Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1999 0519 CC REG ITEM 10ITO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Honorable City Council ISM Ia.z. Ci fib' ?F %1()0RPNRK, CAI IFORNL4, ��''s ?� i,t1 €lC3�9� :tij€Ctifl� of 5-1q "�GI ACTION: � `fil1r', �ri hP /i)YIhIC�fY�/� BY: John E. Nowak, Assistant City Manager 07 May 1999 (Council meeting of 05- 19 -99) Consider the Issue of an Additional Police Officer at the Moorpark High School DISCUSSION: At its meeting of May 2, 1999 Steve Sills, representing the Moorpark Rotary Club, presented an offer for the Rotary Club to give the City $10,000 for the City to provide a full -time deputy on the campus of the Moorpark High School during school hours. Based on the figures provided to staff by Captain Lewis for the preparation of the FY 99/00 budget, the cost of a deputy sheriff is $105,163. A senior deputy costs $114,501. A plain car costs $3,070 per year plus $0.17 per mile. A marked car cost $9,343 per year plus an additional $0.27 per mile. Captain Lewis has provided a memorandum related to this issue which is attached. RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. Attached: Memorandum 000423 Moorpark Police Department MEMORANDUM TO: John Nowak, Assistant City Manager FROM: Captain Mike Lewis � DATE: May 10, 1999 SUBJECT: Proposed High School Resource Officer Position At your request I am supplying the following information which capsulizes my understanding of the discussions that have taken place relative to the creation of this new position. My sole contact with the school district on this topic was with Tom Duffy to confirm their level of financial contribution to this position as presented by Steve Sill. The following is a quick recap: When I was approached by Steve Sill last year with the concept of an officer on the high school campus I suggested that he use 80% as the amount of time the officer would be committed to the high school on a full-time basis. The balance of time (20 %) would represent the summer and conceptually could be committed to directed enforcement and gang suppression activities. I explained to him the current structure of the DARE officer positions, ie: that the school district shared with the city 'h of the cost of time committed to the program. In the case of our DARE Officers, 70% of their time is devoted to the program and the remaining 30% is for special enforcement detail (SED) duties, thus the school district paid for 35% of the total officer cost. I spoke with Tom Duffy after last weeks City Council meeting and confirmed that he would support the district contributing 'h of the 80% cost, or the equivalent of 40% of the total cost for this position based upon the Sheriffs Department contract rate with the City. He said that he would include funding for the position in his recommended budget to the School Board, should the City Council appprove the position, and would continue to support this position in future years budgets. Based upon the above information it would be my impression that the school district would supply 40% of this position costs and that the City or other sources, ie grant funding, Rotary Club, etc., would provide the 60% balance cost of the position. 000424 Proposed High School Resource Officer Position Page 2 of 2 I have attached a fact sheet on available Department of Justice (DOJ) grant funding through a program titled COPS in Schools. School Resource Officers are specifically mentioned in this program that is aimed at primary and secondary level schools. This grant will provide $125,000 over three years and has application deadlines of June 4 and July 16, 1999. Continuation of efforts (funding) is required by this grant. It would be my suggestion that if this position is added to the police department that it be classified as a Senior Deputy position. The justification for this rank would be based upon attracting the best candidate to fill the position, retention of the individual in the position, broader experience level and individual maturity. At your direction I can supply additional information on how I would envision this position fitting into our Community Policing Plan and the associated responsibilities. The established FY 99/00 contract rate for a senior deputy has been set at $114,500. If the Rotary Club donation of $10,000 was applied to the total position cost, the balance remaining would be $104,500. This balance, based upon the above formula would be funded by the School District at $41,800 (40 %) and by the City/Federal Grants at $62,700 (60 %) during FY 99/00. Please advise if there is any additional information that you or the City Council might need in determining how to proceed with this proposal. 000425 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services COPS imn Schools "When our children's safety is at stake, we must fake action — and we all must do our Part„ . . — President Clinton Program'information Recent headlines about violence in our schools are result- ing in a surge of interest in school safety - Unfortunately, these headline- making crimes are not isolated incidents. According to the National Education Association; ■ 100,OW children carry guns to school; ■ 160,000 children miss class every day because of the fear of physical harm; and ■ 81 percent of teachers say they spend most of their time on undisciplined students. Many communities are discovering that trained, sworn Law enforicement officers assigned to schools make a dif- ference. The presence of these officers provide schools with on -site security and a direct link to local law enforce- ment agencies. Community policing officers typically perform a variety of functions within the school. From teaching crime preven- tion and substance -abuse classes to monitoring troubled students to building respect for law enforcement among students, School Resource Officers combine the functions of law enforcement and education. To help hire community policing officers to work in schools, the COPS Office is offering up to $60 million to local law enforcement agencies. The COPS in Schools mi- tiative provides an incentive for law enforcement agencies to build working relationships with schools to use com- munity policing efforts to combat school violence. The COPS in Schools initiative reduces the local match requirement for law enforcement agencies seeking to hire additional officers in and around schools. -Funding Requirements Grants will be awarded to provide for a designated portion of the salary and benefits of each new officer over three years. The ma)dmum is $125,000 per officer, any winder is paid with state or local funds. Funding begins when new officers are hired or on the award date (whichever is later). Funds are distributed over the course of the grant. COPS grants must not replace funds that eligible agencies otherwise would have devoted to hire officers in the future. In other words, any hiring under the COPS in Schools pro- gram must be in addition to, not in lieu of. Officers that oth- erwise would have been hired. Grant recipients must devel- op a written plan to retain their COPS- funded officer posi- tions after Federal funding ends. This plan must be submit- ted with the application- Program Requirements To be eligible to receive funding under this grant program, applicants must: ■ be eligible to receive funding under the current guidelines established for the Universal Hiring Program (UHP); 000426 ■ . provide assurance that the officers ,employed under this program will be assigned to work in primary or secondary schools, enter into a partnership agreement with either a specific school official or with an official with general educational oversight authority in that jurisdiction. In addition to these program requirements, applicants must.document: ■ Problem Identification and Justification For Example: Problem Ident yication: Gang violence adjacent to or within schools. Just#iwtion: Documentation such as crime data, information. on the number of gang members in a particular school, number of suspension and expulsions related to gang activities, school survey, and complaints from the community. ■ Community Policing Strategies Examples include conflict mediation, mentoring activities, gang mediation, problem solving projects, and truancy programs. ■ Quality and Level of Commitment to Program Examples include the amount of dedicated officer hours deployed to school activities, the duration and quality of the proposed program, evidence of previous successes, and a description of the impacted or targeted areas. ■ Link to Community Policing Information on how proposed activities are linked to an overall organizational community policing strategy. Deadlines 5 Use the Universal Hiring Program application to apply for COPS in Schools grants. The application deadlines are December 4,1998, February 5, April 2, June 4 and July 16, 1999. If your agency already was awarded a PAST, AHEAD or UHP grant, you may request additional offi- cers at any time. Note on your application if you are requesting officers that will be assigned to primary or sec- ondary schools. For More Information To obtain a copy of an application or for more information, please call the U.S. Department of justice Response Center at 1- 800-421 -6770 or visit the COPS website at wwwusdoj.gov /cops/ Departments that have a pending application under the Universal Hiring Program and that are interested in apply- ing that request to the COPS in Schools initiative should contact their grant advisor at 14300-421 -6770. Updated.