Partial Compliance Clause Samples

Partial Compliance. Partial fulfillment of the Secured Obligations does not result in corresponding release of the Disposed Assets (as defined below) within the scope hereof.

Partial Compliance. 2020 Status Beginning Compliance Assessment Nothing in the materials that we have reviewed (including samples of incident reports and body-worn camera footage from October 2020, February 2021, and June 2021) indicates that officers have arrested people on quality of life offenses for purposes of questioning or interrogating on other offenses. Next Steps EPSO supervisors must review all quality of life arrests and explanations where the officer failed to seek prior approval. During the next reporting period, DOJ will (1) monitor implementation of the EPSO’s Vehicle Stops, Field Interviews, Investigative Stops, Voluntary Contacts, and Quality of Life policies; and (2) audit documentation of law enforcement activity to assess compliance with these Agreement provisions.

Partial Compliance. 2020 Status Beginning Compliance Assessment EPSO developed policies and conducted training that addressed the requirements of this provisions. EPSO should ensure that the most recent versions of the policies are updated on EPSO’s website and distributed to EPSO personnel. Next Steps EPSO should finalize its updated policies, and DOJ will conduct further audits of documented law enforcement activity to assess compliance with these Agreement provisions.

Partial Compliance. Partial fulfillment of the Secured Obligations does not result in corresponding release of the Credit Rights (as defined below) within the scope hereof.

Partial Compliance. 2020 Status Beginning Compliance Assessment DOJ reviewed a sample of body-worn camera videos and incident reports from October 2020, February 2021, and June 2021, confirming continued improvement in compliance with this provision. In the majority of cases that we reviewed, EPSO provided video footage reflecting body-worn camera use by each officer on the scene of the incident, and the cameras appeared to have been turned on and off at appropriate times and in accordance with EPSO policy. In some cases that we reviewed, however, there were incidents for which footage was not provided or was not provided for all personnel on the scene. We also reviewed some incidents for which some body-worn camera footage was provided, but it did not appear that cameras were activated at appropriate times in accordance with policy. Furthermore, we remain concerned that supervisors failed to routinely audit these videos to ensure that officers were complying with the constitution and EPSO policy. If supervisors had been auditing body-worn camera video, they might have discovered the instances of misconduct that we mentioned above and prevented unconstitutional conduct, and the deleterious effect on community trust, that occurred. Next Steps We will continue to audit body-worm camera footage and ensure that first-line supervisors audit officers’ activities on a consistent basis.

Partial Compliance. For the Monitoring Team’s assessment of Settlement Agreement Paragraph 76, we reviewed a series of reports and analyses required to be conducted by the PPB Force Inspector in connection with use of force data and supervisors’ Directive 0910.00 reports (regarding the use of force). The Monitoring Team’s review of these reports and analyses found that they are appropriately designed to accomplish some, but not all, of the outcomes listed in Paragraph 76. We used a series of eight questions to help us evaluate the fulfillment of the requirements in this paragraph. The reports we reviewed included: • Applications of Force Report (2024) • Force Audit Report (Q3-Q4 2024) • Force Analysis Summary Report (Q4 2024) • Force Analysis Summary Report (2024) The complete list of requirements includes: 1) determining whether significant trends exist; 2) determining if there is variation in force practice away from PPB policy in any unit; 3) determining if any officer, PPB unit, or group of officers is using force differently or at a different rate than others, determine the reason for any difference, and correct or duplicate the difference elsewhere, as appropriate; 4) identifying and correct deficiencies revealed by the analysis; and 5) documenting the Force Inspector’s findings in an annual public report. In its Applications of Force Report, PPB relies on FDCRs to report on uses of force within specific precincts and work shifts. The report includes information on statistical means and standard deviations from them in order to identify personnel who used force at notably different rates than others. The Monitoring Team did note in its review of this PPB report, however, that it did not address the reason(s) (or potential reason(s)), behind these differences, and that it did not address how the information being reported on would (or could) be used to correct behavior, where appropriate. The Force Audit Report14 includes data on officer, sergeant, and command reporting accuracy rates as well as comparisons of that information across different Reporting Periods, precincts/divisions, and the Bureau as a whole. The report also provides information on reporting deficiencies over time, allowing PPB to identify trends in these data. The Force Audit Report also includes a breakdown of categories of required elements of use of force reporting, identifying those with the greatest and fewest number of deficiencies. The Monitoring Team did note in its review of this PPB report, ho...

Partial Compliance. The term “partial compliance” shall mean that the State has achieved less than substantial compliance with all of the components of a rated paragraph of the agreement, but has made some progress toward substantial compliance on most of the key components of the rated paragraph. A partial compliance rating encompasses a wide range of performance by the State. Specifically, a partial compliance rating can signify that that the State is nearly in substantial compliance, or it can mean that the State is only slightly above a non-compliance rating.

Partial Compliance. The SME looks forward to receiving information about DHHRs use of CANs related information including DHHRs planned inclusion of baseline data in the January 2023 semi- annual report. The SME understands that the State’s use of CANS data is in its nascent stages. The SME anticipates that the CANS data will facilitate DHHR demonstrating compliance with Paragraph 35 , as well as applications to other Agreement requirements noted elsewhere in this report.

Partial Compliance. The Monitoring Team’s review of PPB’s use of force reporting directives confirmed their inclusion of requirements listed in Paragraph 69 of the Settlement Agreement. These include: