PTO:an overview 
and introduction 

A Problem-Based 
Learning Manual 
for Training and Evaluating 
Police Trainees 


A Problem-Based Learning Manual 
for Training and Evaluating Police Trainees 

This document is intended as an agency guide to the new 
Police Training Officer program and its implementation. 

It is a companion to these other training materials in the 
Police Training Officer Series: 
PTO Manual
Trainee Manual
Training Standard



This project was supported by grant 
#2001-CK-WX-KO38, awarded by the Office of 
Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. 
Department of Justice. Points of view or 
opinions contained within this document are 
those of the authors and do not necessarily 
represent the official position or policies of 
the U.S. Department of Justice or members 
of the Police Executive Research Forum. 


Acknowledgements 

The COPS Office would like to thank the Reno Police Department and the 
Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) for helping to develop this 
model Police Training Officer (PTO) Program. The model presents an 
alternative to current field training officer programs. It is designed for 
training new officers and incorporates contemporary adult educational 
methods and a version of problem-based learning (PBL) adapted for 
police. The model is based on community policing and collaborative 
problem-solving principles. It addresses the traditional duties of policing, 
but in the context of specific neighborhood problems. This new model 
challenges recruits to think creatively and to use community resources to 
respond to crime and disorder. 

Particular thanks go to the members of the core team that developed the 
program, which include Jerry Hoover, Chief of Police, Reno Police 
Department; Ronald Glensor, Ph.D., Deputy Chief, Reno Police 
Department; Gregory Saville, Research Professor, University of New 
Haven; Gerry Cleveland, Police Training Consultant; Lisa Carroll, former 
Research Associate with PERF; Steve Pitts, Commander, Reno Police 
Department; Dave Ponte, Officer, Reno Police Department; and Jim 
Burack, Chief of Police, Milliken (CO) Police Department (formerly with 
PERF). We also extend our thanks to Ellen Scrivner, Ph.D., former 
Deputy Director for Community Policing Development at the COPS 
Office, for her support and guidance in developing this program, as well 
as all of the training officers who participated—particularly those in the 
Reno Police Department—for their valuable assistance. 

In addition to the Reno Police Department, we also extend our thanks to 
the following five agencies that participated in the field-testing phase of 
the PTO Training Curriculum. Their input and ideas helped shape the content 
of this model program. They include the Savannah (GA) Police 
Department; the Colorado Springs (CO) Police Department; the Lowell 
(MA) Police Department; the Richmond (CA) Police Department; and the 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg (NC) Police Department. 


table of contents 

the PTO program  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 
case studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 
lessons learned  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 
implementation resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 


The PTO Program


Introduction 

Community-oriented policing and problem solving (COPPS) has 
quickly become the philosophy and daily practice of progressive 
police agencies around the country. Police1 administrators have 
come to recognize the ineffectiveness of incident-driven policing as well 
as the economic costliness of random patrol, rapid response, and post-crime investigation. 
Officers racing from call to call may have appeal on television, but it does not provide 
effective policing. 

In their implementation of COPPS, police 
executives have voiced a common concern about training, especially post-academy field training for new 
officers. Post-academy field training has not emphasized or promoted COPPS concepts and behaviors. To address 
this deficiency, the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) funded the development 
the pto program of an alternative national model for field training that would incorporate 
community policing and problem-solving principles. To accomplish the 
objective, the Reno, Nevada, Police Department partnered with the 
Police Executive Research Forum (PERF). The result of their collaboration is a new 
training program called the Police Training Officer (PTO) 
program. It incorporates contemporary methods in adult education and 
a version of the problem-based learning (PBL) method of teaching 
adapted for police. Most importantly, it serves to ensure that academy 
graduates’ first exposure to the real world is one that reflects policing in 
the 21st century. 


1 The term “police” is meant to refer to all law enforcement practitioners at municipal, county and state agencies. 


OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAM


The main objectives of the PTO program are as 
follows: 

• 
To formulate learning opportunities for new officers 
that meet or exceed the training needs of the 
policing agency and the expectations of the community; 
• 
To have trainees apply their academy learning to 
the community environment by giving them real-
life problem-solving activities; 
• 
To foster the trainee’s growing independence from 
the Police Training Officer (PTO) over the course 
of the program; 
• 
To produce graduates of the training program 
who are capable of providing responsible, 
community-focused police services; 
• 
To prepare trainees to use a problem-solving 
approach throughout their careers by employing 
problem-based learning (PBL) methods; 
• 
To design fair and consistent evaluations that 
address a trainee’s skills, knowledge, and ability 
to problem solve effectively. 


Following are the members of the core team 
that developed the PTO program: 

Dr. Ellen Scrivner, former Deputy Director at the COPS Office; 
Jerry Hoover, Chief of Police, Reno Police Department; 
Dr. Ronald Glensor, Deputy Chief, Reno Police Department; 
Gregory Saville, Professor, University of New Haven; 
Gerry Cleveland, Education Expert; 
Lisa Carroll, former Research Associate with PERF; 
Jim Burack, Chief of Police, Milliken (CO) Police Department (formerly with PERF); 
Michael Scott, Director, Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, Inc.;
Steve Pitts, Commander, Reno Police Department; and
Dave Ponte, Officer, Reno Police Department.




This new approach to training provides a foundation for life-long learning 
that prepares new officers for the complexities of policing today and in 
the future. It is focused on developing each officer’s learning capacity, 
leadership abilities, and problem-solving skills. This is very different from 
traditional police training methods that over-emphasize mechanical skills 
and rote memory capabilities. While static skills are a necessity in police 
work and are integral to any training program, they constitute only one 
set of skills needed in contemporary policing. 

During the research for this project, police 
administrators and training practitioners raised 
many issues about field training programs. Two 
common concerns stood out: traditional field 
training programs have not changed significantly over the past 30 years, and protection 
against liability. This model speaks to both 
concerns, incorporating contemporary COPPS 
concepts and guarding against liability through 
an emphasis on effective training. Moreover, 
the program can be tailored to each agency’s 
unique needs. Because of its flexibility, future changes in policing can be 
easily incorporated into the program. 

Adoption Considerations 

Why read this report? 

Police executives across the nation have been looking for a 
post-academy training program that stresses community policing 
and problem solving. This report describes such a program. 
Numerous attempts have been made over the years to modify the 
traditional “field training” model so that it could facilitate the learning of 
COPPS concepts. Those modifications were not successful. The PTO 
program reflects a new design and not a modification of a pre-existing 
training program. Police executives who want to innovate their training 
programs and institutionalize community policing and problem solving in 
their agencies should read this overview of the PTO program and summary 
of the implementation experience of six agencies. 



What conditions must be present to implement the PTO program? 

Because of its flexibility, the PTO program can be successfully 
implemented by any agency. However, the program is designed to function 
under the umbrella of community policing and problem solving. To 
implement the program, an agency needs to designate a PTO 
Coordinator and PTO Supervisors, and will develop a Board of 
Evaluators (BOE). These positions are described in the PTO Manual— 
one of the implementation resources described at the end of this document 
that is available to agencies. 

What are the costs of implementing the PTO program? The costs of 
implementing the PTO program resemble the costs of implementing 
traditional field training programs. The costs are related to the training of 
officers, the writing of manuals, and the creation of forms. 

What are the immediate and long-term benefits of the PTO 
program? The immediate benefits of the PTO program are many: patrol 
officers who understand and engage in problem solving; increased interest 
and involvement in community-oriented policing and problem solving 
(COPPS) on the part of new and experienced officers; greater trainee 
self-awareness; and a sense of area responsibility by new officers. 
An important long-term benefit to the agency is the further 
institutionalization of community policing and problem solving. 

What was the outcome of testing the PTO program? As noted earlier, 
the PTO program was piloted by six agencies. The common outcome 
for these agencies, as the case studies in the next section make clear, 
was the development of a PTO program that improved the learning 
capacity of new officers. Agencies reported that the PBL method 
improved new officers’ ability to handle basic policing tasks and 
responsibilities. Further, trainees learned to perform their duties more efficiently, 
effectively, and equitably and in a manner that reflects the principles of 
COPPS. The PTO program is designed to achieve the same results in 
any progressive police agency and the community it serves. 



Implementation of the Program 

To implement the PTO program, agencies will need to 

• 
Philosophically support and educate trainees and PTOs in community-
oriented policing and problem solving; 
• 
Familiarize command staff and supervisors with this alternative national 
model for field training before they implement the PTO program; 
• 
Educate trainees and Police Training Officers in the principles of 
problem-based learning; 
• 
Introduce trainees to the model before they enter the PTO program; 
• 
Train the PTO supervisors and PTOs in the new model. 
Further, because the program is based on problem-based learning, instructors 
should have a mastery of fundamental problem-based learning (PBL) 
and teaching principles. Resources that are available for agencies 
wishing to implement the PTO Program are described at the end of 
this document. These include PTO and PBL training manuals. 


what this document provides 
In addition to introducing the reader to the PTO program, this document 
summarizes the valuable experiences and lessons learned from 
the six agencies selected to participate in the PTO pilot project—Reno 
(NV) Police Department, Savannah (GA) Police Department, Lowell (MA) 
Police Department, Colorado Springs (CO) Police Department, 
Richmond (CA) Police Department, and Charlotte-Mecklenburg (NC) 
Police Department. These agencies agreed to implement the developing 
model so that it could be tested in real-world 
conditions and improved based on their input 
and experiences. The summary of their experiences provides an 
honest and candid assessment of benefits and challenges that 
police executives, training officers, and trainees confronted 
during implementation of the PTO program. 


