Areaka: Welcome back to another episode of Accreditation Made Easy. I am your host, Areaka Jewell. Today we're talking about something that tends to spark a little debate whenever I bring it up. That is, does signing a policy count as training? I've had some very interesting conversations about this over the years and Some people have some very strong opinions. One argument I hear frequently is that signing a policy confirms an employee received it, acknowledged it, and understands that they're responsible for following it. And that's an important point, especially in law enforcement, where policy acknowledgements can play a huge role in internal affairs investigations and discipline proceedings. If an employee violates a policy, the agency may need to demonstrate that the employee received it and acknowledged it. I've even had people tell me that a signed policy holds up in court just like training would. Now, I'm not here to debate the legal implications of a policy signature. That's a total separate conversation. But what I want to talk about is whether Signatures demonstrate training when an accreditation standard specifically requires it. Because I think those are two different things. A policy acknowledgement documents that someone received or acknowledged a policy, whereas training is intended to help someone understand the information and how to apply it. Both are important, but I don't automatically consider them interchangeable. And here's why. Think about the last time you had a bunch of documents sitting in your PowerDMS inbox waiting for signatures. Maybe there were five, twenty, fifty, or think about the new employee who has maybe a hundred or a couple hundred documents waiting to be signed in their inbox. Do you really believe that everyone carefully reads every single word before clicking that signature button? I'm sure some do, but don't get me wrong. We also know that there's plenty of people trying to get through the inbox as quickly as possible. Even if you require a minimum amount of time before someone can sign, because you can do that too, that doesn't guarantee they're actually reading and understanding the information. So while that signature gives us documentation of acknowledgement, it doesn't necessarily tell us what the employee learned. And that's where the accreditation requirement comes into play. If a standard specifically says employees must be trained on a policy or procedure, an assessor may expect something more than just a signature record. So, what can we do about it? Well, training doesn't always have to mean everyone gathering in a classroom for an hour. There's several different practical options, and some can be built right into the processes that you're already using. Let me share five of them. first, you can add a knowledge assessment to the policy, you know, a test. If you're already distributing policies through PowerDMS, consider adding a short multiple choice test, maybe 10 questions focused on the most important requirements. I'm not talking about trick questions or trying to make the test difficult, and little side note here chat GPT or a similar Platform can create these types of tests for you in literal seconds. It's a game changer. Just something to think about before you write off doing tests because of how long it will take you to write the test and multiple choice answers. Anyways, the goal is to get employees to engage with the information and demonstrate some sort of understanding of it. Now, a passing score doesn't necessarily guarantee they're going to remember everything in six months from now, but it Does give you something more meaningful than just a signature. Number two, create a PowerDMS training course. This is especially useful when there's already online training available on the topic. You could create a basic course that includes your policy as the first element. And the second element would be a link to the online training. That way, employees are reviewing the actual policy and receiving the additional instruction on the subject. Just make sure that you have documentation showing they completed the training because just the hyperlink sending that out to them, that's not going to demonstrate that they took the course that included your policy. Number three, develop a short PowerPoint presentation, and I mean short and simple. You don't need to have fancy graphics or even a professional narrator, which by the way, not to keep plugging AI, but it can do this for you as well. Just saying. The presentation can just walk through the key points of the policy, particularly anything employees need to understand or apply. And then you set the presentation to play automatically, almost like a video, and distribute it through PowerDMS. You might even You might even set a minimum viewing time based on the length of the presentation, but remember, viewing time alone doesn't prove understanding. And if appropriate, maybe consider adding a few questions to reinforce the important points. Number four, conduct the training during a shift briefing. Sometimes we get so focused on technology that we overlook one of the simplest options, and that's just to have a supervisor review the policy during shift briefing. They can explain important requirements, they can discuss how to apply it in actual situations, and they're there to answer any questions that the staff may For some topics, that interaction may be more useful than having employees complete something independently. And from an accreditation perspective, be sure it gets documented. Use like a sign-in roster that identifies the training topic, the date, and who attended. And then of course include any additional documentation that the standard requires. Again, we don't need to make it complicated. It just needs to demonstrate what occurred. And number five, consider power recall. If you're familiar with PowerDMS, you may have heard about Power Recall, which uses flashcards that are AI generated from your policy content to help reinforce important information. I like the concept because it focuses on something that we don't always give enough attention to, and that's retention, repetition, actually, and retention. It's one thing to read the policy today. It's another thing to remember the important parts when you need them three months from now. Flashcards and other knowledge reinforcement activities like power recall, they can help keep that information fresh. Now. I wouldn't automatically treat power recall activity as proof of training. You need to understand what records are available and whether they satisfy the accreditation requirement. But as a way to reinforce knowledge, it's worth considering. So those are the five options that I am presenting to you. And here's what I want you to notice. They don't all accomplish the exact same thing. Some are checking knowledge, some provide instruction. Some encourage discussion and others reinforce what employees have already learned. That's why the training method should match what you're trying to accomplish and what the standard requires. this brings me to one more distinction I think is worth considering: exposure, acknowledgement, comprehension, and retention. Exposure means someone had an opportunity to receive the information. acknowledgement means they confirmed receipt or accepted responsibility for the policy. Comprehension means they understand what the policy is telling them. And retention means they can recall that information later when they need it. Those are four different things. And a signature doesn't necessarily demonstrate all four. Neither does a quiz for that matter. Someone can pass a test today and forget the information next month. That's why I think it's important to consider what the training is supposed to accomplish instead of simply looking for the quickest way to check a box. But here's where I want to be careful about creating unnecessary work. If the accreditation standard only requires policy distribution and acknowledgement, then demonstrate Distribution and acknowledgement. On the other hand, if the standard specifically requires training or training on the policy, don't automatically assume the acknowledgement record is sufficient. Look at the wording of the requirement, Consider what the training is intended to accomplish and make sure your documentation demonstrates that the required activity actually occurred. Sometimes your agency may already be providing the training, you just need to document it more effectively. So here's my challenge for you this week. Find one standard in your assessment that specifically requires training on a policy. Take a look at the proof you've attached. Is it a training roster? Is it a course completion record? Is it a knowledge assessment or is it simply a list of employees who signed a policy? If it's just the signatures, ask yourself whether that documentation demonstrates what the standard is asking for. And if you're not sure, take another look at the requirement before deciding whether you need something additional. Of course, I've included the five training approaches we've discussed today in this week's companion document. I'm calling it policy receipt is not training. So look it up. You can refer back to them when you're working on your files. And remember, I'm not suggesting policy signatures aren't important. They absolutely are. But when the standard says training on the policy, make sure you can demonstrate the training. All right, friends, thanks so much for joining another episode of Accreditation Made Easy. If you're not already signed up for my free helpful tips in this podcast inside the Accreditation Academy content hub, head over to www.com.com. accreditationacademy.net forward slash sign up. And if you're already signed up but know someone else who could benefit from this, please consider sharing this episode or the sign-up link with them. All right friends, until next time, let's keep making accreditation easy, one step at a time.