Law enforcement officers face myriad situations that often appear outside the scope of traditional police work. Increasingly, they encounter persons with mental health issues, address homelessness, or deal with problems involving youths in schools. Current movements aimed at reducing police agency funding or redirecting funds to other services make it difficult for departments to answer these calls for service while meeting public expectations.

Knowing they cannot manage such issues alone, police agencies are adopting co-response models to address them, thereby redefining crisis response. In a co-response model, a police officer responds alongside a mental health clinician or service provider — ideally in the same vehicle — to calls for service that may involve a person experiencing a mental health crisis and/or homelessness.

Background

In 1991, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD) created the first co-response model, the Mental Evaluation Team (MET), designed to address calls for service involving mental illness. Shortly after, in 1993, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) developed and implemented its police-mental health co-response model, the Systemwide Mental Assessment Response Team (SMART).

Both models incorporate the support of the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health when responding to calls pertaining to mental illness. The goal of this co-response model is to reduce incidents involving use of force, decrease hospitalizations, and avoid unnecessary incarcerations of citizens with severe mental illness.

Homelessness

The LASD expanded the use of police co-response models by creating a team to address homelessness in a humanitarian manner. The Homeless Outreach Services Team (HOST) consists of deputy sheriffs trained in crisis response who assist communities with high volumes of homelessness. Community members and business owners seek HOST’s assistance in areas where homelessness has created a dangerous environment. This can result from public health issues or homeless individuals camping in free-space areas, such as parks and sidewalks, thereby discouraging use by citizens.

Using the co-response model, HOST teams up with government agencies and nongovernment organizations (NGOs) to address these issues while strictly adhering to constitutional principles. Such models do not involve “sweeps,” nor do they impose their services on persons who do not want them. It is indeed a delicate balancing act addressing the public’s needs and requests while assisting the homeless population. Unlike traditional law enforcement functions, HOST provides services and medical attention first — arrest is a last resort.

Mental Health

Further expanding its co-response model, the LASD introduced a team specifically trained to handle incidents involving military veterans experiencing a mental health crisis. The Veterans Mental Evaluation Team (VMET) pairs a specially trained deputy sheriff, often a military veteran, with a clinician from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. VMET is part of the LASD’s MET.

Similarly, MET teams up a deputy sheriff with a mental health clinician. They respond to calls for service or assistance from patrol units related to a community member who may be having a mental health emergency. Deputies are in plain clothes but clearly identifiable as law enforcement. This “dressing down” has proven useful, especially when de-escalating a potentially volatile situation.

Members of both MET and VMET receive specialized training in de-escalation and communication. In LASD’s models, deputies are assigned directly to MET or VMET and do not otherwise participate in routine patrol. Personnel assigned to MET are also cross-trained as crisis negotiators, further adding to their ability to handle a person in crisis.

Agency Size and Funding

Smaller or less-funded departments may not consider a co-response model feasible. However, those facing the same societal issues as the LASD have important considerations.

• If a patrol unit(s) responds to a mental illness-related call and must place an involuntary hold on the patient, how long will it be unavailable for service?
• In a crisis involving a potential crime, does the agency arrest a person with a mental illness or divert them to mental health care?
• How many times has an officer lacked the skills to de-escalate a situation before it resulted in a use of force? Could a trained professional have been more successful?
• Is a police agency willing to criminalize homelessness and potentially make itself liable for unconstitutional practices?

These are just a few relevant questions. Agencies with a co-response model are equipped to manage these scenarios in a manner that reduces department liability, shows compassion for persons involved, and, more important, adheres to constitutional practices by reducing the need or escalation of force.

Greater metropolitan agencies such as the LASD and LAPD have a larger workforce to draw from to staff co-response teams. Smaller departments may be hard-pressed to dedicate even one full-time officer to this endeavor.

An effective way to start is to develop a plan and memorandum of agreement with either a mental health or homeless resource agency — either government or NGO — and have it be available part-time during peak periods when the need is greatest, such as for mental health crises. To address homelessness, departments can schedule a joint event with a government organization or NGO to provide services and resources.

Regardless of the model, agencies should embrace collaboration with stakeholders and service providers to address these issues.

Conclusion

The concepts presented in this article can be applied to meet the needs of the community — either for homelessness, mental health, or both. Co-response models can help communities interact with some of their most vulnerable people. Since law enforcement is already the first point of contact for these challenges, employing a co-response model will benefit police, the person in crisis, and, ultimately, the community.