0335.00 Corrective Action Process
Refer:
• Portland City Code 3.20.140 Police Review Board
• City of Portland Human Resources Administrative Rule 5.01 Discipline
• DIR 0305.00, Active Bystandership, Intervention, and Anti-Retaliation
• DIR 0330.00, Internal Affairs, Complaint Intake, and Processing
• DIR 0336.00, Police Review Board
• DIR 0338.00, Corrective Action Guide
Definitions:
• Case File: Administrative package containing the originals or copies of the Internal Affairs (IA) investigation or other investigation materials, including all materials related to findings.
• Command Counseling: A formal non-disciplinary corrective action that involves verbal counseling in response to a sustained finding for a minor policy violation. Command counseling is conducted by the Responsibility Unit (RU) manager or a designee and is documented in a memorandum to IA.
• Corrective Action Recommendation Memorandum: A form attached to an administrative investigation case file by the RU Manager recommending the corrective action. The form indicates whether the RU Manager believes a Command Counseling, a Letter of Reprimand, or a Police Review Board is appropriate. The form also ensures the RU Manager considers the individual’s corrective action history and uses the Corrective Action Guide in reaching any recommended corrective action.
• Demotion: Reversion to a lower rank or job classification.
• Corrective Action Guide: A document used to provide direction to Responsibility Unit Managers, the Police Review Board (PRB), the Chief of Police, and the Commissioner in Charge, for determining an appropriate level of corrective action for sworn members.
• Findings: A conclusion as to whether a member’s conduct violated Bureau directives.
o Sustained: The preponderance of evidence proves a violation of policy or procedure.
o Not Sustained: The evidence was insufficient to prove a violation of policy or procedure.
o Exonerated: The preponderance of evidence proves the member’s conduct was lawful and within policy.
o Unfounded: The preponderance of evidence proves the allegation was false or devoid of fact or there was not a credible basis for a possible violation of policy or procedure.
• Findings Cover Sheet: A form attached to an administrative investigation case file by the RU Manager recommending the finding. This form includes sections for the appropriate Assistant Chief, Professional Standards Division (PSD) Captain, and the Independent Police Review (IPR) Director to list whether they concur or controvert the findings, whether more investigation is warranted, whether the case would benefit from a PRB hearing, and/or suggest additional recommendations (e.g., training review, policy review, supervisory review).
• Letter of Reprimand: A disciplinary letter placed in the member’s personnel file detailing a member’s conduct or performance that violated one or more Bureau directives but does not involve an economic sanction such as a suspension, demotion or termination.
• Pre-determination meeting: A due-process meeting with the Chief of Police or designee to discuss the involved member’s proposed corrective action prior to a final decision. This meeting is the member’s opportunity to discuss the case with the Chief or designee, and present any mitigating factors for consideration.
• Preponderance of the Evidence: The facts and circumstances indicate it is more likely than not that a violation of policy or procedure either occurred or did not occur.
• Stipulated Discipline: A process by which pre-determined categories of investigations are eligible for agreed upon discipline.
• Suspension: Removal from work status, without pay, for a specified period of time.
• Termination: Discharge from Police Bureau employment.
Policy:
1. The purpose of this directive is to provide guidance to members regarding the process for recommending and assigning corrective action when an allegation of a policy violation or misconduct against a member is sustained.
2. In order to maintain public confidence in the ability of the Police Bureau to investigate and properly address legitimate complaints concerning employee conduct and performance, and to ensure internal accountability, a broad range of tools are available to set expectations, and impose corrective action. The Bureau has a responsibility to impose corrective action when warranted by a member’s violation of policy.
3. The Bureau’s philosophy with respect to corrective action is the same philosophy that is applied to employees who work elsewhere in the City, which is that corrective action exists to assist supervisors in working with employees whose behavior or job performance does not meet the expectations associated with the position they hold. Corrective action can be used to correct behavior, to deter a violation of policies or procedures, and to hold employees accountable for their behavior or performance. Generally speaking, corrective action is used to put the employee on notice of unacceptable conduct or performance, and give the employee a reasonable opportunity to correct their behavior.
