HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-81-0938RESOLUTION NO. 8-1 _" 938
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE
FORM ATTACHED HERETO, WITH KOEPSELL ASSOCIATES
i TO PROVIDE MANAGEMENT ADVISORY SERVICES FOR THE
MIAMI POLICE PERFORMANCE PROJECT; ALLOCATING
$75,313 FROM THE TRUST AND AGENCY FUND TITLED
POLICE PERFORMANCE PROJECT TO COVER THE COST OF
SAID CONTRACT FOR SAID PROJECT; AND FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT AND
EXECUTE THE NECESSARY AGREEMENTS TO IMPLEMENT
THE PROJECT.
WHEREAS, the City Commission by Resolution No. 79-798 has determined that
the creation of the Miami Police Performance Project is in the best interest of the
general public; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the Miami Police Performance Project is to develop
a Police Performance Measurement System which can systematically and
i accurately assess police agency performance; and
1
f
WHEREAS, funding for the Miami Police Performance Project in the amount of
$70,755 has been awarded by LEAA, and State and local matching funds in the
amount of $7,862 have been committed to the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission by Resolution No. 79-798 has authorized the
City Manager to take such actions as may be necessary to execute all necessary
agreements to implement the Mini -Block Grant Projects, to include the Miami
Police Performance Project; and
WHEREAS, following a comprehensive and objective evaluation by the Police
Department of firms submitting proposals for the Miami Police Performance
Project, said firms' proposals have been ranked in order of most qualified to least
qualified as follows;
PROPOSER FINAL RANKING
KOEPSELL ASSOCIATES
I
—_ ERNST & WHINNEY
2 (tie)
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION
2 (tie)
CENTER FOR LOCAL POLICE
4
CfTY COMMISSI
BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE RESEARCH
5
TOUCHE ROSS & COMPANY
6
MEETING 01
POLICE EXECUTIVE RESEARCH FORUM
7
B.L.C. SYSTEMS, LTD.
8 (tie)
NOV 1 2 1981
ARTHUR YOUNG & COMPANY
8 (tie)
ttESOtUt1oN N(Y
DONAHUE, GROOVER & ASSOCIATES
10
.»••=:_`
Ir
r
and
WHEREAS, THE City Commission by Resolution No. 81-871 has authorized the
City Manager, or his designee, to negotiate a contract with the most qualified firm
to provide services for the Miami Police Performance Project; and
WHEREAS, the Police Department has successfully negotiated a contract with
the top ranked firm, Koepsell Associates, for the provision of services for the
Miami Police Performance Project to the Police Department.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The Miami Police Performance Project proposed herein is in the
best interest of the CITY OF MIAMI and the general public.
i Section 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute in behalf of
the CITY an agreement, in substantially the form attached hereto, with Koepsell
Associates, to provide management advisory services to the Police Department for
the Miami Police Performance Project.
Section 3. (a) The City Manager is hereby authorized to furnish such
information and take such other actions as may be necessary to enable the CITY to
execute the necessary agreement to implement the Project.
(b) The City Manager is hereby designated as the City's authorized
representative of the CITY OF MIAMI in connection with this agreement.
(c) The sum of $75,313 is hereby allocated from the Trust and Agency Fund
titled Police Performance Project to cover the cost of said agreement.
Section 4. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption
and certified copies hereof are to be included as part of the agreement for the
herein.
E
r.81-938
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 12
---A-TTTEST:
City Clerk
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
r
Assistant City Attorney
day of November . 1981.
MAURICE A. FERRE
MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
3
rN
36,
Howard V. Gary
City Manager
et�ti � ��CUti-vn-7
Kenneth I. Harms
Chief of Police
0 C I 10J81
Police Performance
Project
(1) Resolution
(1) Contract
- N
-a- It is recommended that the City Commission
authorize the City Manager to execute the
necessary Agreements with Koepsell
Associates to implement the Police
cam, Performance Project in the Police
f— Department; further, it is recommended that
$75,313 be allocated from the Trust and
C'' Agency Fund to cover the cost of this Project.
The Miami Police Performance Measurement Project is part of the Mini -Block
Grant application authorized by the City Commission by Resolution 79-798,
November 26, 1979. Federal funding in the amount of $70,755, and state and
local matching funds in the amount of $7,862 have been committed to this
Project.
The purpose of the Miami Police Performance Measurement Project is to
develop a system which will systematically and accurately assess police agency
performance in operational areas.
A comprehensive and objective evaluation of the 10 proposals submitted for this
Project has been conducted by the Police Department. Per the terms of
Resolution No. 81-871, a contract has been negotiated, with the top ranked
proposer, Koepsell Associates, to implement the Police Performance Project in
the Police Department.
Because of delays experienced in the development of this Project, and in the
evaluation process, the Project has been reduced from 12 to 10 months in order
to meet the September 30, 1982 termination date for the Mini -Block Grant.
The proposed work schedule of the top ranked proposer has been compressed
accordingly.
In order to avoid a further reduction in the duration of the Project schedule, it
is urged that approval of this Resolution and contract occur at the November
16
12, 1981 Commission meeting so that work can be initiated immediately upon
contract execution.
Delaying contract approval beyond that date will result in at least one more
month's delay in Project implementation, which would reduce the Project wor',<
schedule proportionately. Such a delay would most probably impact on the
effectiveness of Project work.
KIH:sbb `
FIN 21
8I � 938
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into
as
of this
day
of
, 1981, by
and
between
the CITY
OF
MIAMI, a
municipal corporation
of the State
of Florida,
hereinafter referred
to as the
CITY, and Koepsell
Associates,
hereinafter
referred to as the
PROVIDER.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the CITY has been awarded, as subgrantee, Grant No.
DF-80-19-0001 by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration,
United States Department of Justice; and
WHEREAS, the
City Commission, by
Resolution No.
79-798, passed
and adopted on
November 26, 1979,
has accepted
this Grant and
authorized and directed the City Manager to execute contracts and
agreements in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Grant, the PROVIDER has submitted a
sealed competitive bid proposal; and has agreed to render and provide
the professional services and work product described in the work plan
attached to this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the proposal by the PROVIDER was the most responsive
and cost effective of the ten proposals submitted in response to the
CITY'S request for proposals No. 80-81-120.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual convenants and
agreements hereinafter set forth, and in further consideration of the
sum of $75,313 dollars to be paid by the CITY to the PROVIDER, the
parties agree as follows:
1. The PROVIDER agrees that during the period beginning
— December 1, 1981 and ending September 30, 1982 the PROVIDER
shall provide to the CITY and be fully responsible for the
professional services and work product as referenced throughout.
2. The compensation to be paid to the PROVIDER shall be the
' 938
aggregate sum of $75,313 dollars. Said sum shall be payable in
E the manner and at the times described in paragraph 24 of this
contract, for all tasks and deliverables in the PROVIDER'S
proposal, as well as direct services or subcontracting for
Integrated Criminal Apprehension Program (ICAP) remedial
a assistance. To wit:
Police Performance Tasks $ 66,900
ICAP Technical Assistance 881413
Total Contract $ 759313
3. The professional services and work product to be rendered and
performed by the PROVIDER shall be rendered and performed to
the reasonable satisfaction of the Chief of Police and the CITY
and the duty of the CITY to pay the compensation to the
PROVIDER provided in Paragraph 2 of this Agreement shall be
subject to such satisfactory performance. The PROVIDtrK
recognizes that the source of the funds is the above identified
1
Grant awarded to the CITY. The PROVIDER therefore agrees
that the duty of the CITY to pay all or any part of the
compensation to which the PROVIDER will or may be entitled
pursuant to this Agreement, shall be contingent upon the receipt
of the CITY of Grant funds in an amount or amounts at least
equal to the amount or amounts of compensation due hereunder.
4. The PROVIDER shall be deemed to be an independent
contractor. No agent or employee of the PROVIDER who may
render, directly or indirectly, any service pursuant to or in
connection with the performance of the PROVIDER'S obligations
pursuant to this Agreement, shall in any event or circumstances
be deemed to be an agent or employee of the CITY, and no such
pers6n shall be entitled to any right or benefit to which CITY
employees, whether classified or unclassified, are or may be
entitled by reason of their employment by the CITY.