The following sections of this introduction describe the history of post-
academy training programs, the problem-based learning method, and 
the PTO program’s content, phases, and evaluation process. The next 
section, entitled “Case Studies,” describes the specific experiences of 
the six police agencies that participated in the process of developing the 
PTO program. The section on “Lessons Learned” presents agency-identified 
ingredients for success and the final section describes the 
resources that are available to agencies that are interested in implementing 
the PTO Program. 

Post-Academy Training: old and new 

The Beginning 

Police academies have been around in one form or another since 
the early twentieth century. However, post-academy training 
programs, often referred to as Field Training Officer (FTO) programs, 
were not implemented in the United States until the 1970s. The 
first FTO program was developed in San Jose, California. 

The “San Jose Model,” as the first field training model has become 
known, helped trainees transition from the police academy to single-officer 
assignments in the patrol division. Academy graduates were placed 
on the streets with experienced officers. Standard evaluation guidelines 
(SEGs) were developed that described the actions and behaviors 
expected of the trainees. These guidelines then became the basis for a 
system to evaluate each trainee’s performance. Trainees were evaluated 
every day in 29 categories; the evaluators used checklists and Likert 
numerical scales. The overall learning strategy of the San Jose Model 
was loosely based on Skinner’s Behavior Modification method. 




The San Jose Model became a mainstay in police training. It is reportedly 
used today by approximately 4,000 agencies. The original behavioral 
anchors written for the model were increased from 29 categories to 31 
categories in 1981. Other than some peripheral changes, the San Jose 
Model has remained relatively unchanged since then. With little success, 
several attempts were made to modify the model so that it would reflect 
contemporary community-oriented policing. 


A New Model 

As previously mentioned, in 1999 the COPS 
Office funded a project to design, implement, 
and test a training model that would serve as 
an alternative to the San Jose Model. Several 
focus groups were convened, and more than 
400 police and sheriffs’ departments were 
surveyed to identify what agencies wanted in 
modern field training. After almost two years 
of design, the Reno Police Department was 
the first agency to apply the PTO model. Five 
other agencies subsequently adopted the 
developing “Reno Model” and lessons 
learned from implementation in all agencies 
were incorporated into the final model that 
appears here. 


a problem-solving training model 

The PTO program relies on adult learning strategies, in particular 
the problem-based learning (PBL) method. PBL is a learner-centered 
teaching method that uses problem-solving as the vehicle for learning. Under 
the traditional field training model, a teacher 
or trainer (the content expert) delivered 
information to the learner or trainee. PBL 
departs from this traditional method of learning. It begins 
with presentation of a real-life problem that the 
trainee must attempt to solve. The trainee fol
lows a pattern of discovery whereby he or she expresses ideas 
about solving the problem, lists known facts, 
decides what information to use to solve the problem 
(including naming sources for that learning), and 
develops an action plan to solve the problem. Several 
evaluation methods determine whether the action plan 
succeeded or failed. 

PBL is the engine that drives the PTO program. The trainees learn to 
look at problems in a broad community context. The most tangible 
benefit of the new model lies in its application to street situations that 
have neither easy answers nor obvious solutions. It encourages trainees 
to explore, analyze, and think systemically. The PBL method encourages 
trainees to collaborate with peers, develop resources, and communicate 
effectively with the community. These are the hallmarks of good 
police work. 


the pto program 
the program: content, phases, and evaluation process 

This section details the important features of the PTO program— 
features that distinguish it from traditional field training programs. 

Substantive Topics and Core Competencies 

The PTO program covers two primary training areas: Substantive 
Topics (the most common activities in policing) and Core 
Competencies. The four Substantive Topics, that define the key 
phases of the training, are 

• Non-Emergency Incident Response 
• Emergency Incident Response 
• Patrol Activities 
• Criminal Investigation 

Core Competencies are the common activities in which officers engage 
and the skills they use during the daily performance of their duties. 
There are 15 Core Competencies: 

• Police Vehicle Operations 
• Conflict Resolution 
• Use of Force 
• Local Procedures, Policies, Laws and Organizational Philosophies 
• Report Writing 
• Leadership 
• Problem-Solving Skills 
• Community Specific Problems 
• Cultural Diversity & Special Needs Groups 
• Legal Authority 
• Individual Rights 
• Officer Safety 
• Communication Skills 
• Ethics 
• Lifestyle Stressors/Self-Awareness/Self-Regulation 



The Substantive Topics and Core Competencies are brought together to
form a “Learning Matrix” the content of which represents the procedures, 
policies, laws, and philosophies that the trainee will learn during
training (described in detail in the PTO Manual).  The matrix serves as a
guideline for learners and trainers during the training period and demonstrates 
the interrelationships between Core Competencies and dailypolice activities.  
It helps determine what trainees have learned and what
they need to learn, and  guides the Police Training Officer (PTO) 
evaluation of the trainee.


Learning Matrix 

CELL A1 
Non-Emergency Incident Response 
Police Vehicle Operations 
• Defensive driving 
• Proper vehicle stops, positioning of vehicles 
• Awareness of surroundings and conditions 
• Other issues that may apply 




Program Phases 

Each phase of the PTO program is briefly explained below. Note that 
four of the phases are content-related or programmatic phases: Phase A 
on Non-Emergency Incident Response, Phase B on Emergency Incident 
Response, Phase C on Patrol Activities, and Phase D on Criminal 
Investigation. Additionally, the program calls for Orientation and 
Integration Phases and evaluation periods. 

Orientation Phase: Many agencies have found that trainees graduating 
from the academy, especially from a regional academy, require 
additional training in agency-specific skills or information. The 
orientation phase is intended to provide this necessary training and 
information. Examples of this type of agency-specific training include 
computer literacy, specialized firearms training, defensive tactics, 
and policy and procedures. Orientation can also include trainee 
familiarization with the agency’s PTO program. This “orientation” 
training must be completed before the Integration phase can begin. 
The length of or decision to include the Orientation Phase depends 
upon the needs of the agency. 

Integration Phase (1 week): The Integration phase is designed to 
teach the trainee how to report for duty prepared. This is a period of 
time for the trainee to acclimate to a new environment while under 
the PTO’s supervision. Areas of instruction include how to acquire 
necessary equipment, and familiarization with the department, other 
government organizations, administrative procedures, and the PTO 
problem-based learning processes, including evaluations. The 
trainee does not receive an evaluation during the Integration phase. 

Phase A (3 weeks): Phase A is the initial training and learning experience for the trainee; it emphasizes Non-Emergency Incident 
Responses. 

Phase B (3 weeks): Phase B, the second training and learning experience for the trainee, emphasizes Emergency Incident Responses. 



Mid-Term Evaluation (1 week): Following Phases A and B of the 
learning experience, the trainee transfers to a Police Training Evaluator 
(PTE) and participates in a Mid-Term Evaluation. Switching from the 
PTO to a PTE for evaluation ensures that the training officer is not 
constantly changing roles from trainer to evaluator. The roles of trainer 
and evaluator overlap somewhat even in the PTO program, but not 
to the point of interference as has been the case in some traditional 
FTO programs. The PTE will use the Learning Matrix as an evaluation 
tool to assess the trainee’s performance during the course of that 
week’s activities. In the event the trainee is experiencing difficulties 
and does not successfully complete the Mid-Term Evaluation, he or 
she may need to return to a prior phase of the training program or 
otherwise receive remedial training. 

Phase C (3 weeks): The third training and learning experience for 
the trainee, Phase C, emphasizes Patrol Activities. 

Phase D (3 weeks): This final phase of training and learning emphasizes Criminal Investigation. 

Final Evaluation (1 week): During the Final Evaluation, the trainee 
again transfers to a PTE. The PTE will use the Learning Matrix as an 
evaluation tool to assess the trainee’s performance during the course 
of the evaluation period. If the trainee experiences difficulties and 
does not successfully complete the Final Evaluation, he or she may 
repeat a previous phase of training or receive other remedial training 
that focuses on the trainee’s deficiencies. 

If a trainee does not respond to training and is recommended for termination, 
the coordinator forwards all material, including recommendations, to the 
Board of Evaluators. The BOE conducts a review of 
the trainee’s performance before providing a written recommendation 
to the Program Coordinator. 


Coaching and Evaluation Process 

One of the major concerns about traditional field training programs is the 
effort spent on evaluation. In traditional programs, trainees are evaluated 
on 31 categories every day of a 14-week program. Those evaluations, commonly 
based on a one through seven numerical scale, often focus on the trainee’s 
failure to perform certain tasks. Trainees become intimidated at the 
prospect of a failing score and are reluctant to 
extend themselves during training. 

Although evaluation is a component of the PTO program, the program as a whole exists to support the 
training of new officers rather than the termination of the marginal few. 
The documentation used in the PTO program is extensive and adequate 
for use in the termination process, if necessary, but that is not its main 
purpose. The PTO evaluation process is meant to focus on success. If 
the trainee does perform poorly, and each does at some time, then the 
concept of “failing forward” is stressed. Trainees learn from their mistakes 
and are guided and coached through the training process. The 
PTO program encourages training officers to make the evaluation 
process a positive one. This approach can have a tremendously beneficial 
impact on the success of the trainees. 

