Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS1-Police CI'" .. OF SAN BERNARDI~'O - REQU.....T FOR COUNCIL AC.....~N From: DONALD J. BURNETT CHIEF OF POLlCE Dept: POll CE Date: SEPTEMBER 16, 1988 Subject: AGREEMENT BETWEEN DR. LARRY BLUM, CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST CONSULTANT AND THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Synopsis of Previous Council action: The Mayor and Common Council approved a resolution authorizin9 the execution of an a9reement between the City of San Bernardino and Dr. Robert W. Miller to conduct psychological examinations for the police department. Resolution #87-245, Adopted July 20, 1987 and extended for one year was the 6th amendment to the original agreement. Recommended motion: Adopt Resolution " .--, .' ~., '/ vJl:b / ~ II (A."t<? c..'\1L. - \,ignature .~ Contact person: Michael Lewis, Captain Phone: 384-5608 N!A Supporting data attached: Yes Ward: FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $10,000 (for all pre-employment Source: exams) Finance: 001-229-53150 Council Notes: 75-0262 eLl Agenda Item No. ~.J _ CI"~ OF SAN BERNARD'''~O - REQUF~T FOR COUNCIL AC-'ON STAFF REPORT Since July 1, 1988, we have been without the services of a psychologist to perform pre-employment and fit-for-duty examinations. Discussion with City Attorney, James Penman, Personnel Director Gordon Johnson, and Risk Manage- ment Director John Kirwan developed due to a recent evaluation received from Dr. Warburton Miller. It was agreed it maybe time to consider con- tracting with a different psychologist for police officer evaluation services. A survey of available psychologists was conducted and Dr. Larry Blum was selected by the Chief of Police due to his extensive work and expertise in psychological services for police. City Attorney James Penman, Personnel Director Gordon Johnson, and Risk Management Director John Kirwan agreed to that selection based on mandated entry level police officer psychological examination needs and liability considerations associated with officer fit- for-duty evaluations. 75.0264 9-16-88 1 RESOLUTION NO.' 2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH DR. LAWRENCE BLUM REGARDING PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATIONS FOR APPLICANTS TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. 3 4 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY 5 OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: 6 SECTION 1. The Mayor of the City of San Bernardino is 7 hereby authorized and directed to execute on behalf of said City 8 an agreement with Dr. Lawrence Blum, Ph.D., Clinical 9 Psychologist, to perform psychological examinations of 10 applicants to the Police Department, a copy of which is attached 11 hereto marked Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference as " 12 fully as though set forth at length. 13 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly 14 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San 15 16 Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held on the day of , 1988, by the following vote, to 17 wit: 18 AYES: 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NAYS: ABSENT: City Clerk / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / HE/dys 1 September 15, 1988 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION . . . AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH Dr LAWRENCE BLUP qEGARDING PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATIONS FOR PPLICANTS TO . ~ POLICE DEPARTMENT. 1 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day of , 1988. 2 3 4 Evlyn Wilcox, Mayor City of San Bernardino 5 6 Approved as to form a Legal Content: ",T~ y Attorney 7 8 9 I HE/dys September 15, 1988 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 AGREEMENT 2 This Agreement, made and entered into at San Bernardino, 3 California, this day of , 1988, by and between the City of San Bernardino, a municipal corporation 4 (hereinafter referred to as "CITY"), and Dr. Lawrence Blum, Ph.D., Inc., Clinical Psychologist (hereinafter referred to as 5 "BLUM"). 6 CITY and BLUM agree as follows: 7 1. Scope of Work: A. BLUM hereby agrees to perform the following services: 8 9 1. Perform pre-employment psychological examinations and submit reports as requested by CITY. 2. Perform fitness for duty examinations and submit reports as requested by CITY. , 3. Provide court testimony as requested by CITY. B. These services shall be provided pursuant to the "Methods of Assessment in Examinations" and "Response and Report to the Department" provisions in Exhibit 1., attached and incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth. C. Each written report by BLUM shall also be accompanied by an "Authorization for the Release of Medical Information by a Provider of Health Care" in a form consistent with the provisions of California Civil Code Section 56.11. D. BLUM shall be available for consultation with respect to any of his examinations and reports and shall submit supplemental reports as requested by CITY. 2. Term. The term of this agreement is for a period of one year. This agreement shall commence on September 16, 1988, and terminate on September 15, 1989. 3. Option to Extend. Upon expiration of the term hereof, City shall have the option to extend this agreement for a one year period upon the same terms and conditions. HE/dys September 15, 1988 1 EXHIBIT A 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 4. Provision for Payment. 