B) COORDINATE ON-SITE DATES WITH CALEA
C) ARRANGE MOCK FOR EARLY MAY.
D) BEGIN ON-SITE PLAN.
6) MAY, 2007-__-_----__-A) CONDUCT MOCK.
B) CONTINUE FILE UPDATE.
C) BEGIN CORRECTIONS NOTED BY MOCK
ASSESSORS.
D) COMPLETE ON-SITE PLAN.
E) IDENTIFY ON-SITE SUPPORT TEAM AND
ASSIGN RESPONSIBILITIES.
F) COORDINATE OFF -SI'Z'E FILES AND PANAL
REVIEWS WITH TEAM CHIEF
G) SUBMIT ALL REQUIRED DATA/REPORTS
TO CALEA STAFF.
H) DUPLICATE OFF-SITE REVIEW FILES
JUNE -JULY, 07-------------- A) COMPLETE 2007 FILE UPDA I'E.
B) MAIL OFF-SITE REVIEW FILES TO
ASSESSORS.
C) BRIEF COMMAND STAFF AND DEPT.
PERSONNEL ON RE -ACCRED. PROCESS.
D) GATHER AMENITIES FOR ASSESSOR
ROOMS.
E) RESERVE HOTEL ROOMS/RENTAL CAR.
F) PUBLISH PUBLIC RELATIONS PLAN
G) PREPARE ASSESSOR INFORMATION BINDERS
H) PUBLISH FINAL ON-SITE SCHEDULE
AUG. 2007
A) COMPLETE ALL ON-SITE PREPARATIONS.
B) ARRANGE AIRPORT WELCOME AND
TRANSPORTATION.
C) CONDUCT ON-SITE.
D) RETURN TO NORMAL OPERATIONS
NOV. 2007---------------A) ATTEND CALEA CONFERENCE IN
COLORADO SPRINGS. •
B) BEGIN TRANSITION TO 5TH EDITION OF
CALEA STANDARDS.
DATE:
SUBJECT:
ITEM:
Department:
Staff Person:
Justification:
Funding:
Cost/Source:
Background
Information:
CITY MANAGER BLUE SHEET
June 11, 2007
City Manager Approval
2007 Reaccreditation Plan - Police Department
The purpose of this plan is to facilitate continued
accreditation of the Round Rock Police Department. The
plan describes the accreditationprocess, defines the
responsibilities of key department and city personnel, and
establishes time parameters within which all tasks
essential to accreditation will be accomplished, The City
!ecaue the accreditation
Police Department
Joe Teiber/Sherrill Voll
nts.
s ar.
To maintain accredited status, the department must
remain in compliance with the letter and spirit of all
applicable standards. At the conclusion of the three year
period, the Commission offers the department an
opportunity to repeat the process and continue accredited
status. This process rehires the City Manager`s formai
departments kn
nvc lied in the re -accreditation
n particular, the Police Department
may need'to coordinate with HR on policies and practices
that may touch on re -accreditation.
N/A
An accreditation assessment to determine the
current status of the Round Rock Police Department with
regard to the CALEA standards for law enforcement
agencies was completed in June, 2001. This study
resulted in a determination that the department should
proceed with the formal process of attaining initial
accreditation.
Updated 3-10-05