5. The PROVIDER hereby covenants and agrees to defend,
indemnify and save harmless the CITY against any and all
2
may:
rY.
claims, suits, actions for damages, or causes of actions arising
during the term of this Agreement, for any personal injury, loss
;.
., of life or damage to property sustained by reason of, or as a
result of, the PROVIDER'S (its agents, employees or workmen)
carelessness or negligence; from and against any orders,
judgments or decrees, which may be entered thereon; and from
and against all costs, attorney's fees, expenses and liabilities
incurred in the defense of any such claims and the investigation
thereof.
6. The CITY and the PROVIDER shall abide and be governed by the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII, as amended in 1972, and
including Executive orders 11246 and 11375 and Department of
Labor Regulations (41 CFR Chapter 60), which provides in part
that there will no be discrimination of race, color, sex, religious
background, ancestry, or national origin in performance of this
contract, in regard to persons served, or in regard to
employment and it is expressly understood that upon receipt of
evidence of such discrimination, the CITY shall have the right to
terminate said Agreement. The CITY and the PROVIDER shall
abide and be governed by the Age Discrimination in Employment
Act of 1967, as amended in 1979, which provides in part that
there shall be no discrimination against persons aged 40 - 70 in
any area of employment because of age.
The CITY and the PROVIDER shall adhere to the non-
discrimination provisions of Section 815(c)(1) of the Justice
System Improvement Act of 1979. The PROVIDER also agrees
to ensure that any contractors utilized under this contract
and/or its subcomponents and other recipients and/or
beneficiaries of funding from this contract will adhere to the
non-discrimination provisions of Section 815(c)(1) of the Justice
System Improvement Act of 1979.
Also where required, implementing agencies must ensure
compliance with the equal employment opportunity requirements
3
81-938
found at 28 CFR 42.301 et seq., Subpart E. (See Sections
42.306(a) and 42.307).
Further, the CITY and the PROVIDER shall comply with the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504, which does not allow
discrimination against a person having a mental or physical
handicap.
The PROVIDER will notify the CITY of any present or pending
i
"consent decrees" or court orders affecting the PROVIDER
and/or any beneficiaries or recipients of funds provided as a
result of this contract.
Every effort will be made to hire minorities, so as to accomplish
the goals of this grant.
7. The PROVIDER agrees that the CITY, LEAA, the Comptroller
General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized
representatives, shall have access for purpose of audit and
examination to any books, documents, papers, and records of the
PROVIDER that are pertinent to this Agreement, including cost
estimating and actual cost data.
Maintenance and retention of records shall be in accordance with
OMB circulars A-102 and A-110 as set forth in OJARS M 7100.18
Financial and Administrative Guide for Grants, Chapter 41
paragraph 40 a. b. and c. as published by the Office of
Comptroller, Office of Justice Assistance, Research, and
Statistics. Annex "A" of this Agreement, a CITY OF MIAMI
inter -office memorandum, dated October 27, 1981 from Sergeant
Douglas W. Rice, Federal Grants Coordinator, to Lieutenant
Thomas F. Paine, Commander, Planning and Inspections Unit,
describes the conditions of the circulars referred to herein. Said
Annex "A" is hereby incorporated into and made a part of this
Agreement.
4
B. The City Manager shall have the right, upon ten (10) days written
notice to the PROVIDER, to terminate this Agreement if the
PROVIDER shall fail to perform his obligations hereunder to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Chief of Police of the CITY, or if
he shall otherwise fail to perform an obligation or fail to render
any performance expressly or impliedly required by this
Agreement. In the event that the City Manager terminates this
Agreement, all documents, data, studies, reports or other
written material prepared by the PROVIDER in connection with
this Agreement, shall at the option of the CITY become the
property of the CITY; and the PROVIDER shall, in such event, be
entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for the
services he shall theretofore have rendered, such compensation
not to exceed the maximum fee payable under this Agreement.
9. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual agreement of the
parties upon such terms as may be agreed upon, provided that if
this Agreement is terminated prior to the completion of the
Contractual services as contemplated by the Agreement, the
aggregate compensation to which he may be entitled shall not
exceed an amount which bears the same ratio to the total
compensation provided by this Agreement to be paid, as the
services actually performed by the PROVIDER bear to the
aggregate of the services contemplated to be rendered by the
PROVIDER by this Agreement, such compensation not to exceed
the maximum fee payable under this Agreement.
10. The PROVIDER covenants that he presently has no interest and
shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which would
conflict
in any manner or degree
with the performance of
the
services
required to be performed
under this Agreement.
The
PROVIDER further covenants that in the performance of this
Agreement, no person having any such conflicting interest shall
be employed by him.
.5
81 - 938
20
r**,
11. No report, information, data, etc., given or prepared or
assembled by the PROVIDER under this Agreement, including
both raw or source data, as well as evaluations thereof, shall be
made available to any individual or organization by the
PROVIDER without prior written approval of the City Manager.
12. Where activities supported by this Agreement produce reports,
information, data or other material, in whole or in part, prepared
or assembled by the PROVIDER, the CITY and, in turn, LEAA,
have the right to use, duplicate, and disclose, in whole or in part,
in any manner for any purpose whatsoever and have others to do
so. All reports, data, information, or other materials prepared
under this Agreement shall be surrendered to the CITY and the
PROVIDER shall have no claim of any nature whatsoever upon
said materials, provided that the PROVIDER may publish,
disclose, distribute or otherwise use, in whole or in part, any
reports, data, information, or other materials prepared under
this Agreement upon written approval of the City Manager and
such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. All provisions
of this paragraph are subject always to applicable federal
regulations.
13. The PROVIDER shall be obligated to assist, insofar as
practicable and necessary in order to accomplish the purposes of
the attached work plan, all CITY personnel and all other persons
participating in the project.
14. The CITY acknowledges that this Agreement shall in no way
negate their responsibility to comply with Exhibit B, Part IV of
the Standard Subgrant Conditions, Section 1 through Section 33
included in the awarded Grant application, known as FY 1980
CITY OF MIAMI Mini -Block Grant, No. DF-80-19-0001.
15. The contracting parties agree that they shall comply, where
applicable, with the following federal regulations not specified in
the Standard Subgrant Conditions:
6
r
r.
a) Copeland Anti -Kickback Act - (18 U.S.C. 874) as
supplemented in Department of Labor regulations (29
CFR, Part 3).
b) Contractor Work Hours and Safety Standards Act - (40
U.S.C. 327-330) as supplemented in Department of Labor
regulations (29 CFR, Part 5).
16. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any dispute
concerning a question of fact arising under this Agreement which
is not disposed of by mutual agreement between contracting
parties shall be decided by the City Manager, who shall reduce
his decision to writing and mail or otherwise furnish a copy
thereof to the PROVIDER.
17. This Agreement shall not be altered or amended except by
written instrument executed by both parties.
18. It is understood and agreed that the obligations undertaken by
the PROVIDER pursuant to this Agreement shall not be
delegated to any other person or firm unless the CITY shall first
consent in writing to the performance of such services or any
- part thereof by another person or firm.
The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall be construed
and enforced according to the laws, statutes and case laws of the
State of Florida.
19. The following deliverable items shall be submitted by the
PROVIDER to the CITY:
a) Monthly Progress Reports, to be submitted on or before the
tenth calendar day of the following month.
b) Monthly Financial Reports, to be submitted on or before the
tenth calendar day of the following month.
7
81 - 938
-14 IS
c) Quarterly Progress Reports, which may include the third
Monthly Report of each Quarter, to be -submitted on or
before the tenth calendar day of the month following the
Quarter.
d) Preliminary Final Project Report, to be submitted at least
fifteen (15) days prior to the expiration of the contract.
Within two weeks, the Miami Police Performance Project
Director will provide to the PROVIDER any revisions
necessary in the Preliminary Final Project Report. The
PROVIDER will incorporate those revisions and resubmit the
Preliminary Final Project Report to the Miami Police
Performance Project Director for approval or additional
revisions. The Final Project Report shall contain, at a
minimum, the following:
1) A comprehensive list of police productivity measures
designed for the Miami Police Department.
2) An inventory of data collection processes and data
elements relevant to the Miami Police Department.