2 A. Rate of Compensation 3 4 (1) CITY agrees to pay BLUM the sum of $200.00 for each pre-employment psychological examination and report performed by BLUM at the request of CITY. 5 6 (2) CITY agrees to pay BLUM the sum of $400.00 for each fitness .for duty examination and report performed by BLUM at the request of CITY. (3) CITY agrees to pay BLUM the sum of $100.00 per hour for preparation and court testimony performed by BLUM at the request of CITY upon reasonable notice. 7 8 9 B. Manner of Compensation (1) BLUM shall maintain and file with the Police Department a monthly record of services performed. ~ (2) The Police Department shall submit a claim or request for payment based on such record to the Finance Department in such manner that BLUM shall be paid monthly. (3) BLUM shall assume and pay all out-of-pocket expenses and costs of performing services under this agreement except as otherwise specifically provided herein, and CITY shall not be liable for any such costs and expenses. 5. Amendments. This agreement may be amended or modified only by written agreement executed by both parties. 6. Assignment. BLUM'S rights under this agreement shall not be assigned by BLUM to any other person, firm or corporation without the prior written consent of the City. 7. Relationship Of Parties. BLUM is acting as an independent contractor, and not as an employee of the City. In the performance of personal services pursuant to the provisions of this agreement, BLUM shall not be supervised, directed, or under the control or authority of any City officer or employee, except and to the extent as may be expressly or implicitly required by HE/dys September 15, 1988 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 the terms and provisions of this agreement. Any direction or control so required under this agreement shall be limited tobroad objectives or goals of the project or program to be accomplished and not to the details and procedures to accomplish such objectives or goals. BLUM shall not be obligated to conform to the supervision or direction of City officers or employees which are not authorized herein. Changes or modifications of said objectives and goals may be made by written recommendations of either party subject to the concurrence of the other party in writing. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. Hold Harmless. 8 9 BLUM hereby agrees to, and shall, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless CITY, its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents and employees from any liability, claim, suit or actions at law or in equity for damages including personal injury or death, caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of BLUM'S performance under this agreement, including any claims that may arise against CITY by reason of BLUM'S legal relationshi~ with CITY being categorized as other than that of an independent contractor. 9. Insurance. BLUM shall provide to CITY evidence of insurance covering BLUM and CITY as an additional insured as to any potential liability to BLUM and CITY. The evidence to be provided shall be a Certificate of Insurance describing the coverage provided and naming CITY as an additional insured. The insurance shall consist of the following: A. Workers' Compensation. BLUM shall provide proof of workers' compensation insurance coverage for all of its employees pursuant to this agreement. Evidence of such insurance shall be furnished to City's Risk Management Division prior to commencement of this agreement. B. Professional Liability Insurance. Professional liability insurance covering the professional services provided by BLUM, including coverage for professional errors and omissions, in a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 per person. HE/dys September 15, 1988 3 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 10. Attorneys' Fees. In the event an action is filed by either party to enforce rights under this agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees in addition to any other relief granted by the court. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 11. Termination of Agreement. Either party may terminate this agreement without cause and for any reason by giving thirty (30) days advance written notice of termination to the other party. 12. Notices. 9 Any notice required to be given hereunder shall be deemed to have been given by depositing said notice in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows: CITY Chief of Police Dr. Police Department 466 West 4th Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 BLUM Lawrence Blum, Ph.D., 2101 E. 4th Street Santa Ana, CA 92705 In~. .. 13. Entire Agreement. This contract constitutes the entire agreement between CITY and BLUM and may be modified only by further written agreement between the parties. 17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement has been executed by the 18 / / / / 19 / / / / 20 / / / / 21 / / / / 22 / / / / 23 / / / / 24 / / / / 25 / / / / 26 / / / / 27 28 HE/dys September 15, 1988 4 1 parties effective as of the date and year first above written. 