College of Policing National Sift / Online Assessment Process The National Sift: Eligibility, Application and Behavioural Screening Syllabus

What are the four values in the Competency and Values Framework?

Impartiality, Integrity, Public Service, and Transparency.

What structured approach is recommended for writing competency evidence answers?

The STAR method: Situation, Task, Action, Result — describe the context, what needed doing, the specific actions YOU took, and the measurable outcome, keeping focus on personal contribution and CVF-aligned behaviours.

What is the purpose of the Equal Opportunities monitoring section of the application?

To collect demographic data (ethnicity, sex, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation) to monitor fairness, diversity and representation in recruitment. It is normally confidential, not seen by assessors, and not used to score the application.

Define 'positive action' as used in UK police recruitment.

Lawful measures under the Equality Act 2010 to encourage and support under-represented groups (e.g. extra outreach, mentoring, workshops) to apply and compete. It is NOT positive discrimination — selection must still be on merit.

What is the key legal difference between positive action and positive discrimination in policing?

Positive action (lawful) provides support/encouragement to under-represented groups before selection but appointment is on merit. Positive discrimination — choosing or favouring someone in selection purely because of a protected characteristic — is unlawful in the UK.

What is the role of the declaration/honesty statement at the end of a police application?

The applicant confirms that all information given is true, accurate and complete. Signing falsely, omitting material facts, or providing misleading information constitutes a breach of integrity and is grounds for rejection or dismissal at any stage.

Why is integrity weighted so heavily in the National Sift's honesty declarations?

Because policing relies on public trust and officers exercise significant powers; any dishonesty — even on minor matters — undermines the fundamental value of integrity and is treated as a serious disqualifier, often regardless of the rest of the application's strength.

What is the purpose and design intent of behavioural screening in the National Sift?

To assess whether a candidate's typical behaviours, attitudes and values align with the CVF and the demands of policing — screening out those whose behavioural profile poses risk (e.g. poor integrity, low resilience) and identifying suitability beyond knowledge/skills.

What format do behavioural screening questionnaires typically take?

Self-report questionnaires using rating scales (e.g. Likert agree/disagree), situational judgement items, and forced-choice or 'most/least like me' statements designed to measure personality traits and behavioural tendencies relevant to policing.

List common behavioural domains assessed in police behavioural screening.

Integrity/honesty, resilience and emotional control, conscientiousness/reliability, public service motivation, teamwork/collaboration, problem-solving/decision-making, openness to diversity and inclusion, and self-awareness.

What is a situational judgement test (SJT) and how is it used in behavioural screening?

An SJT presents realistic work scenarios with possible responses; candidates rate or rank them by appropriateness. It measures judgement and alignment of behaviour with policing values, predicting how a candidate would act on the job.

What is 'social desirability bias' in the context of behavioural questionnaires?

The tendency of respondents to answer in a way they believe is socially acceptable or favourable rather than truthfully, to appear in a more positive light to the assessor.

What is 'faking good' (impression management) and why do behavioural screens try to detect it?

'Faking good' is deliberately answering to present an unrealistically positive image. Detection matters because exaggerated responses reduce the validity of the screen and may hide poor fit; inconsistency between linked items can flag it.

How do behavioural questionnaires detect inconsistency or faking?

By including repeated or reverse-worded items, lie/social-desirability scales, and forced-choice formats. Contradictory answers to similar questions, or implausibly perfect 'ideal' profiles, raise consistency flags that can invalidate or query a response.

What is a 'consistency index' or 'response consistency check' in psychometric screening?

A statistical check comparing answers to similar or paired items; a high inconsistency score suggests careless, random, or dishonest responding and can lead to the result being treated as unreliable.

Why does answering behavioural questions too quickly or with extreme responses risk a poor outcome?

Extreme or contradictory rapid answers can trigger inconsistency and social-desirability flags, and may not reflect genuine, considered behaviour — reducing the authenticity the screen rewards and risking an invalid profile.

What strategy gives the most authentic, considered responses in behavioural screening?

