Crimes Against Persons in Parking Environments

Crimes Against Property in Parking Facilities

Victims may, and do, sue stores, and those victims who do not sue tend thereafter to shop elsewhere. And they certainly share the story of their victimization with many other people.

Courts across the land have universally held that parking environments are “inherently dangerous” because of the concentration of wealth in terms of property which is easily sold on the street and the sheer remoteness and isolated areas of such environments, with limited foot traffic. Further, the very nature of the environment is tolerant of lone males wandering among the cars, presumably “looking for” their own vehicle. But some are looking for victims or objects of theft.

Other Problems in Parking Environments

An interesting example of “solicitations” took place in Los Angeles in the 1970s when a Muslim mosque became active in distributing its paper Mohamed Speaks, which then was a centerpiece of the Black Muslim community. Their efforts to distribute the newspaper were focused on the Crenshaw Shopping Center. The young men dressed in black suits, white shirts, and ties were universally well groomed and were passionate about their faith. The paper was free, but there was an air of expectation for a donation for the “free” paper, and many customers began to complain to store management that they felt intimidated by these young men and reported they were becoming too aggressive. The customers further informed management they would not return if something wasn’t done to shield them from the confrontations; they would shop elsewhere.

The security department was charged with gathering the necessary evidence to prove to the court the solicitors were threatening. Evidence was gathered and presented, and a restraining order was granted which denied these young men access to the parking lots. The problem was solved.

Step 1: Prepare Employee for the Review

The process should not be a surprise to the employee being evaluated. Contact the employee and arrange a time and date to meet to start the process. It is very important to make sure the supervisor keeps the appointment. Not keeping the appointment can send a signal that the process is not important.(5)

Give the employee being evaluated a copy of the Performance and Development Review worksheet. The worksheet will list the performance factors he will be evaluated on. If there will be any additional performance factors discussed in addition to the standard factors, they should be listed on the copy provided to the employee. Explain to the employee that he is to perform a self-evaluation on his performance during the period from his last evaluation forward to that date. In most cases, that time frame will be approximately 1 year. It should be explained to the employee that he will be rated on how he typically performs in the retail loss prevention environment, not how the employee performs compared to other employees.

Make expectations clear as to what the employee is to do with the forms. Encourage the employee to make notes on the form and write the rating somewhere near each performance factor. If a rating scale will be used, provide the employee with the rating scale. Review the rating scale to make sure the employee understands the definition of each rating. Keep the process simple by making the rating scale easy to understand. Table P-3 and Table P-4 provide examples of rating scales used by several organizations.

Table P-3 Example of Simple Rating Scale

Table P-4 Example of Rating Scale with Points

Once the process is explained to the employee, agree on a place, date, and time to meet again to go over the self-evaluation part of the Performance and Development Review form, as well as the form you will have completed. Be sure to allow at least 7–10 days for completion of the forms. To allow more time than that can result in procrastination on the part of the employee or supervisor. Sufficient time should be allowed for both the supervisor and the employee to do their evaluations without rushing through it. The key to this step in the process is educating the employee on the process and getting the employee to participate.

Step 2: Complete the Performance and Development Review Forms

Before starting the Performance and Development Review form, the supervisor needs to do three things. First, review the employee’s last performance review. Check to see if the employee has taken action to improve in the areas where improvement was needed. Check to see if the short-term goals listed by the employee have been achieved. Has progress been made toward long-term goals?

Second, the supervisor should review the incident file kept on the employee. Supervisors should establish an incident file for all retail loss prevention employees.(6) Some supervisors keep an employee journal where they make notations on specific events that involve the employee. The incident file or journal should contain both positive and negative documentation of the employee’s performance.

The incident file is very important. It provides the documentation to support the rating. Employees should be encouraged to also keep an incident file or journal. The employee should use it during the self-evaluation process. When they are reviewing information in the incident file, it is important that the supervisor and the employee are reviewing only the performance taking place since the last evaluation.

