REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS
to serve as
On April 12, 2002, the City of Cincinnati (the "City") and the United States Department of Justice (the "DOJ") entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (the "MOA"). Also on April 12, 2002, the City entered into a Collaborative Agreement (the "CA") with the Cincinnati Black United Front and the American Civil Liberties Union Ohio Foundation Inc. (together, the "Class Representatives" on behalf of the "Plaintiffs," a proposed "Settlement Class") and the Fraternal Order of Police, Queen City, Lodge No. 69 (the "FOP"). (1) The MOA is available on the DOJ's website at http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/split/. The MOA and CA are available on the City's website at http://www.rcc.org. (2)
The City, DOJ, FOP and Plaintiffs (collectively, the "parties"), invite you to apply to be the Independent Monitor (hereafter, the "Monitor") for both the MOA and the CA. Potential applicants are cautioned that descriptions herein of the Monitor's duties are illustrative and non-exclusive, and that only the MOA and the CA fully describe the scope of the Monitor's responsibilities. Potential applicants should consult each document as applications are prepared.
Because of the unique nature of this proposal, this solicitation is being conducted solely pursuant to the procedures set forth in this document, the MOA and the CA, and is not governed by any formal or legal procurement requirements. The parties are seeking a single Monitor for both the MOA and the CA, and anticipate that the Monitor will head a project team to carry out the responsibilities of the position.
The MOA addresses all aspects of the use of force by the Cincinnati Police Department (CPD), including (1) general policies, (2) use of force (i.e., chemical spray, canines and beanbag and forty millimeter foam rounds), (3) incident documentation, investigation and review, (4) citizen complaints, (5) management and supervision, and (6) training.
The purpose of the CA is to resolve social conflict by improving community-police relationships, reducing crime and disorder, and fostering an atmosphere of mutual trust, respect and accountability among community members and the police. The CA requires the parties to implement Community Problem Oriented Policing (CPOP), evaluate police and community actions and attitudes, engage in bias-free policing, establish a new Citizen Complaint Authority and address the implementation of both agreements. The ultimate goal of the CA is to reduce friction between members of the community and the CPD, and to foster a safer community in which mutual trust and respect are enhanced among citizens and police. The parties hope the principles embodied by the CA will endure beyond the CA's term.
The City has approximately 330,000 residents. The CPD currently is staffed by approximately 1000 sworn officers, and 300 non-sworn police force personnel. The CPD is divided into several bureaus, including the Patrol Bureau, the Investigations Bureau, the Administration Bureau, the Resource Bureau and the Training Section. The City is divided into five police districts, each headed by a captain who is responsible for operations and personnel.
II. Scope of Work
The responsibilities and specific duties of the Monitor are set forth in Section IX of the MOA (ï½¶ï½¶ 95-108) and Section VI of the CA (ï½¶ï½¶ 93-112). As you consider a response to this request for applications, please consider the MOA and CA provisions that specifically outline the Monitor's responsibilities 'as well as' the various substantive provisions of the MOA and CA.
A. In order to monitor and report on the City and the CPD's implementation of the MOA, the Independent Monitor shall perform the following duties:
1. Review, and evaluate for compliance with the MOA, the policy revisions and enhancements the CPD is undertaking under the MOA, including revisions to its chemical spray, canine and non-lethal firearms policy. Review and evaluate for compliance appropriate samples of CPD incident reports to evaluate the implementation of these policy revisions and enhancements. (MOA ï½¶ï½¶ 10-23).
2. Review, and evaluate for compliance with the MOA, appropriate samples of the City's and the CPD's use of force and complaint investigations. This includes ensuring that all investigations are conducted by the appropriate entity, encompass all relevant issues, include the required information, satisfy all professional standards for investigations, and result in a fair and proper disposition with appropriate follow-up action. This also includes evaluating the information provided to the public about the complaint intake and investigation processes, and the disposition of particular complaints. (MOA ï½¶ï½¶ 24-56).