Answer honestly and from genuine personal experience, read each item carefully, avoid second-guessing the 'ideal' answer, use the full range of the scale where true, and keep your responses internally consistent across similar questions.

Why is trying to game a behavioural questionnaire by giving 'perfect' answers counter-productive?

Forced-choice and consistency designs penalise implausibly perfect profiles; faking raises social-desirability flags, and even if passed, a mismatched true personality surfaces later in training/probation, making authenticity the more reliable strategy.

How are National Sift scores typically weighted and combined across sections?

Eligibility acts as a pass/fail gate; competency/CVF evidence and behavioural/SJT components are each scored against defined criteria and combined (often as a weighted total or competency-by-competency standard) to produce an overall sift score used for ranking.

What is the difference between a 'gate' (pass/fail) criterion and a 'scored' criterion in the sift?

A gate criterion (e.g. eligibility, integrity) must be met or the application is automatically rejected regardless of other scores. A scored criterion contributes points toward a total/ranking where higher performance is rewarded.

How is an overall weighted sift score conceptually calculated when sections carry different weights?

As a weighted sum: $S = \sum_{i=1}^{n} w_i x_i$, where $x_i$ is the score on section $i$ and $w_i$ its weight, with $\sum_{i=1}^{n} w_i = 1$. The result is compared to the pass mark/ranking threshold.

What is a 'pass mark' in the National Sift and how does it function?

A predefined minimum standard or score a candidate must reach to be deemed successful. Candidates below the pass mark are rejected; those at or above it progress, subject to ranking and available places.

What does it mean to be 'ranked against the cohort' in police recruitment?

Even after passing the sift, candidates may be ordered by score relative to others applying in the same window (the cohort); higher-ranked candidates are invited forward first, so passing does not always guarantee progression if places are limited.

Explain how a candidate could pass the sift yet not progress in a particular recruitment window.

If selection is capped by available training places, candidates are ranked by score; those above the pass mark but below the cut-off rank for that intake may be held in a pool, deferred to a later cohort, or unsuccessful for that window.

What is a percentile rank and how does it relate to a candidate's standing in the cohort?

A percentile rank indicates the percentage of the cohort scoring at or below a candidate. For example, a candidate at the $80^{\text{th}}$ percentile scored higher than about $80\%$ of applicants, informing where they sit against the cut-off.

What feedback do candidates typically receive after the National Sift?

Feedback is usually limited — often a pass/fail outcome and, in some cases, high-level indication of areas (e.g. which competencies fell short). Detailed item-level feedback on psychometric/behavioural screens is generally not provided to protect test integrity.

What is a 'waiting period' (reapplication period) after failing a police sift or assessment?

A mandatory period — commonly 6 months (and sometimes up to 12 months for the national online assessment) — that an unsuccessful candidate must wait before reapplying or re-sitting, allowing time to develop before another attempt.

Why are reapplication waiting periods imposed after an unsuccessful sift attempt?

To ensure candidates have time to genuinely develop the required competencies/behaviours rather than simply re-sitting repeatedly, to protect test security/validity, and to manage recruitment volumes fairly across cohorts.

What are 'reasonable adjustments' at the sift stage and under what law are they required?

Modifications to the assessment process for candidates with a disability or specific needs (e.g. extra time, screen readers, modified formats) to ensure fair access. They are required under the Equality Act 2010's duty to make reasonable adjustments.

Give three examples of reasonable adjustments that may be offered during the online sift.

Examples: additional time to complete tests, assistive technology/screen-reader compatibility, alternative formats (large print, coloured overlays for dyslexia), rest breaks, or a quieter/supported environment for the assessment.

What should a candidate do to obtain a reasonable adjustment, and does requesting one disadvantage them?

They should disclose their needs and request adjustments early — usually at application — providing supporting information if asked. Requesting adjustments must not disadvantage the candidate; the aim is a level playing field, not lowered standards.

How does the duty to make reasonable adjustments interact with maintaining consistent sift standards?

Adjustments change HOW a candidate is assessed (access/conditions), not the standard or competencies being measured. The required pass mark and behavioural criteria remain the same, ensuring fairness without compromising the validity of the screening.