DGO3.19 "Early Intervention System"

I. POLICY

The San Francisco Police Department's members are its greatest asset. The Department has a responsibility to its members and the community to identify and assist members who show symptoms of job stress and/or personal problems. Such symptoms may be exhibited in problematic performance behaviors.

The San Francisco Police Department's Early Intervention System (EIS) is a structured system that identifies and manages behaviors that result in performance related problems by individual members. The intent of this system is to provide non-disciplinary intervention, whenever possible, to assist our members in their professional development in order to provide the highest level of service and satisfaction to the public.

It is the policy of the Department to provide for the protection and confidentiality of the EIS records maintained by the Department that are peace officer personnel records.

II. DEFINITIONS

A. EIS/SYSTEM DEFINED. Early Intervention System. 

B. INDICATOR DEFINED. Factors tracked in EIS are given a numerical point to allow for a compilation scoring. This total point score will be the basis for comparison of members within their peer group. Numerical points begin from the date of the first indicator entry; time is calculated on a rolling basis. 

C. ASSOCIATED FACTORS DEFINED. Once a member has surpassed indicator thresholds, all items listed under associated factors will be reviewed in order to provide a comprehensive review of the member in question. 

D. THRESHOLD DEFINED. Aggregate value(s) of indicators that would trigger EIS review.

E. INTERVENTION DEFINED. A proactive management tool intended to improve the efficiency of individual members and the Department as a whole.

F. PERFORMANCE REVIEW DEFINED. A performance review, for the purposes of this order, is defined as an informal examination of all aspects of a member's work, with an emphasis on the manner in which the member performs job tasks and how that manner may contribute to EIS Indicator Entries. 

G. COUNSELING DEFINED. For the purposes of this order, personnel counseling is defined as a process in which a command or supervisory officer meets with a member in a non-punitive setting to discuss the member's performance. Counseling sessions employ techniques designed to reinforce good performance, improve poor performance, and when appropriate, correct behaviors that precipitate or contribute to EIS Indicator Entries. The counseling defined in this order is intended to be a positive tool to assist members in reaching a higher level of effectiveness.

H. TRAINING DEFINED. Training is a non-punitive tool used to make members more efficient by providing instruction. Training can be in-house or outside training, specific to the needs of the member and the Department.

I. EAP/BSU REFERRAL DEFINED. Supervisory or self-initiated referral to Employee Assistance Program or Behavior Science Unit. 

J. PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN DEFINED. A written performance improvement plan, agreed upon by the member, the reviewing supervisor and the member's commanding officer, designed to reduce or eliminate identified behaviors that contribute to EIS Indicator Entries. A performance improvement plan must describe the behaviors to be addressed, actions designed to change those behaviors, measures to enable both the member and supervisor to gauge progress and a time-line for reaching the objective of changing, moderating, or eliminating the behavior(s). The plan, once agreed to by member and supervisor, shall be placed in the member's PIP folder (or Personnel File). Once the time period of the plan has expired, the supervisor shall write a memorandum to the member's commanding officer describing the outcome of the plan and recommending further action, if warranted. Completed performance improvement plans shall be retained in the member's PIP folder for six months after completion and then forwarded to the Personnel Section for filing. If the member subject to the review does not have a PIP folder, the supervisor shall document the review in a memorandum to his/her Commanding Officer. Memoranda documenting such reviews shall be retained in a member's Personnel File. Successfully completed performance improvement plans shall be placed in a sealed envelop at such time that the affected member has had no activity in the EIS System that rises to the level of requiring a performance review for two years. Sealed envelopes will be opened only where required to comply with a court or administrative order or process, or where otherwise necessary to comply with a legal mandate. 

K. REASSIGNMENT DEFINED. The Chief of Police or designee may determine that temporarily reassigning a member, who has been identified as reaching a threshold is an appropriate means of intervention. Reassignment is an intervention option that will be used only when absolutely necessary for the welfare of the member and the Department. 

L. POST INTERVENTION MONITORING DEFINED. Follow-up to determine the behavioral patterns. Also, to reassess additional intervention needs and to ensure the facilitation of any additional intervention needs to further assist a member's success. 

M. DISCIPLINE DEFINED. Punishment intended to correct inappropriate behavior. For purposes of the EIS, cases will be forwarded for discipline only when intervention has been ineffective or when the member refuses to cooperate in the intervention process. 

