Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit 6City of Miami PD Proposal Page 34 of 144 EIPUR^.xT�D PRE-EMPLOYMPM PSYCHOLOGICAL S=T;6BILITY SCREENING PXXSE ONE: Pre -Offer Personality Suitability Evaluation Process (non-medical inquiries per ADA) PLEASE NOTE- Per ADA guidelines, this phase of the evaluation consists of what ADA defines as non-medical inquiries, tests and procedures. Therefore, psychological inquiries, procedures and tests considered medical under ADA are conducted Post -Offer after a Conditional offer of Employment (COE) has been provided to selected finalists for the position. The Pre -Offer screening phase covers approximately 75% of the entire psychological evaluation, except for the following: 1. Detailed questions relating to drug usage and alcohol consumption; 2. detailed questions related to medical and mental health history or treatment; administration of a psychological diagnostic instrument whose primary purpose is to assess job-related emotionality stability and/or identify recognized psychological and mental health conditions. The Pre -Offer evaluation consists of the following: 1. Instructions and Consent corm- menu es 2. Pre -Offer comprehensive Public Safety Personal History Questionnaire (PHQ)- 30 minutes 3. Wonderlic Personnel Test (WPT)- Measures problem -solving and learning ability- 20 minutes 4. Completion of the following standardized test battery- Approx. 2-4 hrs. (no time limit imposed) California Psychological Inventory (CPI) Public Safety Screening Questionnaire (PSSQ) State -Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI) 5. Tests are scored utilizing Public Safety norms and actuarial/predictive research data 6. Pre -Offer semi -structured job-related suitability interview conducted - Approx. 30 minutes conducted by a FL. Licensed Psychologist trained in public safety selection. Interview consists of: 1. Review and clarification of Personal History Questionnaire with applicant; 2. Applicant's responses to standardized open-ended questions; 3. Review and clarification with applicant of critical items noted by standardized testing; 4. Interviewer completes the above steps using a standardized interview form and then rates the applicant on the job-related traits deemed essential for the position. The interviewer then prepares a preliminary report of findings using a standard report format based on the aggregate of material gathered from the Pre -Offer evaluation. 7. Review and approval of preliminary report by a senior psychologist. If questions exist, the senior psychologist will staff the file with the interviewing psychologist to reconcile remaining issues. 8. Final report and attached Personal History Questionnaire (PHQ available to agency typically within 24-hrs. of testing. 9. Approximate total time of Pre -Offer evaluation 4-5 hrs. City of Miami PD Proposal Page 35 of 144 Applicants who then go on to successfully complete the various selection steps of the agency and are ,given a Conditional Offer of Employment (COE) per ADA return for phase two of the psychological evaluation: PHASE,TWO: Post -Offer job-related Emotional Stability Evaluation. (medical inquiries per ADA). PLEASE NOTE: This phase is usually briefer and more narrowly focused than the Pre -Offer Suitability Evaluation. It consists of inquiries, procedures and tests considered medical under ADA. Essentially, this Post -Offer phase covers detailed inquiries concerning any drug and alcohol use; mental health and medical history; and a comprehensive standardized psychological instrument, which assesses emotional stability and/or the presence of a diagnosable psychological condition. Our experience has been that very few applicants are disqualified by the Post -Offer Emotional Stability evaluation. Thus far, the pass. rate for this phase has been about 95-98%. The Post -Offer evaluation consists of the following: 1. Instructions, Consent Form and Release of Protected Healthcare Information - 15 minutes 2. Post -Offer Public Safety Personal History Questionnaire (PHQ)- 20 minutes 3. Completion of Stan ar ize psyc_o ogica es instrumen - - Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) 4. Post -Offer se^ni-structured job -relevant emotional stability interview conducted- 30 minutes. Interview consists of: 1. Review and clarification of Post -Offer Personal History Questionnaire; 2. Brief Mental Status assessment; 3. Review and clarification of critical items produced by standardized testing. 4. Applicant responses to standard open-ended questions. The psychologist completes the above interview utilizing a standard interview form. After integration and consideration of all Post -Offer evaluation material, the interviewing psychologist then rates the applicant as having "Met' or "Not Met" the basic emotional stability standards of the applicable position and comments on any further information that could prove useful to the agency. If the applicant does not meet basic emotional standards standards, an explanation and the specific reasons for this finding are provided. 5. Complete file and rating reviewed by a senior psychologist. If questions arise, the file is staffed with the interviewing psychologist. 5. Final report and the Personal History Questionnaire (PHQ) are typically available to the agency within 24-hrs. of testing. 