SMART Community Policing Act
The SMART Community Policing Act would amend the federal Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to expand the authorized uses of COPS grant funds. Its core purpose is to support community policing approaches that better respond to people experiencing mental health crises, trauma, homelessness, poverty, and substance use disorders by pairing law enforcement with mental health and emergency response professionals.
The bill specifically authorizes funding for three related program types: mobile crisis teams, co-responder programs, and case management/outreach teams. Mobile crisis teams could include mental health professionals and paramedics responding to certain 911 calls or direct community requests, stabilizing encounters, and connecting people to treatment. Co-responder programs would pair trained officers with behavioral health clinicians or paramedics to de-escalate crises and connect individuals to services. Case management and outreach teams would follow up after crises, help people access services, support treatment compliance, and reduce repeat emergency or law-enforcement contacts.
If enacted, the bill would amend 34 U.S.C. 10381(b) to add three new categories of permissible spending under the COPS grant program. That would give state and local law enforcement agencies, and their public safety partners, a clearer federal funding pathway for crisis response models that integrate behavioral health, paramedicine, and follow-up case management. The bill does not create a new federal program so much as broaden the uses of existing federal policing funds to support crisis intervention and community-based alternatives to traditional police-only responses.
The bill’s stated goals and structure suggest a generally supportive, reform-oriented approach to public safety, emphasizing de-escalation, treatment, and collaboration rather than enforcement alone. Because there are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided materials, there is no direct evidence of formal opposition or support from lawmakers in the record here. Based on the text, the measure appears designed to appeal to both public safety and mental health advocates by framing crisis response as a way to improve outcomes for residents and officers alike.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be whether federal policing funds should be used for behavioral health response models, how much responsibility should shift from police to clinicians and paramedics, and whether these programs are an effective use of grant dollars. Supporters would likely emphasize reduced use-of-force risk, better service linkage, and fewer repeat emergency calls. Skeptics may question costs, implementation burdens for local agencies, training and staffing requirements, and whether the bill could blur the line between law enforcement and social services.