Success is subjective
Each individual using crisis response services has different goals. This is a strength of Co-Response models, and a complication for standardized measurement.
A practical guide for Co-Response programs, designed to help you evaluate effectiveness, build evaluation capacity, and plan for long-term sustainability wherever you are in your journey.
This toolkit offers a range of resources to help Co-Response and Alternative Crisis Response programs showcase their effectiveness, evaluate existing tools, create implementation strategies, and develop sustainability plans. Drawing on Omni's combined 10 years of Co-Response evaluation experience, it supports emerging programs with a strength-based, impact-driven approach that puts program values and sustainability priorities ahead of traditional evaluation metrics. Its primary audience includes Co-Response and Alternative Crisis Response programs, their partners, and anyone interested in monitoring outcomes of these services. Whether your program is just getting started or has been running for years, you'll find tools here to meet you where you are.
Throughout this toolkit, the term "Co-Response programs" is used broadly to include any alternative or community-based crisis response model. The principles and processes here apply across these models. "Behavioral health" is used inclusively to cover the range of situations these programs are likely to encounter, including mental health and substance use issues.
The primary audience includes Co-Response programs, their partners, and anyone involved in monitoring outcomes of Co-Response services.
The six evaluation phases are flexible. You can begin wherever your program has the greatest need, and revisit any phase as your program evolves.
Each phase includes a key worksheet (six total) that you can download as a fillable PDF to complete and share with staff, partners, and funders.
A flexible framework for conducting an impact-driven evaluation of your Co-Response or alternative response program.
Define the guiding principles that shape your program's purpose.
02 Phase 2Select measurable outcomes that reflect your program values.
03 Phase 3Map your existing data to your outcomes and close any gaps.
04 Phase 4Streamline how, when, and where data is collected in your workflow.
05 Phase 5Clean and analyze your data to communicate impact clearly.
06 Phase 6Share findings with stakeholders and plan for long-term viability.
Co-Response programs take an interdisciplinary approach to supporting community members experiencing mental or behavioral health crises by pairing the safety and access of first responders with the clinical skills of behavioral health professionals.
These programs, including alternative and community-response models, typically involve collaboration between law enforcement or first responders and mental health professionals, with the goal of reducing burden on public safety agencies and improving connections to community services.
These models provide alternatives to traditional police responses when someone's behavior stems from a mental health or substance use issue. Historically, those calls often ended in arrest or informal management, even when neither outcome served the individual or the community. Co-Response programs address that gap by pairing the safety and access that law enforcement provides with the clinical skills of mental health professionals.
When you hear the word "evaluation," it might sound technical or intimidating. But at its core, a program evaluation is simply a structured process for learning about your program.
No matter how meaningful your work is, a flawed program design or inconsistent implementation can prevent you from achieving your goals. Evaluation is how you verify that your program is reaching its objectives, and how you make the case to others that it is.
There is currently no uniform evaluation process or data-tracking system across Co-Response programs. Funding sources, management structures, and program designs vary widely, and so does the quality of program data. Evaluations help address this gap by:
to funders, leadership, and community stakeholders.
by strengthening collection, entry, and reporting routines.
by providing evidence to back long-term program sustainability.
and building organizational capacity over time.
and informing the broader Co-Response field.
and supporting sustainable funding strategies.
Showing the impact of Co-Response and alternative response services matters at two levels: for the program itself and for the wider field of alternative responses.
Even if no one has required a formal evaluation, conducting one is valuable. The right tools make the process manageable, and the insights it produces make your program stronger.
Co-Response services are fundamentally shaped by how each program defines success. An impact-driven approach designs the evaluation around your program's goals, so you track and demonstrate the impacts that matter most to your program and your community.
Some of the factors that make Co-Response programs so powerful also make evaluation more challenging. Co-Response programs often face evaluation difficulties because:
Each individual using crisis response services has different goals. This is a strength of Co-Response models, and a complication for standardized measurement.
Co-Response programs customize their methods to local needs, making consistent cross-program data tracking difficult.
Theories about what works vary, and standardization is not always the goal. Community needs, funding, and support systems differ.
Every Co-Response program defines success a little differently, and your evaluation should match. Impact-driven evaluation builds your questions, data, and analysis around the goals and criteria that matter most to your program, directly addressing what makes this work hard to measure.
Clarify your program's primary goals upfront so the evaluation reflects them, not generic benchmarks.
Ensure your stated objectives appear throughout your evaluation questions, data collection, and analysis, not just in one phase.
Assess and document the features that set your program apart: the unique approach, the relationships, the outcomes others can't easily replicate.
