I know that many police k9 programs require that handlers keep training records, largely, I think, for legal reasons. I've been impressed with this practice as a possible training tool which could be used in PPD training. Got two questions for you guys:

1. How big is the TRAINING benefit from keeping those records?

2. Is there an accepted format for the records? What is it? Is there anything on this on the web somewhere, where us citizens could avail ourselves of it? (OK, I cheated and smuggled in some extra questions.)

I'd like to be a conscientious handler. Seems to me good record keeping might be a very important step. All help appreciated, and many thanks.

From a legal standpoint good training records are indispensable. From a training standpoint, I think they are just as important. A good training record is a roadmap. It is used to tell you where you are and where you need to go. It will also give you the information you need to get to your destination. For those with limited training time, (like most police I've worked with) a well kept training record is used to plan training sessions so the most can be gained from the time available. It points out the strong areas, so more time can be objectively used on the weaker areas.

I'm certain there are as many formats for documenting training as there are trainers, the important thing would be; is the information retrievable, can it be reviewed and does it document what needs documenting.

DFrost

Thank you, David.

"...and does it document what needs documenting." Afraid I am not sure what that is, especially from the legal end, but I'll make a ROUGH start: (considering bitework only)

1. Report of discussion of advance plan with trainer/decoy(s), and of goals for session.

2. Execution of session plan:
2a. exercises and modifications
2b. number of repetitions (ballpark)
2d. Summary of dog's responses to agitation
2e. total time on training task

3. Summary of progress on goals.

4. Preliminary suggestions for next session(s).

5. Date, name of personnel (handler, trainer/decoy(s))

Would you trainers/handlers be happy with something like that?

With SAR, I record all my training methods, time temp, humidity, rain, sun, etc. How weak or strong the alert is, attitude of the dog before, during, after training. If there is a false alert I try to breakdown why, what I may have done differently, distractions during the training. I even record what other teams are training with me. Actual searches are logged the same way, wether there is a find or not. Members of the team I'm on have been to court in the past. It's amaizing how the defence can bring out the dog experts to rake you over the coals. To this point, the team members that have gone to court on different cases, in 10 yrs, have never been on the loosing side. It has all been because of responsible training/search records.

Wayne,
IMO your suggestion for a training record is a little extreme. Too much time would be spent writing, taking away from the precious little time most officers have to train.

David,
While I agree that accurate records are a must for court purposes, I personally do not utilize my previous training records to fix current problems. I do use the Explosives training records to keep up with my partners find percentage and to identify any weaknesses to a certain odor so that I can get him back up to speed on that odor.

I think that as a supervisor who is in charge of a K9 unit, handlers records would be of more value if there is a disciplinary action in the works. Also if a handler is in denial about the effectiveness of his dog and complaints are made to the K9 supervisor, those records can be of use to determine when the problems began to surface...of course if the handler is in denial, his training records will reflect a flawless animal. There's the rub.

I personally keep pretty accurate records but if I see a problem arise, I fix it immediately. I dont wait until there is a paper trail depicting my dogs' poor performance. I am satisfied with the way my partner works, and trains..problems are not allowed to fester, therefore I have no need to refer to my training records to "identify" when or how something negative occurred.

Things I do like to keep track of are new exercises that I have worked on or specific scent discrimination training which may come into question in court. I believe if you stay in tune with your partner and give maximum effort, no problems should pass undetected. And if they do, a brutally honest training partner always sets me straight if there is any question in how the dog performed.

Wayne

I think you have the idea. My records though are more of a go/no go type of documentation. For each task the dog is required to perform, there has to be a standard. Using that standard as the measurement, the dog either completes the task properly or he doesn't. If he doesn't, is it a one time event. That information would be available in a training record. If corrective action is needed, that action would be annotated. For example if the standard is: the dog must release the bite, on command, with no more than one verbal correction. Did the dog perform that task properly. Over time reviewing the record can be reviewed to see if a problem is recurring or an isolated incident.

In detection training, the proficiency on each odor can be tracked as well as amounts, time worked, heighth, depth or any other variable.

DFrost

I would think that many departments had produced standardized forms with the the training task, conditions, and standards all able to be checked off,including a choice of varibles.

My department wasn't that large, and the form was a good time saver - I'd actually be a bit surprised if most K-9 units were not using some variation of the form to simply save themselves time and provide needed documentation when requested for whatever reason.

Training records are very valuable for TRAINING purposes as noted in previous posts. They are likely to do more harm than good when made available through discovery in a legal action.

ANY documented deficiency, whether real or just perceived by the record keeper, will be used with great effect at trial.

As a plaintiff counsel, I would be salivating at the thought of reviewing your dogs training records. I would find just a few minor "gliches" and I would turn them into Mount Everest.

That has not been my experience. Documentation demonstrates good faith effort on the part of law enforcement. No where in any court decision has a dog been penalized because he was not perfect. The key in court, in my experience, written standards, documentation demonstrating adherance to those standards, and documentation to show training to maintain those standards. As of late, at least in the federal district we operate in, the focus has been on the dog's percentage rate relative to responses vs finds. In the past 15 years of this program, there has not been a single issue made of correcting deficiencies.

DFrost

Very helpful responses! Many thanks to all.

Adam, I would like to think that if someone designed his PPD program conscientiously, kept careful (including legally careful) records, and stayed on top of things as with Howard, his use of a PPD would less likely be regarded as macho and irresponsible. May I ask you to say some more? From a legal standpoint, if someone keeps records, what should they be like?

The time issue won't mean so much to me personally, as I will go postal if I am not retired soon, and should have a good deal of time in retirement for training.

My guess (no more than that) is that record keeping would be much easier (more doable with a checklist form) in the case of scentwork than bitework. I would guess that bitework records would require more writeup, but.... don't know.

Many thanks again.