3) Procedures for the collection and analysis of
measurement information.
O A plan for the implementation of the designed Police
Performance Measurement System.
5) A detailed process evaluation of the project.
e) Fully developed Measurement Instruments and Revised Data
Collection and Reporting Forms.
- f) Training Package; to include necessary lesson plans, visual
aids, and instructions necessary for the proper utilization
8
and evaluation of the assessment instrument.
r 20. Annex "B" of this Agreement represents Sections I through IV,
pages 1 through 27, and Section V, pages 36 through 38 of the
Proposal submitted by Koepsell Associates for CITY OF MIAMI
Bid No. 80-81-120, entitled "A Proposal for the Development of
a Police Performance Measurement System for the Miami Police
Department", dated September 9, 1981, as submitted to the
Office of the City Clerk. Said Annex "B" is hereby incorporated
into and made apart of this Agreement except as to the
following specific change:
Whereas Annex "B" at page 27, "Generalized Work Staging"
states a 12 month work program, same shall now be 10 months in
length.
21. It is the intent of all parties that the work program, as described
in Annex "B" in Section IV, entitled "Work Plan", shall be the
work program of this contract.
22. The culmination of efforts under the "Work Plan" shall result in
the PROVIDER delivering to the CITY a Police Performance
Measurement System which will include a validated, reliable and
realistic instrument readily useable by supervisory and
management personnel of the Miami Police Department on a
regular routine basis. This instrument will have defined all
relevant data inputs and shall accurately measure real
performance
and goal attainment.
Failure to
satisfactorily
deliver such
system shall result in
non-payment
of the final
invoice.
23. The CITY shall have and exercises the right to approve all
subcontractors and/or employees of the PROVIDER proposed to
fulfill terms of this agreement. Neither the PROVIDER nor any
subcontractor shall assign any portion of this agreement without
written approval of the CITY.
9
81 - 938
wow
24. Annex "C" of this Agreement represents portions of the "Cost
and Price Analysis" submitted separately by Koepsell Associates
for CITY OF MIAMI Bid No. 80-81-120, dated September 9, 1981,
as submitted to the Office of the City Clerk.
The PROVIDER will invoice the CITY monthly for
reimbursement of completed tasks or portions thereof. The
value of each task will be conditioned on the nature of the work
generally described in Annex "B" and the level of resource
commitment outlined in Table 2 at page 26 of Annex "B". When
the Miami Police Project Director is satisfied that work for
which an invoice is submitted has been completed, prompt
payment will be made. The Miami Police Project Director will
authorize payment of the PROVIDER'S final invoice when all
work called for in Annex "B" has been received and accepted.
The PROVIDER'S final invoice will be at least equal to seven
thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500.00) which is approximately
10 percent of the PROVIDER'S total contract.
25. As noted in the preamble, the amount of the PROVIDER'S total
contract is $75,313. This amount is comprised of a base amount
of $66,900 for which a detailed proposal has been submitted and
accepted and an additional $8,413. This additional sum will be
used for special technical assistance. The Project Director and
the PROVIDER will jointly identify project -related technical
assistance needs. It shall be the responsibility of the PROVIDER
to supply said technical assistance. If it is jointly determined
that the nature of the additional technical assistance is beyond
the competence of the PROVIDER or if said technical assistance
cannot be provided in a cost effective manner by the
PROVIDER, then it shall be the responsibility of the PROVIDER
to procure said competent technical assistance and disburse
those funds held in reserve for said technical assistance. The
CITY shall reserve the right to approve or disapprove the
selection of any subcontractor by the PROVIDER. The
10
ria
4e
PROVIDER shall be entitled to administrative cost not to exceed
12 percent of the amount invoiced for said special technical
assistance.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument and
exact duplicates hereof to be executed in their names by the persons thereto
legally qualified.
THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
By: _
CITY MANAGER
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
KOEPSELL ASSOCIATES
Signed, sealed and delivered By:
in the presence of: TERRY W. KOEPSELL
Witnesses as to
REVIEWED BY:
Assistant City Attorney
APPROVED BY:
Chief of Police
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
City Attorney
11
f
F
ANNEX A
0 81 -938
CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO Lt. Thomas F. Paine
'- Commander
Planning and Inspections Unit
FROM
4Sg.VDolasW. ice
Federal Grants Coordinator
DATE October 27, 1981 FILE: FIN 18
SUBJECT Maintenance & Retention of
Records
REFERENCES Consultant Services/Police
Performance Grant
ENCLOSURES
In accordance with OMB Circulars A-102 and A-1100 all financial
records, supporting documents, statistical records and all other
records pertinent to grants, subgrants or contracts under grants
shall be retained by each organization participating in a program
or project for at least three years for purposes of Federal
examination and audit, State or local governments may impose
record retention and maintenance requirements in addition to those
prescribed in this chapter.
The retention requirement extends to books of original entry,
source documents supporting accounting transactions, the general
ledger, subsidiary ledgers, personnel and payroll records, cancelled
checks, and related documents and records. Source documents in-
clude copies of all grant and subgrant awards, applications and
required grantee/subgrantee financial and narrative reports.
Personnel and payroll records shall include the time and attendance
reports for all individuals reimbursed under a grant, subgrant or
contract, whether they are employed full-time or part-time.
Time and effort reports will be required for consultants.
The three year retention period starts from the date of submission
of the final expenditure report or for grants which are renewed
annually, from the date of the submission of the annual expenditure
report. Exceptions to the three-year requirement, such as for
records for non -expendable property acquired with grant funds and
for grants having an audit in process, are contained in OMB cir-
culars A-102 and A-110.
It is recommended that this memo be included as an addendum to the
contract for professional services between the City of Miami and
Terry Koepsell & Associates.
DWR:wp
K,
ANNEX B
81-120
EVELOPMENT
i OF A
_ l POLICE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM
fFOR THE
[ MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENT
=f
fSubmitted to the
f Office of the City Clerk
3500 Pan American Drive
P.O. Box 330708
Miami, Florida 33133
i
by
I Koepsell Associates
_ 540 Innsbruck Avenue
P.O. Box 212
Great Falls, Virginia 22066
September 9, 1981
CONTENTS
Section
Page
I PROPOSER IDENTIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
II STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2
Prescribed Objectives . . . . . . . . . . .
2
Commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
III MANAGEMENT SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
` IV WORK PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
General Background and Baseline Information
7
Develop Overall Project Design . . . . . . .
9
Develop Assessment Instruments . . . . . . .
9
Pre -Test Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
Implement Assessment Instruments . . . . . .
17
Conduct Training for Draft Instrument Use
18
Monitor and Evaluate Instrument Use
19
Provide ICAP Remedial Technical Assistance
20
Develop Performance Measurement System . . .
21
Assist in System Implementation . . . . . .
22
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
Manpower Commitment to Work Tasks . . . . .
25
I
Work Staging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
25
Deliverable Products . . . . . . . . . . . .
25
V A REVIEW OF THE PROJECT TEAM AND
RELEVANT PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE . . . . . . . .
28
Relevant Experience of the Project
Coordinator . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
28
Experience of Other Team Members . . . . . .
35
Estimated Time Commitment of Project
Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
37
Reserved Technical Assistance Fund . . . . .
39
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
39
- i -
r 81-938
CONTENTS (Continued)
VI ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COMMENTS . . . . . . . 41
VII AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
! VIII STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
APPENDICES
A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PRODUCTIVITY
AND PERFORMANCE LITERATURE
B RESUMES OF TEAM MEMBERS AND SELECTED
CONSULTANTS
SECTION I
PROPOSER IDENTIFICATION
Requested information concerning the proposer organization is
as follows:
Koepsell Associates
540 Innsbruck Avenue
Post Office Box 212
Great Falls, Virginia 22066
(703) 759-4147
Koepsell Associates is located in the immediate Washington,
D.C. area. Although presently operating as a sole proprietorship,
the firm is in the process of becoming incorporated under the laws
of the State of Virginia. It is quite likely that all necessary
steps toward this end will be completed by the time a decision is
reached relative to this proposal.
The individual to be contacted concerning any technical or
procedural questions relative to this proposal is Terry W.
Koepsell. He may be reached at the above noted address and tele-
phone number.