- October 15, 1998 000427 Moorpark Police Department MEMORANDUM TO: John Nowak, Assistant City Manager FROM: Captain Mike Lewi<9) DATE: May 14, 1999 SUBJECT: School Community Partnership Grant Program I received this information yesterday regarding the availability of $10,000,000 in State funding through the California Department of Education which will provide grants of up to $300,000 to school districts to implement a school community policing approach to dealing with school crime and safety issues. I have not discussed this with the school district. I did mention this to Steve yesterday and he suggested that I forward it for the City to review before doing anything further. My thought on this would be that the High School Resource Officer, if approved by Council, could be almost fully grant funded for three years and then a participative sharing of the cost between the city and district would take over to provide future funding. Please let me know if you would like me to do anything further at this time. CG`, Cr' Cx A , CC California Department of Education California Attcmey General's Office SCHOOL /LAW ENFORCEMENT PARTNERSHIP April 26, 1999 To: District Superintendents County Superintendents Attention: School Safety Coordinators From: Delaine Eastin Bill Lockyer State Superintendent of Public Instruction Attorney Gener Subject: School Community Policing Partnership Grant Program Due Date: June 21, 1999 The California Department of Education and the Office of the Attorney General, through the School/Law Enforcement Partnership, are soliciting applications to operate School Community Policing Partnerships (SCPPs). The SCPP program will provide grants of up to 5300,000 (plus up to $25,000 in start-up funds, if needed) to school districts or county offices of education that work with a law enforcement partner to implement a school community policing approach to dealing with school crime and safety issues. Grant recipients are required to provide a 25 percent match to the operational grant funds, and are encouraged to obtain a part of that match from the collaborative partners. The SCPP program will operate in a school/community neighborhood (or in a cluster of school neighborhoods). A district or county office is eligible to submit multiple applications for projects at different sites. The attached request for applications describes the elements of School Community Policing Partnership programs and contains instructions for applying for the grants. A key feature of this program is the collaboration between schools, local law enforcement agencies, and the community. Because a letter of agreement is required from the law enforcement partner in the collaboration, and because collaborative agreements take some time to work out, districts or counties wishing to apply for an SCPP grant should contact prospective law enforcement partners very early in the application process. This request for applications is also available over the Internet at two sites: www.cde.ca.gov /spbranch/safety/safetyhome.html and www.caag.state.ca.us /cvpc Proposals must be received by 5 p.m. on Monday, June 21, 1999, at the address provided in the request for applications. If you have questions concerning the application, please contact Chuck Nichols at (916) 323 -1026 or Arlene Shea at (916) 327 -9722. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Safe Schools and Violence Prevention Office Crime and Violence Prevention Center n60 ) Street, Suite 400 1300 1 Street, Suite 1150 Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 9581.1 (916) 323 -2183 (916)324 -78b3 SCHOOL COMMUNITY POLICING PARTNERSHIP GRANT PROGRAM REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS APRIL 1999 _ School /Law Enforcement Partnership California Department of Education Office of The Attorney General Table of Contents Page I. Introduction 1 II. Required Elements of School Community Policing Partnerships A. School Community Policing Defined 2 B. Legislatively Required Program Components 3 C. Reporting Requirements 4 III. Funding A. Operational Grants 5 B. Start-up Grants 6 C. Retention of Records 7 IV. Application Process and Instructions A. Timetable 7 B. General Requirements 7 C. Assembling the Application 8 V. Proposal Contents 9 VI. Reviewing and Scoring Applications 15 Appendices SCHOOL COMMUNITY POLICING PARTNERSHIPS REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS I. Introduction The School Community Policing Partnership Act of 1998 (AB 1756, Havice, Chapter 317 of 1998) established a competitive grant program which will provide funds to local education agencies (school districts or county offices of education) which work with a law enforcement partner to implement or expand a school community policing approach to dealing with school crime and safety issues. AB 1756 charges the School /Law Enforcement Partnership of the California Department of Education (CDE) and the Office of the Attorney General (AG) with the responsibility to develop and administer the program and award grants to local education agencies (LEAs) and consortia of LEAs. The School Community Policing Partnerships (SCPP) program is funded at $10,000,000 per year. Grants of up to $300,000 spread across three years will be awarded, with additional start -up funds of as much as $25,000. LEAs and consortia may apply for more than one grant, for different sites. Approximately 30 three -year grants will be awarded each year, depending upon the budgets of the successful - applications. The applications are due June 21, 1999, and funds will be awarded in July. The $300,000 operational grants will be awarded in two stages. Of the granted amount, $50,000 will be allocated initially, based on the collaborative plans that are presented in the grant applications. After the grant recipient has completed the collaborative problem identification and program planning begun during this application process, and reported on the planning process to the School /Law Enforcement (S /LE) Partnership, the remainder of implementation funds will be allocated upon receipt of quarterly billings for reimbursement of actual costs. The SCPP program has a very strong emphasis on collaboration. The completed application is required to be the result of a collaborative effort between schools, law enforcement, and community partners. Partnerships between local education agencies, policing agencies, and the communities they serve are essential elements for implementing a successful school community policing program. Educators, community leaders, researchers, and police officials recognize the need for joint efforts to significantly prevent and respond to school and community problems. Collaborative work involving multi - disciplinary teams provides the partners and the community with insight and perspective that is far beyond a one - dimensional approach to problem solving. Existing school/ community partnerships for prevention and youth development are already engaged in activities that complement SCPP and can contribute to program success. Thus, local initiatives such as Healthy Start and after school programs should be involved in the planning and implementation of SCPPs. The connection between problem solving and partnering is the focus of the SCPP program. This program offers an opportunity for education agencies and policing agencies to analyze problems and develop solutions through innovative and collaborative thinking. Any organization concerned with school safety or crime issues is encouraged to participate in this program. In conjunction with the primary applicant (the LEA), law enforcement, probation departments, and community- based organizations are encouraged to participate in conducting comprehensive needs assessment and developing innovative responses and solutions. II. Required Elements of School Community Policing Partnerships (SCPPs) A. School Community Policing Defined Section 32296.3 of the Education Code defines "school community policing" as an approach to safe schools in which schools, law enforcement, community agencies, and the members of the surrounding school community collaboratively develop long -term solutions to address the underlying conditions that affect the level of school safety. The code section also identifies two specific program activities which are key components of school community policing programs: -- • "... law enforcement becomes an integral facet of the school community with highly trained law enforcement officers having a visible and active presence on and around school campuses, and • ... law enforcement officers work with pupils during and after school, providing opportunities for pupils' active involvement in positive activities." It is further intended that SCPPs incorporate key elements of Community Oriented Policing & Problem Solving ( COPPS). COPPS strategies are characterized by the formation of law enforcement - community collaboratives which identify safety problems and priorities in the community, develop solutions to the problems, work together over time to implement the solutions, monitor the success of the programs, and respond to changing community needs. Adapting these COPPS elements for SCPPs simply means that students, school staff, and parents will be a part of the collaborative process along with community representatives and law enforcement, and that the strategies implemented will be linked to the school. Attachment A is a resource list which will assist applicants in learning more about COPPS. W The law enforcement partner in SCPP collaboratives must be an official law enforcement agency such as the police department, the sheriff's department, or the probation department. Other potentially valuable members of the collaborative include teachers, students, parents, police activity leagues, boys and girls clubs, community -based organizations, social services agencies, local government, neighborhood residents, park and recreation districts, the district attorney's office, etc. B. Legislatively Required Program Components In enacting the School Community Policing Partnerships Act of 1998, the Legislature mandated a number of specific operational, managerial, and evaluative activities for SCPP programs (Education Code sections 32296.5 and 32296.6 of AB1756, Attachment B). In addition to formation of the collaborative partnership, SCPPs are required to: • Identify problems through a needs assessment which incorporates the results of the California Safe Schools Assessment. • Identify the school communities that face a significant risk of school and community crime or youth behavior problems such as school violence, drug or alcohol use, gang activity, daylight burglary, late -night robbery, vandalism, truancy, and controlled substance sales. • Develop and implement locally- appropriate solutions to the identified problems. • Identify existing school and community resources and mobilize them to meet the identified community needs. • Develop information and intelligence sharing systems to ensure that actions by schools and local law enforcement are fully coordinated. • Identify outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of the program that shall include: Drug and alcohol - related offenses on the school campus Crimes against persons on the school campus Crimes against property on the school campus 3 1 Incidence of possession of firearms or other weapons on the school campus The rates of school attendance and truancy • Evaluate the effectiveness of the chosen solutions and modify the program as necessary. • Ensure that the collaborative partnership continues to work over the Iona term to provide solutions to school - community needs. C Reporting Requirements I. Implementation Report. The key element of a SCPP program is the collaborative partnership involving the entire school community. Because identifying all the relevant community members and agencies and incorporating them into a collaborative can be a time - consuming process, it is expected that the collaborative problem identification and planning process will be started, but not entirely completed, during the eight weeks allowed for completion of this application. Successful applicants will therefore be allowed until January 31, 2000 to complete collaborative problem identification and program planning. Grant recipients will then submit an implementation report to the S /LE Partnership, describing the progress which has been made in implementation of the project plan contained in the application (see Section V.E of this application for elements of the plan). The S /LE Partnership will assist grant recipients in the preparation of the implementation report by providing a detailed report format. A key element of the implementation report will be the demonstration that an inclusive collaborative process has been used for problem identification, solution development, and program planning. Evidence of such a collaborative process will include items such as minutes from collaborative meetings and student and community survey results. Grant recipients will be allocated $50,000 of the operational grant in July 1999, and the remainder of the grant award will be released after the S /LE Partnership has received the implementation report and has determined that legislative requirements for the collaborative process and program development have been met. If the implementation report is completed before January 31, 2000, funds will be released early. 