The evaluation process is not based on daily checklists, but it is fairly 
extensive nevertheless. Evaluation of trainees takes place in the following ways: 

• 
Coaching and Training Reports (CTRs) at the end of each week: 
Reflections on a trainee response to a selected call for service 
pertaining to the theme of the current training phase (for instance, 
Emergency Incident Response, Criminal Investigation) and based 
on the fifteen Core Competencies reflected in the Learning Matrix. 
• 
Problem-Based Learning Exercises (PBLEs) in each of the four program 
phases: Problem-solving exercises that apply the problem-
based learning method to situations the trainee will confront in each 
phase of training. 
• 
Neighborhood Portfolio Exercise (NPE) developed during all four 
phases: A detailed, trainee-developed overview of the area where 
he or she works, including the identification of key community 
stakeholders, a characterization of the social and cultural aspects of 
the area, and a description of key crime and disorder issues. 



• 
Week-long Mid-Term Evaluation: Following the completion of 
Phases A and B, the PTO turns the trainee over to a Police Training 
Evaluator (PTE) who assesses the trainee’s progress using as a 
guide the Learning Matrix described above. 
• 
Week-long Final Evaluation: Same process as above occurring at 
the end of the training. 
• 
If the department chooses, an assessment of the trainee by the 
Board of Evaluators. 


Conclusion 

The PTO program is the first new post-academy field training 
program for law enforcement agencies in more than 30 years. Its 
original design makes it one of the strongest training innovations in 
decades. The program, first tested at the Reno Police Department and 
subsequently tested by five other agencies, has produced outstanding 
results. New officers enter the field with problem-solving skills that are 
rarely seen at that career level. New officers also display remarkable 
leadership and a willingness to work as partners with the local community 
to fight crime and disorder. The PTO program is producing officers 
who have the necessary knowledge, skills and attitude for today’s law 
enforcement environment. 


Case Studies 

Reno (NV) 
Police Department 

Savannah (GA) 
Police Department 

Lowell (MA) 
Police Department 

Colorado Springs (CO) 
Police Department 

Richmond (CA) 
Police Department 

Charlotte-Mecklenburg (NC) 
Police Department 


The Reno PD was the first to test the PTO program. Five additional agencies were chosen as 
pilot sites, bringing the total to six. The selection of these agencies produced diversity across 
sites in terms of geography, size, command structure, and policing environment. Importantly, 
each agency was interested in improving its field training.
 
This pilot implementation in six sites was very important to the development of the PTO pro-
gram. Feedback from each agency about its experiences helped the project team produce the 
high-quality PTO program that is now ready to be implemented in agencies nationwide. 

The Reno (NV) Police Department 
455 East 2nd Street 
Reno, NV 89523 
Chief of Police: Jerry Hoover 
Key Contact: 
Commander Steve Pitts 
775.326.6327 
pitts@ci.reno.nv.us 

Reno, a city of approximately 70 square miles, is located on the north-
eastern slopes of the Sierra Nevada mountains in Nevada. It has a resident 
population of about 187,000 and an average tourist population of 35,000 visitors per day. 
The gaming industry represents the major source of revenue for the City of Reno, and 
it generates a 24-hour culture for community and business services. 

The Reno Police Department, with 340 sworn members and 520 civilian employees, 
has policing jurisdiction over the entire City of Reno, which is primarily urban with some 
rural areas. The police department’s services are divided into three geographic areas of 
command: North, Central, and South. Each area of command is organized into several 
beats. Departmental command is administratively and procedurally centralized. The 
department is headed by a Chief of Police who is supported by an Assistant Chief and 
five Deputy Chiefs of Police. Other ranks within the Reno PD include Commander, 
Lieutenant, Sergeant, and Police Officer. 

The Reno PD ascribes to community-oriented policing and problem solving as its core 
policing philosophy. Department-wide training in COPPS began in 1986, and Reno 
re-certifies officers annually. The department requires officers to practice community-
oriented policing in daily activities, and it uses the COPPS philosophy as a primary 
evaluation measure. Internally, the department employs problem solving as a 
management resource, and the Reno city government has adopted the problem-
solving method to deal with larger issues affecting the whole community. 

Prior to implementing the Police Training Officer (PTO) program, the Reno PD used a 
Field Training Officer (FTO) program that was based on a modified version of the San Jose 


Model described above. The department’s FTO program relied on Daily Observation 
Reports of a trainee’s performance on more than 30 standardized performance guidelines. 
A trainee’s performance was measured on a Likert scale of one through seven. 
To accommodate its policing philosophy, the department modified the FTO program to 
include the components of community-oriented policing and problem solving as 
appended performance guidelines. 

The department discovered that encompassing COPPS in FTO training in the form 
of additional performance guidelines was not effective: new officers were not 
persuaded to practice the philosophy. Instead of being considered the foundation 
of policing, community-oriented policing and problem solving were considered by trainees to 
be merely two elements in the long list of standardized performance guidelines. 
Changing the task-driven orientation of officers in Reno to a problem-based orientation 
was essential because of Reno’s burgeoning population and the attendant new policing 
challenges. Immigration and city expansion as a result of annexation created a more 
diverse population and a higher volume of calls for service. Reno’s greater size and 
diversity made it all the more important that new officers be able to identify interrelated 
community problems. The increase in calls for service made the Reno PD’s former 
incident-driven response burdensome and suggested the need for proactive problem 
solving. The traditional field training model formerly in use was not preparing Reno 
officers to handle the pace of change in the community. 

The Reno PD was the beta site for the PTO program. 

Academy Structure and Training 

• Two academies per year are given at the 
Regional Training Center for Public Safety. 
Each academy graduates 10 to 15 officers 
per cycle for the Reno PD. 

• Officers receive 12 initial hours of classroom 
training in community policing, problem-oriented 
policing, and problem-based learning. 

• Recruits reinforce this training through 
practice during the 15-week continuous 
academy. 


PTO Program 

Selection 

• The Reno PD evaluated any interested 
personnel–including those who had served 
as Field Training Officers–according to the 
principles of learning, education, and leadership found in the PTO program. 


Reno Police Department’s 
PTO Selection Criteria: 

• Three years of service in law enforcement 
• Prior training experience 
• Demonstrated COPPS abilities 
• Knowledge of adult-learning principles 


Reno Police Department’s 
PTO Selection Process: 

• Make a department-wide announcement 
• Request a letter of intent and resume from each 
candidate 
• Convene candidate assessment board 
• Review personnel file, resume 
• Evaluate professional training history 
• Evaluate leadership ability 
• Conduct a suitability review of the candidate 





• Of the 32 officers selected to become 
Police Training Officers, approximately 75 
percent had prior experience as Reno PD 
Field Training Officers and 25 percent were 
new to field training. 

• Selected PTOs had all received the standard, 
department-wide COPPS training. 


Command Structure 

• Location – Patrol Division 

• Command Responsibility 
– Division Commander

• Program Management – One full-time police officer as Program Coordinator 

• Personnel Structure – 20 PTOs report to 5 Police Training Supervisors (PTSs) 
who hold the rank of Sergeant 

• Board of Evaluators – 2 to 3 active PTOs, PTO Supervisor, Program
Coordinator, Program Commander


Incentives 

• By contract, PTOs are entitled to a 10 percent annual pay incentive, which is not 
dependent on whether the PTO is actively training. 

• PTOs are given preferential access to training opportunities and pre-authorized 
overtime while training. 


PTO Training 

• Training was delivered over 40 hours in a five-day period. 

• Thirty-one officers were trained as PTOs, and five Sergeants were trained 
as Police Training Supervisors (PTSs). The Chief and two Deputy Chiefs of Police also 
attended the training. 

• After that training, 20 officers and 5 supervisors were ultimately selected to serve as 
PTOs and PTSs. 

Program Structure 

• The agency-specific trainee orientation 
(Orientation Phase) prior to the program 
lasted two weeks and included instruction 
on problem-based learning and an 
introduction to the PTO model. Trainees 
also engaged in a one-week Integration 
Phase to familiarize themselves with the 
Reno PD. 

• Reno, as the beta site, began the training 
phases with PTO-trainee teams in the 
Emergency Incident Response Phase, followed by the phases Non-Emergency 
Incident Response, Patrol Activities, and 
Criminal Investigation. 

• PTOs and their trainees were assigned to 
both day and swing shifts. This gave the 
training teams maximum exposure to 
resources such as crime analysis, detectives, 
neighborhood meetings, and governmental services. 

• Trainees were assigned to one of the three 
geographic areas of command, and they 
remained in that area for the duration of 
the training. 

• Upon completion of the training, trainees 
may be re-assigned to serve in a different 
geographic area of command, but they 
take with them the ability to learn a geographic 
patrol district and its dynamics. 






Evaluation Structure 

• The Mid-Term and Final Evaluation phases 
each lasted one-week and were based on 
proficiency in the 15 Core Competencies in 
the Coaching and Training Reports (CTRs). 

• The Board of Evaluators was used to evaluate 
the trainers and the overall program 
operation. The BOE also was used at the 
request of PTO staff to evaluate certain 
trainees and recommend remedial training 
measures. 