7. Approximate total time of Post -Offer evaluation- 2-3 hrs. City of Miami PD Proposal Page 36 of 144 Although identifying and screening out high risk applicants is the primary goal of psychological screening, selecting in those applicants with particular job-related areas of strength is also often a valuable part of the evaluation. Below are listed the four screen -in or "Areas of Strength" categories in our evaluation system. 1. Fast Learner 2. Excellent Interpersonal skills 3. Very diligent/Responsible 4. Leadership/Management Potential City of Miami PD Proposal Page 37 of 144 ESSENTIAL/IMPORTANT JOB-RELATED TRAITS A critical part of effective psychological screening is to identify in common sense language the job-related traits that are most critical to performing the public safety job position. This can be accomplished through observation of those performing the job, conducting job position surveys, reading the formal job description and reviewing any studies and research on the subject by respected public safety organizations such as the California Post Commission (POST). Over the years, our firm has availed itself of all the aforementioned sources of information and our current system focuses on and rates applicants on the following 14 public safety job dimensions. The report of applicants w o ono mee s an ar s on ado -re a e ai s wi :�`�►�;ficit--i�I' Moderately Indicated" or "Deficit Strongly Indicated" for each of the traits listed below. 1. Integrity 2. Impulse Control 3. Judgment 4. Openness 5. Emotional Composure 6. Social Orientation 7. Initiative 8, Communication Skills 9. Flexibility 10. Problem -Solving 11. Substance Abuse/Self-Destructive Behavior 12. Readiness for Position 13. Conscientiousness 14. Work Pattems/Habits For further definition and detail of each job dimension, please refer to our "Background Investigation Manual' attachment. City of Miami PD Proposal Page 38 of 144 EVALUATION PROCEDURES AND TEST BATTERY Once the consultant psychologist feels confident that the critical or essential traits of the job position have been determined, then the consultant must expertly decide the test instruments and procedures to be utilized to measure and rate those traits. Since psychological testing is an ever evolving science, the psychologist must always remain aware and cognizant of new research and tests available for psychological screenings. Therefore, selection of a test battery must remain flexible and updated as progress in the field dictates. Our firm's battery of test instruments has changed several times over the we are constantly reviewing and critically assessing the effectiveness of each instrument in our screening system. We believe our current test battery is very comprehensive and represents a "state of the art" approach to screening public safety applicants. It should also be noted that all instruments used in our test battery have established specialized normative data for public safety applicants. In addition to the standardized test battery, our firm requires that each applicant complete a comprehensive Personal History Questionnaire (PHQ) designed by LEPCA specifically for public safety selection and undergo a standardized job-related clinical interview with a Licensed Psychologist trained in the screening of Public Safety applicants. The following pages provide a detailed description of each instrument and procedure. City of Miami PD Proposal Test Battery by Position Page 39 of 144 The test battery and screening procedures are very similar for both swom and non -sworn position applicants. As indicated below, the test battery and interview are somewhat briefer for non -sworn positions and the minimum standards of the evaluation are appropriately less stringent. The firm's screening psychologists remain the same for non - sworn applicants. Law Enforcement and Detention Officer- For certified sworn positions with authority to carry firearms and utilize a use of force continuum that includes deadly force, we utilize the following comprehensive battery of tests and procedures: Personality Assessment Inventory (PA.I) California Psychological Inventory -Revised — (CPI) Public Safety Screening Questionnaire (PSSQ) State Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI) Wonderlic Personnel Test- (WPT) Comprehensive Personal History Questionnaire (PHQ) Clinical Interview Dispatchers/Communications Operator, etc.- For non -sworn positions, we remove the PSSQ from the battery and conduct a somewhat less extensive clinical interview. The PSSQ was primarily developed for use with certified sworn positions, therefore the norms and research for this instrument focus on sworn law enforcement positions. PAI CPI STAXI WPT PHQ Clinical Interview City of Miami PD Proposal Page 40 of 144 California Psycholoeical Inventory (CPI) Our firm uses the most recent and updated version of the CPI, which was modified to more closely comply with ADA requirements. Unlike the MMPI and IPI, the CPI was originally developed in order to assess favorable, rather than pathological aspects of personality functioning. Over the years, the CPI came to be known as "the sane man's MMPI." As the scales of the CPI deal principally with personality characteristics "important for social living and interactions," the test is particularly suited for screening job applicants whose primary duties often involve interpersonal contact and critical decision-making frequently in crisis situations. The CPI is an extremely comprehensive and well researched instrument and contains scales extremely relevant to the job description of Police Officers and other public safety portions. For example, The CPI contains scales measuring such traits as