2. Annual Reports. In addition to the implementation report which is a condition of receipt of the full operational grant, grant recipients will also be required to submit an annual report to the S /LE Partnership containing progress reports and evaluation of the effectiveness of the program, also 4 using a format provided by the Partnership. The S /LE Partnership will provide grant recipients with data collection forms and evaluation guidelines for use in on -going self - evaluation and creation of these annual progress reports. The required data collection will include the outcome measures specified in Section II.B, as well as additional data on program and collaborative activities and outcomes that is necessary to identify the types of programs which are most successful. State - required data collection and reporting will be kept to a reasonable minimum, but grant recipients should plan for on -going data collection, self - evaluation, and reporting as part of routine operations. Grant award payments will be contingent upon completion of the annual report including state- required data and information. III. Funding A. Operational Grants The School Community Policing Partnership Act authorizes operational grants of up to $300,000 spread over three years. The grants may be awarded to school districts, county offices of education, or consortia of school districts and /or county offices. Grants will be awarded to applicants which demonstrate the greatest need, and also demonstrate readiness and commitment to formation of the school /law enforcement/ community partnership and to carrying out the on- going problem identification, problem - solving, and self- evaluation process required by the legislation. When making the grant awards, the S /LE Partnership will consider the distribution of applicants across urban, suburban, and rural areas of northern, central, and southern California. Grant recipients must provide matching funds equal to 25 percent of the grant award. The match may be contributed in cash, staff time, or equipment, or as services or resources of comparable value. Grant recipients are encouraged to obtain part of the matching funds from their collaborative partners. AB 1756 authorizes the S /LE Partnership to waive the match requirement upon verifying that the local educational agency or consortium made a substantial effort to secure a match but was unable to secure the required match. However, the S /LE Partnership strongly discourages applying for this waiver, as it is the Partnership's experience that committed grant applicants can usually obtain larger matches than 25 percent. Charges per square foot for facilities will generally not be approved as matching contributions, nor will the staff time of school or police supervisors and administrators, unless they are new positions established for the program or are existing staff receiving paid overtime. Grant funds may be used only for the purposes of the SCPP program and must supplement, not supplant, existing programs. Grant funds may not be used to pay for previously existing services or to make up for budget cuts. In particular, 1Z grant funds may not be used to pay for existing school resource officer positions. Also, operational grant funds may not be used for the compensation of school or police supervisors and administrators, or to pay for rent or facilities renovation (facilities may be renovated using start -up funds). Grant funds may be used to pay for the compensation of staff who are in new positions established for the program or who are working additional hours to operate the SCPP program. The types of staff who may be funded under those conditions include school staff, law enforcement officers, and community organization staff. Fifty thousand dollars will be allocated to recipients immediately after the grants are awarded, and remaining funds will be made available after completion of the implementation report described in Section H.0 of this request for applications (RFA). All funds provided after the initial $50,000 will be provided on a reimbursement basis, after the grant recipient provides a quarterly billing statement to the S /LE Partnership. Final payments in each fiscal year will be made after submission of the required annual progress and self - evaluation report. B. Start -up Grants Recipients of operational grants may also receive one -time startup grants of up to $25,000. Examples of possible uses of the start -up funds are: • Equipment purchases relating directly to operation of the SCPP • Hiring of staff slightly in advance of program implementation for training and orientation purposes • Contracting for evaluation of the program • Facilities renovation directly relating to operation of the SCPP • The hiring of trainers in community policing, collaborative decision making, problem solving, or prevention programs • Release time for working level education, law enforcement, and community -based organization staff for training or for planning meetings Start -up funds do not require a local match. Start up funds may not be used to pay for staff time of supervisory or administrative personnel, nor may they be used to pay for facilities. The start -up funds will be allocated after approval of the implementation report described in Section II-C, and may be used to pay for start- up costs incurred prior to completion of the implementation report. - 0 C. Retention of Records Grant award recipients shall maintain accounting records and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred, with the provision that they shall be kept available by the grant recipient during the grant award period and thereafter for five full years from the date of the final payment. The S /LE Partnership must be permitted to audit, review, and inspect the activities, books, documents, papers, and - records during the progress of the work and for five years following final allocation of funds. IV. APPLICATION PROCESS AND INSTRUCTIONS A. Timetable May 21, 1999 Optional Letter of Intent postmarked by this date June 21, 1999 Proposals received at CDE by 5:00 p.m. June 22 -July 9, 1999 Proposal review and rating July 12 -16, 1999 A list of the proposed grant recipients will be posted at 660 J St., Suite 400 and 1300 I St., Lobby, Sacramento, CA. The recipients will also be posted on the Internet at: www.cde.ca-gov/spbranch/safety/safetyhome.html and www.caag.state.ca.us /cvpc July 19, 1999 Notification sent to successful applicants. $50,000 awarded January 31, 2000 Program implementation reports due (may be submitted earlier) February 29, 2000 Remaining funds made available for reimbursements (Funds will be made available when implementation reports are completed and approved. If the report is completed early, funds will be released early.) B. General Requirements 1. Any LEA that intends to submit an application or applications in response to this Request for Applications is requested to submit a Letter of Intent 10 (Attachment C) postmarked by May 21, 1999 The letter of in addressed or faxed to: tent should be School Community Policing Partnerships Program Safe Schools and Violence Prevention Office 660 J Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 FAX (916) 323 -6061 2. The S /LE Partnership must receive, at the above four copies of an LEA's application(s) no later than 5:00 Gress, the original and an LEA submits more than one application, P m•, June 21, 1999. If elements described herein. Applications all must contain all of the Applications received late will not be consi erect. Fax in one envelope. accepted. ax copies will not be 3. The typeface used to complete the application must be a Point font size that does not exceed six lines per inch and maint ins a of 12 inch margin (The body of this RFA uses the minimum font size.) ins a one - Applications considered illegible by the grant review team will disqualified. I be 4. Applications must be submitted on standard, white 8 1/2 x 5. Staple or clip he application inch Paper. P pleeveson together for submission. Do not use binders, covers, flat folders, or sleeves. 6. Submission of an application constitutes a release of inform waiver of the agency's right to privac with rea information ation and response to the RFA. Ideas and format presented will beco e provided in the S /LE Partnership. property of C- Assembling the Application Section V of this RFA provides instructions for creating he of the proposal. The various elements of the proposals ghoul substantive content the order below. d be assembled in 1. The grant application cover sheet (Attachment completely and include an original signatu of the Superintendent must be filled out Assistant Superintendent of the a or must designate a contact person and liprovide county at° person's trct. The cover sheet telephone number. 2. The application narrative must be submitted in the format Section V of this document, demonstrating e t specified in qualifications, requirements, and standards in this R- of the LEA to meet all R- of Grant application narratives must be no longer than 15 pages (excluding cover sheet, assurances, budget, letters of agreement, and certifications) and must be typed or printed and legible. Other supporting material such as news clippings, meeting minutes, or letters of support may be attached. There is no page limit on this material, but this material should not contain critical information, as it may only be skimmed by application reviewers. 