Sheriff’s Dept.’s Use of Database Criticized
A sophisticated Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department computer database aimed at identifying and tracking problem deputies is becoming unreliable because much of the information logged into the system is incomplete, inaccurate and often too old to be of value, according to a report released Tuesday.
In addition, many department administrators and managers do not use the “early warning” database because they are ignorant of its capabilities, according to Merrick Bobb, a special counsel to the county Board of Supervisors who has monitored the Sheriff’s Department for the last 10 years.
The sheriff’s computer program has been cited by Sheriff Lee Baca and others as one of the nation’s best risk management tools in law enforcement, tracking and analyzing such information as citizen complaints, use-of-force incidents, lawsuits, discipline and commendations. The sheriff’s system is similar to the one the federal government has mandated that the Los Angeles Police Department adopt as a result of the Rampart corruption scandal.
In his report, Bobb criticized the department for not putting adequate resources into the maintenance of the system. When information is logged into the database, it is typically six months old. Boxes of reports, Bobb said, sit unreviewed because the staff responsible for entering the information is overworked and the office is understaffed.
The department “currently treats [its early-warning system] like a collectible automobile: It is put on display from time to time to demonstrate to the outside world that the [department] has the Rolls Royce of risk management software and procedure.... But when the odometer is checked, it is apparent that it has hardly ever been taken out of the garage.
“When the maintenance records are reviewed, one learns that it cannot perform to the manufacturer’s specifications because of neglect. And even when it has actually been taken out for a spin, few of the people who drive it know how to get it to go more than 35 mph,” Bobb wrote.
If the database were more widely used, Bobb said, department officials might have been better prepared to deal with the current upswing in the number of use-of-force encounters, force-related lawsuits, injuries to suspects and other crucial risk management categories. In fiscal 2002, for example, the county paid out $6.4 million as a result of force-related lawsuits, compared with $2.9 million in the previous fiscal year.
Baca countered that Bobb’s Rolls Royce analogy was an “oversimplified form of hyperbole.” He said the criticism in the report was overstated and did not reflect the importance he places on risk management. The sheriff also said that Bobb interviewed a few internal critics for his report and did not conduct a full survey of the supervisors who, for the most part, work hard on risk management issues.
Nonetheless, Baca said his department “will evaluate what [Bobb] has stated and the things we are able to change we will change.”
“I’m not opposed to improving things,” he said.
Bobb, as special counsel to county supervisors, issues semiannual reports on many subjects confronting the Sheriff’s Department, such as jail conditions and excessive force complaints. The reports are submitted to the county board for its review and consideration.
In addition to the risk management concerns mentioned in the report released Tuesday, Bobb raised several other issues:
* Over the last five years, reckless or imprudent foot pursuits have needlessly put deputies in grave danger and resulted in shootings that might otherwise have been avoided. Department supervisors do not adequately review such incidents and are reluctant to discipline deputies who make those poor decisions, he said. Although one of every five shootings occurred during or at the conclusion of a foot pursuit, Bobb did not quantify just how many he thought were improper.
* Instead of using their batons, deputies are increasingly striking suspects with their flashlights, which cause greater injuries and are not authorized by the department for use as “impact weapons.”
* Deputies need more frequent refresher training in the use of firearms if they are to retain the skill and confidence they need to make sound decisions on the street.
Bobb’s sharpest criticism, however, dealt with the department’s failure to maintain its computer database. Known within the department as the Personnel Performance Index, it is supposed to help department officials track deputies’ careers and identify those who present risk management problems.
Although the system has tremendous potential, Bobb said, it is being underutilized.
“There is widespread ignorance about what the [database] can do among those who should be using it the most -- captains and lieutenants,” Bobb wrote. “Today, its resources are largely untapped.”
Supervisor Gloria Molina said she was disappointed in what the report revealed.
“It’s really a shame,” she said. “We need to rely on a system like this. The sheriff and his department need to take their responsibilities of public accountability more seriously. If we have deputies that aren’t properly performing ... we need to rid our system of them.”
Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky introduced a motion Tuesday requesting that Baca appoint a high-level official to address the findings and recommendations in Bobb’s report.
Bobb said the department’s early-warning system is only as good as the information that goes into it. And that, he said, is a big problem. Currently, many of the citizen complaint reports that are meant to be entered into the database contain inaccurate or incomplete information.
In any given month, as many as 70% of citizen complaint reports are rejected by the unit responsible for typing the data into the computer because of errors or lack of thoroughness. The rejection rate at other police agencies with similar computer programs is between 10% and 20%, Bobb said.
Bobb also said there was confusion among department supervisors over what information to include in citizen complaint forms and how to categorize them.
For example, if a citizen complains that a deputy cursed at him and pushed him, some supervisors will classify the complaint as a “discourtesy” matter rather than the more serious allegation of “unreasonable force.” Some supervisors list deputies as “witnesses,” rather than identifying them as the objects of citizen complaints.
Delays in recording information led one law enforcement executive to quip in an interview with Bobb that the sheriff’s early-warning system was more of an “eventual” warning system.
“This backlog results in key information regarding officer conduct remaining unrecorded and hence unavailable for analysis,” Bobb said.
One long-term Sheriff’s Department employee told Bobb that the much-heralded computer database has turned into more of a public relations boon than a helpful tool.
“We have this system to keep you happy and the Board of Supervisors happy, but we really don’t use it for ourselves the way we could,” the employee said. Another employee agreed: “It’s a sad truth. We get all these numbers but we don’t do anything with them.”