N. DAILY REVIEW. On a daily basis, supervisors will review the EIS system, during their tour of duty, for members under their supervision.

III. EARLY INTERVENTION SYSTEM TRACKING

A. The EIS shall identify and track the following indicators:

1. Use of force as required by DGO 5.01
2. Officer Involved Shootings
3. Officer Involved Discharges
4. OCC Complaints
5. MCD Complaints
6. EEO Complaints
7. Civil Suits
8. Tort Claims
9. On Duty Accidents
10. Vehicle Pursuits

OCC or MCD complaints that are determined to be "proper conduct" or "unfounded" shall not be counted as indicators.

B. The EIS shall also identify and track the following associated factors:

1. Citizen initiated compliments and commendations
2. Department commendations and awards
3. Arrest by officers
4. Citations by officers
5. Motor vehicle stops
6. Pedestrian stops
7. Training history
8. Voluntary overtime worked
9. Discretionary time off
10. Sick time usage not protected by federal, state or local law
11. Principal participant in a critical incident
12. Criminal cases not filed or dismissed due to documented concerns with a member's conduct, as provided by the District Attorney's Office.
13. Charges of resisting, obstructing or delaying a police officer.
14. Charges of assault on a police officer.

C. The EIS is a non-disciplinary system that is designed to improve the performance of the Department and its members through coaching, training and types of professional development as described in this order and the EIS Procedures Manual.

The EIS System shall not be accessed or used for the purpose of discipline, promotion, or when a member requests a transfer of special assignment, promotion, or when a member requests a transfer of special assignment, provided that information that exists outside of and separate from the EIS System may be accessed outside of the EIS System and used for the purpose of discipline, promotion, or when a member requests a transfer or special assignment where appropriate and consistent with Department policies and procedures.

Allegations that Section III(C) has been violated may be addressed through dispute-resolution and/or appeals processes established by Charter or ordinance that apply by their terms to the disputed action. This paragraph is not intended to expand or restrict any existing administrative or legal remedies.

IV.EARLY INTERVENTION SYSTEM INDICATOR ENTRIES

A. The early intervention system is established to identify and evaluate the behavior of members who have received:

1. Five (5) or more EIS Indicator Points, or three (3) or more citizen complaints (OCC) within a six month period.
2. Six (6) or more EIS Indicator Points, or four (4) citizen complaints (OCC), within one year.
3. Three (3) or more documented uses of force, as mandated by General Order 5.01, within a three month period.

4. Involvement as a principal in an officer involved shooting or discharge.

   Each indicator tracked in the system is given one specific point. The member's score will be the basis for comparison to members within similar job assignments. 

   If a member is involved in an incident where multiple points could be accrued, only one point value will be counted. 

   Once the system has been in use, thresholds may be modified to make the best use of the analysis capabilities of the system. 

   Indicator points and thresholds, including any adjustments recommended by the EIS Board and approved by the Police Commission, shall be contained in the EIS Procedures Manual

B. EARLY INTERVENTION PERFORMANCE REVIEW. The Early Intervention System involves a two-step approach. The EIS Unit, and a member's supervisor during their daily review, will conduct an initial review of all members who exceed the stated thresholds. Supervisors may conclude that a pattern of at-risk behavior does not exist and forward their finding to the EIS Unit through their commanding officer. The EIS Unit may concur that a pattern of at-risk behavior does not exist and that corrective action is not necessary. Conversely, the EIS Unit may not concur with the supervisor's finding that a pattern of at-risk behavior does not exist; the EIS Unit will electronically return the name(s) of the member(s) to the respective commanding officer, who shall ensure that the member's supervisor engages in a performance review and, if appropriate, initiate intervention with the member. Further, the commanding officer shall ensure that the supervisor electronically transmits a report within 21 days to the EIS Unit, indicating what type of intervention has taken place. The supervisor shall continue to monitor the member's performance after the intervention has taken place, and transmit a follow-up report at three months and at one year after the initial intervention.

V. EIS PANEL BOARD MEMBERS

A. The Deputy Chief of Administration is responsible for the operation of the EIS and for reports to the EIS Board, the Chief of Police, and the Police Commission.