- 1 -
S�,
r SECTION II
STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
PRESCRIBED OBJECTIVES
The goals and objectives set forth in the Request for
Proposal (RFP) and in the ICAP Self -Assessment Report will serve
as the underpinnings of the proposed work. Principally, it will
be the goal of the work to devise a performance measuring system
that will measure the degree to which MPD objectives and ICAP
activities are being effectively and productively accomplished.
In terms of objectives, Koepsell Associates' work will:
• focus on objectives -oriented measurement data
• be sufficiently comprehensive to include all
ICAP activities
• include only validated measurement data and
indicators
• synthesize measurement data according to
established norms, which themselves will be
statistically valid within specified confi-
dence limits
• allow for periodic updating, expansion and
refinement
• combine measurement data to produce performance
scores and departmental profiles
• devise means to diagnose departmental perform-
ance scores and profiles
• identify methods for improving operations so
that prescribed objectives may be realized
• produce a system that will operate, at a
minimum, on a quarterly basis
• provide inputs in support of police management,
planning, research, evaluation and decision
making.
- 2 -
F
F
COMMENTARY
The terms and expectations outlined in the RFP suggest a
precise, statistically valid system. Although Koepsell Associ-
ates' Project Team will be capable of developing such a valid-
r
ated system, it will also be its intent to insure a functional,
usable system. This will require many ingredients. First, the
performance measurement system must be formatted and presented
in a manner that is clear and easy to use by a cross-section of
the department's managers and supervisors. If it is too complex
or mathematically -oriented, it will "turn-off" a sufficient num-
ber of users to neutralize the principal intent of the work.
'
Second, measurement indicators must assess both activity
(e.g., output) and results (e.g., outcome). Not only will this
overcome the undermining effects of the "numbers game," (e.g.,
the tendency to use beefed-up activity reports to illustrate
performance), but will serve as a basis for true performance
assessment.
Take, for example, Directed Patrol. Activity assessment
may measure such indicators as: number of crime analysis versus
_
field -initiated Directed Patrol strategies developed over a
reporting period; the number of Directed Patrol strategies
executed; or, the number of manhours expended. If these were
a
the sole indicators, not only would little insight be provided,
but "high performance" could be demonstrated at will.
When results, or "outcome" indicators are utilized, however,
true performance can be measured. First, a breakdown of the
nature of a directed Patrol strategy would be required (e.g., a
strategy aimed at a Part One crime problem, misdemeanor offenses,
traffic problems, or other non -criminal or "peace -keeping" strat-
egy). Next, data on "policing actions" would be required for
each "D-run". These would include: felony arrests, misdemeanor
arrests, traffic citations, misdemeanor citations, warning cita-
tions, or field interview reports. Finally, information would be
requested describing the nature of the strategies or tactics
employed. With this information, it then would be possible to
measure several things beyond simple activity, including:
• Policing actions per Directed Patrol strategy,
and manhours of effort (this would be an initial
basis for assessing efficiency and effectiveness).
• The focus of Directed Patrol actions in an area
(e.g., when comparing this to crime data, it would
be possible to determine if a commander is leaning
toward "easy hits," such as traffic control or a
misdemeanor problem when, in actuality, his area
is beseiged by a major Part One crime problem).
- 3 -
s 81 - 938
N
I'N
• The imagination used in an area (e.g., limited or
unimaginative strategies, such as "moving surveil-
lance," may point to a need for additional training
or counselling to explain the breadth of latitude
that may be exercised).
• Finally, if the MPD can document available non -
committed Patrol resources, it can be compared with
the amount of time a Patrol commander applies to
i expanded Patrol. activities (such as Hirected Patrol)
and how much time (e.g., resources) he is not
effectively managing.
Thus, by utilizing output and outcome indicators, effective
performance measurement is possible. This leads to the third
essential ingredient of a successful performance assessment sys-
tem: it must facilitate and possibly even force police managers
and supervisors to be managers and supervisors. It has been
Koepsell Associates' experience that training and friendly urging
alone does not do the trick. A system that clearly places
accountability alongside responsibility and authority is neces-
sary. And further, it must be understood that accountability can
and will be monitored, and that performance will be expected.
Moreover, in carrying out th
Koepsell Associates' approach wil
validation techniques With the re
measurement system. And finally,
within the existing and evolving
of the Miami Police Department.
e Police Performance Project,
1 combine sound methodology and
al wcfld demands of a functional
this approach will be fashioned
capabilities (and limitations)
- 4 -
SECTION III
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
The chart on the following page depicts the project leader-
ship, reporting responsibilities and Project Team interface with
MPD personnel.
j Terry Koepsell will perform as Project Coordinator. In this
capacity, he will be responsible for assigning project personnel
to specific tasks as well as for personally carrying out key
+ aspects of the work. He will also be responsible for all formal
interface with Lt. Paine, the Project Director.
With the approval of Lt. Paine, Mr. Koepsell will also be
responsible for formal contacts with the Command Structure;
Lt. DeJong, ICAP Project Director; Tim Crowe, the ICAP TA consult-
ant; key members of the various ICAP Work Groups; and, with other
personnel of the MPD. Mr. Koepsell will then assign project team
members to appropriate duties.
- 5 -
Illustration 1
Generalized Project Interrelationships
r �
r.
Office of Chief ICAP Group
K. Harmes Lt. DeJong
I
Police Performance
TA Consultant
Project Director T. Crowe
Lt. Paine
- l
Other Police Performance Work Groups
Departmental ----Project Coordinator
t Contacts T. Koepse11
i
Project Staff and I Other
Team Consultants I L4
- 6 -
SECTION IV
WORK PLAN
The following pages present a summary of steps that would
be taken in carrying out the elements of the methodology suggested
in the RFP.
GENERAL BACKGROUND AND
BASELINE INFORMATION
Steps to be Taken
This element would be performed during the initial 45 to 60
days of the project. Undertaken principally by Mr. Koepsell,
interviews would be scheduled so as to obtain a clear understand-
ing of the goals and objectives of the ICAP project. Interviews
are anticipated with:
• Lt. Paine (several)
• Lt. DeJong (several)
• Chief Harmes
` • Tim Crowe (several)
Discussions would also be held with the chairman and/or such other
individuals suggested by Lt. Paine and Lt. DeJong from the ICAP
Steering Committee and the following Work Groups:
• Crime Analysis
• Report Format
• Communications
• Report Flow
• Operations Analysis
• Investigative Management
• Patrol Management
• Directed Activity/Crime Prevention
- 7 -
10
9 Warrants
• Career Criminal
Training
The purpose of these meetings would be to discuss work status,
planned activity, potential data needs and outputs, etc.
Contact would also be made with persons associated with the
following efforts:
i
• Police Department Objective Setting and Measuring
f • City of Miami MBO strategies
• Police Officer Profiling Programs
• Community Evaluation of Police Performance
Project
• Community Crime Prevention Project
• University of Chicago Development of Behaviorally
Anchored Performance Rating Instrument.
All reports, documents, data and draft materials available from
t persons and groups interviewed will be sought and reviewed.
In-house staff will review available literature and reports
dealing with police performance instruments and systems. In addi-
tion to materials available through the now -defunct Federal Commis-
sion on Productivity, such materials as are presented in Appendix A
will be reviewed.
. Anticipated Results
This effort will produce a body of knowledge about the MPD's
ICAP goals and objectives; an understanding of the organization
and workings of the MPD; a sense of priorities and expectations;
and, sufficient source information of key department activities.
This information and knowledge will provide the backdrop for the
t next element of the work.
- 8 -
V
DEVELOP OVERALL PROJECT
DESIGN
Steps to be Taken
A detailed review and analysis will be undertaken of inter-
view notes and pertinent reports, documents and secondary sources
obtained during the work described above.
Anticipated Results
This work element will result in Koepsell Associates' initial
deliverable product: a refined overall project design. A draft
of the design will be submitted to the Project Director for review
and necessary modifications. The project design will highlight the
nature and staging of subsequent work; the design methodology; and,
other information pertinent to achieving the goals and objectives
of the project.
