Q Joe, I was recently advised by my supervisor that my department was changing our purging process and that the detectives were no longer going to be responsible for researching the status of their cases for purging. I was told they are too busy and that I was going to be the responsible person. Can you tell me what the common practice is when it comes to researching cases for a purging? I might note I don't have time enough now to do my job. Can you help? Thanks, Not Enough Time
Q
When I received your question I felt it might be a good time for I.A.P.E. to send out a survey to our members about your topic. There have been a few other similar questions posed recently about inventories of Property Rooms. And while the anecdotal information that we have would help me answer I wanted to get some factual data before answering. So, in July of this year, I.A.P.E. sent out a survey on "Purging Policies and Responsibilities," to approximately 6,000 individuals in the U.S. and Canada. Of that number, just over 900 responded to the survey. Survey Says: I.A.P.E. Members from 906 agencies responded to the survey. Of those agencies, 57% said that they did not have any written policy that identified who was responsible for the research of case status to determine if evidence could be purged. Let me restate that, the majority of the responding agencies do not have any written guidance in this critical area. Furthermore, our survey revealed additional interesting data. Respondents were asked "Who in your agency, is responsible for case status research?" The survey then provided the choices: Property Custodian; Case Detective; Submitting Officer; Disposition Team; Volunteers; No one; and a last choice of "Other." Not surprisingly, the data revealed that 57% of the time, the responsible job category for researching case status was that of the Property Custodian. 12% of those who responded to the survey said that the Case Detective had the research responsibility. Some 9% of the agencies answered the I.A.P.E. survey held the Submitting Officer as being responsible to research the case status. 4% of those who responded said that their agency had not done any purging. The remaining numbers were categorized as Disposition Teams, Volunteers or Other. So, if your Chief is reassigning the research responsibility from your detectives to you in the Property Room, that decision is in sync with the majority of the agencies that responded to our survey. If the detectives do not have time to do the research on case status, do you? The transfer of this responsibility to the Property Room indicates that the decision makers feel that you have enough spare time to handle this additional, time-consuming responsibility. Ironically, of the 906 responding agencies, 58% said that their biggest obstacle to necessary purging was a lack of time. The I.A.P.E. survey also revealed that a full 93% of those who answered our survey said that, on an annual basis, they take in more evidence than is purged. Let's recap: More is coming in than is being purged each year! It is apparent that necessary purging is not being accomplished due to the lack of available time/staff. And now, the case research responsibility is being transferred from the detectives to you in the Property Room. Clearly, your Chain-of-Command needs to be informed of your situation and they should be seeking additional time, for small departments, or additional staff for larger departments. Remember, the goal in the Property Room is to be able to purge at least the same number of items that are booked into the Property Room in a year, i.e. "One In, One Out." The Goal Should Always Be One For One - One In / One Out. This can be accomplished with sufficient staffing time. In future newsletters we will address some of the other findings from the I.A.P.E. Purging Policies and Responsibilities Survey. | 