3. The budget for the proposed program should be included as an attachment to the narrative. The budget display must include object codes from the School Accounting Manual. 4. Letters of agreement between the major collaborative partners should be included as an attachment to the narrative, after the budget attachment. 5. The Assurances form (Attachment E) must be included with the original signature of the Superintendent or Assistant Superintendent of the applicant county or district. 6. The "Drug -Free Workplace Certification" (Attachment F) must be completed and included. V. Proposal Contents The collaborative process required of School Community Policing programs begins with the formation of the school -law enforcement - community collaborative, is followed by the needs analysis and problem solution development, and continues with program implementation and on -going operation and evaluation. A complete application for funding may be written at any point in this process after formation of the collaborative and identification of the proposed project site, and will contain information about what has already been accomplished and about what is planned. An application might therefore describe a completed needs analysis, solution development process, and implementation plan which have been accomplished by an already - existing collaborative, or the application might contain a detailed plan demonstrating a new collaborative's readiness to complete a needs analysis, implement a problem solving and planning process, and collaboratively manage an SCPP. Each of these styles of application is equally likely to be funded. Final decisions about funding will be based primarily on the need for an SCPP which has been demonstrated in the application. Applications must contain the following sections, in the following order. Generally, the following sections ask for information about how an action will be completed or for a description of the collaborative planning process which will accomplish the task. If the action has already been completed, simply describe the process which was used to accomplish the action, and the outcome. G61 A. Table of Contents B. Formation of the Partnership This section of the application must describe how the school -law enforcement - community partnership was formed, who the members are, and how it operates. The manner of operation of the collaboration could be explained by providing information such as: the number of meetings which have been held, the outcomes of those meetings, which agency initially proposed the collaborative, what plans there are to ensure on -going community involvement, how the decision - making process of the partnership works, who is responsible for doing the staff work of the partnership, and how partnership decisions are implemented. A sample of minutes from collaborative meetings could be included as an attachment. The SCPP may be a new partnership, or may be based on an existing community collaborative. In either case, the application must address how the SCPP will link with existing prevention and youth development partnerships such as those supported by Healthy Start, the After School Learning and Safe Neighborhoods Partnerships Program, and 21" Century Community Learning Centers. Include in this section any training classes for partnership members or staff that have been or will be taken (it is encouraged that some type of training in collaborative problem solving processes take place). - Possible members of the collaborative, in addition to law enforcement and the LEA, include teachers, students, parents, community based organizations, the probation department, police activity leagues, social services agencies, local government, neighborhood residents, parks and recreation districts, the district attorney's office, etc. It should be noted that a collaborative which does not involve the school, law enforcement; and the community will not be funded. C. Creation of the application It is required that all significant actions of the SCPP, including the application for funds, be accomplished in a collaborative fashion. This section of the application must therefore describe the collaborative process used to create the application. Events which may be described in this section include: who was involved in writing or guiding the writing of the application (members of the collaborative, parents, students, school staff, etc.); how many collaborative meetings were held to work on the application; how the content of the application was directed or provided by the collaborative; who did the actual writing of the application; how input was gathered from community sources; and who has approved the application. 10 D. Needs Analysis I. The school- community neighborhood and the target population. Describe the community, its geography, and its population in order to place the crime and violence information of the next section into context. A description of the school - community neighborhood in which the SCPP program will operate is required, but you may wish to describe the larger community as well. This section must include the number of schools in the proposed service area, the number of students enrolled, their grade levels, and the number of students the program plans to directly serve (if known at this stage of the planning process). 2. Why does your community need a School Community Policing Partnership? Provide information regarding school - community crime and violence problems. This needs analysis may include school and community crime statistics, truancy data, information about services which are lacking in the community, drop out data, press clippings, historical background, etc. The types of information which would demonstrate need for an SCPP include information regarding school violence, drug or alcohol use, gang activity, daylight burglary, late -night robbery, vandalism, truancy, and controlled substance sales. The needs analysis must also include input from students and parents about the problems of the school and community. Possible ways to obtain opinions from students and parents include surveys, the convening of focus groups, and inclusion of parents and students in the SCPP's meetings. The needs analysis not only must present the results of the parent /student survey, but describe the method by which the information was obtained. Plans for continuing to get input about needs from parents and students must also be included in the section of the application describing the plan for continuing the collaborative process (See Section V.E). This section must also include information from the 1997 -98 California Safe Schools Assessment (CSSA), and the local CSSA data must be compared to statewide averages for the type of school at which the SCPP will operate. Statewide, district -wide, and county office of education data is contained in Appendix C of the California Safe Schools Assessment: 1997 -98 Results which was mailed to all district and county superintendents and which is available on the Internet at: www.cde.ca.gov/spbranch/safety/safetyhome.html The report may also be purchased for $12 by faxing a request to CDE Press, Sales Office at 916 - 323 -0823. The CSSA data for the proposed service area must be separated into the categories which are identified by Section 32296.6(a)(3) of the Education Code as SCPP program outcome measures. The needs analysis must therefore 11 separately present the CSSA information for four categories presented in the report: Drug /Alcohol Offenses (rate per 1000 students) Crimes Against Persons (rate per 1000 students; this figure is the sum of the four different rates presented within this category by the CSSA report) • Possession of a Weapon (rate per 1000 students) • Property Crime (rate per 1000 students) In the needs analysis, each of the above categories of information must be compared to the statewide average rate for the type of school at which the project will be located (Attachment G contains the statewide averages for use in this comparison). It is expected that many applications will be for service areas which are not entire districts or COEs. Because the CSSA report publishes the above rates only for districts and county offices, in this situation data must be tabulated from the service area's copies of the CSSA data which was submitted to the district or COE for 1997 -98. The rates are very simple to compute - an example of this computation is included in Attachment G to this RFA). When this computation is completed, the resulting rates will correspond to the statewide averages also contained in Appendix C of the CSSA report. If the applicant is an entire district or COE, and can therefore directly use the figures from Appendix C, the "Crimes Against Persons" rate is equal to the sum of the rates for the four subcategories under Crimes Against Persons. E. Plan for continuing the collaborative planning and implementation process In this section, describe the way in which the SCPP will carry out the legislatively- required activities for the program (if a step has already been accomplished, describe what has already been done). Separate paragraphs of the narrative must be presented describing the manner in which each of the following activities will be accomplished: 1. Determining the specific problems of the proposed service area 2. Gathering school (including students and parents) and community input about the nature and cause of the problems 3. Analyzing the underlying causes of the problems of the service area _ 12 4. Developing proposed solutions that the collaborative believes will reduce or eliminate the problem (applicants are encourage to refer to research regarding promising practices in the solution development process) 5. Implementing the proposed solutions 6. Identifying outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of the program that shall include, but need not be limited to: • Drug and alcohol- related offenses on the school campus • Crimes against persons on the school campus • Crimes against property on the school campus • Incidence of possession of firearms or other weapons on the school campus • The rates of school attendance and truancy 7. Evaluating the effectiveness of the chosen solutions and modifying as necessary For all of the above activity plans, emphasis should be placed on how the collaborative will work together to accomplish the activity, who will be involved from within the collaborative, and how input will be sought from all elements of the school community (e.g., students, parents, teachers, community members). F. On -going Collaborative Management Describe the manner in which the collaborative nature of the program will be maintained after the project is implemented. For example, identify those responsible for calling and chairing partnership meetings, how often those will meetings occur, and how will the partnership will accomplish the management responsibilities involved in operating the SCPP. Below is a list of responsibilities assigned to the collaborative partnership by AB 1756. Describe how the partnership will continuously carry out these responsibilities over time. I. Develop information and intelligence sharing systems to ensure that actions by school districts and county offices of education are fully coordinated with local law enforcement agencies. 