|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Applicable To: Planning and Research/Accreditation Unit |
|||||||||||||||||
|
Approval Authority: Major P. M. Williams |
|||||||||||||||||
|
Signature: Signed by PMW |
Date Signed: 5/22/08 |
||||||||||||||||
Table
Content
|
This directive sets the procedure for developing a directive by the Planning and Research/ Accreditation Unit (PRAU).
PRAU will develop directives to provide efficient and effective procedures for the Department and to comply with applicable laws, policies, and accreditation standards.
3.1 The Planning and Research/Accreditation Unit commander will review draft directives prior to presentation to the Chief for signature and will designate one employee as the written directive system coordinator.
3.2 The policy development supervisor will review draft directives for compliance with APD.SOP.1030 and this command memorandum.
3.3 Employees in the Planning and Research/ Accreditation Unit will follow these procedures in developing directives.
3.4 The written directive system (WDS) coordinator will check the format of directives prior to signature, maintain the hardcopy and electronic files, and update the directives on Horizon.
4.1.1 Staff members will be assigned directives to create, review, or update. 1. Directives must be updated or created at the Chief’s request, another request, inspection finding, change in State law or City ordinance, court ruling, new CALEA standard, etc.
2. Directives must be reviewed every three years and updated if necessary.
4.2.1 If the task is to update an existing directive, make a copy of it for editing from P:\Library\APD Policy Manual. Rename the Word file by inserting the staff member’s last name. Put “DRAFT” and today’s date in the effective date block, and put “DRAFT” in the “signed by” and “date signed” blocks. If necessary, in File/Properties/General, click off the “read only” attribute on the copy to be edited. Put the working copy in a folder named for the directive in P:\Policy_Development\2 Revised Directives.
4.2.2 If the task is to create a new directive, use the Written Directive Template Form APD 700, and name the Word file for the first draft Nnnn APD.SOP.xxxx Tttt, where Nnnn is the staff member’s name and Tttt is the title of the directive. Put DRAFT and today’s date in the effective date block and put “DRAFT” in the “signed by” and “date signed” blocks. Put the working copy in a folder named for the directive in P:\Policy_Development\1 New Directives.
4.2.3 Use the working folder on the P: drive to keep the current draft of the directive plus any other relevant documents. Move the working folder through the process as explained in this directive.
4.3.1 Research resources such as the City Code, Georgia Code, related directives, IACP model policies, and other law enforcement agencies. Check for resources in the Planning and Research/Accreditation Library.
4.3.2 Discuss the matter with the Department’s knowledgeable people to determine whether they have suggestions for the directive and to determine sources and constraints. Discuss it further with outside experts, such as the Law Department, another City agency, prosecutors, or another law enforcement or criminal justice agency, as necessary.
4.3.3 Develop the draft directive as in APD.SOP.1030, “Written Directive System,” sections 4.2 and 4.3.
4.3.4 Develop or update any forms necessary to implementing the directive. These forms must accompany any review of the directive.
4.3.5 In the draft:
1. Refer to CALEA standards as “CALEA 5th ed. standard x.x.x,” making sure that the number is the correct 5th edition standard.
2. Always use the correct titles and numbers for forms.
3. Always use correct organizational terminology, as shown in APD.SOP.1010.
4. In revised directives, cancel the previous version in the CANCELLATION section.
5. Prior to the signature draft, whenever the staff member updates the draft, he or she will change the date in the heading block under “effective date.”
4.4.1 Directives must be reviewed every three years and updated if necessary.
1. Research the directive’s topic as in section 4.3. The question is whether the staff member, the proponent, or those affected by the directive see a need to change it. Conduct an expert review as in Section 4.5.
2. If a change is needed, prepare the revision, as indicated in sections 4.4 through 4.8.
3. If there is no need for change, summarize the review process in a memo like P:\Policy_Development\model memos\directive reviewed--no need for change.doc.
a. Save this memo in the folder named for the directive in P:\Policy_Development\Triennial review\. Turn in this memo and the expert reviews to the supervisor.
b. When the supervisor has reviewed and approved the memo, he or she will submit it to the WDS coordinator for filing in the directive’s original files.
4.5.1 If a directive is complex or technical in nature and particularly if it seeks to coordinate multiple organizational components, conduct an expert review. Triennial reviews require expert reviews. Select as experts the proponent (below the division commander level), in-house experts on the topic, and those who are affected by the directive. (For triennial reviews, include representatives from patrol, investigative, or support areas that are affected by the directive but not necessarily “expert.”) Include the Law Department or prosecutor when necessary. Email them as in P:\Policy_Development\model memos\Expert review email.doc. The email must indicate why the review is needed, what is being changed, and who has been previously consulted. Set a due date within 7 to 10 calendar days. Include a copy to the PRAU supervisor. Turn on tracking on the email. Do not overload the reviewers. Space out the reviews so that it is actually feasible to do them.
1. For experts who do not have email, hand delivery with a signed receipt is appropriate.
2. Attach any necessary forms to the draft for review purposes.
4.5.2 At the end of the review period, gather reviews and call any reviewers who have not responded. Ask when they can have the review in; if soon, wait for it; if not, or the person cannot be reached, or the person does not come through, document this fact and proceed without it. Ideally, the proponent’s review should always be in hand before proceeding.
4.5.3 Evaluate the comments. Accept any that are obviously appropriate. Resolve any problematic comments with a supervisor.