3. Review, and evaluate for compliance with the MOA, the design, implementation and completeness of the CPD's enhanced risk management system. This includes ensuring that (i) the system is developed according to the schedule set forth in the MOA, (ii) all required data is entered into the system, and (iii) the protocol for the system's use is properly implemented. Provide technical assistance to the City and the CPD regarding the design and implementation of the system. (MOA ï½¶ï½¶ 57-66).
4. Review, and evaluate for compliance with the MOA, the CPD's (i) development of auditing protocols, (ii) implementation of protocols for auditing mobile video camera usage and communications technology, and (iii) revisions to the discipline policy. (MOA ï½¶ï½¶ 67-76).
5. Review the CPD's training program for compliance with the MOA. This includes ensuring effective management oversight and proper curriculum. It also includes evaluating the sufficiency of revisions to the CPD's FTO program. (MOA ï½¶ï½¶ 77-91).
6. Provide technical assistance regarding compliance with the MOA and maintain effective communication with representatives of the parties to the MOA. (MOA ï½¶ 99).
7. Determine whether any investigation is incomplete and should be re-opened by the City or the CPD for further investigation, subject to stated limitations. (MOA ï½¶ 102).
8. Review status reports filed by the City and the CPD, conduct compliance reviews and issue reports (at least quarterly, and more frequently at the Monitor's discretion) detailing the City's and the CPD's compliance with, and implementation of, each substantive provision of the MOA for the duration of the MOA. (MOA ï½¶ï½¶ 104, 107).
9. Perform such additional reviews as may be appropriate, consistent with the terms of the MOA, to monitor and report on the implementation by the City and the CPD of each substantive provision of the MOA. (MOA ï½¶ 100).
10. Maintain all documents related to this project in a confidential manner and not disclose any non-public information to any person or entity except as provided by the MOA. (MOA ï½¶ 99).
11. Testify in litigation or proceedings only as provided by the MOA, and refrain from testifying in any other litigation or proceeding. (MOA ï½¶ 108).
B. In order to monitor and report on the implementation of the CA by the City, the CPD, the FOP and the Plaintiffs, the Monitor shall perform the following additional duties:
12. Review, and evaluate for compliance with the CA, the implementation by the City, the FOP and the Plaintiffs of a CPOP program. In so doing, the Monitor shall review, among other things, whether, consistent with specified deadlines:
a. the City, in consultation with the other parties to the CA, has developed and implemented a plan to coordinate City departments with the CPOP focus of the CPD;
b. the parties to the CA have developed and implemented a system for regularly researching and making available to the public a comprehensive library of best practices in community problem oriented policing;
c. the City, in consultation with the parties to the CA, has developed a "continuous learning" process through the CPD, and whether experiences with problem solving efforts in the field have been documented and disseminated throughout the police department and been made available to the public, and whether problem solving continues to be emphasized in, among other things, academy training, in-service training and field officer training;
d. the parties to the CA have sought out information on how problem solving is conducted in other police agencies, and whether research and best practices on successful and unsuccessful methods for tackling problems, and analogous processes used by other professionals (e.g., conflict resolution, organization development, epidemiology, military, civil engineering and business) have been disseminated;
e. the parties to the CA, consistent with the Community Partnering Program attached as Exhibit A to the CA, have conducted CPOP training for community groups, jointly promoted CPOP and implemented said CPOP training;
f. the parties to the CA have coordinated efforts undertaking through the Community Partnering Program and established an ongoing community dialogue and interaction including, but not limited to, structured involvement between the CPD and youth as well as with property owners, businesses, tenants, community and faith-based organizations, motorists, low income residents and other City residents on purposes and practices of CPOP;
g. the parties to the CA have established an annual CPOP award to recognize the efforts of citizens, police officials and other public officials who have made substantial contributions to CPOP by addressing community problems in Cincinnati;
h. the City, in consultation with the parties to the CA and consistent with Ohio law, has developed and implemented a system for consistently informing the public about police policies and procedures, and whether the City, in consultation with the parties to the CA, has conducted a communications audit and developed and implemented a plan to improve internal and external communications;
i. the CPD has created and staffed a Community Relations Office that will coordinate implementation of the CA within the CPD. (CA ï½¶ 29).