Third, the supervisor should review some of the most common problems encountered when conducting performance reviews. One common problem is rushing through the process. Do not wait until the day before the scheduled meeting with the employee to start completing the review form. Another common problem is evaluating personalities instead of performance. Be aware of your feelings toward each employee and avoid being biased. Refrain from using the word “weakness” when referring to a performance area where improvement is needed.

Now the supervisor is ready to complete the Performance and Development Review worksheet in preparation for the meeting with the employee. The worksheet will list the performance factors the employee is being rated on as well as the various task associated with that performance factor. The supervisor should rate the employee on each performance factor based on how the employee typically performed since the last review. If a point system is used in conjunction with the rating scale, the point total should be noted after each performance factor. If just the rating is used, note it after the performance factor. The supervisor should feel free to make notes on the form for support of the rating or for discussion with the employee. This form should be considered a worksheet. The final form will be cleaned up and not have all the notes.

If a point system is used, the points should then be totaled up and divided by the number of performance factors to produce an average rating. The overall average will indicate the employee’s overall performance rating. Tenths of a point should be rounded off on the scale as follows:

A system may be used wherein each factor’s rating stands alone and there is not an average used. Many times the size of the retail loss prevention organization dictates the method used. The important point is not to get too hung up on the numbers game. The objective is to evaluate performance and communicate to the employee what he can do to make himself a greater asset to the organization. It is important to remember that the performance review process is about managing and improving performance in the retail loss prevention environment and not about completing forms (7)

The last item to complete prior to meeting with employee is the area where the supervisor will list first areas of strengths and then areas where improvement is needed. There should be two or three areas listed for each. The area where strengths have been demonstrated is listed first so it can be discussed first. You want to reinforce the positive performance before starting a discussion on what areas the employee needs to work on before the next performance review.

After completing the performance and development review form and prior to discussion with the employee, be sure to give consideration to the employee’s reaction to those ratings where there may be disagreement. Make sure you have proper documentation to support your rating for those areas that may generate unfavorable reaction by the employee. Disagreement usually results from the employee thinking he is meeting expectations when he is not. The performance and review process is designed to correct that situation.

Step 3: Joint Review of the Evaluation Forms

There are steps the supervisor can take to make the employee feel more at ease when the time comes for the employee and supervisor to meet for review of the Performance and Development Review forms. If possible, schedule the meeting in a conference room or location other than the supervisor’s office. It is important to have the meeting on neutral ground. The location should afford privacy and be free from interruptions such as telephone calls and other employees barging in. Cell phones should be put on vibrate and not answered unless there is an emergency. The process is important and should be taken seriously.

The supervisor should state the purpose of the meeting. It should be made clear from the start that only the performance and development review will be discussed during the meeting. There should not be any discussion of salary issues. If the employee has questions or wants to discuss salary issues, arrangements should be made to do so at another time. The focus of this meeting needs to be on the employee’s performance.

Start the process by reviewing the last Performance and Development Review with the employee. If the organization’s Performance and Development Review includes a place for goals, review them as well. Did the employee accomplish the short-term (1-year) goals? Was significant process made toward long-term (5-year) goals? Did the employee take the steps planned for improvement in the last review?

The supervisor should also explain to the employee that both will review each performance factor one at a time. Do not exchange the performance factor worksheets. That can be done later. Let the employee go first by asking what rating he assigned to the first performance factor. The supervisor should encourage the employee to explain how the rating was decided on. This is an excellent opportunity to let the employee talk about himself. The supervisor then explains what rating he gave for the same factor and why. The supervisor should avoid using the term “weakness” when pointing out an area where improvement is needed. Documentation should be used by both to support the rating in cases where a disagreement arises. As both parties work their way through the performance factors, they can make notes on their worksheets. The supervisor should let the employee do most of the talking. A lot can be learned by being a good listener in this setting. The supervisor will be responsible for keeping the focus on the task at hand.

When a performance factor is reached where the rating is UNSATISFACTORY or NEEDS IMPROVEMENT, there should be discussion by both the employee and the supervisor as to why that situation exists and what can be done to help the employee improve. This process is designed to open up communication between the employee and the supervisor. It is an excellent opportunity for both to clarify expectations each has of the other.

