Recommendations for Implementation

Regardless of agency size, law enforcement agencies should use special numerical codes when storing data to indicate when mental illness was a factor in the call for service.[1] Smaller departments may document incidences using index cards while some larger departments may use computer equipment.  In smaller jurisdictions without advanced Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) systems, dispatchers must be specially trained to collect detailed information that can be stored in location files or similar data sources.

Officers should also be required to update this numerical code when clearing the call to change the nature of the call if they determine that mental illness is an issue.  For example, if an officer is called for a noise complaint and finds a man having a psychotic episode who is a danger to himself, the call should be cleared to reflect this new information. If the officer determines that mental illness is not a factor in a call that was dispatched as such, he or she should also denote that change for dispatch. 

Many CAD systems have only one field that captures the type of call and officers are asked to pick the most relevant code. Agencies will need to provide guidance to officers as to how and when to prioritize the mental illness as the critical feature of the call.  By using appropriate clearance codes in the CAD system, law enforcement agencies can track information (such as repeat calls involving a person with mental illness) and assess agency responses.

Some departments also choose to place "flags" on certain locations in the CAD system (see Policy Statement 2: Request for Police Service).  These flags appear when repeated calls for service are made to that location. The dispatcher then reads the text of the flag when dispatching the call to provide additional information to the responding officers. These flags are placed only on those call locations that pose a particular concern, such as potential for violence or as a repeat location. Personnel are designated to review these flags periodically to make sure the flags continue to reflect current issues or problems. 

Example:  Baltimore County (MD) Police Department

In the Baltimore County Police Department, supervisors make written requests to the communications center to place a flag on certain locations where police have made repeated calls or where there has been a history of weapons use or violence.  These flags are used for a wide variety of calls, not just those related to mental health problems. 

Although information about a person's mental illness on written police reports is important for accuracy and to clarify officers' response choices, it has the potential to influence criminal case outcomes negatively. For that reason, care must be taken in the way that information pertaining to mental illness is documented.

Most important, officers should be trained to concentrate on documenting observable behavior, not pseudo-diagnoses or damaging slang. For example, reports should never include a box stating that a person is mentally ill, but could instead list indicators of mental illness involved (see Policy Statement 3:  On-Scene Assessment, for examples of indicators of mental illness). 

Report forms should also allow room for officers to include their own observations. However, officers should not draw conclusions in their observations about what they believe has caused the behavior, such as that the person is "off his meds," without supporting information.  Whenever possible, local mental health professionals should participate in training officers about the type of information to be included in a report based on federal, state, and local laws.  Confidential information shared by mental health professionals should not be documented in police reports.

Departments may also want to consider using supplemental forms that capture additional information about police contacts with people with mental illnesses. These forms should not become part of the charging documents and should be kept confidential. This documentation can provide information about the nature of the problem, mental health resources that were accessed, and the way police responded.  This information will be helpful to internal decision-making processes, such as the allocation of resources, but will not be part of the individual's arrest record. 

Example:  Memphis (TN) Crisis Intervention Team

The CIT approaches used around the country employ a report form that is completed by the responding CIT officer and maintained by the coordinator for review and tracking.  Memphis, Tennessee, and Montgomery County, Maryland, Police Departments use such a form to document incident specifics such as the living arrangement of the person, the use of restraints, and the disposition chosen.

Police observations related to a person's mental illness are also collected on commitment forms, which in many jurisdictions give only two lines to report observations. Commitment forms must be useful for police, which means short and fast, but they should have sufficient space to record observations that would be useful to mental health providers. These forms are used to indicate probable cause for emergency holds of individuals thought likely to meet criteria for involuntary commitment and will be presented to judges during civil commitment proceedings. Often, police officers have had the best opportunity to observe behaviors that may indicate need for involuntary treatment, so an accurate and professional description in such instances is important.

Officers should document information about mental illness only when that illness is relevant to the police contact. For example, a suspect may have depression that is not relevant to the crime he or she is accused of.  Similarly, for some victims of crime who have a mental illness, that illness is not relevant to the situation and thus should not be recorded.