The evaluation report should include a listing of
the data relied on for the evaluation. The officer’s his-
tory should include information critical to the
agency’s understanding of the officer’s path to the cur-
rent state of affairs, including no more of the officer’s
personal history than necessary to achieve this goal.
The report should include a clear statement of the offi-
cer’s current status, complete with ongoing symptoms
and problems. The officer’s status should be discussed
in light of the critical aspects of the officer’s current
position. For example, if the officer has become para-
noid, it may no longer be appropriate for him or her to
evaluate the performance of subordinates. If the offi-
cer has developed a generalized anxiety disorder, it
may be inappropriate for the officer to serve “on the
street,” where critical minute-to-minute decisions
must be made.
A clear statement of the officer’s fitness for duty
status in light of the four alternatives listed above is
essential. This should be followed with recommenda-
tions for the next step in the process. If the recommen-
dations include modified duty, the nature and extent of
the job modifications should be outlined. If the recom-
mendations include counseling, the kind and duration
of that treatment should be specified. If the recom-
mendation is that the officer is unfit for duty, the report
should include a discussion of how the departure from
duty should be accomplished. In particular circum-
stances in which the officer is a danger to himself or
others, the report should include procedures to mini-
mize the probability of harm to either the officer or
others. This may include a recommendation for an
extended period of medical leave while the officer
receives both treatment and a paycheck. Such periods
allow for the “cooling down” of the officer’s condition
to reduce the probability of a dangerous outcome.
As has been noted in one of the recommended
readings, particular attention should be paid to situa-
tions of officer-involved shootings. Both shooting
another person or witnessing the shooting of a fellow
officer are rated as being among the most traumatic
experiences that an officer may have while on duty. As
in other cases of trauma, the range of responses of
affected individuals varies widely. A good under-
standing of posttraumatic stress disorder and its par-
ticular manifestations among workers in high-risk
occupations is necessary so as not to unduly burden an
officer who is doing well with months of treatment or
of allowing an officer who is brittle but “looking
good” to return to work prematurely.Return-to-Work Evaluations
Although most FFDEs are RTEs, not all RTEs involve
workers in high-risk occupations. In almost any work
setting, a worker may develop a mental illness or sub-
stance abuse problem that results in temporary disabil-
ity. In many cases, it makes sense for the employer to get
the employee back to work as soon as possible. If the
position requires extensive training or if the employee is
a long-time incumbent in the position, the employer has
a significant financial investment in the employee.
Likewise, the employee has an investment in the job and
the relationships and income that come from it.
RTEs are carried out very much in the same way as
FFDEs. The psychologist must have an understanding
of the worker’s duties and work setting. A clear history
of the events that led up to the worker leaving the work-
place must be developed, both from the employer’s per-
spective and from the history of the worker. Informed
consent is also essential in this setting, including the
worker knowing whether a copy of the report will be
made available. Testing may be used as appropriate,
although for most other occupations specialized test
reports are usually not available. The report should
include the same elements, with a well-developed rec-
ommendation section.
RTEs may often be conducted with individuals with
chronic illnesses, such as a major depressive disorder or a
substance dependence disorder, which would eliminate a
security or police officer from consideration for employ-
ment. Because of considerations of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, employers may be required to provide
reasonable accommodation for these chronic conditions.
An RTE may be part of this process and may include rec-
ommendations for specific accommodations for the
worker to be able to function in the workplace.Conclusion
Both FFDEs and RTEs assess the worker’s fit with the
job duties and job setting. In the case of workers in
high-risk occupations, the FFDE often occurs at a crit-
ical juncture in the officer’s career. For the RTE, this
may also be the case, but it may also occur in situa-
tions with more chronic illnesses or recurring prob-
lems than would be tolerated in high-risk jobs.
The psychologist should be aware that the ramifi-
cations of an FFDE are serious. An officer who has
demonstrated a history of problems on the job is going
to be returned to duty, a situation that may place notReturn-to-Work Evaluations——— 697R-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:43 PM Page 697