B. The Deputy Chief of Administration shall serve as Chairperson for the EIS Board. 

C. The EIS Board will consist of the following individuals.

1. Deputy Chief of Administration (Chairperson)
2. Deputy Chief of Field Operations
3. Commanding Officer of Risk Management
4. Commanding Officer of the Training Division
5. Officer in Charge of the EIS Unit
6. Officer in Charge of the EAP/BSU Unit
7. POA Representative
8. OCC Representative

D. The board will meet on the first Wednesday of every quarter at 1000 hours at the Hall of Justice, Room 551, to review aggregate information for thresholds surpassed during the previous quarter. In order to encourage transparency in the review of the aggregate information of EIS, the board meetings shall be open to the public. 

E. The Chairperson may designate a replacement in his/her absence. The number of board members needed for a quorum will be five, and consist of at least three Department members, with the rank of lieutenant or higher. 

F. The board is an advisory panel; as such, on a quarterly basis, the board will review EIS data on an aggregate basis. The board's primary functions are as follows:

1. Review EIS data for identified patterns of successes or ineffectiveness resulting from intervention efforts of supervisors and commanding officers;
2. Make recommendation(s) and/or suggestion(s) to the administrative staff regarding the use of alternate intervention strategies that may be useful to supervisors and commanding officers.
3. Review the total number of interventions for the quarter, the types of interventions employed, and the effectiveness of those interventions.
4. Determine future direction, needs, and development for the EIS program, including modifications to the EIS.
5. Review new trends and thresholds as recommended by the EIS administrative staff.
6. Review quarterly and annual resorts prepared by the OIC of the EIS Unit.
7. Review and recommend changes of relevant policies to the Police Commission.

VI. PROCEDURES FOR INTERVENTION

A. EIS PROCEDURES. On a daily basis, the EIS Unit will review the system to determine if any member(s) has surpassed a threshold. The EIS Unit will conduct an initial performance review of the surpassed indicators and associated factor information to determine if it appears that a pattern of at risk behavior exists. For those which a pattern appears probable, the EIS Unit will electronically transmit the information to the member's commanding officer, for further review and intervention by the member's immediate supervisor. On a quarterly basis, the Officer-in-Charge of the EIS Unit will forward the aggregate number of members who have breached thresholds, along with information relative to the categories surpassed and types of interventions employed to the DC of Administration for distribution to the EIS Board. Also, on a quarterly basis, the Officer-in-Charge of the EIS Unit will forward the names of members who have surpassed the system indicator and associated factor information, and supervisor's performance review and/or intervention documentation to the Captain of Risk Management and DC of Administration for their review. The Officer-in-Charge of the EIS Unit will provide quarterly and annual statistical reports to the Deputy Chief of Administration, who will in turn provide the reports to the Chief and Police Commission.

B. OCC PROCEDURES. On a daily basis, the Office of Citizen Complaints will input new complaint information into the system in order for the EIS Unit to accurately track indicator entries and threshold breaches. On a weekly basis, OCC will forward the names of members who have received any complaints to the member's commanding officer. Quarterly, OCC will compile a list of officers who have received three citizen complaints within a six month period or four or more citizen complaints within a year. The report will be forwarded to the Commanding Officer of the Risk Management Office. For purposes of any second or third referral under this order, no citizen complaint that was filed more than two years prior to the current quarter shall be counted or included in the OCC's Quarterly Report.

C. RISK MANAGEMENT OFFICE PROCEDURES. Upon receipt of the EIS and the OCC Quarterly Reports, the Commanding Officer of the Risk Management Office will prepare a memorandum to the DC of Administration identifying members who fall within the provisions of the EIS as outlined in section IV (A) of this order. A copy of the memorandum shall be sent to the respective member's deputy chief and commander, if applicable. Another copy shall also be sent to the member and to the member's commanding officer, along with copies of the records creating the EIS Tracking Indicators and Associated Factor information. For purposes of any second or third referral under this order, no EIS Tracking Indicator that was filed more than two years prior to the current quarter shall be counted or included in the Risk Management Office's Quarterly Report.