2. Identify existing school and community resources and mobilize them to meet changing community needs. 13 I Ensure that the collaborative partnership continues to work over the Iona term to provide solutions to school - community needs. G. Sustaining the Program After the Grant Expires This section should describe the method by which the SCPP collaborative will seek to sustain a School Communi Policing grant period. Possible resources for continuations include redirected tfunds year law enforcement and the LEA, volunteerism, support from local businesses, et ,etc. H. Budget Two separate line item budgets must be provided — one for start -up funds, and one for the operational funds. The budget for the operational grant must show the planned expenditures of both grant funds and, separately, of matching funds. Matching funds equal to 25 percent of the operational grant must be provided. The applicant LEA is encouraged to seek part of the matching funds from its collaborative partners. The budget for the matching funds must explain the nature of the matching funds (cash, staff time, equipment, etc; see Section III.A for allowable types of match contributions), identify the member(s) of the collaborative which will provide the funds, and the amount provided by each partner. Each budget should display proposed expenditures according to the account codes in the School Accounting Manual, with additional narrative detail which explains the activities that will be associated with the expenditure. A portion of the budget might look like this: Object of Expenditure 1100 Overtime pay for teachers supervising the after Amount school program $30,000 5800 Contract with the police department for officer overtime. $45,000 Include in the operational budget $1,000 annually for travel to statewide training /collaboration meetings. It is understood that both the start -up budget and the operational budget may be very tentative at the time of submission of the application. Because program planning may not be entirely completed at the time of submission of this application, these budgets are being requested simply to allow application scorers to gain some understanding of how resources may be allocated. Final budgets will be included in the program implementation report discussed in Section H.C. The budget must be presented as an attachment to the narrative, and does not count against the fifteen page limit to narrative length. 14 I. Letters of Agreement Include in this section letters from the major partners in the SCPP. There must be a letter of agreement from the primary law enforcement partner, signed by the head of the partner agency. The letters of agreement should describe the manner in which the partner will participate in the SCPP and include information such as: the activities to be performed by the partner's staff; a description of any financial agreements between the partners; the amount of matching funds to be provided by the partner and the type of funds (e.g.; cash, staff time, equipment, etc.); the name or position of the partner's representative to the collaborative; and the person or position who will direct the partner's day -to -day SCPP functions. Letters of agreement should be presented as an attachment to the narrative after the budget pages, and do not count against the 15 page limit. If the application identifies matching funds that will come from a partner in the SCPP, the partner must commit itself to supplying the matching funds in the letter of agreement, or the application will be rejected. VI. Reviewing and Scoring Applications After receipt of the applications, the S /LE Partnership will score each application for effectiveness in meeting the requirements in Sections IV and V of this RFA. T Applications will also be scored based on need, using the rating elements contained in Attachment H. Both quality of the application and community need will be considered in determining grant awards. The S /LE Partnership reserves the right to reject any or all applications. Nothing herein requires the awarding of a grant in response to this RFA. The Partnership will post a notice of the proposed grant recipients during July 12 -16, 1999, both at 660 J St., Suite 400 and at the lobby of 1300 I St. in Sacramento. The recipients will also be posted on the Internet at: www.cde.ca.gov / spbranch /safety /safetyhome.html and www.caag.state.ca.us /cvpc Copies of the rating sheets and applications will be available for public inspection during this same period in the Safe Schools and Violence Prevention Office, 660 J St., Suite 400, Sacramento, CA. Following the posting period, the S /LE Partnership will formally notify the grant recipients. Protests to the grant award process must be filed within five (5) working days of the initial posting of the list of proposed grant recipients. Only those LEAs that submitted applications may protest the grant award. Protest shall be limited to the grounds that the S /LE Partnership failed to apply correctly the standards for reviewing the applications as specified in this RFA. The protesting applicant(s) must file a full and complete written appeal, including the issue(s) in dispute, the legal 15 authority or other basis for the protester's position, and the remedy sought. Protests must be addressed to: Henry Der, Deputy Superintendent Education Equity, Access and Support Branch California Department of Education 721 Capitol Mall Sacramento, CA 95814 In cooperation with the Attorney General's Office, the Deputy Superintendent may hold oral hearings, review written briefs, or both. Their decision shall be the final administrative action afforded the protestant. 16 Attachment A School Community Policing Resources List Community Oriented Policing and Problem Solving, Definitions and Principles Adapted attachment for a school - oriented focus. See following pages School Community Policing Partnerships eight step example "SARA" model, fourth page following Resources Available on the Internet: COPPS Clearinghouse - technical assistance resource www.caag.state.ca.us /cvpc/ clearinc,.htrnl Grants, Programs, and Activities - US DOJ COPPS www.usdo*.gov /cops/ Community Policing Consortium - training, publications, and resources www. communityp olicing. org National Crime Prevention Council - crime prevention resources www.ncpc.org Community Oriented Policing & Problem Solving Law Enforcement Oriented Definition: A philosophy, management style, and organizational strategy that promotes pro - active problem solving and police - community partnerships to address the causes of crime and feat- as well as other community issues. Community Partnerships: A flexible term referring to any combination of neighborhood residents, schools, churches, businesses, community -based organizations, elected officials, and government agencies who are working cooperatively with the police to resolve identified problems that impact or interest them. Problem Solving: Refers to a process of identifying problems /priorities through coordinated community /police needs assessments; collecting and analyzing information concerning the problem in a thorough, though not necessarily complicated manner; developing or facilitating responses that are innovative and tailor -made with the best potential for eliminating or reducing the problem; and finally evaluating the response to determine its effectiveness and modifying it as necessary. Community Oriented Policing & Problem Solving School Oriented Definition: A philosophy, not a program, management style, and organizational strategy with coteznnntity participutioti, that promotes pro - active problem solving and police- school community partnerships to address the causes of crime and fear of crime as well as other community issues. Community Partnerships: A flexible term referring to any combination of neighborhood residents, schools, churches, parks an(l recreation, healthcare, youth groups, community -based organizations, elected officials, and government agencies, such as code compliance, CPS, and probation, who are working cooperatively with the police to resolve identified problems that impact or interest them. Problem Solving: Refers to a process of identifying problems /priorities through coordinated school /police needs assessments; collecting and analyzing information concerning the problem in a thorough, though not necessarily complicated manner; developing or facilitating responses that are innovative and tailor -made with the best potential for eliminating or reducing the problem; and finally evaluating the response to determine its effectiveness and modifying it as necessary. Principles 1. Reassesses who is responsible for public safety and redefines the roles and relationships between the police and the community. 2. Requires shared ownership, decision making, and accountability, as well as sustained commitment from both the police and the community. 3. Establishes new public expectations of and measurement standards for police effectiveness. Includes quality of service, customer (community) satisfaction, responsiveness to community defined issues, and cultural senitivity. 4. Increases understanding and trust between police and community members. 5. Empowers and strengthens community -based efforts. 6. Requires constant flexibility to respond to all emerging issues. Principles 1. Reasses the relationship between the'schools and law enforcement, with the school community sharing the responsibility for public safely. 2. Requires shared ownership, decision making, and accountability, as well as sustained commitment from both the police, schools, and the community. 3. Includes quality of service, customer satisfaction, responsiveness to school community defined issues, and cultural sensitivity. 4. Increases understanding and trust between police and all school community members. 