In 1999, the Commission approved Regulation 1005(d)(4) requiring all peace officers (except reserve officers) below the middle management position and assigned to patrol, traffic, or investigation who routinely effect the physical arrest of criminal suspects to complete Perishable Skills and Communications training.  The decision was based on the premise that manipulative skills, such as driving, arrest and control and firearms, can diminish or perish if not continually used, and the lack of proficiency in these skills can cause high liability to the agency, the officer and the community.  At the time this was presented to the Commission, they opted to add Tactical/Interpersonal Communication to the PSP required topics.

The regulation, as currently written, allows for any student to test out of a course by demonstrating their competency by successfully passing a presenter-developed test that measures the approved training objectives for PSP credit. 

Since its enactment in January 2000, instructors of PSP courses are not exempt, and are required to also attend a course as a student in the topic they are qualified to instruct or to test out of the course by demonstrating competency in the topic.

The regulation was established in this manner based on the premise that when facilitating training the instructor could spend the majority of his/her time observing or correcting others, and may not actually perform all of the skills regularly. Without periodically being observed or evaluated, a trainer could unknowingly be instructing a skill incorrectly to students. There could also potentially be a liability for the instructor and/or the agency if the instructor was involved in an incident on duty or facilitating a class, and the agency could not provide records of any recent or on-going training or method of evaluation for the instructor.  

There is also an advantage for instructors to be students to observe other training methods or facilitation skills that could enhance their own presentations, and to obtain updated information.  

At the June 2016 Commission meeting, staff was asked to review this regulation and look for alternatives to allow flexibility for instructors of PSP courses.

Staff surveyed the members of the POST Advisory Committee, the Consortium Advisory Council and the Instructor Standards Advisory Council as well as soliciting input from training managers through the Training Manager Network on the Learning Portal. 

The majority of those who responded including California Police Chiefs Association,  California Coalition of Law Enforcement, Consortium Advisory Council, Instructor Standards Advisory Council, four training managers and twelve of the nineteen sheriff's or sheriff's representatives who responded to the survey were in favor of exempting an instructor from attending a course as a student or from having to demonstrate his/her competency as long as the instructor was actively teaching, and had presented the training within the same two-year Continuing Professional Training (CPT) cycle.  An instructor who has not presented a course in over two years would not be exempt and would have to either attend a class as a student or demonstrate their competency by successfully passing a presenter-developed test that measures the approved training objectives to meet the PSP requirement. 

Those not supporting a complete exemption including California Community Colleges Association, California Specialized Law Enforcement Association, California Highway Patrol, an Advisory Committee public member and three of the nineteen sheriff's or sheriff's representatives who responded to the survey were in favor of requiring the instructor to demonstrate his/her competency by being evaluated by another instructor by successfully passing a test that measures the approved training objectives for PSP credit every two years.

Two Sheriff responses were in favor of not amending the current regulation and two suggested POST require an instructor update course every two years instead. From the responses to the survey, staff has developed three options for consideration by the Commission:

1. Do not amend the current regulation and do not exempt instructors of a PSP course from attending a course as a student or demonstrating their competency by successfully passing a presenter-developed test that measures the approved training objectives for PSP credit.
2. Amend the regulation to exempt an instructor from having to attend any training as a student in the topic they are qualified to instruct or from having to demonstrate his/her competency. This exemption can be granted as long as the instructor has presented a course within the same two-year CPT cycle.  (Attachment A)
3. Amend the regulation to exempt the instructor from requiring they attend training as a student in the topic they are qualified to instruct but require an instructor to demonstrate his/her competency by being evaluated by another instructor and successfully passing an instructor developed test that measures the approved training objectives for PSP credit every two years.  The evaluating instructors may be from the same or a different agency.  This exemption can be granted as long as the instructor has presented a course within the same two-year CPT cycle (Attachment B).

With any of the options the agencies should be allowed the flexibility to establish a higher training requirement for their instructors.