Webber Seavey Award for Quality in Law Enforcement
Award Judging Criteria
The following categories have been endorsed by the IACP Award Committee
to define the award judging criteria and point-scoring values. These criteria
span the entire range of project development, and beyond. Project results are
certainly important, as are the methods you employ to nurture the project from
conception to completion. Moreover, your project should leave a positive impact
on your agency and/or community that is sustainable long after the project
itself is completed.
Project Selection: 15 points
In this area, participants are judged on the care taken and foresight
exercised in the selection process. Selected projects should be neither
too ambitious nor too modest in proportion to the size of the agency and
its available resources. Projects may focus on either timely agency or
community issues. In either case, direct input from both agency and community
members should be sought and utilized. Specific goals should be set based on
benchmarking with other agencies. Forecasted improvements and a time schedule
should be established.
Key Considerations:
How did we go about choosing our project? Did we elicit proper input from agency and community members? Is the project clearly defined? Are the project goals too ambitious or too modest? Are they based on benchmarking? Have we established clear-cut objectives and a time schedule? Does each member of the team understand his or her role in carrying out the project?
Analysis Techniques: 15 points
Throughout the course of the project, analysis techniques should be used, (i.e., methods of charting and evaluating your progress). In this area, participants will be judged on how effectively they use these techniques to drive the project to completion while keeping it focused on the primary project objectives. For more information on analysis techniques, consult the appendix at the end of the guide book.
Key Considerations:
Have we used analysis techniques to identify the source(s) of the problem we're addressing? Have we developed ways to chart and evaluate our progress? Has our use of charts and diagrams helped us to keep the project in focus and to monitor the results? Have these techniques helped us to evaluate the results with respect to the original project goals?
Solutions: 25 points
In this area, participants are challenged to explore a number of possible solutions to determine the most creative and innovative approach. They should not limit themselves to whatever seems to be the most obvious or accessible option. You must state a strong case for the solution you choose. You must demonstrate a clear understanding of what you expect to accomplish: whether the problem is to be prevented, contained (to stop it from spreading), or solved (eliminated permanently). Your implementation plan should be clearly defined, with documentation and regular meetings to analyze and re-evaluate your progress. Finally, your plan of action should demonstrate innovation and creativity in the methods you use to determine the solution and in the solution itself.
Key Considerations:
Have we examined various solution alternatives? Can we state a strong case for the solution we have chosen? Are we attempting to contain a problem or solve it entirely? Does our implementation plan include regular analysis and re-evaluation? Are we demonstrating innovation?
Results: 25 points
Participants will be judged on whether or not they achieved what they set out to achieve. Keep in mind that the quality of the results is more important than the quantity (size/ scope) of the results. Therefore, an agency that can document positive, lasting change within a small section of the department or community may score higher than an agency that reports widespread but non-maintainable changes.
In addition, other positive results that have come about as a by-product of the project should be stated. These effects will be evaluated for overall positive impact and for how well they have been documented and verified.
Key Considerations:
Have we achieved what we expected to achieve? Are the results the direct outcome of the skills we applied throughout the process? Do the results measure favorably against the difficulty of achievement? Were there other positive effects besides those originally intended? Have we verified these effects through concrete documentation?
Institutionalization: 15 points
Institutionalization requires that improvement is maintainable over an extended period of time, and it can occur on several levels. It may consist of procedural changes, equipment upgrades, or ongoing training programs within your agency. Or it may consist of a lasting impact within the community that can be sustained and furthered. You will also score highly for institutionalization if your project shows promise as a model for other law enforcement agencies to emulate. Finally, institutionalization in the way you typically approach law enforcement problems is also worthy of merit. As a result of completing this project, your agency should have advanced in the understanding of quality principles. You should display a preparedness to apply and adapt these principles to other problem-solving tasks in the future.
Key Considerations:
Are the positive results of the project maintainable over time? Is the project readily adaptable to other agencies and organizations? Are we prepared to adopt the quality principles learned through this project as standard operating procedure?
Submission: 5 points
The project submission should be clear and concise, and should follow a logical sequence from problem identification and analysis through implementation, results, and institutionalization. Particular emphasis should be placed on the improvement process. Charts, graphs, and other
analysis techniques should be used to help illustrate how the project developed and to support its findings and direction. These analysis techniques must have direct relevance to the various phases of the project. (For more information on analysis techniques, consult the appendix at the end of the guide book.) Finally, all documentation must follow the required format: project document (up to 10 pages) and the abstract (up to 1 page typewritten) must be sent to the IACP along with a completed application form.
Be sure to submit a document that can be easily photocopied.
Key Considerations:
Is all documentation clear and concise? Does it follow a logical sequence? Is the primary emphasis on the improvement process? Do the charts, graphs, etc. clearly relate to the various project phases? Dues the submission follow the required format?