It is not all that unusual for the employee’s self-rating to be lower than the evaluator’s. When ratings are not close, there should be discussion to point out why that might be. Documentation kept in the employee’s incident file or journal should be referred to in an effort to support the rating. Once all the performance factors have been reviewed and the ratings on each discussed, the overall rating should be agreed on.

The supervisor and the employee should then review the two or three areas where each feels there has been strong performance demonstrated and where improvement is needed. Once again, let the employee go first. The employee should review the areas where he feels he demonstrated an area of strength. An example might be a loss prevention officer who feels investigative skills is an area of strength. The supervisor would encourage the employee to explain why he feels that way. The supervisor then reviews the areas he feels is an area of strength. It would not be unusual for the supervisor to have the same areas listed. The same process is followed with the two or three areas where each feels improvement is needed. These same areas should already have been discussed while working through each performance factor. Doing it again at this point sets the stage to formulate a plan for development of the employee. The important part of the exercise is for quality communication between the employee and the supervisor that will clarify expectations each has of the other.

Step 4: Formalizing a Plan

Now that the employee and the supervisor have identified two or three performance factors where the employee needs improvement, they can both put together a plan with a goal of raising the employee’s performance from NEEDS IMPROVEMENT to MEETS EXPECTATIONS. If the employee’s performance is rated at MEETS EXPECTATIONS or better in all performance factors, two or three areas can still be picked where the employee can strengthen the MEETS

EXPECTATIONS performance or elevate it to the EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS level of performance.

The plan developed by the employee and supervisor should include actions that can be implemented by both and designed to improve the employee’s performance in each of the specified factors. Those actions should be measurable so that each can review the plan during the course of the year to make sure a sincere effort is being made and the employee’s progress is on track for improvement. An example of development actions that can be implemented are as follows.

The Loss Prevention Officer is rated NEEDS IMPROVEMENT in the area of Job Knowledge. The plan could require the employee to take training related to increase job knowledge in retail loss prevention, either in-house or through an outside agency (college or career training institution). The supervisor’s commitment to the plan would be to locate retail loss prevention training that is available, secure funding for it, and/or arrange time in the work schedule for the employee to attend the training. The expected actions of each are measurable and easy to monitor for progress.

If the performance and development review process in place has a section for short-term and long-term goals, they should be discussed at this time as well. Both the short-term (1-year) and long-term (5-year) goals should be career-related goals that the employee hopes to accomplish. Examples of short-term goals would be to attend some specialized loss prevention training of personal interest to the employee or complete the last couple of classes needed for degree work at a college. Examples of long-term goals might be to get promoted to a supervisory position or complete work on a master’s degree. The supervisor can play an important part in assisting the employee with both short-term and long-term goals. This area is also important for the development of the employee.

Once this portion of the process is completed, the supervisor should explain to the employee that he will be transferring the results of their review, with their plan for improvement, onto a final Performance and Development Review form. It is that final form that goes into the employee’s Personnel File and gets forwarded to the human resources department. A date should be agreed on for the supervisor to meet back with the employee for the employee’s review of the finalized form. The supervisor should allow sufficient time prior to the next planned meeting date for completion of the final form. This is also an excellent opportunity to seek comments from the employee on his thoughts about the performance review process.

Step 5: Complete the Final Form

Now that the meat of the performance review process has been completed, the plan agreed upon by both should now be transferred from the worksheet to the final form that will be filed with the human resources department. A copy of the completed form will also be placed in the employee’s personnel file. The final form can take whatever design the organization chooses to use. It should be typed or computer-generated so it is neat and legible. The supervisor should meet with the employee again and allow him to review the final form.

The final form should contain the following information:

Table P-5 Example of Performance Factor Section on Final form

The employee should be given a copy of the completed, signed form. The supervisor should attach his worksheet used to his copy of the final form and place it in the employee’s incident file. It will be used as a reference during the course of the next review period and when training opportunities arise.

