Study protocol and stakeholder perceptions of a randomized controlled trial of a co-response police-mental health team

ObjectivesDescribe the development, results, and stakeholder perceptions of randomization procedures for determining outcomes of a co-response police-mental health team.MethodsWe present randomization results using the CONSORT diagram and report on three semi-structured focus groups with eight co-response team members, including police officers, mental health clinicians, and program leaders.ResultsStudy procedures resulted in randomization of 686 co-response team-eligible calls for service to either receive a co-response team (treatment group, n = 376) or police-as-usual response (control group, n = 310). Focus groups revealed lessons for randomization of a co-response team, including the importance of the researcher-practitioner partnership, considerations for study site selection and staffing, and suggestions to proactively address ethical concerns of randomizing calls for service.ConclusionsRigorous evaluation of alternative policing programs is possible through randomization at the call-for-service level, provided researchers and program stakeholders work together to determine feasible procedures.

Automated summary

This study describes the development, results, and stakeholder perceptions of randomization procedures for determining outcomes of a co-response police-mental health team. The study found that rigorous evaluation of alternative policing programs is possible through randomization at the call-for-service level, provided researchers and program stakeholders work together to determine feasible procedures.