Dominance, Social Presence, Empathy, Responsibility, Socialization, Self -Control, Tolerance of Others, Intellectual Efficiency, Ability to Work Independently, Achievement via Conformance, Flexibility, etc. Indeed, the CPI is likely the most widely used and respected instrument for the evaluation of personality functioning and behavioral patterns in a normal population. In our professional opinion, the CPI is the premier instrument in accurately evaluating and measuring the essential job traits of public safety positions. Our firm has administered the CPI for the past 25 years to all our Public Safety applicants. We also have conducted screening and normative research with this City of Miami PD Proposal Page 41 of 144 instrument on numerous occasions. To add to our effectiveness with the CPI, we utilize the Roberts, Johnson Public Safety Selection CPI report. This report makes use of the extensive expertise and robust research that was developed principally by Dr. Michael Roberts, who is a very well respected Police Psychologist and acknowledged expert on using the CPI for public safety selection purposes. Among other things, this report provides extensive public safety normative data and includes predictions on several job dimensions and behaviors, which are considered important risk factors in public safety work. Members of our firm have maintained a close relationship and interacted with Dr. Roberts on numerous matters over the years, so we can personally attest to his expertise and specifically the usefulness of his Public Safety Selection Report. City of Miami PD Proposal Page 42 of 144 Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) The Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) is a self-report inventory of adult psychopathology. It was designed as a multidimensional alternative to the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) for assessing abnormal personality traits. Although the MMPI is one of the oldest and most well known psychological instrument, nevertheless, it has frequently been criticized as out of date, methodologically flawed, which required major recent revisions to the original MMPI. The PAI is a self-report questionnaire consisting of 344 items (scored on a 4 - point ordinal scale: F = False; ST = Slightly True; MT = Mainly True; VT = Very True). The PAI includes current items, and avoids colloquial and slang expressions. Items considered potentially biased (on gender, ethnic, economic, religious or other grounds) were excluded. Since the PAI is a diagnostic psychological instrument measuring psychopathology, per ADA guidelines it must be administered Post -Offer after a COE. The PAI has 22 non -overlapping scales which include 4 validity scales, 11 clinical scales, 5 treatment scales, and 2 interpersonal scales (10 scales are further subdivided into 31 conceptually distinct subscales). Most scales consist of 8, 12, or 24 items with an average grade 4 reading level. Validity scales measure response Inconsistency, Infrequency, Legative Impression, and Positive Impression. Raw scores are plotted on the Profile Forms, yielding T scores (M=50,SD=1 ThePAI was normed on three sampie s, a - dwelling adults stratified on gender, race, and age according to 1995 U.S. Census projections, clinical patients; and college students (all samples comprised at least 1,000 individuals). Over the past several years, the PAI has gained increased usage among public safety psychologists as a particularly effective instrument to assess job-related emotional stability for those applying for varied law enforcement positions. Beyond the primary clinical scales, several PAI subscales such as measures of verbal or physical aggression have proven very valuable in determining risk - factors in positions which require a high level of self-control discipline. Of great importance to screening of public safety applicants, Drs. Roberts and Johnson have conducted extensive research with the PAI in this area of use. This research resulted in the creation of the Johnson, Roberts Public Safety Report. Among other things, their research has developed special normative data to compare present applicants' profiles to those currently performing the job in a satisfactory manner. In addition, they have established sound statistical analyses that specifically rates each applicant on various job-related dimensions such as Integrity, Anger Management, Substance Abuse and likelihood of Early Job Termination. Our firm has utilized the PAI and the Johnson, Roberts report for several years in the screening of several thousand public safety applicants from numerous South Florida agencies. Individual members of our firm have associated and worked with Drs. Roberts and Johnson over many years and this collegial relationship has further enhanced our expertise with this instrument. City of Miami PD Proposal Page 43 of 144 PUBLIC SAFETY SCREENING QUESTIONNAIRE (PSSQ) PURPOSE: Design a specialized pre-employment personality instrument to identify high-risk traits, characteristics and behavioral patterns in public safety applicants. The PSSQ is not intended as a "stand alone" instrument and should be used in conjunction with other standardized tests and selection procedures. AUTHOR: Mark Axelberd, Ph.D., Law Enforcement Psychological and Counseling Associates, Inc. (LEPCA) DESCRIPTION: The PSSQ is a self-report questionnaire of 250 items, which requires test -takers to respond STRONGLY AGREE, SOMEWHAT AGREE, SOMEWHAT DISAGREE or STRONGLY DISAGREE to