Step 6: Conduct Milestone Meetings

“Milestone meetings” should be arranged periodically throughout the year to review the retail loss prevention employee’s progress at reaching goals and taking steps agreed upon to improve performance. Ideally, the milestone meetings should take place quarterly or at a minimum of twice a year. The meetings do not need to be of a formal nature but should be documented by the supervisor. The meeting can be done over a cup of coffee or during a visit with the employee in the supervisor’s office. The important aspect of conducting the milestone meetings is to let the employee know you take his development serious enough to check on his progress. It also affords an excellent opportunity to monitor training agreed upon or for the employee to discuss any new concerns or problems he might have.

Basic Pharmacy Inventory

Drugs, just like clothes on a rack, are simply merchandise items as far as inventory accounting is concerned. Pills come from the manufacturer in bottles of 100 or 500 or even 1000, and liquids are usually shipped in bottles containing 480 milliliters (1 pint) or 960 ml (2 pints).

Controlled drugs are on the shelves with the other drugs and are in alphabetical order. There is not a federal or state requirement to keep the CII drugs under lock and key; therefore, they can be dispersed (kept on the shelves). Retail chains will generally maintain the CIIs under lock and key, but that is a company requirement and not a mandate by administrative order. Dispersing the CII drugs has a distinct advantage when considering loss mitigation against burglary or robbery. If kept in a locked drawer, all the most theft-prone drugs are simply in one place. There are specially made drug safes, but they are normally used in hospitals and require dual control. These are simply impractical for a pharmacy due to its size and the staffing requirements needed to manage its use.

The inventory replenishment/ordering is fairly basic: Each drug has a specified quantity on the shelf that is based on the volume of sales for that item. As prescriptions are filled, the physical and book inventory are decremented. When that quantity meets a specified threshold, more is ordered (automatically or manually) to replenish the stock. It is the common min/max concept. In a perfect world, it would be a perfect system.

Most drugs have a “name brand” product and a generic equivalent. As an example, Ritalin© is also sold under the generic as methylphenidate. While both are chemically the same, generic brands are manufactured by various companies and are generally less expensive than the name-brand product. Some insurance plans will not allow dispensing namebrand products if a generic is available, so doctors must designate that the prescription be “dispensed as written” or DAW.

The significance of this basic environment (brand versus generic) is that it allows for the appearance of shortages when in actuality one was probably substituted for another. These false variances would only cause investigative time to be spent needlessly. There are times when pharmacists change the prescribed medication to generic because the name brand is out or the customer’s insurance plan will pay only for generic and the doctor wrote for name brand. This is a common practice, but once the prescription is entered into the computer for generic, the inventory will be adjusted accordingly. If the record is not changed in the pharmacy system to properly reflect the correct medication dispensed, it will create “paper” variances. These factors and others make the detection of theft extremely challenging. Without an internal or commercially available inventory variance software, identifying theft is nearly impossible. As with any enterprisewide system, it would be impossible to investigate all shortages that are detected by a variance software. This truly creates an investigative process that deals with only “high” variances that surpass a certain threshold. Defining “high variance” is different for nearly every store.

Once Filled

Once the prescription is entered into the computer, the medication is removed from the shelf and staged for the pharmacy tech or pharmacist to fill. The prescription is filled, bagged, and placed in a “will call” bin. This process can be repeated as many a 1,000 times a day or more, and in the 24-hour stores, it’s repeated at all hours.

From an inventory accounting standpoint, the filled prescriptions are still considered to be in the physical inventory and are not relieved from inventory until they are rung through a register. Ideally, this would be accomplished through a bar-coding system of the bag’s label that was created by the pharmacy system. When the register transaction is completed, the inventory is relieved. This creates an end-to-end transaction process. This, too, depending on the system, assists in maintaining a proper stock amount so that the pharmacy does not run out of that particular drug.