Despite these challenges, it is possible to identify common definitions of success and build effective systems for tracking outcomes without sacrificing your program's flexibility.
You don't need to work through this toolkit from start to finish. Tell us where your program is today, and we'll point you to the right phase.
Pick the description that fits best.
Each phase builds on the others, but you can revisit or repeat any phase as your program evolves. The worksheets at the end of each phase are your key deliverables; use them to document decisions and share progress with staff and partners. As your community, funders, or program priorities shift, return to the phase that best fits your current needs.
Click any phase below to explore it in depth. Mark phases complete as you finish them. Your progress saves to this device. Each phase has a worksheet you can complete inline and print.
Program values are the guiding principles that shape your program's objectives. If everything worked exactly as intended, what experience would the people you serve have? What would your staff, partners, and community see?
In an impact-driven evaluationImpact-driven evaluationAn evaluation approach designed around your program's specific goals, measuring the outcomes that matter most to your program and community, rather than applying generic benchmarks., your values anchor everything: the outcomes you measure, the data you collect, and the way you report results. Taking time to name them clearly will streamline every step that follows.
Once you've clarified your values, use them to identify the outcomes you want to track. The key question is: what does success look like, and how would you know if you achieved it?
Resist the urge to measure everything. Focusing on too many outcomes can overwhelm staff and obscure your program's most important contributions. A well-chosen set of outcomes is more powerful than a comprehensive but unmanageable one.
You'll know an outcome is worth tracking when it meets two criteria:
The number of individuals served or diverted from emergency services.
Changes such as increased connection to behavioral health services.
Broader impacts such as reduced recidivism or improved community trust.
A logic model is a planning tool that maps the connection between the problem you're addressing, the strategies you use, and the results you expect. Not every program needs one, but it can be a useful way to communicate your goals to partners and track progress over time.
Logic models can be created during this phase or the next, depending on how much information you've already gathered.
Once you know what outcomes you want to track, the next step is figuring out whether your current data supports that tracking, and what changes, if any, are needed.
Co-Response programs often face data management constraints: limited funding, existing procedures, security requirements, and regulatory rules can all affect what data you can collect and how. Whatever your situation, the goal is to build an evaluation plan that is accurate, meaningful, and realistic for your team.
If your program has been running for some time, start by reviewing what you already collect. For each data point, ask:
This audit often reveals redundant questions, outdated fields, and gaps where important data isn't being captured.
The Co-Response field has grown significantly, and there are established resources describing the data types that best demonstrate program impact. These cover both organizational achievements (such as collaboration quality, training, and community awareness) and program-level impacts, including diversion rates, early identification, and linkages to care.
Using established frameworks reduces the pressure to build your evaluation from scratch and ensures your work is grounded in what the field already knows.
Your data system should support your team's work, not add to it. When reviewing your system, consider whether it:
If your current system isn't meeting your needs, explore alternatives. Some programs develop custom solutions tailored to their specific situation. Common platforms include Julota, CITAssess, ClientTrack, and standard tools like Excel or Google Sheets.
How data collection works in practice depends heavily on your program's setting, staffing, and services. For Co-Response programs, data is often collected in the field or outside a traditional office environment, which requires careful planning.
Start by creating a workflow that traces a typical call from start to finish. This visual map helps you identify every point where data could or should be collected.
| Stage | Key Data Collection Points |
|---|---|
| Initial Call | 911 call information · Dispatch data · Officer data entry |
| On-Scene | Assessments · Resources · Interventions |
| Disposition / After the Call | Outcomes · Transportation · Referrals / warm handoffs |
| Follow-Up | Case management · Peer support · Additional supports |
Walk through each stage of your workflow and ask:
This review can also surface opportunities to improve collection, such as using tablets to support on-scene documentation or standardizing dropdown options to reduce manual entry.
Decide who will input data, and where it will be stored. Centralizing information in a consistent location (whether a data management system, an EHR, or a shared spreadsheet) makes monitoring, analysis, and reporting much more manageable over time.
If you collect sensitive data with personal identifiers, implement appropriate safeguards to protect individual privacy and confidentiality. Secure platforms with encryption and role-based access controls are strongly recommended.
When data crosses organizational boundaries, a formal information-sharing agreement is essential. This document specifies the purpose of data sharing, how data is handled, applicable standards, and the responsibilities of all parties involved. It can stand alone or be incorporated into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)MOUA formal agreement between two or more organizations describing the terms and details of a partnership or shared effort..
You may need an information-sharing agreement when:
Federal regulations including HIPAAHIPAAHealth Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Sets baseline privacy standards for protected health information (PHI). Applies to covered entities such as health plans, healthcare providers conducting electronic transactions, and healthcare clearinghouses. set baseline privacy standards for protected health information (PHI). Regulations such as 42 CFR Part 2 govern the confidentiality of substance use disorder records and must be considered when sharing behavioral health data.