5. Encourages empowering and strengthening ofschool community partnerships. 6. Requires constant flexibility to respond to all emerging issues. Principles 7. Requires an on -going commitment to developing long- term and pro- active programs /strategies to address the underlying conditions that cause community problems. Requires knowledge of available community resources and how to access and mobilize them, as well as the ability to develop new resources within the community. 9. Requires buy -in of the top management agencies, as well as, a sustained personal commitment from all levels of management and other key personnel. 10. Decentralizes police services /operations /management, relaxes the traditional "chain of command," and encourages innovative and creative problem solving by all -- thereby making greater use of the knowledge, skill and expertise throughout the organization without regard to rank. 11. Shifts the focus of police work from responding to individual incidents to addressing problems identified by the community as well as the police, emphasizing the use of problem- solving approaches to supplement traditional law enforcement methods. 12. Requires commitment to developing new skills through training (e.g., problem- solving, networking, mediation, facilitation, conflict resolution, cultural competency /literacy.) Principles 7. Requires an on -going commitment to .developing long -term and pro- active strategies to address the underlying conditions that cause community problems. 8. Requires knowledge of available school community resources and how to access and mobilize them, as well as the ability to develop new resources within the community. 9. A sustained personal commitment from everyone involved in the school community. 10. Decentralizes police ser vices /operations /management, relaxes the traditional "chain of command," and encourages innovative and creative problem solving by all -- thereby making greater use of the knowledge, skill and expertise throughout the organization without regard to title. 11. Shifts the focus of police work from responding to individual incidents to addressing problems identified by the community as well as the police, emphasizing the use of problem - solving approaches to supplement traditional law enforcement methods. 12. Requires commitment to developing new skills for all through training (e.g., problem - solving, networking, mediation, facilitation, conflict resolution, cultural awareness.) School Community Policing Partnerships #1. Locate the leaders of "stakeholders" or partners. Possibly utilize your Safe Schools Planning Teams or Committee. Educate them as to the COPPS philosophy and principles. 42. Partnering groups: all school personnel, law enforcement, parents, neighborhood residents, near by church, or businesses, youth organizations, parks and recreation department, local media, government organizations (Child Protective Services, Code Compliance, or Probation) #3. Consider Operational Agreements or Contracts for a more effective working partnerships. #4. All school district personnel and partners will receive training in The Introduction and Orientation to Community Oriented Policing and Problem Solving ( COPPS). #5. Introduction and Orientation to COPPS ideally should contain: Two eight days of information on *Definition and Principles *School's Role in the COPPS Movement *The Law Enforcement Culture *Building Partnerships *Problem Solving technique. The a one day eight hour follow -up training on * COPPS questions *Feedback, and *How COPPS can impact issues like Family Violence, Child Abuse, Drugs and Alcohol Abuse. F ply (S) scan, (A) analysis, (R) A) Assessment Problem Solving Model. E#7- valuate effectiveness of partnerships and problem solving. E7-#, . Celebrate Successes.' I I BILL NUMBER: AB 1756 Attachment B An act to add Article 6 (commencing with Section 32296) to Chapter 2.5 of Part 19 of the Education Code, relating to school community policing. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Article 6 (commencing with Section 32296) is added to Chapter 2.5 of Part 19 of the Education Code, to read: Article 6. School Community policincr 32296. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (a) Many of California's public schools and their surrounding communities are experiencing crime and violence to a degree that makes it difficult for pupils and staff to feel safe. (b) During the 1996 -97 school year, school districts and county offices of education reported a total of 21,947 crimes against persons, 19,876 drug and alcohol offenses, 25,718 property crimes costing schools over twenty-two million six hundred thousand dollars ($22,600,000), and 8,787 other crimes . (c) Schools need assistance in carrying out their constitutional mandate to provide safe environments to educate our children. (d) Schools also need assistance in ensuring safe passage for pupils to and from school and in securing the school campus from outside criminal activity and disturbances. (e) A school community policing approach to school safety, modeled after community policing principles, offers an effective strategy for using proactive problem solving and school law enforcement partnerships to address the causes of crime and fear as well as other safe school issues in the school and its surrounding community. (f) Partnerships among schools, law enforcement, and their communities provide a positive support system for schools in addressing safe school issues. (g) Collaboration by school -law enforcement - community partnerships results in strategic approaches to meet the unique needs of the school community. 32296.1. (a) This article may be known and cited as the School Community Policing Partnership Act of 1998. The purpose of this article is to provide financial assistance to school districts and county offices of education to ensure safe, secure, and peaceful school campuses as guaranteed by the California Constitution through the use of a community policing approach to school crime and safety issues. (b) The School Community Policing Partnership Grant Program, which is hereby established, shall be administered by the State Department of Education through the School/Law Enforcement Partnership established pursuant to Section 32262. With respect to this program, the partnership shall do all of the following: (1) Develop application criteria and procedures for local education agencies pursuant to the provisions of this article. (2) Award grants to school districts, county offices of education, or a consortium of school districts and county offices of education. (3) Evaluate the effectiveness of the funded projects. (4) Report biennially to the Legislature and Governor on the results of the program. 32296.3. "School community policing" means an approach to safe schools that is founded on developing positive relationships between law enforcement and the school community in which (1) schools, law enforcement, community agencies, and the members of the surrounding school community collaboratively develop long -term, proactive approaches and systems to address the underlying conditions that affect the level of school safety; and (2) law enforcement becomes an integral facet of the school community with highly trained law enforcement officers having a visible and active presence on and around school campuses. "School community policing" also involves highly trained law enforcement officers working with pupils during and after school, providing opportunities for pupils' active involvement in positive activities. It also involves teaching pupils skills and providing them with a consistent system of recognition and reinforcement of positive behavior. 32296.4. Grants under the School Community Policing Partnership Grant Program shall be awarded on a competitive basis to school districts, county offices of education, or a consortium of school districts and county offices of education to develop and implement a plan that demonstrates a collaborative and integrated approach between the grant recipients and local law enforcement agencies for implementing a system of providing safe and secure environments. Local education agencies applying for grants under this article shall demonstrate that their proposed program adheres to the definition and principles of school community policing as set forth in this article. 32296.5. Applicants for funds under the School Community Policing Partnership Grant Program shall demonstrate how their program's overall design addresses the definition of school community policing by describing how their programs will do all of the following: (a) Form school -law enforcement - community partnerships to prevent and respond to crime and violence in the school environment. (b) Employ a proactive problem- solving process to accomplish all of the following: (1) Identify problems through coordinated needs assessments, including the use of the results of the California Safe Schools Assessment pursuant to Section 628.2 of the Penal Code. (2) Analyze in a thorough manner information concerning the problems. (3) Develop responses that are innovative and tailormade with the best potential for eliminating or reducing the problems. (4) Evaluate the responses to determine their effectiveness and modify them as necessary . 32296.6. (a) School community policing partnerships funded pursuant to this article shall demonstrate how their program will address the following: (1) Identify the school communities that face a significant public safety risk of crime including, but not limited to, gang activity, daylight burglary, late -night robbery, vandalism, truancy, controlled substance sales, firearm related violence, and juvenile alcohol use. (2) Develop information and intelligence sharing systems to ensure that actions by school districts and county offices of education are fully coordinated with local law enforcement agencies. (3) Identify outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of the program that shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, each of the following: (A) The rate of drug and alcohol - related offenses on the school campus. (B) The rate of crimes against persons on the school campus. (C) The rate of crimes against property on the school campus. (D) Incidence of pupils in possession of firearms or other weapons on the school campus. (E) The rates of school attendance and truancy. (4) Increase understanding and trust between police, the school, and community members. (5) Include an ongoing commitment to developing long-term and proactive programs and strategies to address the underlying conditions that cause school and community problems. (6) Include knowledge of available school and community resources and how to access and mobilize them, as well as the ability to develop new resources within the school and community. (7) Include sustained personal commitment of the top management of law enforcement and other local government agencies, as well as from all other levels of management and key personnel. (b) Applicants for grants under the School Community Policing Partnership Grant Program shall demonstrate how the plan will be sustained after the grant period has expired. 