Too often, the decision to retain or release a recruit is driven almost entirely by Daily Observation Reports and feedback from Field Training Officers. While those tools are important and serve a purpose, they are only one part of the process. As the program supervisor, your responsibility goes beyond reviewing documentation. You are responsible for validating performance, identifying the root causes of deficiencies, and ensuring that the recruit was actually trained before being evaluated. When a recruit fails without having been trained, the issue is not just with the recruit. It is a failure of the program itself.
Before making any decision, you must first determine whether the recruit is trainable. The most effective way to do this is by diagnosing their performance through the K.S.A lens – knowledge, skill, and attitude/aptitude. It’s been my experience that every deficiency can be traced back to one of these areas. A knowledge issue means they do not understand what to do. A skill issue means they cannot yet perform the task. An attitude or aptitude issue speaks to their willingness or ability to improve. Your role is not simply to identify that a recruit is struggling, but to understand why.
One of the most common problems I see is recruits being labeled as failing when, in reality, they were never trained. It is not uncommon to review body-worn camera footage or speak directly with a recruit and realize that what was documented as a failure to respond to training was actually a lack of training altogether. Instead of being taught, the recruit was evaluated. There is a significant difference between the two. Another major issue is the absence of documented remedial training. If a recruit is behind, there should be a clear record of what training was provided, how it was delivered, and how the recruit performed afterward. Without that, it becomes difficult to justify any decision regarding their future in the program.
At some point, you need to step away from the reports and engage directly with the recruit. I start by asking a simple question: whether they believe they are capable of doing the job. The goal is not to get a perfect answer, but to gauge their mindset. You can learn a lot about a recruit by understanding whether they still believe in their ability to improve or whether they have already become defeated. That insight often reveals whether you are dealing with a performance issue that can be corrected or an underlying attitude problem that will be much harder to overcome.
Before making a final determination, I will often reassign the recruit to a different Field Training Officer for a short evaluation period. This allows for a fresh perspective and helps eliminate any potential issues caused by ineffective training or bias in earlier phases. During this reassignment, it is critical to establish clear expectations. Rather than asking vague questions about how to help the recruit, you should provide a structured plan outlining what will be trained, what will be evaluated, and what standards must be met. Including the new FTO in that conversation ensures everyone is aligned and working toward the same objective.
When working with a struggling recruit, simplifying the task load is essential. One of the biggest mistakes is overwhelming them with too many responsibilities at once. If they are already struggling, adding more complexity only increases the likelihood of failure. Instead, focus on simple, attainable objectives tied to the Standardized Evaluation Guidelines. For example, you might begin with a single responsibility such as not missing their callsign over the radio. As they demonstrate competence, additional tasks can be introduced. Confidence builds through repeated success, and as confidence increases, performance often improves alongside it. If deficiencies continue, the solution is not to add pressure but to reduce complexity further and revisit the underlying issue.
Ultimately, your decision must be supported by clear and thorough documentation, but that documentation must reflect more than just performance outcomes. It needs to demonstrate the training that was provided, the opportunities the recruit had to improve, and how their performance was measured against established standards. Documentation that only captures failure without showing the training process is incomplete and leaves your decision vulnerable to challenge.
There will be cases where, despite proper training, simplified expectations, and multiple opportunities to improve, the recruit is still unable to meet standards. In those situations, the issue is typically rooted in skill or aptitude. While that can be difficult to accept, it is a necessary conclusion. Allowing a recruit who cannot meet standards to continue through the program does not benefit them, your agency, or the public you serve. Departments should part ways with a trainee when the training staff has proven that the trainee cannot be trained.
When the process is handled correctly, the final decision becomes much clearer. Recruits who are capable will demonstrate improvement and meet standards. Those who are not will be supported by a well-documented and defensible process that justifies their release. In many cases, when the expectations, training, and evaluations are transparent, the recruit will recognize the outcome themselves and choose to separate voluntarily.
This is about more than just one recruit. It is about the integrity of your Field Training Program and ensuring that the officers who complete it are truly prepared to do the job. It also ensures that every recruit is given a fair, structured, and professional opportunity to succeed.
If you are responsible for training recruits, developing Field Training Officers, or overseeing a program, this is not something you should be figuring out through trial and error. Our Field Training Officer course teaches FTOs how to properly train, evaluate, and document performance so they are building officers rather than simply grading them. The Field Training Officer Update course is a refresher course for experienced FTOs where we focus on remediating struggling recruits with modern, effective training practices. For those responsible for running the program, the Field Training Program Supervisor course provides the structure, oversight, and decision-making framework needed to build and maintain a high-performing system.
A strong Field Training Program does not happen by accident. It is built through deliberate training, consistent evaluation, and leadership that is willing to make the right decisions for the right reasons.
About the author:
Senior Instructor Eddie Chan is a current sergeant with the San Jose Police Department in California. Eddie has over 30 years of experience and spent over 14 years as a supervisor in the FTO Program. Eddie has participated in the training of hundreds of trainees and FTOs. He oversees all of Savage Training Group’s FTO training programs. Learn more about Eddie.
Recent Comments