Evaluations

A couple of protocols that, in our experience, are difficult to execute effectively relate to the formal evaluation of employees in a police agency. Various obstacles to meaningful feedback exist. The process is labor-intensive when done well, and the constant flow of other work in conjunction with the various incentives to avoid contention often result in perfunctory end products that have little real value. Worse, they can create a record that glosses over actual performance issues and makes it harder for the agency to take responsive action if and when it needs to in the future.

Our familiarity with the tepid efforts of other agencies means that VPD’s robust approach is especially noteworthy. Specifically, we refer to annual performance evaluations that all employees receive, and the extensive daily assessments that trainee officers receive from their field training officers in the early stages their employment. We looked at recent examples of each and were impressed by what we saw.

As for the annual performance evaluations, VPD’s format combines different elements in the service of a specific, personalized, and constructive profile. There are pages that call for a supervisor with direct knowledge of the employee to make individual “check the box” findings across several different categories, a narrative section that seemed thoughtful and nuanced, and opportunities for the officers themselves to recount their accomplishments and share goals.

The samples we looked at had several strengths – and largely avoided familiar pitfalls such as “grade inflation” as a path of least resistance.24 While several officers received overall ratings of “Exceeds Expectations,” not all did – and supervisors who gave the higher marks tended to support them with persuasive explanation rather than letting the checks speak for themselves. Individual strengths as well as potential improvement areas were highlighted, and seemingly provided recipients with a genuinely useful document. We hope the examples we saw were representative of VPD’s standards, and that the Department will keep up the excellent work.

As for the ongoing training evaluations of new officers as they acclimate to patrol, VPD’s approach is as structured, rigorous, and thorough as any we’ve seen. The Field Training Officer (“FTO”) cadre provides lengthy reports in which an

24 The annual evaluations also appear to have been completed in a timely fashion, which is a common problem area that VPD has done well to avoid.

individual day’s calls for service and specific training focal points are recounted in detail, along with candid assessments of the trainee’s performance. There are also “end of segment” reports which offer a more cumulative assessment before a trainee moves on to a new phase.

The FTOs come across on the page as knowledgeable, dedicated, and exacting. These are obviously assets when it comes to preparing new officers to succeed. The mix of compliments and critiques was nicely balanced – and appeared to be constructive in spirit and useful in practice for the trainees and Department management. In all, we had a high regard for this program, from what we could glean, and commend VPD accordingly.

This page intentionally left blank.