Question:

How to handle an evaluation and report for an applicant who started working before their psychological.

Handling the Evaluation and Report:

Applicant’s Start Date and Report Adjustment: The Evaluator noted that the applicant began working 1.5 weeks before her interview, which was not explicitly mentioned in her report. The Lead Psychologist suggests that since the applicant has only been working for a short period (a week or two), the evaluation can still be considered a Pre-Employment Psychological Evaluation (PEP). The evaluation must be switched to an Existing Employee report if the applicant has been working for a month or more.

Red Flags and Final Recommendation: The Evaluator highlighted significant red flags in the applicant's personality, history, test results, and interview interactions, recommending "Not Suitable" (NS) for the armed animal control position. Despite these red flags, the lead psychologist sees no need for changes to the report and advises letting the hiring agency decide how to handle the situation.

Key Question:
How should evaluators approach a law enforcement applicant or existing officer who presents with untreated anxiety, chronic insomnia, panic history, observable self-soothing behaviors, medication misuse, and reluctance to engage in recommended care, even if they have been employed without documented disciplinary issues?

Answer:
When significant untreated mental health symptoms are present—such as visible anxiety behaviors, chronic sleep disturbance impacting daily functioning, a history of panic attacks, and prior misuse of non-prescribed medications—these concerns must be weighed heavily in the suitability decision. Current employment without formal disciplinary action does not mitigate the risks posed by ongoing functional impairment and refusal to address symptoms. Records review is appropriate, but the pattern of untreated symptoms, resistance to care, and associated risk behaviors can justify a Not Suitable decision.

Summary:
In cases where observable mental health concerns and untreated impairments are evident, evaluators should proceed with a Not Suitable recommendation unless comprehensive documentation clearly demonstrates effective treatment and resolution of symptoms, regardless of the candidate’s current employment status.

Key Question:
When conducting a psychological evaluation for an existing employee (EE) who has never undergone an initial evaluation and presents with notable concerns (e.g., aggression), but the determination options are only “No Barriers” or “Potential Barriers,” how should the decision be approached?

Answer:
In EE evaluations, “Potential Barriers” is equivalent to a “Not Suitable” (NS) determination. Even if the evaluator considers the individual “weak,” the correct selection is “No Barriers” unless the concerns meet the threshold for NS. Weaknesses or areas of concern should still be documented thoroughly in the report.

For existing employees—especially those who were hired without a prior psych evaluation—it is not possible to retroactively conduct an initial applicant evaluation. If concerns are significant but you are unsure they reach the NS threshold, consider giving a verbal of Deferred/Pending Consultation. This allows time to complete the report, have it reviewed by lead psychologists, and then determine whether to finalize as No Barriers or Potential Barriers.

Summary:
For EEs, “Potential Barriers” equals NS. Use “No Barriers” for individuals you consider “weak” but not unsuitable, while clearly documenting concerns. If unsure, defer the verbal and request a lead psychologist review before making a final determination.