DEVELOP ASSESSMENT
INSTRUMENTS
Steps to be Taken
The purpose of this element will be to develop assessment
instruments and sampling procedures for data collection. The ICAP
generic quarterly reporting format will be used as a point of
departure for this stage of the work. Following is an initial
assessment of the content of the report and how it will presumably
contribute to the project.
• Section 1: General Department Information. This
section could provide the following types of
information:
1) Crime Statistics: Patterns of Part One
offenses, clearances and arrests may offer
a general guide to the results of several
ICAP initiatives (e.g., directed patrol;
habitual, serious offender program; crime
analysis system; zone and beat realignment)
etc. Unfortunately, the type of crime
statistics presented in this part of the
report is somewhat global in scope. This
81-f)38
I
not only makes a direct cause -effect analy-
sis difficult, but significant changes in
current trends may require many years. As
a result, a number of other indicators and
measures may be necessary. This may be aided or
supplemented by the following MPD reports:
Selected Incidence by Zone (Job # 21314-01);
24-Hour Incident Log (Job # 22142-77); Arrest
Activity All City (Job # 10000-04).
2) Personnel Activity: Patrol sick days can be
a reasonably reliable indicator of morale
and attitude. For example, utilizing pre -
and post -program information, the attitude
and reaction of personnel toward ICAP's
expanded patrol role could be monitored.
Requests for transfers to and out of patrol
could serve a corroborative purpose.
3) Manpower Allocation: This may be another
point of measurement concerning ICAP's
emphasis in expanding the resources and role
of patrol. Successful directed patrol, for
1 example, may reduce the need for large
special operating or tactical units. The
successful management of criminal investiga-
tions (including case screening, patrol
investigations, and less than 100 percent
case assignments) may increase detective
clearance rates, or may even precipitate
reductions in detective division manpower
(this has occurred in many jurisdictions,
including Jacksonville). This could be
aided by information produced in the Organi-
zational Employee List (Job # Person 003);
Alpha Employee List (Job # Person 001); and,
the COINS Report (Job # 52200-03).
4) Organizational Changes: Information of this
type, which may clearly be the precursor of
improved productivity or efficiency, should
be available through other, more direct
channels.
• Section 2: Major ICAP Components
1) Crime Analysis: This would provide a running
account of the types, distribution and purpose
of CAU products. Although this report should
- 10 -
be an accurate source for such documentation,
direct contact with crime analysis unit per-
sonnel as well as with major user groups
should provide more timely and complete
information.
2) Crime Analysis -- Acceptance and Utilization:
This can be the base for much useful informa-
tion. The number of requests for CAU infor-
mation, by source, will define the general
acceptance of the crime analysis unit (CAU)
and will provide an initial indication of the
uses to which the information is being put.
(For example, requests from patrol, investi-
gations and crime prevention are generally
used for operational and field management
purposes. Requests from administration,
public relations and other staff units are
frequently for broader, non -operational pur-
poses.) This source may also be used to
insure that balance is kept regarding CAU
emphasis. For example, if a majority of
requests regularly come from investigative
units (i.e., property searches, alias checks,
pawn shop information, etc.), it may be an
indication that patrol needs are being over-
looked. Although investigative needs are
important, such a trend may indicate that
patrol needs require a reassessment or a
shift in emphasis to insure that the CAU is
being utilized to its fullest.
The use of CAU products to serve tactical or
strategic activities should also be monitored.
This might involve directed patrol, patrol
deployment, patrol or detective investiga-
tions and crime prevention initiatives. This
information is key in determining if CAU
products are serving desired ends. As a
supplement, two additional types of informa-
tion would also be suggested. The first
involves a feedback form which should accom-
pany operational and tactically -oriented CAU
products. It should request information such
as the intended purpose of the request;
resources utilized in following up on the
information (as well as needed resources that
were unavailable); manhours of effort expended;
special tactics or strategies employed; and
the results of the activity as defined by
P µ `;
I-NN
"policing actions" (e.g., felony arrests,
misdemeanor arrests, traffic citations, mis-
demeanor citations, warning citations and
field interview reports filed). Results
might also include a description of property
confiscated or recovered, as appropriate.
The second supplemental source of information
that would be suggested is a monthly summary,
by district and sector, that reviews both
activity (output) and results (outcome). For
example, it may eventually be possible to
I identify available, non -committed patrol
resources and to compare this with how and to
what degree these resources were used (e.g.,
for directed patrol, patrol investigations,
etc.). Allowing for unforeseen events, patrol
managers, mid -managers and supervisors would
clearly be prompted into effectively managing
resources. By examining both output and out-
comes, the traditional reliance on the "numbers
game" might be sufficiently diluted to permit
more realistic performance assessments and
management decisions. Further, by differenti-
ating the intent of directed patrol strategies
(e.g., felony, misdemeanor, traffic and non -
criminally oriented strategies), there would
be less incentive to use a misdemeanor or traf-
fic strategy -- that would likely result in
i many "policing actions" -- to produce "numbers"
simply to make monthly summary reports appear
positive.
3) Operations Analysis: Much information in the
generic report format could be valuable for
the planned Police Performance Project. Infor-
mation on call for service (CFS) management
would be helpful in monitoring the performance
(or capture rate) of PDA or a Telaserve Unit.
(Additional study would be needed, however, if
maximum capture rates were to be achieved.)
Call for Service demand by shift would be help-
ful (i.e., Section 2.3.3 in the Progress Report)
when compared to manpower allocation by shift
(see Section 2.4.1 of the Progress Report).
More detailed information -- by district and
sector -- would be even more meaningful. The
following existing reports should offer inputs
to this section of the generic format: Roll
Call Sector (Job # 21300-77); Statistical Sum-
mary By Field and Sector (Job # 21000-77); and
- 12 -
I
A
Calls by Hour of Day and Day of Week (Job #
21300-04).
Information on call stacking and prioritization
would most likely come directly from departmental
i contacts.
Information concerning the proportion of patrol
time expended on various duties (e.g., CFS res-
ponse, officer initiated activity, personal and
administrative duties, etc.), would provide a
long-term indication of the effectiveness of
ICAP-oriented resource management strategies.
4) Patrol and Investigations: The information pro-
vided in the Progress Report is of certain
value. For example, it permits one to compare
CFS requiring patrol presence (e.g., a dispatched
unit to deal with a "peace keeping" function)
versus those requiring preliminary investigations
(i.e., the differential might be the object of
strategies to expand teleserve activity). Infor-
mation provided by Carecase and Carelog (Job #
71112-02) would be a useful supplement. This
entry also serves as a general monitor of patrol
and detective activity regarding follow-up
investigation. To be a more effective measure
of performance, however, additional information
would be needed, including the nature of patrol
investigations (i.e., field -initiated versus
detective assigned cases), the types and numbers
of cases investigated, the number and percentage
of cases cleared, and the nature of the clear-
ances (i.e., by arrest, exception, etc.). This
would permit monitoring of activity, impact,
efficiency, and capability. (See also Arrest
Activity All City -- Job # 10000-04.)
The section of the generic report dealing with
case management appears to be of limited value
at this time. The number of cases presented for
prosecution is essentially a control figure.
! The other two factors -- cases filed by prosecu-
tion, and conviction rates -- ostensibly are to
measure the quality of cases submitted by the
MPD. Unfortunately, many aspects of both factors
are outside the control of the department. For
example, the number of cases accepted for prosecu-
tion depends on the size of the prosecutorial
staff complement; criteria and standards used by
the State's Attorney to accept cases (i.e., in
Florida, the State Supreme Court places the
- 13 -
81-3
— burden on the State's Attorney to file only on
those cases with a "reasonable probability of
conviction"); and, the relative experience and
qualifications of the legal staff (e.g.,
� qu g whereas
an experienced attorney may see a "reasonable
probability" in a case, an inexperienced attor-
ney may not). Moreover, much interplay between
the MPD and the State's Attorney would be
required, including extensive briefings and in-
service training (e.g., see Police Legal Manual,
prepared by the Norfolk (Virginia) Police
Department ICAP Program), to give police person-
nel a reasonable opportunity to be instrumental
in State's Attorney case acceptance decisions.
5) Crime Prevention Activity: This provides a broad
indicator not only of the activity (output) of a
crime prevention unit, but the degree to which
crime prevention strategies are made part of stan-
dard patrol operations. Impact analysis would
require the monitoring of subsequent victimiza-
tion of survey recipients, which may not be cost -
beneficial.