Implementation Experiences 

• Early involvement at all levels throughout 
the department enhanced cooperation and 
buy-in: 

• Officers in the Reno PD began receiving 
information about the PTO program one year 
prior to implementation. 

• Command staff was familiarized with 
the program at all stages. 

• All lieutenants and sergeants were 
given an orientation and executive 
summary. 

• Prior to their 40-hour training, PTOs 
attended workshops to engage them 
in decisions regarding the specific 
implementation of the program in 
Reno. 

• A committee of PTOs planned and 
implemented the program. 

• PTOs were encouraged to take time to 
explain the program to anyone in the 
department with questions. 

• Including teaching abilities as one of the 
criteria for PTO selection proved valuable 
because of the program’s intense emphasis on coaching. 

• Bi-weekly PTO meetings kept the group 
cohesive and enabled participants to share 
training ideas and work through program 
implementation obstacles. Weekly team 
meetings of trainers and PTSs identified 
the immediate training needs of each 
trainee. 

• Daily journal writing, when introduced in 
the PTO course, was a new concept initially 
resisted by trainers. It proved, however, 
to be one of the most important and useful 
tools for PTOs and trainees in the field. 

• In the initial design of the program, PTOs 
and trainees were required to complete 
two CTRs per week – a workload that 
proved burdensome. Reducing the CTRs 
to one per week improved the quality of 
the reports, reduced the time burden on 
the training team, and did not negatively 
affect the training. 

• PTOs recommended shifting the 
Emergency Incident Response phase from 
the beginning of the program to one of the 
later phases. Neither trainer nor trainee 
was comfortable initiating the program and 
its active learning philosophy under emergency 
incident circumstances. 


Case Studies 
 
The Savannah (GA) Police Department 
201 Habersham Street 
Savannah, GA 31401 

Chief of Police: Dan Flynn 

Key contact: 
Sergeant Bobby Gardner 
912.652.3844 
bob_gardner@ci.savannah.ga.us 


The City of Savannah lies midway along Georgia’s Atlantic coast and 
contains one of the nation’s largest historic districts. The city covers 70 square 
miles and is home to 142,000 residents. Serviced by an international airport, 
Savannah welcomes over six million visitors per year. Tourism, one of the city’s main 
industries, is increasing, and crime during the past decade has slowly increased as 
well. The Savannah Police Department faces the challenge of protecting the city’s citizens 
and historic properties, as well as projecting an image of safety to prospective visitors. 

A force of 425 sworn members police the largely urban area of the City of Savannah. 
The Savannah PD includes the ranks of Patrol Officer, Advanced Patrol Officer, 
Corporal, Star Corporal, Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain, Major, and Chief. The 
department is divided into four districts and a headquarters. Daily operations can vary 
slightly between districts. For example, some districts operate three shifts per day; 
other districts work on a “4-10” shift schedule. The department chose to implement 
the PTO program across all districts. 

Community policing is incorporated in the department’s mission statement, and 
problem solving is expected of every officer. Its application in the field is not 
uniform: some officers implement formal “projects” and others practice community-
oriented policing and problem solving (COPPS) less formally. 

Prior to the Savannah PD’s participation as a pilot site for the Police Training Officer (PTO) 
program, the department trained its new officers using a modified version of the San 
Jose Model. This model involved daily and weekly observation reports that measured 
trainee performance on a seven-point Likert scale. The Savannah PD had not formally 
modified its field-training model to incorporate COPPS, but many individual Field 
Training Officers (FTOs) had informally modified their training practices to include 
problem solving. 

Savannah PD personnel felt that their field training system lacked department-wide uni-
formity, with training tailored to the abilities and inclinations of a particular trainer. There 
was a lack of uniform application of certain elements at specific times or phases. In 
order to instill in PD personnel needed confidence in new trainees, trainers decided to 
ensure that all trainees were covering critical material. Further, trainers felt that observation 
reports didn’t reflect accurately the abilities of trainees or provide for accurate evaluation. 
Extremely high or low scores on observation reports were seldom given since 
these scores required additional paperwork on the part of the trainer. 


Academy Structure and Training 

• Five to six 10-week academies per year at 
a regional academy graduate 6 to 13 
Savannah PD officers per academy. 

• Community policing is taught for 8 hours 
in the academy, with a portion of that time 
devoted to problem solving. 

• Academy graduates receive five weeks of 
additional department-specific training 
after the regional academy, including 12 
hours of COPPS training.

• All officers who graduated from the academy 
before COPPS was an instruction topic 
received 40-hours of in-service training. 


PTO Program 
Selection 

• Selection of PTOs was informal, with each 
precinct taking its own approach. 

• Forty-nine officers were selected for PTO 
training. Almost all of the participants in 
the first class of 25 were experienced 
FTOs, while the second class of PTOs was 
split evenly between experienced FTOs 
and officers who had not previously been 
field trainers. 

• Selected PTOs had all received either 
COPPS training in the academy or a five-
week in-service training. 


Savannah Police Department’s 
PTO Selection Criteria: 

• Past performance on the force 
• Shift assignment, to ensure even distribution 


Savannah Police Department’s 
PTO Selection Process: 

• Sergeants submit candidate recommendations 

• For the second class, some precincts had
candidates submit applications

Incentives 

• Trainers are given extra overtime allowance 
while training. 

PTO Training 

• To accommodate the department’s size, 
Savannah trained two classes of PTOs 
over two five-day periods. 

• The department trained 39 officers as 
PTOs, as well as 9 Sergeants and one 
Lieutenant. Senior staff at the ranks of 
Captain and Major demonstrated interest 
by attending segments of the training. 


Program Structure 

• A one-week agency-specific Orientation 
Phase was part of the program. 

• Trainees were assigned to PTOs in the district 
in which they would be stationed, but 
each training team rotated between beats 
in that district, covering a different beat in 
each three-week phase. 

• An effort was made to assign PTO-trainee 
teams to daytime shifts, but due to shift 
rotation some PTOs were only available on 
midnight shifts. 

• Precincts tried different variations of PTO-
trainee assignment, with some assigning a 
different PTO for each of the four program 
phases and others switching PTOs at the 
Mid-Term point. 

• The first group of training teams made 
Patrol Activities the focus of the first phase, 
but subsequent teams became most comfortable 
with executing the program phases 
in the following order: Non-Emergency 
Incident Response, Emergency Incident 
Response, Patrol Activities, and Criminal 
Investigation. This sequence enabled 
trainees to begin with the phases that 
involve more calls for service. 


Command Structure 

• Location – Police Precinct 

• Command Responsibility 
– Precinct Captain

• Program Management – One full-time 
Lieutenant serves as Program Coordinator. 

• Personnel Structure – Precinct PTOs 
report to two Sergeants in each precinct. 

• Board of Evaluators – The membership 
rotates, but the Board always includes a 
Captain and a Lieutenant from each 
precinct and three Sergeants. 


Evaluation Structure 

• One-week Mid-Term Evaluation and, initially, 
a two-week Final Evaluation. Final 
Evaluation was later reduced to one week. 

• Phase repetition was used as a remedial 
measure for trainees experiencing problems. 

• The Board of Evaluators was used to evaluate 
the program, to evaluate the effectiveness 
of trainers, and occasionally to 
discuss remedial measures for trainees. 


Implementation Experiences 

• Using shift and precinct assignment of 
trainees as part of the PTO selection criteria 
ensured even distribution of personnel, 
but it necessitated training some PTOs 
with lower experience levels. 

• PTOs enjoyed the flexibility of allowing 
trainees time to return to the station to 
complete program assignments while the 
PTO still answered calls for service. 

• The department developed a two-hour 
informational session about the program 
for Lieutenants and Sergeants who did not 
attend the PTO trainings, so they would 
understand why some trainees were off 
the street and in the squad room. 

• PTOs found their own journal entries very 
helpful for reflection when passing the 
trainee to the next training officer. The 
nature and depth of trainees’ journal 
entries varied, reflecting the varied emphasis 
placed on journal writing by each PTO. 

• Shift schedules made communication and 
cohesion between PTOs and precincts difficult. 
PTOs were unable to meet regularly, 
and while some PTOs met together informally to 
hare experiences and ideas, variations in 
program application were experienced across 
the four districts. 

• Trainers need consensus to pass recruits. 
The PTO, Sergeant, Lieutenant, and 
Captain all sign off in the process. Under 
the previous system, trainers were reluctant 
to be responsible for giving the failing grade 
that held a trainee back. Now trainers must 
take responsibility for the passing grade. 

• Savannah tailored the Problem-Based 
Learning Exercises (PBLEs) to reflect 
unique precinct problems. As a result, one 
trainee solved an eight-year-old crime 
problem while field training. 

• Evaluators felt they had an accurate picture 
of whether trainees and trainers were 
performing well. 

• Trainees are asking more questions, they 
are learning faster, and they are becoming 
more involved in the community. Their skills 
in problem solving also are improving. 

• Officers’ confidence in new recruits is 
improved. 



Case Studies
The Lowell (MA) Police Department 

50 Arcand Drive 
Lowell, MA 01852 
Police Superintendent: Edward Davis III 

Key contact: Lieutenant Paul Laferriere 
978.970.4013 
plaferriere@ci.lowell.ma.us 

The Lowell Police Department’s 119 civilian personnel and 256 sworn officers, police a Massachusetts city of 
approximately 106,000 residents. The City of Lowell, 30 miles North of Boston, began 
as a textile-producing community. Since weathering an economic downturn, Lowell is 
restoring warehouses and experiencing an influx of new industry. It has an expanding 
Southeast Asian population. 

