Multi-Agency Investigation Team

MULTI-AGENCY INVESTIGATION TEAM

Model Policy

Effective Date Number Reference Special Instructions Distribution Reevaluation Date No. Pages December, 1995 3

I. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy to provide the authority for organizing, administering and operating this agency's participation in the multi-agency investigation team (MAIT).

II. POLICY This agency recognizes that the pooling and coordination of resources among regional law enforcement and criminal justice agencies are often the most effective and efficient means of investigating selected major crimes. Therefore, it is the policy of this law enforcement agency to participate in and fully cooperate with the multi-agency investigation team as detailed in the regional mutual aid agreement, the MAIT interjurisdictional agreement, and the policy and procedures set forth herein.

III. PROCEDURES A. Organization and Jurisdiction 1. Task force members shall be comprised of agencies that have entered into this region's mutual assistance agreement and have executed the agreement of the regional investigation team. 2. All MAIT agencies shall be equal members of and shall be governed by the MAIT Board of Directors. A board chairman shall be elected annually from among the MAIT Board of Directors. 3. The MAIT Board of Directors shall be responsible for establishing and amending, as appropriate, a. all administrative concerns of the investigation team, to include its goals and objectives, scope of operations, funding, voting, meeting, resignation and dissolution provisions among other matters; and b. all operational policies and procedures relating to unit activation, operation, staffing, supervision, training, logistical support and related matters.

1 4. Jurisdiction of the MAIT and its assigned members is limited by the laws of these participating jurisdictions and by the provisions of the MAIT and mutual aid agreements. a. Use of the team for investigation of crimes that arise during an authorized investigation but are not specifically designated in the agreement shall require the concurrence of all MAIT members. b. Use of the team for any purpose outside the scope of the interagency agreement shall require an addendum to the MAIT agreement and the approval of all MAIT members. B. Command and Supervision The composition of specific investigation teams will vary according to the nature and complexity of the case and the jurisdictions involved. However, most MAIT investigations will require the use of the following command personnel or officers who assume one or more of the following supervisory roles 1. Chief Executive. The chief executive officer of the agency requesting MAIT services, or a full-time, commissioned officer serving as his designate, shall retain jurisdictional authority over the criminal prosecution but shall serve in an advisory capacity only for operational purposes to the MAIT commander responsible for the investigation. a. Any disagreements with regard to conduct of the investigation may be appealed to the chairman of the MAIT Board of Directors who has final authority for resolution of these matters. b. The chief executive may request that the MAIT investigation be discontinued at any time. The request may be made verbally to the MAIT commander but must also be submitted in writing to the MAIT board. 2. MAIT Commander. The MAIT commander is appointed by the MAIT Board of Directors and is in complete charge of the investigation with advice from the executive officer. The commander shall also be responsible for overall administration and coordination of the investigation, support services, case review and analysis, budget preparation and administration, special operations and intelligence functions, and liaison with the chief executive, other unit commanders, the prosecutor's office and any other agencies and officials that are not MAIT members. 3. Investigative Supervisor. The investigative supervisor is designated by the MAIT commander to serve as his chief assistant and to be primarily responsible for follow-up investigations and case preparation. 4. Operations Unit Commander. The operations unit commander oversees the lead investigator, crime scene technicians, investigative teams and other special team operations. 5. Support Unit Commander. The support unit commander directs and coordinates the investigative team's support functions to include facilities and equipment, budget and audit activitiesincluding buy monies and

2 confidential funds accountingpersonnel accounting and the coordination of volunteers. 6. Lead Investigator. The lead investigator is responsible for conducting and coordinating the investigation, including assisting the prosecutor in case preparation. The lead investigator is the focal point for all aspects of the investigation and is accountable to the Operations Unit Commander. 7. Case Review Coordinator. The case review coordinator is responsible for case management, including analyzing investigative information and leads, coordinating evidence collection and preservation, laboratory, criminalistic activities and other specialized functions. C. Unit Activation/Deactivation MAIT member agencies that wish to use the unit for crimes committed within their jurisdiction shall use the following procedures: 1. The case under consideration should conform to the investigative priorities and goals of MAIT operation defined in the MAIT agreement. Other major crimes or suspicious circumstances that may have significant local or regional impact may also be presented to the MAIT commander with approval of the requesting agency's chief executive. 2. To request unit activation, the ranking officer of the requesting agency shall contact the MAIT commander as soon as possible following the agency's response to the crime scene. Undue delays, as specified in the MAIT agreement, shall be considered sufficient grounds to deny MAIT involvement. 3. The MAIT commander shall verify the authenticity of the request and obtain relevant general information on the nature of the crime. The MAIT commander shall submit the request immediately to the board of directors for consideration. 4. The MAIT commander shall recommend deactivation of the team or reductions in force as appropriate as investigative leads are exhausted or when the solvability of the case is insufficient to justify continued team activation.