6) Directed Patrol: This sub -section provides fur-
ther information on the volume and nature of
directed patrol "runs". To be of maximum value,
it should include a breakdown of the particular
I types of strategies utilized. Negative findings
(i.e., limited variation) would, for example,
indicate a need for additional in-service train-
ing to discuss available strategies as well as
the command structure's desire for police managers
and supervisors to use their imagination. (This
attitude is frequently interpreted quite conserva-
tively during the early stages of ICAP programs.)
7) Warrant Service: The issuance of a felony arrest
warrant is an indication that appropriate police
work has been performed and completed. Service
of the warrant is the final step in the process.
Unfortunately, no matter how well a policing
effort is carried out, unless the suspect is
arrested, the work remains incomplete. Figures
in this sub -section monitor this process and can
be used to assess special warrant service initi-
atives (e.g., the "Deputy Tester" program used in
Jacksonville; special warrant purge systems, such
as are used in Norfolk; the use of patrol person-
nel to serve warrants -- which is popular in
several ICAP cities, etc.).
- 14 -
0
Section 3: Achievement of Project Objectives.
Although this section may summarize progress toward
the achievement of project goals and objectives, it
is believed that more effective means exist to moni-
�°�
for this aspect of the city's effort.
Moreover, from the foregoing review of key elements of the
generic progress report, it appears valuable in at least two ways.
'
First, it is a tested and refined instrument that monitors all
important aspects of the ICAP program. Second, it helps to iden-
tify the types of data collection and generation activities that
will. be necessary to construct an effective performance measure-
ment instrument and system.
Anticipated Results
The work will result in an initial series of assessment
instruments. It will include a description of the nature and per-
ceived value of each instrument, or key elements thereof; if the
data is now being produced or is available in some form; justifi-
cation for each instrument; and, a description of Koepsell Associ-
ates' approach for the collection and processing of records and
surveys. Draft guidelines will also be presented for the collec-
tion, collation, analysis and interpretation of the data. The
draft instrument(s) will be submitted to the Project Director for
review and comment. To the maximum extent possible, existing
information sources, reports and systems will be utilized so as
' not to require the unnecessary expansion of already extended EDP
and paper processing systems.
PRE -TEST INSTRUMENTS
Steps to be Taken
Each of the data collection forms and instruments developed
in the previous element will be pre -tested. The intent of the pre-
test will be multi -faceted. First, procedural and other refine-
ments will be made to minimize response burden and error. Second,
steps will be taken to maximize item response by identifying and
suggesting modifications to existing formatted reports and records.
Finally, when necessary, new or substantially modified information
reports will be recommended.
Another purpose of the pre -test will be to validate input
data utilizing a variety of techniques. One method will be to
assess reliability by testing for a statistically significant
number of omissions, inconsistencies or errors in samples of
collected data.
- 15 -
81 - 938
IOW
Statistical analyses will also be made. The techniques to be
used will be conditioned on the number and nature of indicators
' developed and the number and type of hypotheses to be tested. At
a minimum, however, the following techniques will be considered:
• Coefficients of internal consistency
• Confidence intervals using standard error of
measurement
• Construct validity determination using such means
as the multitrait-multimethod matrix, which
' measures convergent and discriminant validity of
performance measures using a matrix of correla-
tions among two or more indicators each measured
by two or more methods; or, factor analysis to
discover clusters of interrelated variables
underlying empirical measures.
• Validity coefficients.
• Data reduction, using either Contingency Table
Analysis to infer whether differences in perform-
ance measurements are real or due to random chance
factors, or Multiple Regression Analysis as a
j basis for determining the interrelationships
between empirical measures.
I As part of this element, methods of assessing the impact of
ICAP on the MPD will also be examined. Such methods would include:
• Statistically comparing results obtained prior to
and subsequent to ICAP program initiation (i.e.,
pre- and post-
e Comparing results after ICAP with data obtained
for similar size cities with and without ICAP.
• Comparing expected ICAP results with observed
results. This would require the establishment of
target values for empirical performance measures
prior to the ICAP program.
As noted earlier, however, the instrument design, pre -testing
and validation process will aim at a balance which reflects:
• accuracy and validity
• ease of collection, collation and analysis
- 16 -
o general acceptance of the instruments and subse-
quent measurement system among persons who will
use or be affected by the system
• utility of system results in insuring maximum
performance, accountability and management
decision -making.
In carrying out the pre -test, a selected number of graduate
students will be available to complement permanent members of the
Project Team. This step is being taken to provide maximum oppor-
tunity to identify and correct, to the extent possible, all flaws
in the availability, collection, collation and analysis of needed
information.
Anticipated Results
This element will result in a report to the Project Director
summarizing the findings and conclusions of the pre -test; present-
ing guidelines for the collection, collation and analysis of
required data; and, offering recommendations concerning full imple-
mentation and use of the instruments.
Recommendations will also be presented regarding future data
collection requirements. That is, at this stage of the project,
many ICAP elements will still be in developmental stages. To the
extent possible, information and indicators necessary to measure
performance will be identified along with collection, collation and
analysis requirements. This added measure is made possible by the
extensive ICAP, evaluation and management experience of the Project
Team.
IMPLEMENT ASSESSMENT
i
INSTRUMENTS
Steps to be Taken
The "implementation plan" report referenced in the previous
task will be presented to the Project Director in "draft" form.
The Project Director, and such others as he may deem appropriate,
will also be provided an oral briefing of the plan. As a result
of the briefing and other associated reviews, it is expected that
certain revisions or modifications will be suggested.
- 17 -
81 - 938
M
Anticipated Results
Suggested revisions to the implementation plan will be made
and a final implementation plan will be submitted to the Project
Director.
i
CONDUCT TRAINING FOR DRAFT
INSTRUMENT USE
Steps to be Taken
This element will involve the development of lesson plans
and the provision of training to those who will be involved in
implementing the assessment instrument(s).
The lesson plans will be designed for each group of indi-
viduals who will be involved in the collection, collation and/or
analysis of information associated with police performance.
Based on pre -test experience, the lesson plans will identify:
• What data or information is to be collected.
• Where, from whom and at what interval or cycle
the information can be obtained.
• Difficulties that may be encountered (and
methods of mitigating or circumventing these
1 difficulties) .
• Methods and formats that should be employed in
collating and compiling the information.
• Indicators which are being used and the data
elements and methods of analysis necessary to
arrive at said indicators.
• The meaning or interpretations used with each
indicator, including what various trends may
suggest.
Another element of the lesson plans and subsequent training
will be a desire to impart a positive attitude toward the assess-
ment instrument(s) and the performance measurement system. It is
important that those involved in data collection and analysis
understand that the system is designed for continuing, construc-
tive improvements in the MPD's delivery system (as opposed to a
' system that will simply demand more and offer less to sworn per-
sonnel). It will be emphasized that negative results (as shown by
- 18 -
the indicators in use) are not necessarily negative. Rather, they
will point to areas or personnel who may benefit from additional
training, orientation sessions, or supervisory counselling. It
will also be noted that ultimate improvements in productivity and
performance will benefit the city, the department and its indi-
vidual members. For example, such improvements may mitigate major
crime problems being experienced in the city. This, in turn, will
improve the image and "profile" of the department. Further, a
department with high productivity and performance should receive
more favorable treatment at budget time.
The principal reason for this emphasis is to insure that those
involved in implementing the instrument help it to grow rather than
intentionally undermine it because they feel they have to "protect
their friends". This has occurred in other departments, especially
during early program stages. Avoiding this misconception could be
instrumental in keeping Miami's program on track.
Prior to the training, the lesson plans will be submitted to
the Project Director for review. Following this review, necessary
modifications will be made.
If possible, the training will be provided in discrete mod-
ules. Each module will involve those persons who will be involved
with similar types of information and/or indicators. if this
approach is used, the training will be in an informal, hands-on
environment to insure that each trainee receives individual atten-
tion and assistance. If training in larger groups becomes necessary,
every possible effort will be made to maximize individual attention.