The Lowell PD divides the city’s 14 square miles into the three geographic sectors of 
North, East, and West. These sectors house the department’s seven satellite precincts 
and centralized command. The Superintendent of the PD is supported by the ranks of Patrol Officer, 
Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain, and Deputy Chief. 

Community-oriented policing is the operational philosophy of the department. Once 
the function of one unit, it is now expected of all officers. In the academy, recruits are 
prepared with a curriculum that is based on community-oriented policing and problem 
solving (COPPS), and they must complete a problem-solving project before graduation. 
The department wanted to move toward a post-academy training model that reinforced 
its policing model. Training was being conducted using the San Jose Model. This 
model had not been modified to incorporate community policing concepts. The traditional 
Field Training Officers (FTO) program had lost the confidence of officers, who consequently were 
reluctant to become trainers themselves. One of the early obstacles 
overcome by the Lowell PD in switching from the FTO program to the Police Training 
Officer (PTO) program was convincing potential trainers that the new program 
would turn out competent, capable problem solvers. 

Academy Structure and Training 

• The regional academy is annual and runs for 25 weeks. 
• The Lowell PD graduates approximately nine officers per academy class. 
• The academy curriculum is structured around COPPS, with recruits actively practicing problem solving. 


PTO Program 
Selection 

• Selection of PTOs was difficult for the 
department, largely because of trainers’ 
dissatisfaction with the previous training 
model. 

• Officers were asked to volunteer for the 
training positions. 

• Half of those chosen had been FTOs; half 
had never been trainers. 


• All those attending the training had received 
the academy COPPS training or, if they had 
attended the academy prior to the inclusion 
of COPPS in the curriculum, had received 
40 hours of in-service training. 


Lowell Police Department’s 
PTO Selection Criteria: 

• Three years of duty as a Lowell PD 
officer

• Favorable training attitude 

• No disciplinary actions within the past 
year 


Lowell Police Department’s 
PTO Selection Process: 

• Initially, the department selected PTOs 
from a short list of volunteers; because 
the list was short, the screening was not 
vigorous. 

• A renewed interest in training produced 
a longer list of volunteer candidates, 
allowing the Lowell PD to implement 
a more rigorous selection process: 

• PTO Sergeants evaluate each applicant. 

• Criteria were expanded to include 
community policing indicators. 

• The selection continues year-round. 

Incentives 

• The department offered the same incentives 
(listed below) that it had under the 
previous training program. 

• A weekly stipend is provided for the duration 
of the program. 

• PTOs who are actively training receive an 
hour of compensatory time for each day of 
training. 


PTO Training 

• To accommodate shift scheduling, the 
department delivered the 40-hour PTO 
training over a four-day period. 

• Twenty-eight officers were trained, including 
15 PTOs, 5 Police Training Evaluators 
(PTEs), 6 Sergeants, a Lieutenant, and the 
Training Academy Supervisor. 

• The agency’s Superintendent attended 
part of the training. 


Program Structure 

• PTOs are distributed between the day shift 
and the early night shift. 

• The six trained Sergeants are evenly divided 
between the department’s three sectors, with a 
Sergeant covering each of the 
two training shifts. 

• Sergeants coordinate groups of PTOs, 
their trainees, and PTEs. Bi-weekly PTO 
meetings are held throughout the program. 

• PTEs only serve as evaluators and do not 
function in a PTO capacity. 

• Initially, trainees remained in a single sector 
throughout the training, but the program has 
been changed to expose 
trainees to each of the three sectors. 

• The department modified the program 
schedule. Instead of four three-week 
phases, the department used three four-
week phases so that the trainees could 
spend time in each of the three sectors. 


Evaluation Structure 

• The Mid-Term and Final Evaluation phases 
each lasted one week. 

• Because the department changed the 
schedule to produce three phases, it 
added a third evaluation. Now an evaluation 
follows each phase. 



Command Structure 

• Location – Support Services Division 

• Command Responsibility 
– Deputy Chief of Support Services

• Program Management – One Lieutenant 
acts as part-time Program Coordinator. 

• Personnel Structure – PTOs report to 
PTO Sergeants, who in turn report to 
the Program Coordinator.

• Board of Evaluators (BOE) – Three Patrol 
Officers and three PTO Sergeants constituted 
the BOE for the pilot training. Its 
composition is presently under review. 


Implementation Experiences 

• Participants found that it was difficult to 
learn all of the material in only a four-day 
PTO academy. 

• Despite officers’ criticism of the field 
training model in place before the PTO program, 
many remained attached to certain 
components of that model. 

• The clear-cut numeric evaluation of 
the previous model was acclaimed, 
until it became apparent that useful 
evaluation information could be 
gleaned through the PTO program’s 
written evaluations. 

• PTOs moved to incorporate their 
“rook book”—or trainee task manual—into 
the Learning Matrix, creating 
a program hybrid. 

• The Union requested involvement in program 
administration components, such as 
PTO selection and compensation, and in 
BOE activities. 

• Bi-weekly meetings ensured that the trainer 
group was cohesive. Meeting topics 
included program modifications, new criteria for 
incoming PTOs, and the identification of potential p
roblems with trainees. 

• The program structure was modified to 
expose trainees to all police sectors, and 
the evaluation structure was modified to 
fit the three-phase schedule. 

• The Board of Evaluators was used successfully 
to solve a PTO-PTE personnel 
issue that arose, demonstrating that 
Problem-Based Learning Exercises 
(PBLEs) can be useful not only in training 
but also in program administration. 

• Trainees were allowed to work together in 
learning teams on Neighborhood Portfolio 
Exercises (NPEs). Exercises were done 
well and presented to the command staff 
at meetings. 

• Journal writing was not emphasized as a 
learning tool by PTOs, who were concerned 
about the potential for “discovery” 
pursuant to court cases. 

• Initial training teams left PBLEs and NPEs 
until the end of program phases, and then 
they felt rushed to complete them. 
Backing those components up into the 
heart of the program re-emphasized their 
learning value. 

• Compared to the FTO program, PTOs 
found it easier to head off problems with 
recruits and to fix them before they 
became major. PTOs felt that they would 
not have detected these issues under the 
FTO program. 

• PTOs respected the program’s separation 
of evaluation and training. 

• Recruits became involved in regular policing 
activities more quickly than under the 
previous program, and they gained a 
greater understanding of the communities 
they policed. 



The Colorado Springs (CO) Police Department 

725 North Murray Blvd 
Colorado Springs, CO 80915 
Chief of Police: Luis Velez 
Key contact: 
Sergeant Charles Rabideau 
719.444.7687 
rabidech@ci.colospgs.co.us 
 

Alongside Pike’s Peak and the Rocky Mountains, the City of Colorado 
Springs, Colorado, is located 68 miles south of Denver. Colorado Springs covers 
approximately 200 square miles and is a hub for the U.S. military space industry, as well 
as for technology manufacturing and amateur sports training. Its geography and cli-
mate make it a popular travel destination. 

The recently expanded force of the Colorado Springs Police Department oversees 
public safety for the city’s population of 386,000. At the time of its participation as a 
PTO program pilot site, the Colorado Springs PD was in the process of increasing 
its force of 594 sworn officers by 117. (Currently there are 666 sworn officers.) As 
part of the adjustment, the department’s three patrol divisions were expanded to four. 
Operations of the PTO program were decentralized to a degree in Colorado Springs. 
This produced variations in the program within the then three different divisions of the 
department. 

The practice of community-oriented policing and problem solving (COPPS) is uniform 
throughout the department. Community policing is the Colorado Springs PD’s core 
value, and it is the policing philosophy that underlies the execution of its daily police 
activities. Additionally, a neighborhood-policing unit focuses on specific projects. 
The department was interested in switching to the Police Training Officer (PTO) program 
to better prepare new recruits for policing within the context of the department’s 
COPPS orientation and to address trainers’ concerns about the Field Training Officer 
(FTO) program then in use. 

The department was using a field training model it had modified to include a neighborhood 
summary component. It had also added a problem-oriented policing project to 
the checklist of FTO performance guidelines, but command staff still felt that the program 
was turning out new officers who, while proficient at basic policing tasks, were not 
focused on solving crime and disorder problems. Further, the Colorado Springs PD was 
having difficulty keeping and recruiting training officers, despite overtime and other pay 
incentives, because officers found the daily paperwork requirements of the agency’s 
existing training program too burdensome and time consuming. 

Academy Structure and Training 

• The Colorado Springs PD training acade-
my runs two classes per year, each lasting 
21 weeks. With the proposed expansion 
in agency size, the academy and post-
academy trainers faced greater-than-usual 
numbers of graduating recruits. 


• Thirty-five to 40 new officers graduate per 
class. 

• Community-oriented policing and problem 
solving are taught in an eight-hour instruction 
block, and they also are incorporated 
in exercises throughout academy training. 
Sixteen to 20 hours of instruction in problem-
oriented policing (POP) are delivered, 
and recruits are required to complete a 
POP project while in the academy. 


PTO Program 

Selection 

• The selection process was formal and 
department-wide. 