4.5.4 Revise the draft. Update the draft date in the effective date block. If the changes are substantial, in rare cases consider doing the expert review again.
4.6.1 Each new or substantially revised directive must have a command review to gather input, put command staff on notice that a change is coming, motivate buy-in to the directive, and satisfy CALEA 5th ed. standard 12.2.1, bullet i.
4.6.2 The reviewers will generally include the deputy chiefs, chief of staff, OPS commander, and FIS commander, with copies to the proponent and PRAU supervisor. Include the DTVH commander, Training Section commander, and others as appropriate. Email them as in P:\Policy_Development\model memos\Command review email.doc. The email must indicate why the review is needed, what is being changed, and who has been previously consulted. Set a due date within 7 to 10 calendar days. Turn on tracking on the email. Do not overload the reviewers. Space out the reviews so that it is actually feasible to do them.
4.6.3 Attach any necessary forms to the draft for review purposes.
4.6.4 At the end of the review period, gather reviews and call any reviewers who have not responded. Ask when they can have the review in; if soon, wait for it; if not, or the person cannot be reached, or the person does not come through, document this fact and proceed without. Ideally, the review by the commander requesting the directive and/or responsible for implementing the directive should always be in hand before proceeding.
4.6.5 Evaluate the comments. Make any changes that are obviously appropriate. Discuss any problematic comments with your supervisor. If comments are conflicting or contrary to law, City policy, CALEA standard, or good management, it may be necessary to discuss them with the reviewer or, ultimately, to present the conflict to the Chief for resolution.
4.6.6 Revise the draft. If the changes are substantial, in rare cases consider doing the command review again.
4.7.1 In the final draft, put the expected effective date in the effective date block; leave the date signed and signature blocks blank. Put the electronic final draft and its working folder in the P:\Policy_Development\3 Final Format folder. Forward the final drafts of the forms to the forms coordinator.
4.7.2 Draft a cover memo (one page if possible) for the Unit commander’s signature with “THROUGH” lines and approval checkoffs for the Chief of Staff and Assistant Chief. Describe the purpose of the directive, the expert input, the command review, and any major references. Highlight any significant policy issues or conflicts from the command review. Include a “copy” line to get a copy to yourself. See P:\Policy_Development\model memos\transmittal to chief for signature.doc. Save the memo in the working folder in P:\Policy_Development\3 Final Format.
4.7.3 The WDS coordinator will check the format, verify the links to the table of contents, and place the file and its working folder in the P:\Policy_Development\4 Waiting for Signature folder.
4.7.4 Prepare a manila folder with the command reviews and the Unit commander’s last mark-up (if any) on the left side of the folder and the cover memo to the Chief, CALEA standard (if any), and draft directive on the right side. Complete Form PRU 001, attach it, and give this folder to the Unit commander.
4.7.5 Signature drafts should be coordinated with the quarterly submission schedule for directives. A directive to go into effect January 1 should be turned in for signature by about December 10, and similarly for April 1, July 1, and October 1. When an item is urgent, it can be signed and issued earlier. The Unit has to manage this process so that meaningful notification and distribution can occur by the effective date.
4.8 When the directive is signed
4.8.1 When the directive is signed, the Unit commander and the responsible staff member will give the expert reviews, command reviews, email tracking reports, Form PRU 001, and any other significant drafts or documents to the WDS coordinator. The coordinator will file these documents with the signed original.
4.8.2 The written directive system coordinator will:
1. Type the signer’s initials and the signature date on the electronic copy.
2. Rename the electronic copy and put it on P:\Library\APD Policy Manual. It is essential that this electronic copy is the source of the hard copy that the Chief signed. Make these files “read only.” Remove any canceled directives from P:\Library\APD Policy Manual. P:\Zarchive\Policy Manual\Archive Chapter x\ should have a copy of all versions of each directive, with the successive versions of a given directive number distinguished by appending a letter to the end of the file name, beginning with a. Save these as read-only.
3. Format the electronic copy into hypertext and place it on Horizon, removing any canceled directives. Create or correct the links between directives and the various tables of contents.
a. Archive the current contents of the WD web site
b. Make updates on the WDDEV web site
c. Push changes from WDDEV to WD
d. Make a master CD
4. Keep backups of these files on his or her C: or X: drive.
5. Send the original to the Print Shop for reproduction and distribution. Retrieve the original for the file.
6. Distribute a copy to each of the work sites with an instructional cover memo signed by the Unit commander. Give a copy to the responsible staff person and to the Unit commander.
7. File the original, the expert and command reviews, Form PRU 001, and any other significant drafts or documents in the “originals” file.
8. For January 1 distribution and when necessary for new employees, the WDS coordinator will format the Horizon material for distribution by CD. In the January 1 distribution, include a Printed Matter Control Sheet, to be returned to PRAU.
4.9 Directives need to proceed promptly through this process, particularly those that have been requested by the Chief or are otherwise urgent. The Unit commander will track the time-to-completion as a quality control measure. If the Unit commander holds a directive under his or her review for more than three working days, remind him or her. Conditions outside the Unit’s control will determine some of the processing time; the Unit needs to manage its business to keep the process moving.
Proponent: The commander requesting a directive or the person with overall responsibility for implementing the directive.
MSS.CM.03.02 “Developing a Directive”
APD.SOP.1030, “Written Directive System”
APD.CM.08.15, “Written Directive Format”
Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, 5th ed. Standard 12.2.1, bullet i. |
|