D. DUTIES OF COMMANDING OFFICERS AND SUPERVISORY OFFICERS Commanding Officers shall ensure that supervisors input data into the system by the end of their tour of duty in order to track indicator entries and threshold levels. (Refer to DM 17, EIS Manual)

1. On a daily basis, supervisors shall review the EIS system for members under their supervision. Based on the information in the EIS system and their knowledge of the members' work performance, a supervisor may initiate a counseling session prior to a threshold being surpassed. Members on loan or special assignment will be tracked by their currently assigned supervisor and their regularly assigned supervisor.
2. Commanding officers shall review electronically transmitted information sent by the EIS unit and assign these reviews to the appropriate supervisor(s).
3. Command and supervisory officers are encouraged to initiate performance reviews and counseling sessions with members under their command whenever they deem it appropriate. Counseling sessions shall not be considered as discipline; however, the fact that a counseling session took place may be considered. Counseling sessions should be recorded in the member's PIP binder (or personnel file) after the member has been given an opportunity to review and sign the documentation.

E. INITIAL REFERRAL-PERFORMANCE REVIEW.

1. If the Commanding Officer is not familiar with the member subject to review due to a recent transfer, the Commanding Officer's superior officer shall determine whom to assign the Performance Review. The Officer in Charge of the EIS Unit shall be electronically notified of any changes in assignment of a Performance Review.
2. Commanding Officers shall review the EIS Unit's and Risk Management Office's Quarterly Report with the member's supervisor.
3. The EIS Unit and a member's supervisor, during their daily review, will conduct an initial review of all members who exceed the stated thresholds. The supervisor may conclude that a pattern does not exist and forward their finding to the EIS Unit through their commanding officer. The EIS Unit may concur that a pattern of at-risk behavior does not exist and that corrective action is not necessary. Conversely, the EIS Unit may not concur with the supervisor's finding that a pattern does not exist, in which case the EIS Unit will electronically return the name(s) of the member(s) to the respective commanding officer, who shall ensure that the member's supervisor engage in a performance review and, if appropriate, initiate intervention with the member. Further, the commanding officer shall ensure that the supervisor electronically transmit a report within 21 days to the EIS Unit, indicating what type of intervention has taken place. The supervisor shall continue to monitor the member's performance after the intervention has taken place, and transmit a follow-up report at three months and at one year after the initial intervention. This performance review and intervention plan shall be noted in the member's PIP folder in Section II - Record of Entry, as well as transmit an electronic reply through the EIS System.
4. If the member subject to the review does not have a PIP folder, the supervisor shall document the review in a memorandum to his/her Commanding Officer. Memoranda documenting such reviews shall be retained in a member's Personnel File.
5. Commanding officers shall, within 21 days of receipt of an EIS referral for a member of their command, certify that the required performance reviews have been completed and that the information has been electronically transmitted to the Officer in Charge of the EIS Unit. The commanding officer shall electronically notify the EIS Unit if the performance review cannot be completed within 21 days, along with the reason(s) why it cannot be completed.

F. SECOND REFERRAL-PERFORMANCE REVIEW SESSION. A second performance review session shall be held with any officer who has previously surpassed a threshold and come to the attention of the EIS Unit, and receives one or more additional EIS Indicator Entries within a six (6) month period after the Initial Referral - Performance Review. This session shall be conducted by both the member's supervisor and commanding officer within 21 days of the referral from the EIS Unit.

1. When conducting this second performance review session, commanding officers and supervisors shall review Quarterly Reports along with the member's EIS Indicator and associated factor history for the last five years.
2. The member, the member's commanding officer, and the member's supervisor shall jointly develop, in the course of this performance review session, a performance improvement plan in order to reduce or eliminate member's behaviors that may contribute to unnecessary conflicts. The plan shall be agreed to by the member and signed by the member, the supervisor, and the commanding officer. The original of the plan shall be placed in the member's PIP folder (or Personnel File). Any member subject to a second referral, who refuses to assist in the development of a performance improvement plan or declines to sign the plan, shall be immediately referred to a counseling panel.
3. If the member's complaint history indicates similar conduct, as reported in the Quarterly Reports, a behavior pattern may be evident. If the member's PIP file documents any prior corrective action or failed performance plans, the matter shall be immediately referred to a counseling panel so that a comprehensive plan can be developed to correct the behavior.

G. THIRD AND SUBSEQUENT REFERRALS- COUNSELING SESSION/ COUNSELING PANEL. Whenever a third counseling session is warranted, the matter will be examined by a counseling panel composed of the member's Supervisors Commanding Officer, Deputy Chief or Commander, the Commanding Officer of the Management Control Division and the Commanding Officer of the Risk Management Office. The panel will review the member's EIS Indicator and associated factor history and recommend a course of action in writing to the Chief of Police within 21 days. Upon the Chief's approval, the action plan shall be initiated, a copy of the plan shall be included in the member's PIP folder (or Personnel File).

