Accreditation Process

1. Accreditation Process

2. History of Accreditation • 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. • Law Enforcement did not learn from other’s mistakes. • No communication between agencies. • Many LEOs under-trained. • Hiring/recruiting practices often discriminatory • SOPs not well written. • Public did not respect LEOs as professionals.

3. History of Accreditation • 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.

4. CALEAThe Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies • 1979 CALEA formed by: • IACP-International Association of Chiefs of Police • NOBLE-National Organization for Black Law Enforcement Executives • NSA-National Sheriff’s Association • 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.

5. Florida Statutory Consideration • 1993 F.S. 943.125 • 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.

6. CFAThe 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. • Comprised of four sheriffs, four chiefs, and one representative each from the Association of Counties, the League of Cities, and the Judiciary.

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

8. Accredited vs. Non-Accredited • 10 agencies accredited October 1996 • 100 + agencies accredited to date • 160 agencies in process

9. 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.”

10. Goals and Objectives • 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 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;

11. Accreditation • It is not mandatory! • 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 is not a rubber stamp.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

20. Policy Review • Standard identified by Accreditation Manager • 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 • Assistance Request Assignment made/logged and sent to personnel

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

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

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