each item. The PSSQ is only for use with public safety candidates applying to positions such as Police Officer, Correctional/Detention, Firefighter, Trooper, Security Guard or other certified positions. It also may be utilized in the selection of personnel for special unit assignments such as SWAT, Hostage Negotiation, etc. but separate normative data for these positions have not been established. Careful review was taken to develop test items that are job-related, easily understood and do not require a high level of reading comprehension. The administration of the PSSQ is not timed and the average applicant takes 40 -minutes to complete the instrument. Per the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines, the PSSQ does not contain any medical or diagnostic items. Therefore, the PSSQ can be administered both at the pre -offer phase of the selection process. The PSSQ consists of 9 scales that are directly related to either the on - duty personality job description of a Public Safety Officer or off-duty behaviors recognized as violations of Officer conduct. The goal of scale development was to create job dimensions that would identify the attitudes, beliefs and behaviors, which have often been found to be associated with serious Officer misconduct. The applicant receives a rating of Unremarkable Range, Mild to Moderately High Range or High Range on each job dimension as well as a suitability rating based on the total instrument score. The following scales/job dimensions currently make up the PSSQ report: Intolerance of Others/Inflexibility; Non -Compliance with Rules/Lack of Integrity; Aggression/Lack of Impulse Control; Arrogance/Risk-Taking; Poor Judgment/Decision-Making; Money Problems/Financial Irresponsibility; Sexual Acting Out; Domestic Violence Potential and Defensiveness/Inability to Admit Shortcomings. A Lack of Conscientiousness/Unreliability scale is under development and City of Miami PD Proposal Page 44 of 144 should become part of the PSSQ in the near future. NORMS: The normative sample consisted of 799 public safety applicants referred to LEPCA during 2007 for pre-employment psychological screening. The majority of applicants were from the Florida and South Florida region but a sizable number of applicants resided outside the state of Florida. The sample had adequate representation of males and females. The ethnic breakdown of the sample contained a majority of applicants who were from minority backgrounds, pre -dominantly of Hispanic or Afro-American ethnicity. A prior study of scoring patterns between Caucasian, Afro-American and Hispanic applicants did not reveal meaningful differences between the groups. The applicants in the sample were applying to certified public safety positions such as Police Officer or Correctional Officer, etc. Although the majority had no prior public safety experience, a large number of applicants with public safety experience was also included. A prior study of the PSSQ scores of -those wi pri r veal meaningful differences between the two groups. RESEARCH DESIGN: The author contracted with a local university Professor who's educational training and expertise was in the specialty area of test construction and validation. This consultant was not a member of or an on-going associate of LEPCA. He observed and contributed to all facets of test design and independently performed the statistical analyses associated with the PSSQ. The PSSQ was developed through a sequential approach consisting of several rounds of analysis and refinement. Initially, the author created a large pool of test items based on his extensive experience in public safety work and pre-employment screening. He then utilized a cross-section of numerous members of the public safety community and several psychologists familiar with public safety work to review the items and create new ones for possible inclusion in the instrument. As a result, these individuals made significant contributions to the final PSSQ item content, which greatly enhanced the job - relatedness, content validity and face validity of the instrument. The author then had a former English teacher review each item for grammar and ease of comprehension. A team of psychologists consisting of a female Afro-American Police Officer with a graduate degree in mental health, an experienced Afro-American psychologist specializing in cross- cultural evaluation and a female Hispanic public safety psychologist did City of Miami PD Proposal Page 45 of 144 a final review of the items for potential bias towards minority group members. The expert consultant performed numerous analyses related to establishing the reliability of each job dimension scale. Appropriate factor analysis, inter -item correlations and Cronbach Alpha Coeficients were conducted to achieve scale stability and consistency. Satisfactory scale reliability was achieved ranging from a low correlation of .81 to a high of .93. Construct validity was established by comparing PPSQ scores to various scale scores on instruments such as the MMPI -2, CPI, PAI and STAXI. As desired, low to moderate positive correlations were noted between similar construct scales of the PSSQ and the other instruments. In addition, PSSQ scores were positively correlated to a high level of sta isfic—la significance with various job-related performance predictions noted on both the PAI and CPI Public Safety Report. Thus far, criterion and concurrent validity have been measured through the following studies. A representative sample of