If a member complies with the intervention plan but the plan has been ineffective, the EIS Unit shall review the intervention strategies used and determine if other intervention is appropriate. In cases where the member has been non-compliant with the intervention process, the EIS Unit shall make a recommendation to the Chief of Police that an administrative investigation be initiated.

H. PIP BINDERS (See PIP, A Supervisor's Guide, DM-06). Supervising officers are required to review citizen complaints as they are received, notify the involved member that a complaint has been filed against him or her, and file the complaint in the member's PIP binder.

VII. BEHAVIOR FACTORS

A. When conducting a performance review or a counseling session, the following behavior factors should be among the items to be considered.

1. s there a behavior pattern that may be causing these EIS indicator entries, whether or not the EIS indicator entries have been investigated or sustained.
2. How does the EIS indicator history of the member compare with other members in similar assignments?
3. Can EIS indicator entries be reduced by simply informing the member of Department policies and procedures?
4. Can better interpersonal skills be developed?
5. Can formal or informal training correct the problem?
6. Are the details of the EIS indicator entries and the allegations so different as to suggest that there is no improper behavior pattern?
7. Is there any other relevant information about the member or circumstances that contributes to the number of EIS indicator entries?
8. Is there a common thread of conduct in separate EIS indicator entries that may be contributing to the frequency of EIS indicator entries?
9. In addition to the other options provided in this order, supervisors may make referrals to the Employee Assistance Program or other intervention programs available to Department members (see DGO 11.09, Employee Assistance Program/Stress Unit).

B. UNFOUNDED/PROPER CONDUCT COMPLAINTS. Once identified, unfounded and/or proper conduct complaints shall not be counted or included in OCC quarterly reports or EIS quarterly reports.

VIII. OVERSIGHT OF THE EARLY INTERVENTION SYSTEM

A. Each Deputy Chief is responsible for ensuring that his or her subordinates adhere to the provisions of this order. If the Deputy Chief determines that a Supervisor or Platoon Commander/Officer-in-Charge has not complied with the requirements of this order, the Deputy Chief shall direct the Commanding Officer to conduct an immediate investigation to determine why the Supervisor and/or Platoon Commander/Officer-in-Charge failed to comply with this order. This investigation shall be forwarded to the respective Deputy Chief within 21 days, who will, in turn, determine whether any, or all, of his or her subordinates will be subject to disciplinary action. In addition, the commanding officer may be required to prepare a plan to bring the unit into compliance. If a commanding officer has not complied with this order, the respective Deputy Chief will be notified by the EIS Unit and the Deputy Chief shall conduct an immediate investigation and submit his/her findings to the Chief of Police within 21 days, who will, in turn, determine whether the commanding officer will be subject to disciplinary action. 

B. The Commanding Officer of the Risk Management Office is responsible for ensuring that an audit of the early intervention system takes place every six months. Such audits shall evaluate the data entry system, the quality of supervisory evaluations, the outcomes of supervisory evaluations, and the quality of supervisory reviews. Audits shall be presented to the Chief of Police, the OCC, and the Police Commission.

C. The Commanding Officer of the Risk Management Office is responsible for ensuring that audits tracking 148 PC/243PC charges and cases dismissed by the District Attorney's Office due to documented concerns with a member's conduct, are maintained and presented to the Board on a quarterly basis for review.

IX. STATISTICAL REPORTS

A. The EIS Unit will provide quarterly and annual statistical reports to the Commanding Officer of Risk Management and the Deputy Chief of Administration.

1. The Deputy Chief of Administration shall review the reports and provide this statistical information to the Chief of Police and the Police Commission.

B. An audit of the EIS will be performed every six months to verify accuracy of data. The EIS Unit will forward a report of the findings of this audit to the Deputy Chief of Administration.

References 

DGO 1.04, Duties of Sergeants 
DGO 1.06, Duties of Superior Officers 
DGO 2.04, Citizens Complaints against Officers 
DGO 11.09, Employee Assistance Program/Stress Unit 
DM 17 EIS Procedures (this is currently not in existence)