4. Generally, corrective action is progressive, beginning with an oral warning or Letter of Reprimand and proceeding to suspension, demotion, or termination. Serious offenses may result in termination, even if there were no prior warnings or attempts at corrective action. Serious offenses include, but are not limited to, criminal or other unlawful acts, abuse of authority, theft, untruthfulness, excessive force, failure to follow orders, unlawful discrimination, workplace harassment, retaliation, creation of a hostile work environment, or workplace violence and may justify suspension or termination without the necessity of progressive corrective action.
5. In certain cases, as defined in City Code 3.20.140, the Bureau and member may both agree to the appropriate corrective action to allow for a more timely resolution, i.e., Stipulated Discipline.
6. In all cases, the level and degree of corrective action shall conform with the seriousness of the offense, taking into account the circumstances relevant to the case. It is not the purpose of this directive to require an automatic progression of corrective action measures. Rather, the circumstances of each situation are considered on a case-by-case basis. The Corrective Action Guide serves to ensure that corrective action is applied in an impartial and consistent manner.
7. Before the Bureau takes corrective action, the Bureau or IPR will conduct a thorough investigation to assist it in determining whether the employee, in fact, engaged in misconduct or performance that is contrary to Bureau directives and policies.
8. Members are subject to corrective action for cause or just cause. Corrective actions are identified in the Corrective Action Guide,.
9. Counseling, instruction, and training are non-disciplinary.
Procedure:
1. Those responsible for making recommendations on findings and corrective action shall refer to the Corrective Action Guide in accordance with Directive 0338.00, Corrective Action Guide.
2. Development of Proposed Findings and Recommended Corrective Action.
2.1. RU Manager Responsibilities.
2.1.1. Obtain the member’s corrective action history by contacting:
2.1.1.1. The corrective action coordinator in PSD for administrative investigations of sworn members.
2.1.1.2. The CRB coordinator in PSD for collision review board (CRB) cases.
2.1.1.3. The BHR business partner in PPB’s personnel division for non-sworn members.
2.1.2. Review and consider the member’s work history, including aggravating and mitigating factors as set forth in the Corrective Action Guide when recommending corrective action.
2.1.3. Make a corrective action recommendation and document such on the Findings Cover Sheet and in the Corrective Action Recommendation Memorandum.
2.1.4. Submit the entire packet to IA, including the Findings Cover Sheet and the Corrective Action Recommendation Memorandum, within seven days of receipt of the case file.
2.1.4.1. When submitting the packet to IA, the RU Manager shall indicate in the Corrective Action Recommendation Memorandum whether the case is eligible for Stipulated Discipline (subject to member’s agreement and final approval by the Chief and the Commissioner in Charge). If the case is eligible for Stipulated Discipline, the RU Manager shall include specific recommended discipline in the Corrective Action Recommendation Memorandum.
2.1.5. RU Managers or designees shall not take any corrective action before being informed by the IA Captain or Corrective Action Coordinator that the case has been closed. Ensuring adherence to, and reminders of, directives and administrative rules is authorized at any time.
2.2. IA Captain Responsibilities.
2.2.1. Upon receipt of the RU Manager’s proposed findings, the IA Captain or their designee shall, by the end of the next business day, send a copy of the case file, including the proposed findings and recommended corrective action, to the IPR Director and the supervising Assistant Chief for a seven-day concurrent review.
2.2.2. The IA Captain shall review the proposed findings and recommended corrective action within seven days of receipt.
2.2.2.1. The IA Captain may controvert the RU manager’s proposed findings and/or recommended corrective action. All controverts shall be documented in a memorandum that clearly articulates that the reviewer wishes to controvert and provides an adequate explanation for the writer’s basis for disagreeing with the proposed finding or recommended corrective action.
2.3. Supervising Assistant Chief Responsibilities.
2.3.1. The Supervising Assistant Chief shall review the proposed findings and recommended corrective action and resubmit to IA within seven days of receipt.
2.3.1.1. The Assistant Chief may controvert the proposed findings and/or recommended corrective action. All controverts shall be documented in a memorandum that clearly articulates that the reviewer wishes to controvert and provides an adequate explanation for the writer’s basis for disagreeing with the proposed finding or recommended corrective action.
2.4. IPR Director Responsibilities.
2.4.1. The IPR Director will review the proposed findings and recommended corrective action and submit a response to IA within seven days of receipt.