Anticipated Results
This element will result in a lesson plan, including necessary
visual aids and graphics, which may be used in the future by the
M.PD in training data collection and analysis personnel. The actual
training of an initial group of in-house personnel will also be
accomplished.
MONITOR AND EVALUATE INSTRUMENT USE
IN THE MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENT
Steps to be Taken
Via telephone and written communication, as well as during
regular site visits, the Project Coordinator will monitor and evalu-
ate progress in the use and analysis of the assessment instrument(s)
He will be assisted by other team members, as needed.
- 19 -
►'81 - g��g
W
Anticipated Results
Although findings, observations and suggestions resulting from
these efforts will be provided verbally to the Project Director and
others, they will also be summarized in regular monthly and/or
quarterly progress reports.
PROVIDE ICAP REMEDIAL TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE
Steps to be Taken
Four mandays of remedial technical assistance have been allo-
cated from the principal project budget (two days each for Terry
Koepsell and Gary Higgins). An additional $9,000 has been allo-
cated for technical assistance, the providers of which must be
requested and approved by the Project Director. Members of the
Project Team would be available to provide such technical assist-
- ' ance if it is so requested.
! Two individuals are described in Section V of this proposal
who might be considered as possible TA Consultants -- Douglas
Carroll and Raymond Bragg. Both are presently systems analysts
W for ICAP departments (Jackson, Mississippi and Jacksonville,
Florida, respectively) and have extensive and proven expertise in
making "data rich" systems also "fact rich". Both departments
have very effective retrieval and cross -tabulation capabilities
' from which the MPD could clearly benefit. Of note, Dr. Carroll
utilizes a DEC PDP 11/70 system, while Mr. Bragg developed his
programs with a Burroughs system. Resumes of these individuals
are presented in Appendix B.
Based on evolving program
pleased to help identify other
able experience who may be of
Anticipated Results
needs, Mr. Koepsell will also be
persons with ICAP or other desir-
assistance to the MPD.
Appropriate direct technical assistance and verbal presenta-
tions will be provided for all TA by members of the Project Team.
The nature and results of such work will also be summarized in
regular monthly and/or quarterly progress reports.
- 20 -
( r
DEVELOP PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT SYSTEM
Steps to be Taken
This task will be the culmination of the knowledge and experi-
ence gained in each of the work elements described above. Emphasis
will be placed on the instrument(s), the information retrieval and
analysis system and the series of indicators and measures discussed
earlier. Summarized in a report format, the Performance Measure-
ment System will detail:
• information that must be gathered, including its
substance, format, source and frequency
• procedures for collating, analyzing and assessing
the information
• indicators that should be used relative to each
segment of the city's ICAP program, including
specific information elements and methods of
assessment
• norms or bases for measuring each indicator
• methods and means for "reading" or assessing each
indicator, including the diagnosis of results or
trends
• general directions or action which should be taken
(or prescribed) based on possible outcomes involv-
ing each indicator (in other words what corrective
action may be appropriate).
The Performance Measurement System will be comprised of
information needs, indicators and diagnostic and prescriptive
recommendations for each ICAP element that is operational at the
time the system is developed. To the maximum extent possible,
similar information will also be included for program elements
that are in developmental stages.
Another topic that will be discussed will be the recommended
frequency of operation. In terms of trend analysis, it is expected
that quarterly interpretations will be most appropriate. With
regard to resource allocation decisions (especially if an opera-
tions analysis capability is on line), monthly review may be
advisable.
Although this overall project could be carried out in less
than the full 12-month term, it is recommended that an abbreviated
project period be avoided. By utilizing the longer period, the
- 21 -
61 81 - 03a
W
MPD, would benefit from more complete experience (and consultant
assistance) in utilizing the assessment instrument(s), in formu-
lating and analyzing performance indicators, and in testing and
implementing the measurement system. The longer term will also
permit more ICAP elements to become operational and fully incor-
porated in the assessment instrument(s) and measurement system.
Anticipated Results
A preliminary final project report will be submitted at
least 30 days prior to the expiration of the contract. The
report will be submitted to the Project Director for review.
Suggested revisions will be incorporated in a Final Project
Report. The report, at a minimum, will contain:
• A comprehensive list of police productivity
measures designed for the Miami Police
Department.
• An inventory of data collection processes and
data elements relevant to the Miami Police
Department.
• Procedures for the collection and analysis of
of measurement information.
• A plan for the implementation of the designed
Police Performance Measurement System.
• A detailed process evaluation of the project.
ASSIST IN SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION
Steps to be Taken
Even as it is being developed, the Project Coordinator will
work with the Project Director, ICAP Director and other MPD per-
sonnel relative to implementing the Police Performance Measurement
System. The key area where emphasis is anticipated will be in
prescribing and carrying out corrective action (i.e., where indi-
cators suggest deviations from established norms or expectations).
Changes in any organization require care and subtlety. This
is sometimes especially true of police organizations, given civil
service regulations, labor agreements and a general aversion to
change. A frontal assault on a problem frequently manifests it-
self in a real world example of the Law of Relativity -- for every
- 22 -
-fir j
<t 4
action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Thus, turning
around certain managers and supervisors may require many variations
on a theme (e.g., motivation, peer pressure, assistance, training,
—
pursuasion, counselling, direct orders, and many others). Knowing
when to use which strategy will require a certain amount of exper-
ience. It will be in this area that assistance will be emphasized,
although other areas will not be overlooked.
i
Anticipated Results
It is anticipated that this element will produce among
involved MPD personnel feelings of confidence, familiarity and
competence in utilizing the Performance Management System. It
will also put the finishing touches on a mechanism that will serve
the Department's management, planning, research, evaluation and
decision -making needs.
OVF.RV TF.W
As noted earlier, Koepsell Associates personnel have been
intimately involved in ICAP programs and other police management
activities for many years. The MPD, by far, has outpaced other
departments in its early planning, organization and thoroughness
relative to ICAP and organizational change. Its commitment to
ICAP is also exemplary. This is clearly evidenced by the honest
opinions and hopes expressed in The Miami Police Department% A
Self -Assessment.
And even with the unprecedented growth in its service popu-
lation, crime rates, and its shortage of sworn officers, actual
performance has been remarkably positive. As is shown on the
following table*:
• With regard to arrests per reported offense,
1980 figures represent the median for the past
eleven years, although 1980 represents the
first reversal in a progressively positive
trend which began in 1976.
• Although Part One offenses during 1980 were
the highest ever recorded, MPD response was
also the greatest as measured by per capita
Part One arrests. What is even more impres-
sive is that this record was achieved with
6 percent fewer officers than were available,
on average, over the previous ten years.
*Derived from information presented on page 7 of the 1979-1980
MPD Annual Report.
- 23 -
a 81-938
Table 1
Generalized Performance Measures
Year Part One Arrest 1 Per Capita 2 Per Capita
Per Reported Offense Part One Arrest Part Two Arrest
1980
6.11
12.5
20.8
1979
5.00
11.0
18.0
1978
5.76
8.7
15.1
1977
6.00
7.7
18.6
1976
6.92
6.7
18.9
1975
6.47
8.1
21.4
1974
6.96
7.3
32.4
1973
7.34
5.4
30.0
1972
6.19
5.0
30.0
1971
5.89
3.9
31.9
1970
5.47
6.4
31.1
10ne arrest was made for each "N" reported Part One offense. The
lower the figure, the more positive the results.
2Per capita arrests are calculated on the basis of all sworn per-
sonnel, other than sworn persons assigned to such operations
staff as patrol and criminal investigations (which would produce
a somewhat more accurate indication of performance).
- 24 -
1
• Even with regard to Part Two per capita arrest
productivity, 1980 figures were the best since
1975.
MANPOWER COMMITMENT
TO WORK TASKS
Section V contains descriptions of the Project Team to be
fielded by Koepsell Associates. A total of 250 mandays of effort
will be committed to the proposed work. The table on the follow-
ing page provides a breakdown of estimated mandays to be spent,
by team member, on various elements of the work.
WORK STAGING
The illustration following the referenced table displays the
anticipated staging of the work.
DELIVERABLE PRODUCTS
All deliverable items set forth on page 19 of the RFP, plus
those additional items described previously in this section, will
be provided to the Project Director in the required number of
copies and at the required times.