32296.7. The School/Law Enforcement Partnership shall award grants to a school district, county office of education, or a consortium to pay the costs of establishing and operating, on behalf of one or more qualifying schools within the school district, county office of education, or consortium, programs that apply a community policing approach to school crime and safety, as follows: (a) Grants may be awarded to school districts, county offices of education, or consortia that have demonstrated readiness to begin operation of a program or to expand existing programs. Grants shalt supplement, not supplant, existing programs. (b) Grants shall be awarded for no more than three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) for the three -year grant period. (c) Recipients of grants may also receive one -time startup grants, in addition to the base grant, that may be used, among other things, for purchasing equipment, hiring staff, designing a program evaluation, or hiring a program or evaluation consultant. Startup -rants shall be awarded for not more thati one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). (d) All grants awarded under this article shall be matched by the participating local educational agency or consortium and its cooperating agencies with one dollar ($1) for each four dollars ($4) awarded. The match shall be contributed in cash or as services or resources of comparable value. It is the intent of the Legislature that participants seek and utilize funds or resources for this purpose. The School/Law Enforcement Partnership may waive the match requirement upon verifying that the local educational agency or consortium made a substantial effort to secure a match but was unable to secure the required match. (e) Pursuant to this article, the School/Law Enforcement Partnership shall award competitive grants to school districts and county offices of education or consortia in urban, suburban, and rural areas of northern, central, and southern California. (f) Grants shall be awarded for programs that demonstrate the greatest need and meet the criteria for the program pursuant to Section 32296.5 for a school safety grant under this article. The Schoonaw Enforcement Partnership shall consider the latest school crime data for the school or schools in which the program will operate when determining that need. (g) Commencing in the 1998 -99 fiscal year, and each subsequent year for which funding is available, grants shall be awarded according to the following schedule: (1) The School/Law Enforcement Partnership shall issue requests for applications on or before November 1. (2) Grant applications shall be submitted to the Schoonaw Enforcement Partnership on or before March 1. (3) The Schoonaw Enforcement Partnership shall award grants on or before May 15. 32296.8. Nothing in this article shall be construed to require a school district or county office of education to hire police officers as a condition of receiving a grant under the School Community Policing Partnership Grant Program. Grant funds may not be used to provide funding for school resource officers. 32296.9. It is the intent of the Legislature that funding for the School Community Policing Partnership Grant Program established pursuant to this article shall be provided through the annual Budget Act and that grants shall be for a period of three years. Attachment C School/Law Enforcement Partnership SCHOOL COMMUNITY POLICING PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM LETTER OF INTENT Please submit by May 21, 1999 Send to: School Community Policing Partnership Safe Schools and Violence Prevention Office 660 J Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 9814 County Office of Education or School District Name This Letter of Intent is to inform the School /Law Enforcement Partnership that the local education agency named above intends to apply for funding under the School Community Policing Partnerships Program. At this time, this education agency intends to submit how many applications? Contact Person and Position Street Address Telephone Fax City Zip School /Law Enforcement Partnership Attachment D 1999 SCHOOL COMMUNITY POLICING PARTNERSHIP GRANT APPLICATION Original and four copies must be received by 5:00 p.m., June 21, 1999, addressed to: School Community Policing Partnerships Program, Safe Schools and Violence Prevention Office, 660 J Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 Program Title Project Duration: School Community Policing Partnerships Program July 19, 1999 — June 30, 2002 County Office of Education or School District Name Total Funds Requested Address: Telephone Number City: Zip Fax Number () School Site(s) to be served by this application's School Community Policing Partnership: Description: (summarize purpose and scope of program) County or District Superintendent Name (Type or Print) Contact Person Contact Person Telephone and Fax: Certification: I have reviewed this grant application and will support its implementation when funded. Superintendent Signature (or Assistant Superintendent) Date Attachment E SCHOOL COMMUNITY POLICING PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM ASSURANCES The original signature of the county or district superintendent of schools (or the assistant superintendent) is required as part of the application process to assure that: 1. The funds made available for the School Community Policing Partnerships program will be used to supplement, not supplant, existing programs. 2. The grant recipient shall maintain accounting records and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred, with the provision that they shall be kept available by the grant recipient during the grant award period and thereafter for five full years from the date of the final payment. The School /Law Enforcement Partnership must be permitted to audit, review, and inspect the activities, books, documents, papers, and records during the progress of the work and for five years following final apportionment of funds. 3. The grant recipient will complete by January 31, 2000 the program implementation report which is a condition of receiving grant award funds, using the format and containing the information requested by the School /Law Enforcement Partnership. 4. The grant recipient will collect the data and information necessary to complete the annual progress report and self- evaluation, following the guidelines and instructions supplied by the School /Law Enforcement Partnership, and submit the annual report by August 1 of each year following program implementation. School district or county office of education: County or district superintendent name: County or district superintendent signature: Date: Attac.ment F STATEOFCALIFORMA DRUG -FREE WORKPLACE CERTIFICATION ST11 21 (REV. 1297) CERTIFICATION I, the official named below, hereby swear that I am duly authorized legally to bind the contractor or grant recipient to the certification described below. I am fully aware that this certification, executed on the date below, is made under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California. CONTRACTORJBIODER FIRM NAME - FEDERAL 10 NUMBG;I BY(AUMOnM 1 DATEEXECUTD PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING TELEPHONENUMBER (61 wo Ana oxe) ( TITLE CONTRACTORMIDOER FIRMS MAILING ADORESS The contractor or grant recipient named above hereby certifies compliance with Government Code Section 8355 in matters relating to providing a drug -free workplace. The above named contractor or grant recipient will: 1. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations, as required by Government Code Section 8355(a). 2. Establish a Drug -Free Awareness Program as required by Government Code Section 8355(b), to inform employees about all of the following: (a) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace, (b) The person's or organization's policy of maintaining a drug -free workplace, (c) Any available counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs, and (d) Penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. 3. Provide as required by Government Code Section 8355(c), that every employee who works on the proposed contract or grant: (a) Will receive a copy of the company's drug -free workplace policy statement, and (b) Will agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition of employment on the contract or grant. 4. At the election of the contractor or grantee, from and after the "Date Executed" and unHl �0•r{ (NOT TO EXCEED 36 MONTHS), the state will regard this certificate as valid for all contracts or grants entered into between the contractor or grantee and this state agency without requiring the contractor or grantee to provide a new and individual certificate for each contract or grant. If the contractor or grantee elects to fill in the blank date, then the terms and conditions of this certificate shall have the same force, meaning, effect and enforceability as if a certificate were separately, specifically, and individually provided for each contract or grant between the contractor or grantee and this state agency. Attachment G Computation of School Crime Rates per 1000 Students and Comparison to Statewide Averages One of the multiple indicators that will be used to assess the need for a School Community Policing Partnerships grant is the rate of school crime at the site of the proposed SCPP program. For school districts and county offices of education, these rates are printed in California Safe Schools Assessment: 1997 -98 Results, Appendix C. However, when the proposed site is not an entire district or.COE, the applicant must compute rates for the proposed site which are comparable to those contained in Appendix C. The process for calculating the rates is straightforward: 1. Collect all CSSA School Crime Reporting Forms which were submitted to the district or county office level for 1997 -98 from the proposed service are of the SCPP. This may require the CSSA School Crime Reporting Forms to be obtained for more than one school (each school site's CSSA recorder is required to keep copies of the reporting forms). 