Note: some agencies, including many state and local law enforcement agencies, schools, and child protective services, are not subject to HIPAA. Understanding which rules apply to each partner is a critical step. Identify information-sharing needs early in your planning process. Finalizing these agreements often takes considerable time.
Accurate results depend on accurate data. Before analyzing anything, take time to monitor and improve the quality of what you've collected.
You don't need a data analyst to make sense of your program data. The following four approaches are accessible to most program staff and are enough to tell a compelling, accurate story.
Ensure entries are complete, accurate, and consistent. Correct or remove entries that don't make sense before analyzing. Leaving in bad data will distort your results.
Example: If you're tracking days per week on duty and see "10," go back to the source to confirm, or exclude the entry.
Simply counting how often something occurs. Add up reported numbers or tally events to get frequency totals.
Examples: 150 individuals received crisis support. 35 individuals were referred to behavioral health services. 60 individuals were placed on an involuntary hold.
Gives you an overall picture by averaging all values. Useful for understanding patterns over time and making staffing or resource decisions.
Examples: Average number of crisis calls per month can inform staffing capacity. Average individuals using specific services can identify community needs.
Express a portion in relation to the whole. Useful for communicating program reach, measuring goal attainment, and showing change over time.
Examples: 85% of Co-Response encounters resolved on-scene. Hospital diversions increased from 60% in Q1 to 75% in Q2.
These calculations can be performed using Excel, Google Sheets, or free online calculators. No specialized software is required.
The purpose of an impact-driven evaluation is to show what your program is accomplishing, and to make sure the right people know it. Sharing results with partners, funders, and community members is an essential part of the process. Before communicating your findings, think through the following:
Tailor your language to your audience. For general audiences, minimize jargon, check reading levels, and ensure the content is accessible across formats. For technical audiences, you can go deeper, but always provide context for proper interpretation.
No program is perfect, and funding is never guaranteed. Sustainability planning helps you manage both realities proactively. This process includes reviewing your evaluation outcomes, applying what you've learned, and identifying resources to strengthen your program over time.
A useful framework for sustainability planning is a SWOT analysisSWOT analysisA review of your program's Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. A quick way to identify what's working, where to improve, and what external factors could help or hurt sustainability.: an examination of your program's Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. A SWOT review can help you identify what's working well, where improvements are needed, and what external factors could support or threaten your program.
After gathering input from staff, partners, participants, and administrators, summarize priorities and strategies into a formal sustainability plan. This plan should address both near-term adjustments and longer-term goals.
Securing stable, long-term funding is one of the most significant challenges Co-Response programs face. While grants can support launch or expansion, the ultimate goal is for local, county, or state budgets to sustain these programs. The Council of State Governments (CSG) Justice Center identifies four common funding strategies:
While grants can support launch or expansion, the ultimate goal is for local, county, or state budgets to sustain these programs.
Six fillable PDF worksheets, one per phase. Download each one, fill it out in your PDF reader (Adobe Acrobat, Preview, or any modern PDF app), and save it locally. Your responses stay on your computer.
Click Download PDF on any worksheet below to save it to your computer. Open the file in your PDF reader, type directly into the form fields, then save the completed copy. Share it with your team, attach it to grant reports, or revisit it as your program evolves.
Capture the values that emerge from staff, community partners, and the people your program serves.
Download PDFMap your situation, goals, inputs, outputs, and short, intermediate, and long-term outcomes.
Download PDFConnect your program goals and objectives with measurable indicators, data sources, and timelines.
Download PDFWalk through each stage of a typical call and identify your data collection opportunities and gaps.
Download PDFReview your data for completeness, accuracy, and readability with nine Yes/No prompts plus a notes column.
Download PDFReview your program's Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats in a four-quadrant template.
Download PDFHaving worked through some or all of these phases, you've made real progress, whether that means naming your program's values for the first time, tightening your data collection, or putting together a sustainability plan. That work matters.
Evaluation is not a one-time task. Programs evolve, communities change, and funding landscapes shift. The most effective programs build evaluation into their ongoing work by regularly checking in, updating their processes, and sharing what they learn.
Use the checklist below to identify what you've completed and where to focus next. Your selections save to this device.
Thank you for your commitment to understanding and improving your program. The work of Co-Response and alternative response programs makes a real difference, and rigorous, thoughtful evaluation helps ensure that difference is felt, documented, and sustained.
A curated list of reports, toolkits, and research articles on co-response evaluation, implementation, and policy.