This is the first in a series of articles that will examine at least 25 different areas of concern regarding the operation of a professional property unit. In each issue of the Evidence Log we will discuss an area (or areas) of property unit operation, but using a common format, in order to make the articles more useful as references. In each article, we will (1) describe the area to be discussed, (2) quote standards for the area from various sources, and (3) provide a narrative discussion of the goals that the standards hope to accomplish.

          Since there are so few organizations attempting to set standards for the operation of property units, most of the standards referred to in this series of articles will be from a very limited number of sources. Those quoted most frequently are likely to be the Standards Manual of the Commission on Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA), a policy paper from International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), and the Property and Evidence Manuals from the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST, 1984), and the California Association for Property and Evidence (CAPE, 1995),

In this issue we will look at three relatively brief, but critically important, areas which are highly inter-related. In the next issue, we will focus on only one, but one which is rather expansive: Responsibilities of the Property Officer.

Organizational placement deals with the authority lines and reporting relationships affecting the property unit. It considers the fact that managers hold some elements of formal and informal control over the supervisors reporting to them. The supervisors, in turn, have the same influences over their employees. The property unit's organizational placement can greatly impact its independence and credibility.

Standards

          The size of a law enforcement agency ordinarily influences the organizational placement of its property and evidence function. There are however, compelling reasons - which apply to all departments - that the responsibility for safeguarding and processing property be assigned to a specific organizational unit which functions primarily for that purpose. The unit usually is placed organizationally in the Support Services or Administrative Bureau. POST - Managing Property In Law Enforcement Agencies, 1984, Page 3.

          Separation of duties are paramount in centralizing the control and storage of property. Centralizing the control and storage of property, and staffing the property unit with personnel, who are not involved in operational tasks, are precautions that will simplify control procedures and enhance the integrity of a property room. POST - Managing Property In Law Enforcement Agencies, 1984, Page 2.

          When two or more persons or departments are involved in a transaction, the work of one serves as a check on the accuracy of the work of another. When two or more persons are involved in a transaction, the possibilities of fraud and the incidence of undetected error diminish considerably. No one person should handle any transaction from beginning to end. For example, a person receiving cash from officers should not post any ledgers accounting for the transaction (two man rule). Obviously, Segregation of duties becomes more difficult among a small staff. Some exceptions may be necessary in small organizations due to staffing requirements. CAPE - Property Manual, Page 55, 1995.

Goals

          The organizational placement of the property unit can be part of the overall checks and balances of the agency in two ways. First, the unit should be provided with limited authority. The unit is for property custody and documentation only. It should not be involved in decisions about what to seize, or in decisions related to property disposition. Second, the unit must be organizationally separate from the patrol and investigation 
functions.  Patrol personnel seize and book almost all property, and detectives most often check out property and arrange for its final disposition. Using the property unit as a buffer between those two functions insures accountability from them both. In some small departments, this may mean that the property unit is assigned to an administrative division, or even reports to the Chief's office.

          Patrol personnel, who are involved in collecting evidence in the field and who subsequently may authorize release of these items, should not be given the responsibility to store or process evidence. Investigative personnel, who are in the position to oversee criminal investigations and who are responsible for making decisions regarding the collected evidence, should not be involved in the property and evidence function.

          In addition, having the unit independent of patrol and investigations reduces the appearance of conflict of interest. It is not related to patrol, so has no motivation to cover discrepancies in property descriptions or packaging by patrol officers. It is not related to investigations, so it has no motivation to release or dispose of property without accurate documentation. Employees of the unit don't have any input in what is seized, so they can't "shop" for desirable property, and they have no input on the decisions regarding its disposition, so they can't funnel property to an acquaintance or associate.

          Staffing deals with the selection of employees to work in the property function of the agenc It includes such things as hiring standards, background investigations, assignments, and employee turnover.

Standard

          Employees assigned to the Property / Evidence function should ordinarily be non-peace officers, because the position of property controller (custodian) frequently is closely allied to that of storekeeper and peace officer powers are not necessarily required. The same reasoning may apply to supervisors or managers of the function. POST - Managing Property In Law Enforcement Agencies 1984, Page 2.

          The position of Property Controller should be filled by individuals whose background includes experience in general warehousing. Candidates selected to fill these positions must have successfully passed both the qualifying exam and a thorough background check. Individuals filing for the Property Controller position must meet the requirements set forth by the agency. Rotating personnel through the property unit should be discouraged, as it makes quality control more difficult. CAPE - Property Manual, 1995, Page 1.

          Planned and unannounced rotation of duties is an important principle of internal control, but rotating employees through the property unit can create significant accountability problems. If it is determined that rotation of personnel is necessary, a complete inventory is absolutely necessary to protect all employees involved in the rotation. Rotation of personnel, besides being an effective internal control check, can also be a valuable aid in an overall training program (i.e., employees can be taught to handle other job responsibilities in the organization). CAPE - Property Manual, 1995, Page 55.

Goals

           It is important that the agency's selection criteria produce qualified employees, and a significant part of that is a thorough background investigation. Whether the employee is sworn or civilian is less important than that he or she is a qualified, committed, long-term employee. Duties within the property unit may be rotated for quality control, or even for variety, but employees should not rotate through the property detail from other parts of the agency unless it is to be for an extended period (several years). Accountability can be pinpointed more easily when as few as possible employees are directly involved in the property function. At no time should any classification of employee ever be routinely rotated through the property room. High turnover for any reason is unacceptable, as it requires too frequent inventory, re-keying, and other accommodations. Staffing levels must consider that there is much "behind the scenes" work other than accepting and releasing property for officers and the public.

          Hours of operation deals not only with the days and hours that the property unit employees work, but the days and hours during which the public and police counters are open for business. Counter duties frequently keep property employees from doing many of their necessary tasks, so some allowance must be made for "non-public" work hours.

Standards

          Only large agencies can usually justify around-the-clock property control staffing. Most property storage facilities are open only weekdays during normal business hours; circumstances or occasions should be rare when it is necessary to enter the property room at any other time. POST - Managing Property In Law Enforcement Agencies 1984, Page 2.

Goals

Having sufficient property employees available to sign out evidence to officers for court appearances, and check it back in afterwards, are primary scheduling factors, as is having some "after hours" time for property release to the public. Allowance must be made for the distance of the property room from court in some jurisdictions, or for return of property from detectives in courts with late hours. Property lockers with "one way doors" frequently satisfy this need. To avoid temptation, or the appearance of temptation, employees should work with at least one partner during times when the property counter is closed. Note that audits, inventories, and purging are best accomplished when the counter is closed, as those functions require more concentration than an open counter allows. The unit schedule should attempt to minimize the times in which "after hours" entry is needed. For those rare situations, there should be a call-in of property personnel, or a carefully written and strictly enforced exception policy.