2.4.1.1. The IPR Director may controvert the proposed findings and/or recommended corrective action. All controverts shall be documented in a memorandum that clearly articulates that the reviewer wishes to controvert and provides an adequate explanation for the writer’s basis for disagreeing with the proposed finding or recommended corrective action.
2.5. Controverted Findings and Corrective Action.
2.5.1. If the RU Manager’s proposed finding or recommended corrective action is controverted by the supervising Assistant Chief, the IPR Director, or the IA Captain, the case will be heard by the PRB in accordance with Directive 0336.00, Police Review Board.
3. Imposing Corrective Action.
3.1. Command Counseling or Letter of Reprimand.
3.1.1. The IA Captain shall refer all cases where proposed corrective action is less than suspension to the involved member’s RU Manager to implement the corrective action.
3.1.2. The IA Captain shall notify the RU Manager and the Corrective Action Coordinator when the case is closed and the Command Counseling or Letter of Reprimand can be issued.
3.1.3. The RU Manager, in consultation with the Corrective Action Coordinator, shall prepare the proposed corrective action and other documentation as appropriate.
3.1.4. The appropriate Assistant Chief shall review the RU Manager’s recommended action and upon approval return the documentation to the Corrective Action Coordinator.
3.1.5. The Corrective Action Coordinator shall receive the documentation and coordinate corrective action with the RU Manager.
3.1.6. Pursuant to city code, involved members may appeal the proposed findings to the Citizen Review Committee (CRC).
3.1.6.1. In such cases, the Chief shall not issue proposed corrective action or make recommendations until the CRC has made a final decision, or until after the City Council has made a determination, if the CRC appeal process has resulted in referral of the case to the City Council.
3.1.7. If the proposed corrective action is Command Counseling:
3.1.7.1. The RU Manager shall meet with the member to review the incident and communicate their expectations moving forward.
3.1.7.2. The RU Manager shall outline the expectations in the meeting with the member and document as such in a memorandum.
3.1.7.3. The RU Manager shall forward the Command Counseling memorandum to the Corrective Action Coordinator via IA.
3.1.7.4. The Command Counseling memorandum shall not include documentation of other allegations which required debriefings. Debriefings shall be documented separately in accordance with Directive 0332.00, Administrative Investigations.
3.1.8. If the proposed corrective action is a Letter of Reprimand:
3.1.8.1. The RU Manager shall meet with the member to review the incident and communicate their expectation moving forward.
3.1.8.2. The RU Manager shall serve the member with the letter of proposed corrective action.
3.1.8.2.1. The member can request a pre-determination meeting with their supervising Assistant Chief.
3.1.8.2.1.1. Following the meeting, the Assistant Chief shall notify the Corrective Action Coordinator in writing of the final corrective action to be imposed.
3.1.8.3. The Corrective Action Coordinator shall coordinate with the RU Manager the service of the final Letter of Reprimand.
3.1.9. The Corrective Action Coordinator shall forward a copy of the Command Counseling memorandum or the proposed and final Letters of Reprimand to the Personnel Division for inclusion in the member’s personnel file.
3.2. Corrective Action of Suspension or Greater.
3.2.1. All cases in which recommended corrective action is suspension or greater will be heard by the PRB. PRB procedures are outlined in Directive 0336.00, Police Review Board.
3.2.2. Pursuant to city code, involved members may appeal the PRB’s recommended findings to the CRC.
3.2.2.1. If a member files a timely appeal with the CRC, the Chief shall not issue proposed corrective action until the CRC has made a final decision or until after the City Council has made a determination, if the CRC appeal process has resulted in referral of the case to the City Council.
3.2.3. After the close of the CRC appeal window or after the completion of the CRC appeal process, if any, IA shall forward the PRB’s recommendation memorandum to the Chief.
3.2.4. The Chief, after consultation with the Police Commissioner, shall provide the Chief’s proposed findings to the Corrective Action Coordinator and to PSD.
3.2.5. The Corrective Action Coordinator shall provide the letter of proposed corrective action to the RU Manager for delivery to the involved member.
3.2.6. Upon receipt of the letter of proposed corrective action, the involved member may request a pre-determination meeting with the Chief.
3.2.6.1. The Chief shall notify the Corrective Action Coordinator in writing of the final corrective action to be imposed following the meeting.