- 25 -
I
I � i IIIII IIII
tIII i1 l II II , II ►IIII i�
x}'^i w.
.w-
Table 2
Level of Involvement of Consultant Team Mebers in Key Work Tasks
PROJECT
TEAM
MAJOR TASKS
GRADUATE
TOTAL.
T. KOEPSELL
M. KOEPSELL
L. STREETER
K. WEINER
G. HIGGINS
STUDENTS
MANDAYG
1.
Gather background and
2
0
40
baseline information
20
15
2
1
2.
Develop overall project
2
2
0
20
design
10
3
3
3.
Develop assessment
5
2
0
24
instruments
10
2
5
4.
Pre -test instruments
7
10
4
2
0
40
63
5.
Implement assessment
0
1
0
9
instruments
5
2
1
6.
Conduct training for draft
3
3
0
instrument use
10
5
3
7.
Monitor and evaluate instru-
0
0
0
16
ment use in MPD
10
5
1
B.
Provide ICAP remedial
0
2
0
4
technical assistance
2
0
0
(as
needed)
9.
Develop performance
1
2
2
0
40
measurement system
20
15
10.
Assist in system
0
0
1
0
10
implementation
6
3
Total Mandays
100
60
20
15
15
40
250
-2 6 -
I . ,, I Il,lll I I I I I�III II III II I IIII�I I ill I I��II II I �I If I
Major Tasks
1. Gather background and
baseline information
2. Develop overall project
design
3. Develop assessment
instruments
4. Pre -test instruments
5. Implement assessment
instruments
6. Conduct training for
draft instrument use
7. Monitor and evaluate
instrument use in MPD
8. Provide ICAP remedial
treatment assistance
9. Develop performance
measurement system
10. Assist in system
implementation
Illustration
Generalized Work Staging
Month
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxx
xxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxx
- 27 -
Pages 28-35 of "A Proposal for the Development
of a Police Performance Measurement System for
the Miami Police Department" are omitted from
this Annex, and are therefore not part of this
Agreement.
_ ! Dr. Weiner, on the other hand, is located in the Washington,
D.C. area. Technically, his skills fully complement those of
Dr. Streeter. Geographically, he is in a position to economically
work with Mr. Koepsell in both the design and validation of per-
formance measures -- work which can well be accomplished off -site.
Computer Applications
As was noted during the Bidders' Conference, the Miami Police
Department utilizes, with limited success, both Burroughs and DEC
computer hardware. Because correcting the department's data pro-
cessing problems may be an important element in this work, the
availability of persons skilled in this area would be advantageous.
Therefore, two persons will be available as technical assistance
consultants under the $9,000 technical assistance reserve fund.
They are:
• Douglas Carroll, Ph.D. Dr. Carroll is presently sys-
tem analyst for the Jackson, Mississippi ICAP Program.
He has developed and has made operational a fully
integrated filing and cross -tabulation system for use
in both crime and operations analysis. Jackson uses
a DEC PDP 11/70 system.
• Raymond B. Bragg, Jr. Mr. Bragg served as systems
analyst for the Jacksonville ICAP Program. He was
responsible for that city's operations analysis,
crime analysis, investigations case management and
tracking system, and operations deployment plans.
These systems were developed on Jacksonville's
Burroughs hardware.
Because of Mr. Koepsell's continuing work in both Jackson and
Jacksonville, he is personally familiar with Dr. Carroll and
Mr. Bragg and is highly confident in their abilities. Both indi-
viduals have indicated their interest in assisting the Miami Police
Department as specific requests or needs emerge. They will work
during personal leave time and will do so with the full knowledge
and consent of their respective agencies. If this function
becomes critical, however, it may be desirable to interchange cer-
tain regular team assignments so that immediate support from these
individuals could be precipitated.
Data Gathering and Assessment
Under the direction of Terry Koepsell, necessary data gather-
ing, collation and analysis will be performed by two principal
resources. Mark M. Koepsell, Associate, holds a Master of Business
- 36 -
i � �p38
U
10
Administration degree from the University of Maryland, where he
concentrated in finance and statistics. He has been with Koepsell
Associates for the past year during which time he has performed a
variety of research, data gathering and analysis tasks. In
Dr. Streeter's absence, Mark Koepsell will supervise and coordinate
graduate student data gathering efforts, as well as participate
directly in the work, as appropriate.
Practical Applications
As a complement to the experience brought to bear by the afore-
mentioned team, Gary S. Higgins, Program Manager of the Jacksonville
ICAP Program, has agreed to assist Koepsell Associates as a special
advisor. Utilizing personal leave time, with the consent and
approval of the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office, Mr. Higgins would
offer his broad insight in such areas as organizational dynamics,
utilization of formal feedback procedures, patrol resource deploy-
ment planning, and ICAP institutionalization.
Resumes for persons who will comprise the Koepsell Associates'
project team are presented as an appendix to this proposal. These
resumes were forwarded to Koepsell Associates as implicit statements
of the respective individuals' desire to participate in the proposed
work. If more formalized letters or other documentation is desired
by the city, it will be provided forthwith.
ESTIMATED TIME COMMITMENT
OF PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL
In total, 250 mandays of effort will be applied to the proposed
work. This is deemed sufficient to undertake and complete all work
described in prior sections of this proposal. Of the total esti-
mated mandays, approximately 45 percent (or 110 mandays) will be
spent on -site. The remainder will be applied to work best undertaken
off -site. The illustration on the following page provides a more
detailed breakdown of anticipated manpower expenditures.
- 37 -
r
Illustration 2
Anticipated Manpower Deployment
Mandays
Mandays
Total
Team Member
On -Site
Off -Site
Mandays
T.
Koepsell,
Project Manager
40
60
100
M.
Koepsell
15
45
60
L.
Streeter
10
10
20
K.
Weiner
15
0
15
G.
Higgins
5
10
15
Graduate students
25
15
40
Total
110
140
250
*Doctor Carroll and Mr. Bragg will expend such time to
the project as is deemed appropriate by the Miami
Police Department/Police Performance Project Director.
OEM-=
81 - 938
Iw
.^ON
Pages 39-43, and Appendices A and B of "A
Proposal for the Development of a Police
Performance Measurement System for the Miami
Police Department are omitted from this Annex,
and are therefore not part of this Agreement.
j
„1
ANNEX C
COST AND PRICE ANALYSIS
BID NUMBER: 80--81-120
A PROPOSAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
OF A
POLICE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM
FOR THE
MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENT
Submitted to the
Office of the City Clerk
3500 Pan American Drive
P.O. Box 330708
Miami, Florida 33133
by
Koepsell Associates
540 Innsbruck Avenue
P.O. Box 212
Great Falls, Virginia 22066
September 9, 1981
0�'
BUDGET
Direct Labor
Permanent Staff
T. Koepsell: 100 days @ $165 $ 16,500
M. Koepsell: 60 days @ 95 5,700
Secretarial: 30 days @ 50 1,500
23,700
Consultants
L. Streeter:
20
days
@ 135
2,700
K. Weiner:
15
days
@ 135
2,025
G. Higgins:
15
days
@ 135
2,025
Graduate Students:
40
days
@ 50
2,000
8,750
Indirect Labor* $ 32,450
.71 x Direct Labor of Permanent Staff 16,820
Travel and Per Diem
Air Fare
14 round trips: Washington/Miami
Coach Class @ $300 4,200
3 round trips: Jacksonville/Miami
Coach Class @ $100 300
Per Diem
60 days @ $50 3,000
Local Travel (Rental Car)
60 days @ $30 1,800
9,300
Miscellaneous Expenses
Long Distance Telephone 600
Printing and Reproduction 1,400
Miscellaneous Expenses 250
2,250
Sub -Total 60,820
Profit @ 10% 6,080
Total $ 66,900
*Indirect Labor includes such fringe benefits as health insurance,
vacation and sick pay, plus rent, telephone, utilities, depreciation,
professional services and publications and periodicals. A key ele-
ment to Indirect Labor is also non -billable professional time and
associated travel and expenses utilized for professional development,
business management and procurements. This indirect cost rate was
approved some time ago by LEAA, Office of the Comptroller, following a
detailed review of operations. Documentation is available upon
request.
81 - 938