13. Consistent with the CA, monitor and assist with implementation of the Community Partnering Plan, an effort to prepare all members of the community to partner with the police on problems that relate to safety and disorder. See Exhibit A-1 to the CA.
14. Consistent with the CA, aid the City, the FOP and the Plaintiffs to develop an Evaluation Protocol to track the attainment of the goals agreed to in the CA. (CA ï½¶ï½¶ 30-46).
15. Review, and evaluate for compliance with the CA, the efforts of the City, the FOP and the Plaintiffs in implementing the Evaluation Protocol and issuing compliance reports. (CA ï½¶ï½¶ 30-46).
16. Review, and evaluate for compliance with the CA, the data gathered by the Plaintiffs, the CPD and the City pursuant to Paragraph 48(b) of the CA regarding the pointing of firearms. The Monitor shall forward that information to the Conciliator (as that term is defined in the CA) as required by Paragraph 48(e) of the CA. (CA ï½¶ 48).
17. Review, and evaluate for compliance with the CA, the CPD's provision of police services in a fair and impartial manner without any discrimination on the basis of race, color or ethnicity. (CA ï½¶ï½¶ 50-54).
18. Review, and evaluate for compliance with the CA, the efforts of the parties to the CA to educate and train members of the Cincinnati community regarding the Professional Traffic Stops Bias-Free Policing Training Program. (CA ï½¶ 52)
19. Review the effectiveness of the City's new Citizen Complaint Authority based on particular accountability measurements. (CA ï½¶ 86).
20. Provide technical assistance to the City, the FOP and the Plaintiffs regarding compliance with the CA. (CA ï½¶ 99).
21. Maintain all documents in a confidential manner and without disclosing any non-public information to any person or entity except as provided by the CA. (CA ï½¶ 101).
22. Review status reports provided by the City, the FOP and the Plaintiffs, conduct compliance reviews on the implementation of the CA by the City, the FOP and the Plaintiffs and, beginning 180 days after the Court's approval of the CA, file with the Conciliator quarterly written public reports regarding compliance. (CA ï½¶ï½¶ 102-103, 105).
23. Testify in litigation or proceedings only as provided by the CA, and refrain from testifying in any other litigation or proceeding. (CA ï½¶ 108).
III. Period of Performance
Unless earlier terminated for cause, the Monitor shall serve until the termination of both the MOA and the CA. Both Agreements will be in effect between three and five years, absent agreement of the parties to extend their duration.
IV. Evaluation of Award
The parties will select a Monitor based on the requirements and qualifications set forth herein. Fees and costs shall be one factor the parties will consider in making the selection. (MOA ï½¶ 96; CA ï½¶ 94).
V. Proposal Submission Requirements
An applicant shall submit twenty copies of its application, each of which shall be accompanied by a cover letter that clearly indicates the contact person for the project team and all appropriate contact information. The application shall include a table of contents, and it shall be divided into two sections: (1) technical proposal, and (2) cost proposal. Each of these sections shall be separately bound. Five copies of the application shall be submitted in a single sealed envelope conspicuously marked "Application for Cincinnati Independent Monitor" to 'each' of the following:
1. Steven H. Rosenbaum, Esquire
Chief, Special Litigation Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Or, if by overnight courier, to:
601 D Street, NW, Room 5034
Washington, DC 20004
Deputy City Solicitor
City of Cincinnati
City Hall, Room 214
801 Plum Street
Cincinnati, OH 45202 3. Donald Hardin, Esquire
Hardin, Lefton, Lazarus & Marks
915 Cincinnati Club Building
30 Garfield Place
Cincinnati, OH 45202 4. Alphonse A. Gerhardstein, Esquire
Laufman & Gerhardstein
1409 Enquirer Building
617 Vine Street
Cincinnati, OH 45202
The application is due June 10, 2002 at 5:00PM. This is the date the application must actually be received; it is not a deadline for postmarking the application. The parties have no obligation to accept late applications. Telephonic, electronic and telegraphic proposals will not be accepted except upon prior written agreement by the parties. If you have technical questions regarding the completion and/or submission of an application, please contact the City's Compliance Coordinator, S. Gregory Baker, at 513-352-3536.