those applicants tested with public safety experience was divided into two groups. Group one reported positive work performance with none or very limited job problems, critical incidents or disciplinary actions. Group two reported work performance problems such as serious or numerous reprimands, suspensions, prior yermnaion from apu is sae yjo , sever critic b domestic violence. A comparison of the two groups performance on the PSSQ demonstrated a statistically significant difference with Group one (positive performers) obtaining lower (better) scores than Group two (negative performers). A second study divided applicants without prior public safety experience into those rated by expert psychologists as having good or acceptable backgrounds for public safety work vs. a group who were judged to have poor or questionable backgrounds. Both groups were then administered the PSSQ and their scores were compared. The results demonstrated to a statistically significant degree that the group with positive backgrounds performed better on the PSSQ than those with a negative background. A third study administered the PSSQ to several hundred applicants in addition to the standard evaluation consisting of a battery of standardized tests, background review and clinical interview. The PSSQ was not scored until completion of an applicant's final report and employment rating, which was based on the results of the standard evaluation procedures. The PSSQ was then scored and comparisons were made between applicants rated unacceptable on their report vs. those who received a passing rating. The results revealed to a statistically significant degree that applicants with passing final ratings on their report scored better on the PSSQ than those with an unacceptable rating. Therefore, the PSSQ was effective in blindly predicting an applicant's final rating as determined by an expert public safety psychologist who utilized a battery of standardized tests, background information and a clinical interview. Lastly, the PSSQ was administered for research purposes by three police psychologists to obtain anecdotal feedback as to its ease of use and accuracy of findings. In-depth review and discussion of numerous individual PSSQ profiles with City of Miami PD Proposal Page 46 of 144 these psychologists indicated that the PSSQ had a high hit rate for distinguishing between applicants rated qualified vs.unqualified by this group of psychologists. Ka ra , jLho/ogical and Counseling Asa4afrsf„1oc, ADVAXTAGES OFPSSQFORPUBLIC SAFETY SCREENING PSSQ DEVELOPMENT 1. Includes extensive input from actual Public Safety Community 2. Primary author has worked exclusively in all facets of Public Safety consultation for over 30 yrs. 3. Contains specific and numerous questions related directly to Public Safety work -or employment settings 4. PSSQ scales designed and researched only for the screening/selection of Public Safety applicants S. Normed exclusively on a large sample of Public Safety Officer applicants COMMONLY USED INSTRUMENTS 1. No input from that community 2. Authors typically are academics, IO background or general clinicians 3. Typically contains a few general questions related to the workplace 4. General personality scales for the population at large S. Normed on general population. 6. Every question relevant and/or face valid for Public Safety 6. Very few questions face valid for screening and selection Public Safety screening results in many "wasted"/'irrelevant questions r° 7. Questions are easily understood and use practical down to 7. Many questions contain words and earth wording. No questions should be left blank phrases that seem `odd” and difficult for applicants to understand Results in many items mismarked or. left blank Validity questions arise S, Produces critical items that stimulate discussion S. Typically produces critical items during interview, which are directly germane to Public that are only tangentially related Safety work to Public Safety work Applicants often claim raisunderstanding the item or marking it in error 9. Several applicants have stated they "enjoyed" taking 9. Some applicants become frustrated the PSSQ and found many questions interesting. Have not or even annoyed at answering what had a single complaint or question about any item in over they consider confusing/strange 2,000 administrations. questions and request assistance 10. Gives opportunity to respond beyond "T" or' F" which can 10. Only a limited number of be very important to applicant self -disclosure instruments provide apps. this response set 11. Questions written and researched through the "eyes" and 11. Test items were developed for ' motivations of a Public Safety applicant. Items fit the mindset general use and not for job of someone taking a test for an actual job apps. Could effect validity 12. PSSQ clearly non-medical per ADA guidelines 12. Often medical or "grey.' area City of Miami PD Proposal Page 48 of 144 State -Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STA. It is universally accepted that appropriate self-control and modulated expression of anger are critical traits for a law enforcement officer to possess. The State -Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI) was designed to assess the specific behavioral patterns that an individual utilizes when experiencing feelings of anger and hostility. As a result, over recent years numerous psychologists have administered this instrument within their test batteries when screening public safety