Point of Sale

The final step of the sales process is at the register. This point provides the means to use subterfuge to pass stolen drugs and, more frequently, presents the opportunity to fail to properly record a transaction and steal cash. The cash register is an enormous point of theft of cash because the sales are predominantly insurance co-pays that are even dollar amounts such as $10, $20, etc. Prescription bags have large labels attached to them which include literature for the drugs. Customers would not be suspicious of not receiving a register receipt and, as such, the cashier would not need higher level math skills to manipulate a register. The No-Sale function on a pharmacy register can prove to be disastrous if not properly managed.

Register manipulations through voids of any kind and refunds are equal opportunity offenders. Refunding a prescription is rare, but the highest dollar merchandise in the store can be found near the pharmacy. Cash register exception reporting must be fine-tuned for the pharmacy. The number of transactions is much lower than the front end, but they are, by average, much higher average transactions. A successful search for theft tracks can be accomplished only if the pharmacy sales transactions are separated from the rest of the store. Their transactions are unique and would skew any reporting system if included within the store as a whole.

Many POS systems are tied to the pharmacy dispensing system to maintain an accurate perpetual inventory. Rigorous enforcement of policy and procedure will always act as a deterrent. However, work flow in a pharmacy tends to break down those standards during peak pickup times. This is especially true in high-volume pharmacies.

Return to Stock

The desired final destination for all filled prescriptions is in the customer’s hands. Surprisingly, many prescriptions are never picked up, and the medication must be returned to the shelves. This process is accomplished through the pharmacy management system to correct the inventory accuracy. The actual bottle or vial is placed back in the location from which it was filled and can be used again to fill later prescriptions. It is a violation of law to combine the contents of a returned prescription with the contents of what is on the shelf. The shelf contents may have a different manufacturer or a different lot number, and therefore the vial or bottle is placed on the shelf. This practice allows for easy monitoring of how return-to-stock procedures are being handled. If there are no containers on the shelves from previously filled prescriptions, then the contents are being mixed.

The shrinkage and theft opportunity here is that a person can indicate that the prescription was returned to the shelves and then actually steal it. Again, this will create a variance in the system but does little to point an investigation in the right direction. Additionally, as with all theft, detection is severely limited if the subject steals small amounts of drugs at a time.

Discovery Phase

Identification of potential drug loss is really simple inventory math. In its most basic description, the suspect must order more drugs than is being used to fill prescriptions. Diversion on a large scale is rare in a chain drug store because of the monitoring that takes place. Unusual ordering activity, P&L book inventory values spiking, and other areas might also give some insight to operations. Being able to detect a problem across numerous stores or across an entire chain would be impossible without software monitoring.

Following is the typical scenario that initiates an investigation. This is a generalization as every company has different methods to order drugs: A pharmacy orders two bottles of Drug A. The bottles contain 100 tablets each. The order can be entered manually through a handheld device, or it can be ordered through an automated replenishment system. Its source can be a company distribution center or an outside vendor. Two bottles of 100 tablets are sent to the store, where it is received and placed on the shelf. Over a period of time, the pharmacy fills prescriptions that equal 100 tablets. In a perfect scenario, there would be one bottle of 100 left (see Figure P-1). Either through auto replenishment or through manual orders, more bottles are ordered. To successfully steal drugs, the normal order quantity must be overridden in the system. Over time the number of bottles (or number of dosage units, in this case tablets) ordered begins to exceed the amount needed for filled prescriptions. A data mining program would begin to alert the investigator that the pharmacy was experiencing ordering activity that was not justified for the number for actual prescriptions. According to a report, over the period of time reviewed, the pharmacy had ordered 13 bottles (1300 dosage units) and had dispensed only 2 bottles (200 dosage units). Again, in our sample case, there should be 11 bottles of tablets on the shelf. A visual inspection of that specific drug reveals there are only 2 bottles. The next phase of the investigation begins.

FIGURE P-1 The dark bars represent the number of tablets dispensed through prescriptions. The lighter bars represent the number of tablets (100 per bottle) ordered.

