NACOLE Achievement In / Contribution to Oversight Award

The NACOLE Achievement in Oversight / Contribution to Oversight Award recognizes a specific significant accomplishment or contribution to civilian oversight during the past year (or in previous years) by an individual, an organization, or an agency whose performance demonstrated a commitment to the goals and values of NACOLE and the oversight of law enforcement, jails, and prisons.

The criteria used to evaluate nominees are substantially similar to the criteria for the NACOLE Flame Award, but they may be satisfied by a specific accomplishment, as opposed to a long-term contribution. The distinction is between the degree of accomplishment.

Types of achievements or contributions to be recognized may include, but are not limited by, the following types of contributions:

  • The individual, group or entity has worked in establishing or promoting good practices including implementation, adoption or enforcement of policies reflective of NACOLE ethics.
  • The individual, group or entity has worked in promoting, establishing or significantly improving or strengthening an oversight entity.
  • The individual, group or entity has worked within a particular agency or community conducting, managing or facilitating an outstanding investigation, audit or review.
  • The individual, group or entity has conducted research and/or disseminated information that significantly contributes to the field of civilian oversight.

Each nominee will be evaluated using the following criteria:

IMPACT: Did the nominee’s actions

  1. Have a significant impact on oversight in the community;
  2. Contribute to significant changes in one or more law enforcement agencies, jails, and/or prisons;
  3. Advocate or advance legislation regarding law enforcement, jail, and/or jail accountability;
  4. Help create oversight in a particular community;
  5. Have a significant impact on NACOLE and/or on the field of civilian oversight?

Did the nominee demonstrate courage and conviction and commitment to healthy oversight principals? Did the nominee experience significant opposition to their efforts?

REACH: Was the nominee’s accomplishment local, regional or national?

COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY: Did the nominee’s efforts reflect advocacy of transparency in law enforcement, jails, or jails as well as civilian oversight?

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT & OUTREACH: Did the nominee’s efforts advance open and constructive dialogue with stakeholders?

INNOVATION: To what extent did the nominee’s accomplishment represent innovation in police oversight? (Examples of innovation could include, but are not limited to, establishing a mediation program or developing a new complaint process or method by which complaint investigations are evaluated.)

VALUES: Were the nominee’s actions consistent with NACOLE’s stated goals and core values e.g., did they demonstrate high ethical standards, take steps to educate the public and/or encourage excellence and diversity in oversight?