applicants. The instrument is a paper and pencil self-report test, which requires a test -taker to respond to numerous statements concerning their behavioral and emotional reaction when feelings of anger arise. Specific public safety norms for the STAN have been developed, which compares applicants to those already performing the job satisfactorily. The STAXI report produces T-scores on each anger dimension, allowing the test user to easily compare an individual applicant's scores with the normative group. For example, the instrument will identify individuals who experience chronically angry feelings from those that experience anger in only specific situations or contexts. The STAXI provides valuable information such as whether an individual expresses their anger in an overly intense/aggressive reaction or perhaps over controls their angry feelings resulting in isolated but explosive reactions to frustrating situations. The inventory also assists the screening psychologist in determining if an individual expresses angry feelings through verbal aggression vs. those who are prone to actual physical aggression. The STAXI is primarily used with a normal population and is not a diagnostic instrument per ADA guidelines. Therefore, it can be administered Pre -Offer the COE. Dr. Charles Spielberger, a very well-known and respected psychologist in the specialty of test construction, is the author and developer of the STAXI. The theory and research underlying this instrument is widely accepted and presented in detail in the STAXI user manual. Our firm is very familiar with the STAXI and we have utilized this instrument in the screening of public safety applicants for several years. City of Miami PD Proposal Wonderiic Personnel Test Page 49 of 144 Since law enforcement appliumts are tested in group settings, this makm it impractical to conduct in-depth intellec ttal testing of each applicant. However, the educational requirements for law enforcement officer aEgh School diploma or G.E.D.) and the fact that the appii rot must academically perform within a stringent Law Enforcement Academy makes it necessary to gain some measure of an applicant's capacity and ability to loam new informatim in addition, law enforcement applicants •are frequently called upon to deal with complex situations when adequate analytical and abstract skills are necessary. In cat* mchon with the Florida highway Patrol MV) academy, our firm has conducted research to detmmine an effective cut-off score for this instrument. The Wondedic Personnel Test is particularly suited for employment selection purposes ainceit wased for measuring what level of learning ability is necessary for specific occupations. The test yields a general int ecce score which is used to des-ibe the level at which an individual les=s, indent—A instructions and solves problems. It provides objective information into how easily individuals can be trained, how well they can adjust and solve problems on the job, and how well satisfied they are likely to be with the demands of a specific job. The instrument consists of 50 questions which are admiaistered in a group setting with a 12 minute time limit. The Wcndedk has been extensively validated and is the only intelligence measure we are aware of which meets all the requirements of various govemmental agencies for employment selection purposes. The instrument has specific norms for law =forcemeat applicants including police officer and correctional officer. Thus far, we are extr=ely satisfied with this instrument and feel it has made a very positive contribution to our battery of tests. City of Miami PD Proposal CLINICAL INTERVIEW Page 50 of 144 Each applicant is required to undergo a clinical interview with a Licensed Psychologist trained in pubic safety selection. The interview is conducted after other phases of the evaluation process are completed and standardized test profiles are available. The interview generally supplements and/or verifies findings on standardized testing. Interviews are important since some applicants, especially bright ones, can to an extent atten! 4 •fal e» th— bjec. - e + : 6 /�, r� final w x.11 n . •0 ��� o.u.. `.fvJ..uJV 6 uxSui2u"I X. 0, ...aha �'iGr� y"� .5 iS v��.auaay standardized so as to assure reliability and fairness for each applicant. All interviewers must follow a structured and ordered interview format and complete a uniform interview form. This interview approach in employment screening is critical, since the psychologist must demonstrate that each applicant essentially undergoes the same interview process to avoid claims of subjectivity or favoritism. The steps are outlined below: 1. i he interviewer must review and clarify with the applicant all relevant admissions on the Personal History Questionnaire (PHQ). 2. The interviewer must then review and clarify any critical items triggered by standardized testing. Beyond making certain the applicant did not answer a question in error, a in ernewer rs o g 6 style and how they go about interpreting the meaning of questions. - The interviewer must then ask 14 standardized open-ended questions to each applicant, These questions fiuther elicit the applicant's ability to respond spontaneously to questions, reasoning and judgment, vocabulary (communication skills) and willingness to self -disclose their true beliefs and feelings about various matters. A sampling of these questions include: 1. Tell me about the most difficult or stressful event so far in your life? 2. No one is perfect. Tell me a time you violated a work rule or procedure? 