D. Personnel 1. Investigative officers desiring assignments to the MAIT shall submit a written request detailing their interest in and qualifications for this assignment to the MAIT commander. Such submission shall be made with the approval of the agency's chief executive officer. Officers shall be selected for possible assignment on a competitive basis based on a. relative number of years of service; b. training and education; c. specialized skills; and d. job performance. 2. Officers selected for MAIT duties shall be considered eligible for assignment upon completion of training required by their parent agency

3 and the multi-agency team. 3. Assignments to the MAIT shall be regarded by agency personnel in the same manner as assignments to duties and responsibilities within their parent agency. Therefore, assigned officers shall a. follow the direction and command of senior MAIT officers and command personnel regardless of the assigned officer's rank, grade or assignment within their parent agency; b. conduct themselves with the highest degree of professionalism and dedication to duty; and c. conduct themselves according to the policies, procedures, rules and code of conduct specified by the MAIT agreement. 4. Assignment to a specific MAIT operation shall be the responsibility of the parent agency's investigative services commander based on personnel availabilities and workload priorities. Available personnel will be assigned with the approval of the MAIT commander. 5. Officers shall maintain contact with their supervisor in their parent agency while assigned to MAIT duties. E. Logistical Support/Finances 1. Agencies requesting services of the MAIT are responsible for coordinating availability of a. communication equipment and facilities; b. vehicle fuel, oil, maintenance and repair; c. food and lodging as required; and d. criminalistic and forensic services. 2. Assigned officers shall use personally assigned equipment to include weapons, soft body armor and personal protective gear, vehicles (if not otherwise available through the MAIT) and related equipment normally carried in the line of duty. a. Specialized equipment such as that needed for surveillance operations may be requisitioned from member agencies and will be made available whenever possible. b. The replacement or repair costs of personal or departmental equipment lost or damaged in the course of MAIT operations shall be incurred as detailed in the MAIT by-laws. 3. Overtime pay for personnel working MAIT assignments shall be paid in accordance with the by-laws of the interjurisdictional agreement. 4. Indemnity for accident, injury, death and liability shall be borne by the officer's parent agency. F. Debriefing Following completion of the MAIT assignment, officers shall submit a report of their assignment to their commanding officers. The MAIT commander shall also submit a written report to the MAIT Board of Officers. These reports shall include, but shall not be limited to 1. nature and duration of the assignment;

4 2. the amount of regular and overtime work devoted to the investigation team assignment; 3. expenditures, losses or damage of resources and personnel injuries as a result of MAIT involvement; 4. outcome of the case with regard to arrests, warrants issued, intelligence gathered, and the like; and 5. recommendations for enhancing future MAIT investigations.

Acknowledgement This model policy was prepared through the assistance of the IACP Committee for Investigative Operations. Special appreciation is extended to the following committee members without which this effort could not have been accomplished: Peter Modafferi, Chairperson, Chief of Detectives, Office of the District Attorney, New City, NY; Deputy Chief Eugene Fields, Vice Chairperson, Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Department, Harvey, LA, Chief Timothy Braaten, Victoria Police Department, Victoria, TX; Mildred D. Braxley, Senior Operations Analyst, Georgia Bureau of Investigation, Decatur, GA, Dennis DeMay, Adam Business Technology, Toms River, NJ; Edward Doyle, Group Supervisor, U.S. Department of the Treasury, Arlington, VA, Chief Inspector Thomas Durkin, AMTRAK Police, Philadelphia, PA, Emma Fern, Criminal Intelligence Analyst, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Miami, FL; Terence Green, Senior Major Case Specialist, FBI Academy, Quantico, VA, Deputy Chief Mike Leyman, Richardson Police Department, Richardson, TX; John McCann, Executive Director, McCann & Associates, Redmond, WA, Commissioner James Moore, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Tallahassee, FL; Chief James Nursey, Thornton Police Department, Thornton, CO; Chief Charles O'Neal, Chief of Internal Security, NASA, Kennedy Space Center, FL; Captain Alfred Stewart, Jr., Greensboro Police Department, Greensboro, NC; SAC David Troy, BATF, Washington, DC; Chief Gary Wade, Huntington Police Department, Huntington, WV; Chief Thomas Wagoner, Loveland Police Department, Loveland, CO; Chief Ken Walker, McKinney Police Department, McKinney, TX; Superintendent Thomas Constantine, IACP Vice President with Committee Oversight, New York State Police, Albany, NY; and Philip Lynn, IACP Committee Staff Liaison and Manager, IACP National Law Enforcement Policy Center, Alexandria, VA.

This project was supported by Grant No. 93-DD-CX-K009 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs, coordinates the activities of the following program offices and bureaus: the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Institute of Justice, Office of Juvenile and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office of Victims of Crime. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the author and do not represent the official position or policies of the United States Department of Justice.

Every effort has been made by the IACP National Law Enforcement Policy Center staff and advisory board to ensure that this model policy incorporates the most current information and contemporary professional judgment on this issue. However, law enforcement administrators should be cautioned that no "model" policy can meet all the needs of any given law enforcement agency. Each law enforcement agency operates in a unique environment of federal court rulings, state laws, local ordinances, regulations, judicial and administrative decisions and collective bargaining agreements that must be considered. In addition, the formulation of specific agency policies must take into account local political and community perspectives and customs, prerogatives and demands; often divergent law enforcement strategies and philosophies, and the impact of varied agency resource capabilities among other factors.