• All selected PTOs had received COPPS 
training. Some had received this training in 
the academy, and some received 16 hours 
of in-service training when the department 
switched philosophically to community-oriented policing. 

• Three-quarters of the 28 Colorado Springs 
PD officers who were selected for the PTO 
program were experienced FTOs; the 
remainder had never been training officers. 


Incentives 

• The department maintained its five percent 
pay increase for training officers. 


PTO Training 
• The Colorado Springs PD trained 28 personnel in the PTO program. Among those 
trained were four Sergeants, including the 
Training Academy Sergeant, and three 
Lieutenants. One of the department’s 
Deputy Chiefs also attended part of the 
training. 

• Training was conducted over four ten-hour 
days. 


Colorado Springs Police Department’s 
PTO Selection Criteria: 

• Rank of Patrol Officer, 2nd class, with at least two years of service 

• No disciplinary action within the past one year 

• Passing grade on the most current fitness test 

• “Memorandum of Request” from the officer (stating why the officer felt he or 
she was qualified for the position) and a personal resume 


Colorado Springs Police Department’s 
PTO Selection Process: 

• PTO positions were posted. 

• All candidates, including those active as FTOs, had to apply for the PTO 
positions. The department felt this encouraged applications from officers who truly 
wanted to train. 

• Applications and resumes were reviewed by the department’s Board of Evaluators 
(BOE). 


Program Structure 

• Trainees in the PTO program were 
assigned to afternoon and swing shifts to 
allow them daytime opportunities to make 
community contacts. 

• Training teams remained in a single 
assigned sector within a division for the 
duration of the training. 

• Colorado Springs PD trainees went 
through the program phases in the order 
established during the Savannah training: 
Non-Emergency Incident Response, 
Emergency Incident Response, Patrol 
Activities, and Criminal Investigation. The 
department was comfortable with that 
order. 


Command Structure 

• Location – Each Patrol Division 

• Command Responsibility 
– Division Lieutenant

• Program Management – Division Sergeant 

• Personnel Structure – Teams of nine 
PTOs report to a PTO Sergeant within 
their division. 

• Board of Evaluators – An implementation 
committee that had been formed to direct 
the department’s transition to the PTO 
program became the BOE. Members are 
a Commander, three Lieutenants, three 
Sergeants, and a representative from the 
training academy. 


Evaluation Structure 

• PTEs used Learning Activity Packages and 
Coaching and Training Reports (CTRs) as 
evaluation tools. 

• A one-week Mid-Term Evaluation and one-
week Final Evaluation were conducted. 

• The BOE met only when PTOs identified a 
problem with a trainee. 


Implementation Experiences 

• The Colorado Springs PD pilot tested the 
PTO program while it was training a class 
of recruits using the FTO model. Trainers’ 
instruction in the PTO model and a comparison 
of the FTO and PTO programs 
convinced trainers and command staff of 
the inadequacy of the traditional training 
model. By the next training cycle, the 
department had switched to train its entire 
post-academy class using the PTO 
program. 

• The department has ranks of Chief, 
Deputy Chief, Commander, Lieutenant, 
Sergeant, and Police Officer. An additional 
rank of Master Police Officer – which 
included FTO duties – was removed after 
Colorado Springs began to implement the 
PTO program. 

• The department recognized variation 
between its three divisions in the manner 
of PTO implementation. After the initial 
training, the divisions cooperated operationally 
in the execution of the program. 
That is, the training was no longer decentralized. 

• Supervisory oversight was identified as 
essential for program success. The 
department found that in the division 
where supervisors became directly 
involved, formed training teams, and 
oversaw logistical issues, the trainers 
developed cohesion and the program had 
consistency of structure and content. 

Effective division coordination included: 

• Face-to-face weekly meetings 
between the Sergeant and each PTO-
trainee team 

• Bi-weekly meetings of all division 
PTOs and Sergeants to discuss the 
program 

• Training relied heavily on the learning 
matrix, and each call for service was later 
related back to the matrix by the training 
team. Journal writing was used at these 
times, and it became a valuable reference. 

• The PTO program significantly affected the 
training curriculum at the academy. 

• Instruction was reconfigured to adopt 
the problem-based learning (PBL) 
style of teaching used in the PTO program. 

• Initially, as a time-saving measure for 
trainees, some of the components 
were removed from the PTO training 
program and placed into the academy.



The department later realized 
that the components that had been 
moved to the academy program were 
a vital part of the learning that 
occurred during the PTO training. The 
department decided to move the 
components back into the context of 
the PTO training, but use the academy 
to introduce recruits to Problem-
Based Learning Exercises (PBLEs) 
and CTRs. The early exposure to 
reports, forms, and exercises helps 
Colorado Springs’ trainees to complete 
these components more efficiently 
once in the program. 

• The Neighborhood Portfolio Exercise 
(NPE) was moved entirely into the 
academy and made part of its curriculum. 
Trainees in Colorado Springs 
had not remained in one division 
sector long enough during the PTO 
program to complete the assignment. 
This shift also gave the trainee more 
of an opportunity to focus specifically 
on the training phases of the PTO 
program while in the field. By giving 
trainees the time and the opportunity 
to complete the assignment while in 
the academy environment, the 
department found that the NPE 
quality improved. Once graduated 
and in PTO training, the trainee is still 
required by his or her PTO to use his 
or her NPE-developed skills. 

• When the most significant weekly incident 
applied to a different phase of program 
training (for instance, an emergency 
response incident occurs during the 
Criminal Investigation phase), PTO-trainee 
teams chose to complete a CTR on that 
incident. 



The Richmond (CA) Police Department 
401 27th St 
Richmond, CA 94804 
Chief of Police: Joseph Samuels, Jr. 
Key contact: Officer Roger Buhlis 
510.620.6836 
roger_buhlis@ci.richmond.ca.us

 
Northeast of San Francisco on the San Francisco Bay, the City of 
Richmond, California, spans 56 square miles of land and water area and has 
32 miles of shoreline. The city has both residential and industrial areas and an 
estimated population of 100,000. The population is highly diverse—37 percent 
African American, 32 percent Hispanic, and 22 percent Caucasian. 

Primary law enforcement jurisdiction for the city falls to the Richmond Police 
Department, with approximately 200 sworn officers and 80 civilian employees. The PD 
ascribes to the community-oriented policing philosophy as its primary method for 
delivering service. All officers (not specialized teams) practice community-oriented policing 
and problem solving (COPPS). Command for the Richmond PD is divided into five 
geographical areas, with each area subdivided into smaller beats. Each of the five areas 
contains a sub-station for the convenience of officers and citizens, but departmental 
control is centralized. The department is comprised of Police Officers, Sergeants, 
Lieutenants, five Captains, an Assistant Chief, and Chief. 

The Richmond PD adopted the PTO program in order to teach its recruit officers 
methods for creative problem solving in a city where calls for police service are high. 
The department’s prior model of police training measured trainee performance across 25 
dimensions, using a seven-point scale associated with Daily Observation Reports. The 
concept of community-oriented policing was added to the Daily Observation Report as a 
performance dimension; however, the department found that a daily evaluation of a 
trainee’s COPPS application was not an effective training tool. Through the PTO 
training process, Richmond PD officers are taught to engage the community in problem 
solving, to seek creative solutions to neighborhood problems, and to utilize resources 
outside the department for the purpose of improving residents’ quality of life. 

Academy Structure and Training 
• The Richmond PD draws from three 
regional academy facilities: the Napa 
Valley Criminal Justice Training Center, 
Alameda County Basic Academy, and 
Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office 
Academy. 

• Post-academy, recruit officers receive a 
three-and-one-half hour classroom 
orientation to the PTO program and the 
problem-based learning (PBL) method. 
 

PTO Program 

Selection 

• The Richmond PD invited its 13 Field 
Training Officers to attend and evaluate the 
PTO training course. 

• The PTO course was not open to officers 
interested in becoming trainers for the first 
time because the department preferred to 
use experienced trainers. 


Incentives 

• PTOs receive four hours paid overtime for 
each week spent training a recruit. 

• PTOs wear Corporal stripes to signify their 
position as a training officer. 


PTO Training 

• Forty hours of training were completed in 
five days. 

• An initial pilot site training of 13 PTOs was 
conducted. 

• Chief was involved and supportive at the 
implementation level and attended part of 
the PTO training. 


Program Structure 

• PTOs and their trainees are mostly 
assigned to daytime shifts to facilitate 
resource exposure. However, since some 
PTOs are assigned to the graveyard shift, 
some recruits have been trained on this 
shift. 

• Trainees’ beat assignments are determined 
at the discretion of the PTO. 

• The Richmond PD modified the pilot project 
training phases and now it trains in the 
following order: Patrol Activities, Non-
Emergency Incident Response, Emergency 
Incident Response, and Criminal 
Investigation. 

• The department extended each of the training 
phases by one week for a total 19-week 
police training program (four four-week 
training phases, a one-week Mid-Term Evaluation, 
and a two-week Final Evaluation). 

Richmond Police Department’s
PTO Selection Criteria:

• 2.5 years of service at Richmond PD 

• Assignment to the Patrol Bureau 

• A score of “Standard” or above in all 
categories on the two most recent evaluations 

• A high degree of initiative and motivation, 
including willingness to work extended 
hours 

• Demonstrated abilities in 
- interpersonal skills and teaching 
- prioritization of departmental demands 
and commitments 
- conducting preliminary investigations 
- writing clear and concise reports 

• No substantiated force, racially abusive 
conduct, or sexual harassment complaints 
in the past two years 


Richmond Police Department’s
PTO Selection Process:

• A department-wide announcement is made. 