2 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, a Municipal Corporation of the State of California 3 ATTEST: 4 5 By Mayor City Clerk 6 7 DR. LAWRENCE BLUM, Ph.D., INC. 8 9 By Dr. Lawrence Blum, Ph.D. 10 Approved as to form and Legal Content: 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Ie rf HE/dys September 15, 1988 5 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 EXHIBIT 1 2 Methods of Assessment in Examinations: Three main methods will be used in examinations. follows: 3 They are as 4 1. Use of structured clinical interviews performed with each candidate in either pre-employment or departmental assignment examinations. Included in the interview will be both psychodiagnostic information used in assessment of emotional, mental and behavioral stability; simulated case situations used in assessing response tendencies in specified areas of police work. Of importance here is assessment of availability of internal resources the officer has which will likely be used in order maintenance, crime suppression, or investigative areas of pOlice work; aspectsof the candidate's past life experiences which will be influential in his/her dealing with subjects, suspects, and other police personnel, especially command; strengths and weaknesses in the candidate's personality, experience, and ability, aad the candidate's ability to acknowledge areas needing improvement; and finally ability to communicate assertively under differing conditions. 5 6 7 8 9 2. Use of Psychological Test Instruments in Examinations. Two personality profile tests will be administered to each candidate. They are the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and the 16 Personality factor Questionnaire (16PF). Both are objective, standardized tests with a great deal of research done validating both for use in law enforcement. The MMPI provides a profile useful in distinguishing pathological (or impaired) from non-pathological personality characteristics in candidates. Its results describe the accuracy of the responses given by candidates, as well as ten clinical personality scales which provide information on the emotional and mental status of candidates, discriminating between "normal" and "abnormal" characteristics. Its utility is limited in that it cannot accurately describe personality characteristics and response tendencies within "normal" populations. The l6PF serves to discriminate amongst the probable response tendencies and habit patterns characteristic of the candidate. In addition to the profile of the personality characteristics of normally employed adults, the l6PF provides "second order" clusters of traits to assist in questions regarding departmental assignments: 1 5 Introversion versus Extraversion Low Anxiety versus High Anxiety Emotionality versus Tough Poise Subduedness versus Independence Low control versus High Control Neurotic versus Adaptive Adjustment Low Leadership versus High Leadership Low Creativity versus High Creativity 1 2 3 4 6 The use of both tests allow for accurate assessment in both entry level and assignment examinations. Once the examiner is provided departmental profile work priorities for both new officers as well as officers applying to different duty assignments, profiles can be tailored to fit continuing work requirements. 7 8 9 3. Use of Departmental Background Investigation. Although not used in every examination, background information is highly useful in areas where test results and interview data are conflicting, or where some concern exists at a level requiring follow-up but not necessarily disqualific~tion. 10 11 12 Cooperative interaction FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF TESTING 13 AND INTERVIEWS between the examiner and Department background personnel has been proven invaluable in 14 sharpening the accuracy of recommendations in "borderline" , candidates where there is not a clear acceptable or 15 disqualifiable profile. 16 Response and Report to the Department: 17 Within 24 working hours following completion of examinations, a verbal recommendation will be made to the 18 department. Following wi thin two (2) weeks wi 11 be a written report documenting work relevant information, 19 including justification for recommendations and details requiring monitoring in a candidate. Three response 20 categories are suggested: Pass, Fail, and Borderline Pass. The category of Borderline Pass has enabled some agencies 21 to give opportunity to a candidate who demonstrates areas creating concern, but not at a level necessarily requiring 22 disqualification. Still other agencies have preferred solely a Pass or Fail recommendation. The Department can 23 use either type of recommendation structure. 24 Under normal circumstances, all ratings, test results, and interview data will be kept in locked storage in Dr. Blum's 25 offices. After the written report is received and cleared by departmental personnel, the original report would be 26 returned to Dr. Blum. This confidentially protection has proved beneficial where disqualified candidates have 27 28 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 , 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 proved beneficial where disqualified candidates have challenged the recommendations made to the departments served by Dr. Blum. In the event of litigation involving a candidate's appeal of the screening process, Dr. Blum will provide any testimony and documentation required to support the Department in hearings or suits resulting in any way from recommendations arising from contracted evaluations. An additional fee will be charged for each hour of preparation and testimony required. . 3