The application must, at a minimum, include the information requested below in the section titled "Required Proposal Content." Applicants who fail to provide sufficient detail and specificity will be disadvantaged in the selection process, both because the parties will be unable to fully evaluate the application, and because it negatively bears upon the applicant's ability to carry out the requirements of the position of Monitor.
IV. Required Proposal Content
A. Technical Proposal
24. Executive Summary. Provide a brief description of the manner in which you and your project team would complete the project. The summary should include an outline of your proposed project team (i.e., individual(s) and/or subcontractor consultants and/or agency(ies) proposed to be involved and proposed reporting responsibility hierarchy).
25. Coordination Plan. Provide a brief explanation of the manner in which you and your project team would manage and coordinate the responsibilities of monitoring the two separate agreements in a manner that ensures that both agreements are fully monitored without unnecessary duplication of efforts and resources.
26. Personnel. Provide the name(s) of the individual(s) and/or subcontractor consultant(s) and/or agency(ies) who would constitute the project team, including a summary of the relevant background/experience of each team member. Provide an organization chart for the project team showing the lines of responsibility and reporting for the project team. If the identity of the individuals or entities that would assist in performing the monitoring function is unknown at the present time, state the areas of expertise you would seek to retain and your organization's process for contracting for such services.
27. Qualifications. Describe your and your project team's qualifications in the following areas:
- law enforcement, law enforcement practices, community policing, complaint investigation and monitoring law enforcement practices;
- auditing, investigating, or reviewing performance of organizations (including experience in monitoring settlements, consent decrees, or court orders);
- mediation and dispute resolution;
- statistical and data analysis;
- computer technology and data management;
- working with government agencies, municipalities, and collective bargaining units;
- federal, Ohio and Cincinnati laws, policies and rules governing police practices;
- appearing in court as a judge, monitor, counsel or expert witness, or in providing other types of testimony; and
- report writing.
28. Experience. Provide a brief description of current or recent (within past 5-8 years) project experience possessed by you or members of your project team relevant to the monitoring tasks sought in this Request for Applications. Furnish references for each project listed, including the name of the organization, contact person, title, address, and telephone number. If available, submit non-confidential work products that are similar to the quarterly monitoring reports required for this project.
29. Proposed Activities. Describe (in as specific detail as possible and using illustrations as necessary) the activities you and your project team would propose to undertake in order to monitor compliance, including but not limited to:
- method(s) of obtaining information;
- method(s) of analyzing information;
- frequency of various proposed activities;
- the personnel (e.g., yourself, employees assigned to the project team, or proposed subcontractor(s)) responsible for the various activities and the number of hours anticipated to be devoted to specific aspects of the project by month or quarter;
- the monitoring processes, methodology, and staff you and your project team would use to review the CPD's canine training as an example of how your team would review the CPD's use of force training (Paragraph 84 of the MOA);
- the monitoring processes, methodology, and staff you and your project team would use to review and evaluate the effectiveness of the complaint investigations conducted by the Civilian Complaint Authority as an example of how your team would review citizen complaints. (CA Paragraph 86);
- how your project team's experience and expertise has prepared your team to fulfill the monitoring requirements of the MOA and CA, particularly the requirement to report regularly on compliance with each substantive provision of the MOA and CA, within the context of the CPD's organizational structure, size, and volume of work;
- how your team would monitor and provide technical assistance to the Parties in the comprehensive implementation of a CPOP program;
- whether and, if so, how you would utilize the police practices consultant previously employed by the Special Master during negotiation of the CA; and
- how your team would coordinate with the City and the CPD to arrange visits, on-site records reviews and interviews, and how your team would coordinate its monitoring activities and communications with the City, the CPD, DOJ, the FOP and the Plaintiffs.
