Through the Budget Analyst"s field work, we found discrepancies in the data provided from different data sources, especially with regard to the disposition of cases. These inconsistencies indicate that the Police Department may not be tracking and recording workload and performance statistics accurately. 

• In addition, although individual cases are reviewed by section Lieutenants before being closed and filed, there is currently no broad discussion or evaluation of cases which are not accepted by the DA for prosecution. 

• As such, the Investigations Bureau needs to improve record-keeping by maintaining more accurate and comprehensive statistics, particularly on the disposition of cases. 

• The Police Department should also establish a formal, documented case review process that involves staff from Investigations, Field Operations and the District Attorney"s Office, in order to increase the future likelihood of cases being accepted for prosecution. 

 

The Tracking and Reporting of Statistics

In conducting our field work and analysis, we used data from several different sources in order to evaluate the performance of investigative units. First, we collected monthly performance reports from each investigative unit for the past four years in order to calculate workload and performance measures. Secondly, we selected and reviewed two separate statistically significant samples of rebooking and suspect cases (based on a 95.0 percent confidence interval) and recorded data concerning the disposition of cases, how long cases remained active and the manner in which cases were investigated. Third, we received data from the District Attorney"s Intake unit regarding the disposition of felony rebookings performed by the Police Department. In addition, we obtained and reviewed statistics from the California Department of Justice and the Judicial Council of California regarding arrests, felony filings, Penal Code 849(b) releases and other performance measures.

In many cases, we noticed discrepancies in the data among the various sources. For example, as noted in Section 1.5 of this report, the number of 849(b) releases reported to the State does not reflect the actual number of 849(b) releases issued by the Police Department based on our review of 849(b) files. Also, the data maintained by the DA"s Intake Unit on felony rebookings accepted by the DA did not match data provided by the Police Department regarding the disposition of felony rebookings. In some units, such as the Narcotics Division, data regarding the number of rebookings performed and the disposition of rebookings was not available at all.

In addition, there were often large differences in the results from our case sample and the statistical reports provided by the Police Department"s investigative units. For instance, Table 1.6-1 below shows the results of our sampling compared to the data from statistical reports provided by the Police Department and the DA"s Intake Unit. Table 1.6-1 Performance Data Based on Reports from Police Department, DA"s Intake Unit and Budget Analyst"s Case Sample 1993 - 1997 Percentage of Suspect Cases Cleared  

	Auto	Burg lary	Dom. Viol.	Fenc- ing	Fraud	General Work	Hit & Run	Homi- cide	NIU	Rob- bery	Sex Crimes	SID	All Units
Sample	75	50	89	54	73	61	100	60	46	50	50	50	63
SFPD	67	78	62	98	78	71	93	50	50	21	53	26	69

  Percentage of Felony Rebookings Accepted by DA for Prosecution  

	Auto	Burg lary	Dom. Viol.	Fenc- ing	Fraud	General Work	Hit & Run	Homi cide	NIU	Rob- bery	Sex Crimes	SID	All Units
Sample	64	51	69	n/a	58	48	83	n/a	69	35	67	46	55
SFPD	65	65	62	32	65	56	92	91	81	68	61	55	64
DA	48	49	60	32	56	45	73	75	81	45	70	55	53

 
These discrepancies in data indicate that the Police Department may not be tracking and recording workload and performance statistics accurately. For example, the Police Department"s records reflect a higher overall clearance rate than our sample and a higher DA filing rate than our sample and the DA"s records.

As such, the Investigations Bureau needs to improve record-keeping by maintaining more accurate and comprehensive statistics, particularly on the disposition of cases. For example, each Inspector should be required to record the clearance code and discharge code (if applicable) for each case closed on their monthly activity reports. This data should be tallied by the section lieutenant and reported to Investigations Administration as part of the monthly performance report. Furthermore, the Narcotics Division needs to improve its documentation of cases by storing all rebookings in a centralized location and tracking the number and disposition of rebookings.

Establishing a Formal Case Review Process

All assigned cases are reviewed and signed by the commanding lieutenant of each investigative section before being closed and filed. However, there is minimal, if any, follow-up discussion or evaluation of all cases in general once they have been closed and filed. Although each investigative unit maintains statistics on the number and disposition of cases assigned, there is currently no broad discussion or evaluation of cases which are cleared but which were not accepted by the DA for prosecution.

Evaluating discharged cases, including both rebookings and suspect cases, would provide a means of assessing performance and of determining whether improvements could be made in order to increase the likelihood of cases being accepted for prosecution in the future. For example, Assistant District Attorneys should provide more input and comments on the existing SFPD Record of Investigation form, which is used to record and evaluate felony rebookings, than is currently the practice. Staff meetings should be held each month between section Lieutenants and Inspectors in order to discuss specific cases (including cases suggested by the DA"s Office) which were presented to the DA but which were not accepted for prosecution, in order to identify what factors led to such cases being turned down by the DA and general improvements that could be made in order to improve future performance. In addition, quarterly meetings should be held between Inspectors in the Investigations Bureau, Sergeants and/or Police Officers from each district station and a representative from the District Attorney"s Office in order to identify ways in which patrol personnel can increase the chances that cases will be accepted by the DA for prosecution. The Investigations Bureau should establish, in writing, a formal case review process, including a requirement to conduct these periodic meetings. The results of these meetings should be documented in informational bulletins distributed to all Police Officers.

Conclusions

Through the Budget Analyst"s field work, we found discrepancies in the data provided from different data sources, especially with regard to the disposition of cases. These inconsistencies indicate that the Police Department may not be tracking and recording workload and performance statistics accurately.

In addition, although individual cases are reviewed by section Lieutenants before being closed and filed, there is currently no broad discussion or evaluation of cases which are not accepted by the DA for prosecution.

As such, the Investigations Bureau needs to improve record-keeping by maintaining more accurate and comprehensive statistics, particularly on the disposition of cases.

The Police Department should also establish a formal, documented case review process that involves staff from Investigations, Field Operations and the District Attorney"s Office, in order to increase the future likelihood of cases being accepted for prosecution.

Recommendations
 

Costs and Benefits

These recommendations could be implemented using existing staff and resources within the Police Department.

Establishing a formal, documented case review process would provide a means of assessing performance and identifying improvements in order to increase the future likelihood of cases being accepted for prosecution by the District Attorney"s Office. In addition, implementing a case review process would improve interaction between staff from Investigations, Field Operations and the DA"s Office.