Police-Mental Health Collaboration Toolkit
PMHC Toolkit



Program Design

The planning committee designs a specialized law enforcement-based program to address the root causes of the problems that are impeding improved responses to people with mental illnesses and makes the most of available resources.

As a critical first step in the design process, the planning committee should develop a detailed understanding of the problems in its jurisdiction and identify all contributing factors. In this analysis, it is important to understand the driving force(s) behind current efforts to improve the law enforcement response. In some jurisdictions, law enforcement executives may become aware of the problem because of a tragic incident. In others, executives may realize there are operational challenges presented by particularly complex field encounters, such as the inordinate amount of time officers spend waiting for medical clearance in emergency rooms or the frequency with which officers repeatedly come in contact with the same individuals without an effective resolution.

The committee must examine the reasons why these incidents occur and other aspects of the problem that may not have been raised by the single high-profile incident. It should look at law enforcement data on calls for service, beat boundaries, feedback from officers, community survey data, and other sources of information. To enhance their understanding of root causes and available resources, committee members also should examine factors such as the community’s inpatient and outpatient treatment options, crisis response services, ancillary services such as housing and substance abuse treatment, population, and geography. They also may want to talk to people in other jurisdictions who have grappled with limited community resources to see what alternatives are available to increase the reach of existing services.

The analysis of the problems and assessment of available and potential resources to address them should drive the short- and long-term goals of the program. For example, if the analysis reveals that a significant barrier to improving the law enforcement response is that officers lack the training to safely de-escalate situations involving people with mental illnesses, one program goal would be to correct this deficiency. If officers cannot efficiently link people to mental health treatments, another goal may be to revise and streamline processes for connecting to these services.

Once the program’s purpose is defined, the committee must address personnel assignments and related considerations. The planning committee must decide whether some or all officers should be trained to stabilize and de-escalate situations involving people with mental illnesses in immediate response to the call for service. Should all officers receive some baseline training and others receive more extensive training? Should a subset of officers be trained to respond with a mental health professional? When considering the answers to questions like these, the committee should explore the practical implications of different staffing options and present them to the chief law enforcement executive or his or her designee on the committee. The committee also must help interpret the criteria for emergency mental health evaluation and decide how officers will access that service. These decisions will help the committee determine which additional skills and information the identified group of responders should receive in training.

If committee members, including representatives from policing, conclude that a subset of officers will respond to incidents involving people with mental illnesses, they should help the law enforcement executive determine how many officers are needed to cover all shifts and geographic districts. The committee also should develop personnel selection criteria and a process for identifying officers best suited for the challenges of this new role. In particular, planners should consider officers’ ability to reorient from the more traditional method of gaining control by using an authoritative approach during a field contact to a nonadversarial, crisis-intervention style. To the extent possible, the selection process should be voluntary, yet selective.