Investigative Phase

Pharmacy drug loss investigations are initially highly confidential because the number of potential suspects includes anyone who has access to the pharmacy or who can potentially gain access to the pharmacy. The one saving grace of these types of investigations is that if the suspect is a pharmacy employee, the thief is usually going to be the person who is overriding the internal systems replenishment process. However, even with that group narrowed, it is unknown as to how the drugs are leaving the pharmacy. This could involve accomplices, multiple suspects, or outside vendors. Carrying out one bottle of pills is fairly easy to do on your person, especially if the pills are no longer in the bottle. Diverting large quantities may present a challenge but may be overcome by simply using the mail or commercial carrier to ship them home.

Once a loss has been determined, the DEA must be notified in writing within 1 business day. This can be accomplished by faxing a simple memo to the local DEA office regarding the initial reporting of a loss. Further investigation would be needed to confirm the actual loss. The DEA has very stringent administrative policies regarding loss reporting, but unless it is a special circumstance, the agency will not become actively involved. Every state also has a State Board of Pharmacy that regulates the licensing of the pharmacists and the pharmacy itself. The reporting requirements vary for each state, but, in general, there is no requirement to inform them of any investigation. However, it is a good practice to do so.

Narrowing the scope of the investigation to an individual takes a thorough review of store-level paperwork, schedules, or through any technological means. Again, the sensitive nature of the investigation generally prohibits the usual hands-on investigative techniques at the outset. Unless a trusted individual is cooperating with loss prevention, a great deal of work must be done before store opening or after store closing. To reinforce the sensitive nature of the investigation, a confidentiality agreement can be requested of any assisting employee. Breaking the confidentiality agreement would result in termination.

CCTV is almost paramount, and it may require multiple cameras. The layout of the pharmacy makes camera placement difficult, as an overhead view of the target drug severely limits view. Theft of one bottle of pills from shelf to pocket takes 2 seconds, but there is no need to review video unless there is a known shortage. This will required frequent, if not daily, reconciliations of that drug to determine if there is a shortage.

Investigative Scenario

Whether detected by automated means, audit, or tip, the investigative process can be very long. However, with proper preparation, these cases are likely to last no more than a few weeks.

When surveillance is begun, there is a period of time when it requires total confidentiality. Operations staff should be notified, however, because they may have to escort you in to the pharmacy during nonoperating hours. A licensed pharmacist must be present if you are entering the pharmacy. Entering the pharmacy is key obviously to physically recording the on-hand count of any targeted drugs. Using an automated system allows decisions to be made as to where to position a camera(s) to get the most likely theft.

The difficulty of these investigations is confirming a loss. An actual pill/liquid count is generally not necessary, as the theft usually involves full bottles. Nonetheless, it requires surveillance to determine where suspicious activity is occurring. In the multistore environment of retail drug establishments, there is not always the luxury of having stores closely clustered together. Pharmacies at great distances from the investigator’s home may require a revised approach to complete the investigation. Retrieval of video may be an issue if a DVR is used. Using time-lapse VCR may be of more benefit if the investigation is being assisted by a member of store management.

If the amount of stolen drugs is high, it is very likely that that local authorities or the DEA will be involved. There may be requests to allow the thefts to continue to occur while their criminal investigation proceeds. This should obviously be reviewed by a corporate legal department.

Apprehension Stage

Closing out an investigation can occur with or without an apprehension. In both instances, several administrative items must be concluded.

If a company employee is apprehended, the usual internal steps should be taken regarding evidence and statements. Prosecution has several variations that are of interest. Drugs are generally inventoried at cost and may be converted to retail for physical inventory purposes. This sometimes presents a challenge to local authorities as to how to assess value. This is important because most jurisdictions will charge the individual with theft because there is no statue that provides for illegally taking of controlled drugs. This truly points out the value of having the DEA or State Board of Pharmacy involved even if just as an advisor. Those agencies can assist in the proper framing of criminal charges if necessary. In the case of a pharmacist and in some states a drug tech, the State Board of Pharmacy will hold an administrative hearing to determine the fate of the offender’s license. More importantly, the state can sanction the license of the store’s pharmacy too and levy a fine against the company. While the pharmacy’s license could be revoked, it would be extremely rare in a chain drug store.