• The candidate submits a request for 
consideration, endorsed by direct 
supervisor, Division Commander, and 
Bureau Commander. 

• A PTO Selection Committee of PTO 
Coordinator, Training Sergeant, and at 
least one PTO is convened. This group 
- Reviews requests and files 
- Interviews applicants 

• A list of successful applicants is forwarded 
to the Chief for a final decision. 



Command Structure 

• Location – Patrol Division 

• Command Responsibility – Patrol Bureau 
Commander 

• Program Management – One full-time 
police officer is the Program Coordinator 
supervised by the Administrative Training 
Sergeant. 

• Personnel Structure – PTOs report to the 
team Sergeant and to the PTO Program 
Coordinator. 

• A Probation Review Board already in 
existence prior to the program served as the 
Board of Evaluators and was composed of 
a PTO Coordinator, an Administrative 
Training Sergeant, three PTO-trained 
Sergeants, a Patrol Bureau Lieutenant, a 
Patrol Bureau Commander, two officers, 
and an active PTO. 


Evaluation Structure 

• One-week Mid-Term Evaluation was based 
on Core Competencies and included a 
trainee self-evaluation interview component. 

• One-week shadow-oriented Final 
Evaluation was extended to two weeks. 
The Final Evaluation was used to determine 
comprehension, application, and 
synthesis of the 15 Core Competencies. 

• The Board of Evaluators (BOE) evaluated 
the trainers, trainees’ progress, and the 
overall program operation. The BOE also 
was used at the request of PTO staff to 
recommend remedial training measures. 


Implementation Experiences 

• Chief Joseph Samuels, Jr., had the PTOs 
present him with a case for switching to 
the program after they had undergone 
PTO training. He then championed initial 
program exploration. Project leadership 
responsibility was transferred from the 
Chief to the trainers who were motivated 
to make the program work. 

• To minimize internal resistance to the 
program and to help supervisors understand 
the trainee balance between completing 
the training components and answering 
calls for service, PTOs made presentations 
to each patrol team and first-line 
supervisors. The PTOs also invited Patrol 
Sergeants to attend the second PTO training 
course. Further, each PTO took the 
time to describe the program to other 
officers in the department when asked. 

• PTO group cohesion greatly benefited 
from dedicating one officer as a full-time 
PTO Coordinator. 

• The PTOs met weekly to maintain enthusiasm 
and to share information on trainees’ 
progress and issues. 

• PTOs used the Learning Matrix and the 
“Course Development Problem” from the 
PTO training as tools for teaching their 
trainees. 

• The department found the new program to 
be flexible. It allowed trainers and trainees 
to address training issues effectively. 

• Journals were used on a daily basis, and 
they provided a strong record of reference 
for both PTOs and trainees. 

• PTOs noticed trainees applying Problem-
Based Learning Exercises (PBLEs) to daily 
calls for service. 

• Training officers decided to create 
“essential learning packages” corresponding to 
phase themes to encourage trainees to 
study areas that the PTOs felt should be 
emphasized. 

• New officers are demonstrating job 
proficiency and problem-solving skills. 



The Charlotte-Mecklenburg (NC) Police Department 
601 East Trade Street 
Charlotte, NC 28202 
Chief of Police: Darrel Stephens 
Key contact: Sergeant Brian Cunningham 
704.336.8535 
bcunningham@cmpd.org 

 
Charlotte-Mecklenburg is located along North Carolina’s southern 
border and just hours from the Blue Ridge Mountains to the West and the 
Atlantic Ocean to the East. It is a major U.S. banking center and has an international 
airport. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department is the largest local law enforcement 
agency between Washington, D.C. and Miami, Florida. It polices the fifth largest 
urban region in the United States, with a population of 600,000 in the City of 
Charlotte and a population of 740,000 when combined with the residents of Mecklenburg 
County. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department polices this area with a force of 
approximately 1,535 sworn officers. The large area policed by the department is 
divided into six service areas. Each service area contains two districts, which are 
further divided into multiple response areas. 

Community-oriented policing and problem solving (COPPS) is included in the department’s 
mission statement. COPPS permeates academy training, and all officers are 
expected to practice community policing and to complete problem-oriented policing 
initiatives. Additionally, certain officers are assigned exclusively to community policing 
duties.
 
The initiative for the change to the Police Training Officer (PTO) program came from 
senior management. The department had been using a 12-week field training program 
based on the San Jose Model, modified to include a problem-oriented policing (POP) 
project as a task on the Daily Observation Report. Charlotte-Mecklenburg’s Field 
Training Officers (FTOs) had all received COPPS training, and each officer had been 
incorporating it into field training as she or he saw fit. Many were relying more heavily 
on the comment portion of the Daily Observation Report than on the checklist to 
evaluate trainees. 

Academy Structure and Training 
• Charlotte-Mecklenburg runs its own 26-
week training academy. Academy training 
is continuous and not split with segments 
of street training. 

• The academy graduates three classes per 
year, providing the department with 
between 20 and 40 new officers per class. 
• Recruits receive 80 hours of COPPS 
instruction in the academy, and they must 
complete a community project before they 
graduate. 

PTO Program 
Selection 

• Charlotte-Mecklenburg chose PTOs from 
each of its 12 patrol districts. 
• Of the officers trained as PTOs, approxi-
mately 60 percent had previously served 
as FTOs. 
 

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police 
Department’s PTO Selection Criteria: 

• Acceptable prior personnel evaluations and 
ratings from direct supervisors 

• Three years of service with the Charlotte-
Mecklenburg PD 

• Disciplinary record for the past five years 
is considered 

• Letter of intent explaining reasons for 
wanting to become a PTO

• Written recommendation from a current 
PTO 


Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police 
Department’s PTO Selection Process: 

• Department-wide announcement was made.

• All previous FTOs were relieved of 
training duties and invited to submit 
formal applications, as were potential 
new trainers, for the position of PTO. 

• PTOs within each district were originally 
selected by each district’s Sergeants and 
Commanders. PTOs are still selected 
within districts, but the selections are 
made by the Captain, the PTO Sergeant, 
and the current PTOs of that district. 


Incentives 

• Pay increases of 3 percent offered under 
the FTO program were changed to 5 percent. 

• The department is considering the additional 
incentives of take-home cars and 
first preference for training opportunities. 

• “PTO of the Year” Award was instituted to 
generate enthusiasm. 


PTO Training 

• Three PTO training sessions were held for 
the Charlotte-Mecklenburg PD. 

• Each training lasted five days, with all 
three 40-hour trainings held over a period 
of six weeks. 

• Eighty-four PTOs were trained, as were 12 
Sergeants—one per district—and some 
members of the Training Academy staff. 

• The Chief and the Command staff came 
by to observe segments of training. 


Program Structure 

• The approximately 50 trainees forming the 
pilot class were assigned to districts 
according to the current staffing allocations. 

• Shift scheduling varied by district, with 
some districts attempting to keep trainees 
off third shift (i.e., night shift) to ensure that 
they could complete the community interaction 
components in the program. Many 
trainees were assigned to day shift. 

• The majority of trainees remained in a 
single assigned district throughout the
 program. In the event that a district did not 
have a sufficient number of PTOs available, 
a PTO from a neighboring district 
would voluntarily transfer to the training 
district to accommodate the additional 
training needs. 

• Program phases were not switched from 
the then-established order (Non-
Emergency Incident Response, Emergency 
Incident Response, Patrol Activities, 
Criminal Investigation), unless an excellent 
training opportunity arose in a different 
phase. 

• Sergeants in each district were in charge 
of program operation, and they attempted 
to coordinate implementation by meeting 
together monthly. 


Evaluation Structure 

• PTOs trade recruits during the evaluation 
phases, and then function as PTEs. 


 
• Charlotte-Mecklenburg added a driving 
evaluation to each of the four program 
phases but later reduced the number of 
driving evaluations to two; these occur 
during each of the two evaluation periods. 

• Week-long Mid-Term and Final Evaluations 
are conducted. 

• The Learning Matrix is used as a reference 
guide for evaluations. The Problem-Based 
Learning Exercises (PBLEs), Coaching and 
Training Reports (CTRs), and NPEs also are 
used as evaluation tools to measure the 
progress of the trainees throughout the 
training phase. 

Command Structure 

• Location – District 
• Command Responsibility 
- Program Commander 
- Service Area Major 
- District Commander (Captain) 
- PTO Program Coordinator 

• Program Management – PTO-trained District 
Sergeant 

• Personnel Structure – Seven PTOs per district 
report to the PTO-trained Sergeant. 

• Board of Evaluators (BOE) – The BOE within each 
district is composed of the Service Area Major, the 
District Commander, the PTO Sergeant, and all 
PTOs and Police Training Evaluators (PTEs). They 
meet to discuss training issues, to evaluate the 
Neighborhood Portfolio Exercises (NPEs), and to 
make final recommendations regarding whether a 
trainee is ready for solo status, needs remedial 
training, or needs to be terminated.


Implementation Experiences 

• Key components of success were command staff 
support and central program organization. 