3.2.6.1.1. If the imposed corrective action is suspension without pay, the Bureau shall adhere to the following suspension guidelines to ensure that members are held accountable.
3.2.6.1.1.1. Members shall not use accrued vacation time in lieu of suspension, unless authorized by the Chief or their designee.
3.2.6.1.1.2. Suspension of 40 hours or fewer: Suspension will be taken in consecutive increments of time (e.g., 20-hour suspension equals two 10-hour back-to-back work days) according to the member’s schedule. The suspension can carry over into the following pay period, but once the suspension starts, the member shall not be scheduled for work during the period of the suspension.
3.2.6.1.1.3. Suspension of 40 hours or more: Members may choose to take their suspension all at once or schedule the suspension in 40-hour increments in consecutive following months. In other words, someone receiving a 120-hour suspension may serve 40 hours suspension (in consecutive increments of time) in the current month, 40 hours in the following month, and the last 40 hours in the third month. This method allows the member to continue receiving health benefits in accordance with their respective collective bargaining agreements.
3.2.6.2. The Corrective Action Coordinator shall coordinate the service of the final letter of imposed corrective action to the involved member with the RU Manager.
3.2.7. The Corrective Action Coordinator shall schedule the dates of the suspension or separation with the RU Manager and shall forward the dates to the Fiscal Division.
4. Stipulated Findings and Discipline.
4.1. The following categories of cases are not eligible for stipulated findings and recommended discipline and, if they otherwise meet the criteria for review by the PRB, shall go through PRB review and recommendations:
4.1.1. Cases involving alleged use of excessive force;
4.1.2. Physical injury caused by an officer that requires hospitalization;
4.1.3. Any use of force where the recommended finding is “out of policy;”
4.1.4. Cases involving alleged discrimination, disparate treatment or retaliation;
4.1.5. Reviews of officer-involved shootings and in-custody deaths; and
4.1.6. Cases in which the Chief or the Commissioner-in-Charge does not agree to accept the member’s proposed stipulation to findings and recommended discipline.
4.2. The following categories of investigations are eligible for Stipulated Discipline without review by the PRB when the involved member elects, with the concurrence of the Chief and the Commissioner-in-Charge, to accept the proposed findings and recommended discipline of the RU Manager following a full investigation of the alleged misconduct, issuance of investigative findings and concurrence with the findings by IPR, PSD and the member’s Branch Assistant Chief:
4.2.1. First time offenses that fall under Category A through Category C of the Police Bureau Corrective Action Guide and that are not otherwise excluded above;
4.2.2. Second time offenses that fall under Category A of the Police Bureau Corrective Guide;
4.2.3. First-time, off-duty driving while under the influence offenses that fall under Category C of the Police Bureau Corrective Action Guide. To be eligible for stipulated discipline for an off-duty driving under the influence offense, there can be no other driving-related violations or charges and the member must comply with all court-ordered conditions of a diversion or delayed prosecution;
4.3. In an investigation involving multiple sustained violations, the violation with the highest category from the Police Bureau Corrective Action Guide will be used to determine whether the case qualifies for stipulated discipline.
4.4. Stipulated Discipline Request Procedures.
4.4.1. Upon receipt of the case file, including completed Findings Cover Sheets, IA administrative staff shall provide notice to the member and, when applicable, the member’s bargaining unit representative, of the proposed findings and recommended disciplinary action.
4.4.2. After receiving the notice, the member shall have ten calendar days to review the case file and request Stipulated Discipline.
4.4.2.1. If the member requests Stipulated Discipline, they shall provide written notification to the IA Captain and the Corrective Action Coordinator.
4.4.3. Upon receipt of the request from the member, the Corrective Action Coordinator shall submit the member’s request and the case file to the Chief for review.
4.4.4. The Chief, in consultation with the Commissioner-in-Charge, shall then have ten calendar days to either accept or reject the Stipulated Discipline proposal.
4.4.4.1. If the Chief or Commissioner-in-Charge does not approve the Stipulated Discipline proposal, the case will revert to its normal review procedure.
4.4.4.2. If the Chief and the Commissioner-in-Charge approve the Stipulated Discipline proposal, the Stipulated Discipline will be imposed without going through any further review process.
Effective: 6/21/2024
Next Review: 6/21/2026