If a good relationship exists between the investigator and law enforcement, loss prevention should be allowed to complete the internal investigation. This allows the company to fulfill all obligations to protect company assets and at the same time still provides law enforcement with a prosecutable case. Collaboration is the key to successfully investigate any drug loss.

Drug Testing and Polygraph as an Investigative Tool

Because narcotics are involved, there are two additional investigative avenues afforded: drug testing and polygraph. Despite common belief, the use of the polygraph is still viable. The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1989 allows pre-employment and investigative use of polygraph. This is a thorny subject. Policy and procedure for its use should be well planned and distributed to all employees. There should be a formal review process in place that includes the legal department and loss prevention senior management for requesting the use of polygraph. It is recommended that the polygraph request is presented to the employee in writing. That request should outline why the examination is being requested and should outline both company policy and the Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 (EPPA) for the employee’s review. The employee should be allowed to keep a copy of this document as well. If considering the use of polygraph, keep in mind that neither refusal to take the polygraph nor the results of the polygraph can be used solely as justification for termination. The polygraph is simply a tool within the totality of the investigation. It has been my experience that it is rare when an employee actually appears for the process.

Note: While we believe the polygraph is a valuable investigative tool, as noted in the preceding text, the nuances of the EPPA are many and complicated, and the penalties for violation of its provisions can be severe. Therefore, before any mention of the use of the polygraph is made during an investigation, we strongly suggest competent legal counsel be consulted. CAS/JHC.

Prohibitions

Employers are generally prohibited from requiring or requesting any employee or job applicant to take a lie detector test, and from discharging, disciplining, or discriminating against an employee or prospective employee for refusing to take a test or for exercising other rights under the act.

Examinee Rights

The act permits polygraph (a kind of lie detector) tests to be administered in the private sector subject to restrictions, to certain prospective employees of security service firms (armored car, alarm, and guard), and of pharmaceutical manufacturers, distributors, and dispensers.

The act also permits polygraph testing of certain employees of private firms who are reasonably suspected of involvement in a workplace incident (theft, embezzlement, etc.) that resulted in economic loss to the employer.

Drug Testing

Drug testing can also be employed, but it must comply with the Federal Workplace Drug Testing Guidelines. If a drug test is conducted for a pharmacy investigation involving personal use or addiction, it is recommended that the test be administered after the investigation target has been on duty for a few hours. Most companies have very clear drug testing policies, and retail drug chains have fundamental policies and procedures firmly in place. Those policies will generally state that failure to submit to a drug test is basis for termination. Due to the nature of the test, it will be unannounced, and proper relief of staff is critical to maintain the operation of the pharmacy. If an employee refuses to submit to a drug test, there should be sufficient policy in place to seek termination.

Confirming the Loss and Conducting an Audit

Regardless of the end result of the investigation, an inventory is recommended for all controlled drugs at the conclusion of the internal investigation. This should be done for two reasons:

There are variables as to how the inventory is performed to ensure that the pharmacy’s record keeping is in compliance. There is somewhat of a Catch-22 with this process, however. By law, the initial loss was reported to the DEA and possibly the State Board of Pharmacy. They can accept your internal inventory results or conduct independent audits of their own. The State Boards of Pharmacy have the power to adjudicate any violations of record keeping found during an audit. Even though their audits were initiated by the company itself, penalties such as fines can be assessed. Obviously, if a pharmacist is involved, the board will take action against his license.

This is truly an end-to-end investigation that provides a paper trail and a reconcilable inventory to determine exact loss. These cases require extreme patience that may even dictate that thefts are allowed to occur to expand the investigation as needed.

