Study of US law enforcement co-responder programs identifies wide variations
Findings are first step in evaluating initiatives’ effectiveness, which can lead to evidence-based guidelines and protocols
Crime and Justice Research Alliance
In response to demands for police reform, agencies have begun to pursue alternative responses to calls involving mental health crises. Across the United States, jurisdictions are adopting co-responder teams that bring qualified mental or behavioral health professionals into police emergency responses calls. In a new study, researchers surveyed local and state law enforcement agencies to determine the prevalence and use of these teams. They found wide variation in the types of teams and how they operate.
The study, by researchers at George Mason University and the University of Wyoming, appears in Policing: An International Journal.
“Our survey is the first to examine the prevalence and characteristics of law enforcement co-responder programs in the United States,” explains Cynthia Lum, professor of criminology, law, and society at George Mason University, who coauthored the study. “Our findings represent a first step in evaluating the effectiveness of these programs and in turn, developing evidence-based guidelines and protocols for their implementation.” Lum is an expert whose work is promoted by the NCJA Crime and Justice Research Alliance, which is funded by the National Criminal Justice Association.
Since the deinstitutionalization of state mental health hospitals in the 1960s, law enforcement has become the primary responders to people experiencing a mental health crisis. But the practice has come under intense scrutiny as a result of high-profile officer-involved deaths of people experiencing mental health crises. Among alternative responses is the co-responder model, which involves police partnering with qualified mental health professionals to respond to mental and behavioral health calls. However, the extent, nature, and effectiveness of these programs has not been widely investigated.
In this study, researchers developed and administered a survey to a nationally representative sample of local and state law enforcement agencies. A total of 568 agencies from all regions of the United States completed the survey between May 2022 and May 2023; 70% were local, county, or regional police departments; 24% were sheriff’s offices; and 3.5% were state or highway patrol agencies.
The study found wide variations in staffing, operations, qualifications, and characteristics of co-responder programs, as well as in respondents’ beliefs about the effectiveness of such programs. The study also found a lack of consistent programmatic guidance to inform programs’ development, which results in personnel and funding challenges to implementing and maintaining co-responder programs. Specifically, the study found that:
- Nearly 88% of responding agencies had officers certified to be part of crisis intervention teams (CITs) and 41% reported having a co-responder program.
- Of the 232 agencies with co-responder teams, almost half (45.7%) started their program since 2020, 39% of the agencies had just one co-responder or qualified mental health professional to respond to calls with an officer (i.e., one team); 32% had two to three teams, 12% had four to six teams, and 9% had seven or more teams.
- Only 19% of responding agencies had co-responder teams available around the clock; 55% had teams operating on certain days and times, and 53% said when teams were not in operation, they were available to assist over the phone or by radio.
- In terms of training, 48% of agencies said co-responders received no additional training from the law enforcement agencies. Of the 48% that did provide training, the most common was maintaining personal and officer safety, followed by guidance on police procedures and culture, state laws, and use of force.
- Only 31% of responding agencies had some plan to evaluate or track the effectiveness of their co-responder teams by assessing outcomes such as use of force, arrests, officers’ time spent on calls, repeat calls, and hospitalization. Evaluation and tracking were sometimes tied to how programs were funded or managed (78% of programs were funded by local or state governments and 27% were funded by federal grants).
“Our study suggests that several characteristics of co-responder programs are ripe for evaluation, including qualifications and training for mental health professionals and officers; protocols for implementation and operation; assessments of officer buy-in; understanding of data collection necessary for evaluating outcomes; and recommendations for building relationships with the community, between agencies, and with stakeholders,” notes Clair V. Uding, associate professor of criminal justice and sociology at the University of Wyoming, who led the study.
“While jurisdictions and communities are unique, efforts to better document programs’ development and encourage agencies to evaluate and share their information about effectiveness or lack thereof can help inform others who have adopted or want to adopt these programs.”
Among the study’s limitations, according to the authors, are that the high prevalence of CIT and co-responder programs among respondents could represent a selection bias; agencies without these programs may have disregarded the survey. In addition, the study was not designed to evaluate any specific aspect of co-responder programs but to provide information about agencies’ practices. And the study did not explore types of alternative responses to mental health crises that do not involve the police.
“If we want more evidence-based approaches to co-responder units, police agencies’ approaches need to be tracked, assessed, and evaluated against desired outcomes,” adds Haley Moon, PhD student in psychology at the University of Wyoming, who coauthored the study. “Our results can help inform a theory of change framework for co-responder programs that can be applied to different communities with different needs and resources, to help identify short- and long-term goals, articulate required actions to achieve these goals, and develop measurable indicators of success.”
Journal
Policing An International Journal
Article Title
The status of co-responders in law enforcement: findings from a national survey of law enforcement agencies
Fayetteville police positive about partnership with social workers
image:
University of Arkanas School of Social Work professors Mark Plassmeyer and Kim Stauss.
view moreCredit: Photo by Whit Pruitt/University of Arkansas University Relations
In 2021, the University of Arkansas School of Social Work partnered with the Fayetteville Police Department to pair officers with social workers trained to help people suffering mental crises. Initially, the officers were supportive of the effort but also somewhat hesitant. Now that the co-response teams are fully established, the officers say the program benefits the community and helps them carry out their duties.
The officers’ changing attitudes to the program were reported in the latest issue of the Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology. The paper was written by U of A social work professors Mark Plassmeyer and Kim Stauss, who helped launch and continue to work with the Fayetteville Police Department on the co-response program. Melissa Gute, who completed her Master of Social Work at the U of A and now works for the police department, was also an author.
The Crisis Intervention Response Team in Fayetteville launched with a single intern from the U of A School of Social Work. Today the police department has two teams that pair a full-time social worker with an officer and is in the process of hiring social workers for two more teams.
“I think you are seeing the co-response programs expanding and growing, because people are seeing that not only do they help their community but also support the individual police departments in accomplishing their missions,” Stauss said.
In Fayetteville, officers told the researchers the program reduced their workload while helping them better serve people suffering a mental health crisis. The intervention of the social workers also cut down the number of “high utilizers,” people who officers might encounter weekly or even daily.
“Their retention has increased, which is a huge thing for police departments. Frustration has gone down,” Stauss said.
The officers said the progressive culture of the Fayetteville Police Department and the strong support of their chief helped the co-response program succeed.
Plassmeyer and Stauss next plan to study how people who have received services from the Crisis Intervention Response Team view the program and how aware the Fayetteville community is of the work.
The research evaluating the Fayetteville co-response program is supported by a grant from the National Institute of Justice, the research agency of the Department of Justice.
Police departments around Arkansas have expressed interest in creating their own version of the Fayetteville co-response teams. Plassmeyer and Stauss also spoke about the work at a recent conference of the Arkansas Association of Chiefs of Police.
“People are trying to get these off the ground in rural areas, urban areas, suburban, you name it. I’ve noticed that a lot of people are struggling to find clinicians,” Plassmeyer said.
Next semester, the lead social worker at the Fayetteville Police Department will teach a class at the U of A on practicing in a law enforcement environment. The School of Social Work’s online advanced-standing master’s program could also train students around the state who want to work with police departments.
Journal
Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology
Method of Research
Survey
Subject of Research
People
Article Title
"We Need to Not Fear You": Essential Factors Identified by Sworn Officers and Civilian Staff for Implementation and Expansion of a Co-Response Program
No comments:
Post a Comment