The parties are aware that the combined CA and the MOA monitoring task is unique. Your proposal should demonstrate your aptitude and appropriateness for this task.
30. Potential Conflict or Bias.
(a) Disclose any potential conflicts of interest involving yourself, your team, your firm, employee(s) assigned to the project, or proposed subcontractor(s), including current or former employment, contracts or grants with any of the parties and any involvement in the last eight years (whether paid or unpaid) with a claim or lawsuit by or against any of the parties or any of their officers, agents, or employees. Disclose whether any member of your proposed team has been the proponent or subject of any complaint, claim or lawsuit alleging police misconduct. To the extent such a conflict or potential bias exists, but you believe it does not bar your selection, state the basis for that position, including any legal or ethical opinions or waivers upon which you rely.
(b) Describe any law enforcement monitoring services that you or members of your proposed team currently perform for other communities, and state why you believe those other responsibilities should not bar your selection.
(c) To the extent members of your proposed team are not located in the Greater Cincinnati Metropolitan Area, describe in detail how your proposed team will establish an adequate presence in the Greater Cincinnati Metropolitan Area to provide the services called for herein.
B. Cost Proposal
Provide a detailed budget (using the attached form as a model) (3) for all costs under the proposed Monitor contract, including staff costs, travel, sub-consultant/contractor services, overhead, supplies etc. The cost proposal must provide adequate detail to enable the Parties to assess how the cost estimate allows the level of performance and monitoring required by the MOA and the CA. The Cost Proposal must be broken down into three categories: (i) costs attributable to both agreements, (ii) costs attributable only to the MOA, and (iii) costs attributable only to the CA. The Cost Proposal should be further broken down based on the different activities required of the Monitor (e.g., technical assistance, review, report writing, etc.).
The Cost Proposal also must account for the fact that the duration of the Monitor contract is uncertain. Proposals must be broken down into two categories: (i) one time or fixed costs that will be incurred regardless of the duration of the contract, and (ii) annual costs incurred for each year the contract is in effect (factoring in some rate of inflation). This breakdown must allow the total cost of the contract (regardless of how many years it is in effect) to be calculated by multiplying the total number of years the agreements are in effect by the annual costs (factoring in some rate of inflation) and adding the one time or fixed costs.
1 The CA resolves claims for injunctive relief filed in the matter In re Cincinnati Policing, No. C-1-99-317 (S.D. Ohio 2001). By Order dated April 18, 2002, the U.S. District Court provisionally approved the CA, the proposed Settlement Class and the Class Representatives. That provisional approval is expected to be made final at a fairness hearing on or about June 6, 2002. Also, two organizations--the Urban League of Cincinnati and the Cincinnati Chapter of the NAACP--have been invited to join as additional Class Representatives not later than May 13, 2002.
2 Hard copies of each document are available by request to: Mr. S. Gregory Baker, Compliance Coordinator, Cincinnati Police Department, 310 Ezzard Charles Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45214.
Cincinnati Independent Monitor Request for ApplicationsBudget Template *Year ____ of 5
|Cost Item||Technical Assistance||Review||Report Writing||Collaborative Survey||Base Year Total|
|Direct Labor |
ï½· Employee A
ï½· Employee B
ï½· Employee C
|Total Labor Hours|
|Total Labor Dollars|
|Cost of Living Increase|
|Total Direct Labor|
|Other Direct Costs (e.g., Equip. & Supplies; Materials)|
ï½· Sub A
ï½· Sub B
R = Rate
H = Hours
D = Dollars (Rate X Hours = Dollars)
* Note: Please provide cost information in the above format for each year of the five year term of the proposal and provide a Total Budget Template reflecting the aggregate costs of Years 1 5.>