Forged Prescriptions(8)

Signs to aid in the detection of fraudulent prescriptions: Forged prescriptions are a significant problem for today’s pharmacies. Pharmacists should be aware of the various kinds of fraudulent prescriptions which may be presented for dispensing:

Characteristics of Forged Prescriptions

Theft and the Impaired Pharmacist

Impaired pharmacists are no different from any other person with an addictive disease. The addiction may start with taking pills to take the edge off the day or to help with backache from standing all day. Taking the drugs may initially be circumstance driven, but then the drugs may be taken in anticipation of the original problem. As the body increases its tolerance, larger doses or more powerful drugs are needed to obtain the same effect. The early stages are difficult to detect unless it involves CII drugs, as there is a requirement of perpetual inventory on these.

These types of thefts are long term, however, and the loss begins to accumulate. The pharmacist or drug tech knows that continued abuse of one specific drug will eventually be detected, so he begins stealing a variety of drugs that deliver the same effect. A unique factor to the investigation of impairment thefts is that some pharmacists “float.” They are not assigned to a specific store, or they act as part-time pharmacists who are called in for staffing reasons. These are absolute moving targets who take advantage of the variety of stores they work. Now the situation is complicated by a person stealing multiple drugs and multiple locations. However, once a possible suspect is identified, that person can be moved to one store for surveillance purposes.

Narcotics, specifically pain medication, are the most abused type of drug. Whether liquid cough syrups with codeine or heavy pain management pills such as Vicodin or OxyContin, the theft methodology is fairly consistent. Drugs must be brought into the pharmacy by any means available and then be hidden or must be removed from the pharmacy as quickly as possible. Liquids are often drunk directly from a bottle and then placed back on the shelf. The consumed liquid is then replaced by adding distilled water to the container. This practice creates an obvious health risk for patients.

The impaired pharmacist has a disease that cannot be addressed through awareness meetings or poster campaigns. These individuals need professional help and, like most addicts, are reluctant to come forward to get the help they need. Their biggest fear is that their license to practice pharmacy may be in jeopardy. Pharmacies should have available the phone numbers of the state’s impaired pharmacist hotline so they can get immediate help. One of the primary organizations that deal with pharmacist rehabilitation is the Pharmacy Recovery Network (www.usaprn.org). The success rate for many of the PRN programs is as high as 85%.

Understanding addiction as a disease will help the loss prevention professional a great deal in this industry. This is somewhat of a learning curve for those coming from other types of retail. The interplay between the theft of narcotics and the need to satisfy an addiction is important to understand. An impaired pharmacist may seek medical treatment on his own, and it may be through that process he will divulge the amount of drugs stolen. Even though the pharmacist stole from the company for his own use, restitution may be the final outcome. In short, a pharmacist may be allowed to enter into a rehabilitation program, make restitution for the drugs stolen, and be returned to work upon successful completion of treatment.

This situation is not to be confused with a theft investigation whereby the offending pharmacist is identified and apprehended. There is no “get out of jail free” card for the pharmacist by announcing that he wants to go into a rehabilitation program after he has been caught. Theft cases are handled just as any other.

Reinstating an impaired pharmacist is not as problematic as you might think. Every state has special programs legislated for health professionals with addictions, where the treatment is rigorous and the penalty for relapse is the possibility of permanent loss of license to practice. While the risks are high, the rewards are substantial, as these highly successful state-sponsored programs allow professionals to regain their health and their careers.

These voluntary programs, paid for through health professional license renewal fees, operate on the same basic requirements in each state. The health professional undergoes detoxification before signing a contract agreeing to 3 years of monitoring and random drug tests between 3 and 10 times each month. Weekly group therapy meetings, regular sessions with an addiction physician, at least three 12-step meetings per week are also required. The patient also identifies a sponsor and a work-site monitor.

Approximately 95% of participants in state health professional recovery programs remain sober for at least 5 years, which is a remarkable success rate, especially when compared to other treatment programs that display relapse rates of 66% or higher.(9)

Additionally, reinstatement is a sound business decision because, quite simply, there is a shortage of pharmacists. If the retailer did not reinstate the pharmacist, the pharmacist would certainly work for another company. It is an issue of supply and demand.