Cutting the Training Budget by Harvey Heddon of ILEETA

One of the most common complaints of trainers within criminal justice agencies is that when budgets are cut, training is usually the first casualty. Cutting training is terribly easy from a bureaucratic standpoint. It requires no re-scheduling, no cuts in public services and there are fewer complaints except for those zealots who work in the training bureau. We need to look at defending funding for training as just another teaching assignment. We must inform and persuade administrators and public officials of the importance and advantages of training.

When agency budgets are cut we never expect that the agency will cut back on its services to the public but rather that it will work more efficiently with fewer resources. But how likely is it this will occur without training? Training is a force multiplier making for more effective and efficient work, boosting morale, reestablishing agency priorities and improving teamwork. When we train our staff during the toughest of times we are telling them we are in this together, that we value their work and their professionalism. Conversely when we drop training we send a quite different message down the line which will impact agency performance.

If we learned that our surgeon or airline pilot had not received training updates due to budget cutbacks, would we feel confident about their work? We expect them to be well trained because their work product can be the difference between life and death. Law enforcement officers are often tasked to make critical decisions alone and under pressure that can also have grave consequences. When we tell our officers they don‟t need training aren't we telling them that their performance and/or their safety really doesn't matter?

Even in a bad economy the courts are still open. Decreasing training can make the agency a more appealing target of litigation. A single lawsuit could cost and agency much more than its annual training budget.

Training not only reduces the frequency of workplace errors but protects the agency from deliberate indifference claims when an error is made. Plaintiff‟s counsel would much rather attack the agency for allowing an unskilled or rogue officer to have made the error without concern for the public.

It is important realize that the budget shortfall isn‟t going to just go away. Be prepared to offer suggestions of other ways to reduce the budget. Before we point the red pen at other parts of the agency, find ways to reduce training costs such as roll call or other self-directed on-duty training. Maximize every minute of real training time and offer examples of how this training can reduce other operating costs as well as keep our officers safer and reduce civil litigation.

Does the agency have non-mandated services we can curtail or charge user fees? Can some services be reassigned to non-law enforcement resources? Can we reduce fleet operating costs through better driving (training)? Can we find ways to reduce overtime? Does every report have to be completed before the officer goes home? Our officers and first line supervisors are often in the best position to help our administration find cost savings.

We can hardly expect to have great training without also investing in our instructors. Keeping the trainer up to date in an ever more complex world is critical to our success. Without effective training we cannot keep pace with change and we cannot effectively protect our officers, agency and community. Training is much like insurance, if you don‟t pay now, you almost certainly will later.