• Sergeants met weekly with their divisional 
PTOs. PTOs also began meeting among 
themselves to exchange information informally 
as a learning cohort. 

• PTOs found that they were well supported 
in instances where trainees were recommended 
for termination. The support 
came from senior personnel trained in the 
program and from a range of evaluation 
instruments, including trainee reflections 
on self-evaluations. 

• Time management 

• The department has integrated into its 
Computer-Aided Dispatch System the 
ability of a trainee to “check-out” while 
he or she is completing the CTR. 

• Initially, CTRs took trainees three to 
six hours to complete, but trainees 
improved as training progressed. As 
a time-management component, 
PTOs now dispense with the CTR on 
weeks where the trainee is preparing 
the Problem Based Learning Exercise 
for a phase. 

• For trainees who are lateral transfers from 
other departments, scheduling post-academy 
training is difficult due to part-day 
attendance in the academy and part-day 
patrol assignment. To remedy the problem, 
laterals complete Phase A in the academy, 
and the remainder of the program is completed 
post-academy. 

• Charlotte-Mecklenburg PTOs heavily 
emphasize journal writing with trainees 
and reference the Learning Matrix for all 
daily activities. The journals functioned as 
an icebreaker and enhanced learning. 

• The Problem-Based Learning Exercises 
have proved an excellent learning experience 
for trainees. Most districts have now 
modified the PBLEs to fit their unique 
environment. 

• The department found that new trainers 
were more receptive to the PTO program 
than were trainers who had been FTOs. 



Lessons Learned


Lessons Learned

The experiences of the six pilot agencies described in the 
previous section were critical to the development of the final Police 
Training Officer (PTO) program. Most importantly, the piloting 
process proved that the new model for field training could be successfully 
implemented in a variety of departments and produce high-quality 
officers ready to serve their communities. The piloting process also 
showed that the program was flexible—allowing agencies to tailor it to 
their own circumstances. Summarized here are some of the lessons 
learned, lessons that will be helpful to other agencies that choose to 
implement the PTO program. 

Personnel/Management 

• Adopting a new training program, such as the Reno Model, requires 
commitment at all levels of the organization. The most successful 
approach is to assign to program positions a cadre of individuals who 
both support the concept and have credibility with officers. 

• Agencies experienced greater success when everyone in the program was clear about their 
roles and responsibilities and everyone understood the structure of the program. 

• Agencies experienced greater success when they provided in-service training 
for supervisors and mid-managers who were not directly involved in the PTO program so that they 
could become familiar with the program and support it. 

• Agencies experienced greater success when they held weekly or bi-weekly meetings of 
PTO supervisors and trainers. These meetings helped to standardize implementation of the program, and they 
helped the Police Training Officers to be more prepared and feel more 
confident. Agencies that did not have these meetings experienced 
less cohesion among personnel and more implementation obstacles. 

• 
Program supervisors have a great impact on the extent to which program learning components are 
emphasized and promoted. If a program component—such as the Problem-Based Learning Exercise 
(PBLE), journal writing, or the Learning Matrix—is downplayed by 




supervisors, PTOs are unlikely to execute that program component 
and, as a result, learning opportunities are lost. Agencies experienced 
greater success when they emphasized and utilized all learning 
components. 

• Agencies experienced greater success when they used their Board of 
Evaluators (BOE) to its full potential. The BOE could identify trainer 
and trainee issues, identify programmatic/procedural issues, conduct 
exit interviews to produce feedback on the process, and determine 
whether a trainee needed remedial training or to be terminated. 

• Although the Learning Matrix can and should be customized to reflect 
an agency’s special circumstances and needs, the pilot agencies found 
that the universal matrix created as part of the PTO Program fit the 
general needs of each agency. 

• Agencies found that, relatively quickly, they needed to train a second 
group of PTOs. The lesson learned is to have an ample stock of trained 
PTOs (and, ideally, trainers on staff who can train more) before implementation. 
Agencies learned they should forecast staff turnover (e.g., 
losing trainers due to attrition, transfer) to minimize program disruption. 


Phases

• Agencies ordered the four programmatic phases of the PTO program 
(Non-Emergency Incident Response, Emergency Incident Response, 
Patrol Activities, and Criminal Investigation) in different ways, but they 
determined that it was not advisable to begin training with the 
Emergency Incident Response phase. Starting with one of the other 
phases built the necessary confidence for trainees, so that later, when 
they received the emergency response training, they felt more 
prepared. 

• Agencies experienced greater success when they allowed the programmatic 
phases to be flexible with regard to the content covered. 
For instance, an emergency response topic might be introduced during 
the Non-Emergency Incident Response phase as a result of a relevant 
incident. Even though the current phase is the trainer’s primary focus, 
every opportunity to train should be explored. 



Learning Components/Methods 

• Problem-based learning (PBL) is an excellent training method for law 
enforcement. Initially, the method’s lack of structure makes trainees 
feel uncomfortable, but the purpose and payoff of their dissonance 
become clear as training moves forward. The PBL method can be 
adjusted to fit the trainers and trainees. As a case in point, some 
trainees and trainers never became comfortable with the unstructured 
delivery, believing that more structure was preferable. At least one 
department has implemented a more structured approach. 

• Agencies experienced greater success when they spaced out the PTO program’s 
assignments—for example, Neighborhood Portfolio Exercises (NPEs) and PBLEs— 
over time, instead of saving them until the end of a phase or the end of the program. 
If PTOs delayed asking the recruits to complete the NPEs and PBLEs until the 
end of a phase, the trainees tended to complete them quickly all at once as tasks 
and not gradually as learning tools. Many learning opportunities were missed by not 
doing these assignments over the course of the program; daily activities contribute 
to the assignment, and the assignments inform daily learning, in turn. 

• Agencies experienced greater success when their trainees wrote in 
their journals. The trainees in these agencies were encouraged by 
PTOs who provided guidance in how to use the journal and explained 
its purpose. 

• Agencies experienced greater success when they allowed their 
trainees time to return to the station to complete assignments. This 
ensured that the assignments weren’t rushed at the end of a phase or 
dropped entirely. The program assignments are time-consuming. 
Agencies that tried to lessen this burden by removing elements of the 
program or by making the elements part of academy training rather 
than post-academy training found that learning opportunities were lost 
or aspects of the training were not communicated. Some agencies, 
however, determined that it was effective to explain to academy 




students the forthcoming PTO training; they would introduce PTO program 
assignments in the academy, but they would not require students 
to complete them at that time. Trainees then emerged from the academy 
familiar with the structure and content of their forthcoming PTO 
training, providing an important continuity between academy and infield training. 

• The Neighborhood Portfolio Exercise was very positively received by 
trainers and trainees in the pilot agencies. Agencies reported that 
trainees experienced accelerated learning about neighborhoods, local 
government, and community resources, and they developed excellent 
networks. 

Evaluation 

• Agencies experienced greater success when they used the Learning 
Matrix to guide evaluation of the trainees. Evaluations based on outcomes 
were found to be superior to traditional evaluations based on 
task standards. The matrix was particularly useful for identifying reasons 
a trainee was experiencing problems. 

Outcomes 

• The attrition rate of trainees in the PTO program was similar to that 
associated with the traditional field training program. Interestingly, 
however, the type of officer who failed the two programs was different. 
Under the San Jose Model, trainees failed who thought creatively or 
who did not excel with rote learning methods; under the Reno Model, 
trainees failed who were too regimented and could not think analytically 
or outside the box. 

• Agencies found that the PTO program produced quality recruits. The 
recruits were resourceful, willing to take risks, and more willing to 
interact with senior officers than were the recruits who had completed 
previous post-academy training programs. 



Implementation Resources


Implementation Resources


The implementation of the PTO program in the six pilot sites 
was tremendously important to the development of the new 
model. Each agency—impressive in its willingness to implement an 
untested training program—helped the project team enhance the quality 
of the program and make adjustments to ensure smooth implementation 
in real-life conditions. As the case studies and “lessons learned” make 
clear, the model can be adapted to the needs, priorities, and structure of 
the implementing agency. The PTO program was not uniform as implemented by 
the six pilot agencies; each one customized the program to 
produce the best fit. 

What is uniform across the pilot agencies is their success at producing 
high-quality officers to serve their communities. Officers trained in the 
PTO program are not only proficient in the basic skills required of law 
enforcement personnel, they also are oriented toward the communities 
they serve, able to partner with key stakeholders, and able and willing to 
think analytically to solve problems. 

To implement the PTO program, an agency should have one or more 
agency trainers receive instructor courses in PTO and PBL. It is also 
desirable for these same employees to sit through the 40-hour PTO 
course being conducted at another agency to become fully familiar with 
the content and methods. 

Web-based resources are available to agencies that want to implement 
this new program. Guides developed by the Reno/PERF team include the 

• PTO Manual to guide agencies implementing the program and the 
PTO Officers who train academy graduates, 

• Trainee Manual for use by academy graduates undergoing PTO 
training, and 

• Training Standard for use in training PTOs. 


The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services has also funded the 
development of an Instructor Development course in problem-based 
learning. 

All documents are available for downloading in PDF-format on the web-
sites of the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (at 
www.cops.usdoj.gov) and PERF (at www.policeforum.org). These 
files can be used by agencies to produce multiple copies for personnel. 
Additional information is available at these sites regarding instructor-
development courses. These include courses for instructors on both 
PTO and PBL.