3. Everyone gets angry occasionally. Tell me the last time you remember getting really angry? Could you have responded differently? How do you usually act when you get very angry (scream, curse, throw things, slam door, leave, etc.)? The questions are changed periodically. 4. At this point, the interviewer is provided flexibility to address any relevant issues that may be remaining about an individual applicant. For instance, if it is obvious the applicant misread many questions on various questionnaires then the interviewer might question the applicant as to why. It could be important to assess whether these mistakes were the result of low reading comprehension, carelessness or lack of motivation for the job. 5. The interviewer then completes a standardized interview form that summarizes the above obtained information, rates applicants on required job dimensions and produces a preliminary report of findings for review by a senior psychologist of the firm. City of Miami PD Proposal Page 51 of 144 DETERMINATION OF JOB-RELATED RATINGS As with most medically related professional opinions and ratings, the assessment psychologist's decisions are based on procedures and tests considered to be reliable and valid. In the evaluation of public safety applicants, we use multiple and overlapping sources of information in arriving at ratings on each essential job trait as well as an overall job suitability rating. All procedures, forms and the rating system in our evaluation process are carefully standardized so as to assure reliability and fairness for each applicant. Our firm's findings are based on the aggregate of information collected from the four phases of the evaluation. These phases include standardized test profiles derived from the battery of tests, personal history/background information, clinical interview material and performance on a problem -solving and learning ability test. All test profiles and each phase of the evaluation are reviewed closely and then integrated together to achieve the most accurate and complete picture of the applicant's potential job-related strengths or weaknesses. Beyond standard clinical interpretation of test profiles, we also utilize various actuarial predictions of job performance generated by research on each of the instruments. For the great majority of applicants, we find the piecing together of the parts of the evaluation lends itself to clear-cut and logical final ratings. Occasionally, we do find. that an applicant's results are ambiguous or "borderline." In those instances, the applicant's file undergoes a thorough staff review and we may compare our findings with those of the Background Investigator. City of Miami PD Proposal Page 52 of 144 In some cases, it is useful for the Background Investigator to clarify the report with our office and we are always available to do so. To assure the reliability and quality of every report, the findings of each report are carefully reviewed by a senior psychologist before submission to the agency. To further evaluate ourselves, we periodically compare our rating category percentages with a select group of other national experts in this field. Our ratings have always been found to be very similar to this respected group. lastly, a thorough multi-year study of our evaluation system conducted by the Miami -Dade Police Department found no adverse impact on any protected group. Please be aware, members of our screen ng team are always interacting and discussing aspect of the evaluation process on a daily basis. The challenge of rating and predicting human behavior will always remain a daunting task and the assessment psychologist can never let complacency set in. Those who have worked closely with us know how relentless and determined we are in our on-going efforts to get every applicant's assessment "right." City of Miami PD Proposal Page 53 of 144 REPORT FORMAT Our report format was designed specifically for public safety selection after receiving input from numerous public safety personnel and reviewing ADA guidelines, the HIPPA privacy law and recent court rulings in this area. Our conclusion is that use of `wordy" narrative reports is very questionable for the purpose of employment testing. Psychologists often "fall in love" with lots of psychological jargon and flowery descriptions of applicants but many times these type reports contain superfluous, confusing or irrelevant information and are not practical for the task at hand. As a result, many times a psychologi is screening report can miss the "forest from the trees." Just citing one example, almost all screening psychologists use some type of categories for final ratings of applicants. However, some psychologists still do not provide a brief and clear definition differentiating each rating category. Instead, these psychologists assume that the user of the report will automatically define rating categories such as "Suitable," "Marginal," "Unsuitable" exactly how the psychologist does. This is often not the case and can cause major misunderstandings, actual misuse of a report or stigmatize certain applicants. With a few clarifying words or sentences describing a rating category, these problems can be avoided. To further alleviate confusion over ratings, our system does not utilize a rating category such as "Marginal," "Borderline" or "Acceptable Conditional." On the Pre -Offer evaluation each applicant is rated "Suitable" or Unsuitable." Likewise, on the Post -Offer evaluation each applicant is rated "Met" emotional stability standards or "Did Not Meet" those standards, City of Miami PD Proposal Page 54 of 144 We find that law enforcement users of screening reports basically want relevant, clear- cut, concise and easy to understand job-related statements about an applicant. In many cases, the agency also needs reports quickly. These concerns are exactly what our law enforcement screening reports attempt to address. To summarize, we provide all relevant information and final reports within 24 hrs of testing in a concise and user-friendly report. We believe our report format is very thorough, but at the same time, easy to use and simplistic in design. Everything contained in our report format has been well thought out and designed for the specific needs of law enforcement agencies. Of course, the applicant's entire file including psychological profiles, raw data and any other supportive information is always available should an administrative or legal challenge ever occur. To further assist the agency, we provide a comprehensive manual that educates the report user on each job-related deficit and how to assess whether the deficit is substantiated by the applicant's personal history and behavior. NVithout such assistance, we find that users of a psychologist's report will often just look at the overall rating and little else. From reviewing the bid language in this area, we believe our report format provides the requested information in a focused, practical and user-friendly way. The following pages contain two sample reports. Please note, each applicant's completed Personal History Questionnaire (PHQ) will be attached to each report. The page number in Background Section of the Pre -Offer report refers to the PHQ. City of Miami PD Proposal CRITICAL INCIDENT DEBRIEFING Page 117 of 144 A Critical Incident Debriefing (CID) is a specialized counseling session utilized with Public Safety Officers who have experienced an unusual, abnormal or potentially traumatic job-related event. Typically, Officers are most often referred for this service after discharging their firearm in the performance of their duties. However, any event viewed as traumatic by a supervisor or the affected Officer may warrant referral. For example, an Officer responding to the scene of a murdered child can have serious emotional repercussions for particular Officers. In many medium to large sized agencies, the CID program is a part of comprehensive EAP services. The majority of Officers responding to abnormal or traumatic events only require 1-2 sessions to resolve or deal with their emotional reactions. For these Officers, the CID counseling is more of an educational and preventive session vs. an in-depth therapeutic intervention. Nevertheless, for a minority of Officers the referral event can trigger more severe and long lasting emotional reactions and can develop into Post -Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). These Officers require more intensive longer-term counseling in order to manage their symptoms, which could include depression, anxiety, sleep disturbance, irritability, slowed motor skills, inability to concentrate and intrusive thoughts or — —s—s off -a even-To--cumpliczte-matters o-often-times--the-symptvms-of-TSB-do--- - not manifest themselves until several weeks or months after the event. Therefore, education of all Officers involved in a critical event about PTSD and what should be considered `formal" vs. "abnormal" reactions to an event is extremely important. The following are the recommended practical considerations in an agency's creation of an effective policy for a CID. 1. A CID is conducted for the benefit of the Officer and is not a formal Fitness for Duty Evaluation (FFDE) or to be used as part of any investigation into the critical event. 2. To avoid the fear of stigmatizing any individual Officer as "weak," all Officers experiencing or exposed to a potential traumatic event should be mandated to an initial CID session. It should be the shift Commander's responsibility to verify that a referral has been made. 3. Except in an emergency circumstance, CID's are to take place at the psychological consultant's office. It is important that the CID occur no later than 24-48 hours after the event. Many agencies remove the Officer(s) from their usual duties, at least until the CID is concluded. 4. A CID should be considered a confidential professional service and other than verifying an Officer's attendance, the consultant will not provide further information to anyone except as specified below. City of Nfiami PD Proposal Page 118 of 144 It is assumed an Officer is fit for duty after a critical event, unless the following scenario occurs. If during a CID it becomes apparent to the psychologist that the Officer is experiencing acute or incapacitating symptoms, then the psychologist will explain to the Officer the need for his/her removal from their usual job duties and the necessity for further treatment. The psychologist typically with the Officer present will immediately contact by phone a designated agency Commander to inform them of the situation. The psychologist will discuss and coordinate with the Commander the specific actions that are being recommended before release of the Officer back to full duties. As previously stated, for the great majority of Officers the CID is more of a required educational session and removal of Officers from their routine job duties is the exception vs. the rule.