2. Total the number of incidents for each of the four categories below • Drug and alcohol • Crimes against persons • Property crimes Possession of weapons 3. Add the four numbers created in step 2, and compare it to the number of incident forms you began with. The combined total should at least equal the number of School Crime Reporting Forms (excluding forms which only record "bomb threat," "destructive/ explosive devices," or "loitering/ trespassing"). This step is simply a cross check to ensure that your tabulation is correct. 4. Obtain the enrollment of the school(s) at which the proposed SCPP will operate from the October 1997 School Information Form used to report enrollment for the California Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS). This enrollment should be the total for the same schools for which the CSSA School Crime Reporting Forms were tabulated in step 2. 5. Divide each of the four figures from step 2 by the enrollment total from step 4, carry the result out to 5 decimal places, and multiply the result by 1000. The results are the rates per 1000 students of the four different types of crimes. For example: School Crime i Category ! Drug /Alcohol Offenses Crimes Against I Persons Weapon Possession Number of Crimes 5 9 2 Oct. 97 CBEDS Crimes divided Enrollment I by enrollment 1,9841 .00252 1,9841 .00454 1,984 .00101 I Times 1,000 I = Rate 2.52 _ 4.54 1.01 i Property Crimes I 4 1,984 I .00202 2.02 6. The right -hand column above contains the figures which are to be used in the needs analysis described in Section V.B. The final step in the analysis of this CSSA data is the comparison to the statewide average for the type of school at which the SCPP program is to be located. Below are the statewide averages for each type of school, and each category of school crime. The figures for the applicants type of school from the chart below should be compared to the figures from the right hand column above. School Crime Elementary Middle/ High Category Schools Jr. High Schools Drug /Alcohol 0.16 3.39 10.63 Offenses Crimes Against 2.18 6.67 4.92 Persons Weapon I 0.41 2.27 2.26 Possession Property Crimes 15 4.98 6.29 COE Program 4.24 7.19 0.82 3.54 The results of this comparison, along with community input about community needs and the other types of need information as discussed in Section V.B, will be the basis upon which the applicant's need for a School Community Policing Partnership grant will be judged. Attachment H RATING ELEMENTS SCHOOL COMMUNITY POLICING PARTNERSHIP APPLICATIONS The rating process will be conducted in two steps. Step one of the process will determine whether the applicant has demonstrated the successful formation of a School Community Policing Partnership, and demonstrated readiness to operate the program as required by the authorizing legislation and the Request for Applications. Among the criteria which will be used to make this determination are the below items: • Does the application demonstrate the formation of an inclusive collaborative including school -site personnel, parents, students, law enforcement, and the community? • Does the application demonstrate how the collaborative will link with existing collaboratives? • Do the letters of intent reflect the individual plans of participation for each of the collaborative partners? • Was the creation of the application a collaborative effort involving school staff, parents, students, the community, and law enforcement? • Does the application present plans to work collaboratively to identify and determine causes of the site's problems, implement solutions, conduct on- going self - evaluation, and respond to changing community needs? • Does the application present plans to maintain involvement of the entire collaborative over time? • Are there plans to develop information- sharing systems with law enforcement? Will the collaborative identify and use existing school and community resources? • Does the applicant demonstrate intent to continue operating the SCPP after the grant funding expires? • Does the budget plan correspond to the proposed action plan? Are the type and source of the 25 percent matching funds clearly specified? If the budget shows matching funds from a collaborative partner, there must be a letter of agreement from that partner making a commitment to provide the funds Step two of the rating process will determine the strength of the demonstrated need for a School Community Policing Partnership grant. Among the criteria which will be used- to make this assessment are the following: • How well does the application describe the school neighborhood, the school(s) and their population? • Does the application contain statistics about both community and school crime and violence issues? How do those statistics compare to other areas? • Is community input about the needs of the school neighborhood included? • Does the application contain additional information such as truancy and drop -out data, press clippings, gang and substance -abuse problems? • Does the application present CSSA data in the required four categories? How do those rates compare to statewide averages. D t.'; s.Y 19 1999 c i Moorpark Police Department TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Captain Mike Lewis DATE: May 17, 1999 SUBJECT: Proposed High School Resource Officer - Supplemental Information At the suggestion of the City Manager, I am providing the following synopsis as a broad overview of what I envision the position duties would include and the rational for the creation of this new staff position. It would be my recommendation that this individual be assigned full time to the High School during the school year. During the summer months, while students are on vacation, the officer could be assigned to the Specialized Enforcement Detail (SED) and /or gang suppression activities giving us another officer on the street. I strongly believe that this person should be viewed, not as a guard, but rather a member of the high school community in a role that would be approachable and open to the student population. I envision this officer being a person of high energy, friendly, good at conversing with teens and adults, and a person who would believe that they can make a positive difference in the lives of the students they would come in contact with. The consistence of the same officer developing relationships and being accessible will be the turning point of this program's success. This officer would also be a resource to the teaching staff on appropriate topics such as health, history, civics, debate, etc. serving as a guest instructor. With appropriate accreditation the officer could even teach a class such as Introduction to Law Enforcement which students could take as an elective and receive advance college credits through Moorpark College. This formate is already used in several high schools in the county. Based upon the rapport that the officer would build with the students he /she would serve as a resource to students in need of assistance with personal problems. The officer could give referrals to different services available to students such as ACTION and could facilitate intervention in cases of home abuse or violence and would be instrumental in breaking the cycle of violence often found these days in the home. I would expect that some limited office space would be provided by the high school so that the officer could have publicized `office hours' which would increase the opportunity for students to meet with the officer in a private setting. Supplemental Information - High School Resource Officer Page 2 of 2 I feel that this officer would also become a person that parents could turn to who are concerned about their children or need answers to questions. This contact would allow the officer to channel parents to assistance available to them through many parential support groups located in the county. This officer could also be used to instruct in an evening parenting class open to the community. Parenting classes are being offered with great success in Thousand Oaks and Camarillo. These classes offer instruction in parenting skills, group support from other parents having problems with their children and provide a higher level of assistance from other sources in the county from both the public and private sector. As a police agency, we use demographics, current trends and accurate statistics to forecast the demand for our services and challenges we are likely to face. Demographics studies show that a large segment of our population are in their early teens. This age group, as it moves through the `pipeline' during the next 5 to 7 years, will become part of a age group that is statistically more prone to violence, drug usage and criminal behavior if given the opportunity. It is also this age group that statistically have higher abuse rates of alcohol, are killed more frequently in traffic collisions and because of these stated reasons require a disproportionately higher amount of law enforcement time then other segments of the population. If through preventative opportunities, these problems areas can be mitigated, then the resultant crime, accident rate and youthful deaths can be reduced. It has also come to my attention this week that another source of grant funding exists through the California Department of Education which will provide grants of up to $300,000 to school districts who partner with law enforcement to implement a school community policing approach to deal specificly with school crime and campus safety issues. The school district would have to take the lead in applying for this grant. I have forwarded the overview of this grant and the application to the Assistant City Manager for his review. This grant has a filing deadline of June 21, 1999. A second grant opportunity still exists for the City (as reflected in the staff report) to receive federal COPS MORE money that will provide $125,000 over a 3 year period for the expressed purpose of providing an officer to primary and secondary schools. This grant has filing deadlines of June 4 or July 16, 1999. Lastly, I have included a survey of Community Policing Programs that are provided by different communities throughout the county. This information is provided to contrast what different police agencies are providing under the umbrilla of proactive community policing programs. Please see Attachment W. I can provide additonal information or respond to questions as requested. c: Steve Kueny, City Manager John Nowak, Assistant City Manager Attachment `A' Community Oriented Policing Programs Survey City Community Policing Coordinator /Officer D.A.R.E. Education Youth Officer High School Resource Officer Camarillo 1 0 1 1 Fillmore 1 0 0 1/2 Moorpark 1 2 0 0 Oak Park 1 1 0 0 Ojai '/2 1 0 '/2 Oxnard 3 0 1 3 Simi Valley 2 2 1 1 Thousand Oaks 4 2 1 1 Ventura 1 1 1 2 Unincorporated 1 2 0 0 05/18/99