Supporting Statement Part A 04-21-11SR_MPD_StressReduction_COPS

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

Part A. Justification:

1. Necessity of Information Collection.

On September 13, 1994, President Clinton signed into law the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-322). Title I of the "crime bill," the Public Safety Partnership and Community Policing Act of 1994 (the Act), authorizes the Attorney General to make grants to states, units of local government, Indian tribal governments, other public and private entities, and multi-jurisdictional or regional consortia thereof to increase police presence, to expand and improve cooperative efforts between law enforcement agencies and members of the community, to address crime and disorder problems, and to otherwise enhance public safety.

The objective of this proposal is to test the hypothesis that training police to self regulate their emotional and physiological responses to stressors will increase their resiliency. Stress is modifiable risk factor that contributes to chronic disease. Over a three-month time period, our stress resilience intervention will: 1) educate officers on techniques to manage emotional and physical responses to stress and 2) provide practice sessions that use a hand-held, non-invasive heart-rhythm monitor to facilitate acquiring the skills to self-regulate responses to stress techniques. A wait-list controlled design provides a scientific way to assess the intervention because the wait-listed group serves as control until it also receives the intervention. Five self-administered survey instrument will be used as part of the study. For the purposes of this study the five instruments are collectively referred to as the “Stress Resiliency Study Questionnaires for the Milwaukee Police Department.” This group of five survey instruments includes: the Impact of Events Scale; the Perceived Stress Scale; the Personal and Organizational Quality Assessment; the Response to Stressful Experiences Scale; and the Vital Exhaustion Scale. Each of these instruments, is widely used in the study of stress, has been standardized, and has been established as reliable and valid. This study builds on field research that has studied the impact of stress reduction techniques in military and combat situations. The study is unique and innovative in that it is the first systematic effort to assess self-regulated stress reductions techniques in the context of policing. The proposed work also is innovative because the focus is not on modifying the officers’ exposures to stressors but on modifying how they respond to stressful situations.

2. Needs and Uses

The surveys and data collected will be used to determine the impact of training interventions in reducing stress by comparing aggregate level chances of treatment and control groups between in both pre- and post-intervention phases as well as a follow-up phse. Individual scores will not be analyzed or compared, nor will any individually identifying behavior be publicly shared or disclosed to supervisory or management personnel.

3. Efforts to Minimize Burden

Each of the five surveys will be completed at 3 time intervals during the study: at baseline intervention, 3 and 6 months. Completion at these time points is necessary to measure the effect of the intervention on psychological variables. The surveys take approximately 15 to complete, collectively.

4. Efforts to Identify Duplication

There is no duplicative effort. The survey does not duplicate a current information collection instrument.

5. Methods to Minimize Burden on Small Business

There is no significant impact on small business.

6. Consequences of Less Frequent Collection

A less frequent collection or fewer respondents would not allow sufficient information to evaluate the effects of the stress reduction intervention. Three points of data collection are the minimal needed to adequately assess the initial impact and duration of treatment effects.

7. Special Circumstances Influencing Collection

There are no special circumstances that would influence the collection of information.

8. Reasons for Inconsistencies with 5 CFR 1320.6

There are no inconsistencies with 5 CFR 1320.6.

9. Payment or Gift to Respondents

No government funds will be used as payment or for gifts to respondents.

10. Assurance of Confidentiality

No assurance of confidentiality has been made to respondents.

11. Justification for Sensitive Questions

There are no questions of a sensitive nature. No information commonly considered as private is included in the proposed requested information.

12. Estimate of Hour Burden

There are 20 participants in the study annually while taking the battery of tests 3 times annually. The average response time for the packet of surveys is approximately 15 minutes (0.25 hours). The total number of annual burden hours will be 15 hours (15 minutes X 3 test taking sessions = 45 minutes X 20 participants = 15 hours).

13. Estimate of Cost Burden

This collection will not generate any costs other than those associated with the applicants’ time. Therefore, the estimated burden cost in dollars is 0.

14. Estimated Annualized Cost to Federal Government

Grant funds have already been allocated to the grantee. Therefore, the estimated annualized cost to the federal government in dollars is 0.

15. Reason for Change in Burden

No changes, proposed new collection.

16. Publication

The results of the study will be published in a manuscript. Only aggregate data will be reported. No individual or identifiable data will be reported. The Milwaukee Police Department will not be named in any external publication without prior written permission to refer to the Department by name.

17. Request not to Display OMB Control Number

The COPS Office will display the OMB approval number and expiration date on the upper right hand corner of the collection instrument.

18. Exceptions to Certification Statement

The COPS Office does not request an exception to the certification of this information collection.

4