Characteristics and Proximal Outcomes of Calls Made to Suicide Crisis Hotlines in California

Variability Across Centers

Published in: Crisis: The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention, 2016

Posted on on July 14, 2016

by Rajeev Ramchand, Lisa H. Jaycox, Patricia A. Ebener, Marylou Gilbert, Dionne Barnes-Proby, Prodyumna Goutam

Read More

Access further information on this document at Crisis: The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.


Suicide hotlines are commonly used to prevent suicides, although centers vary with respect to their management and operations.


To describe variability across suicide prevention hotlines.


Live monitoring of 241 calls was conducted at 10 suicide prevention hotlines in California.


Call centers are similar with respect to caller characteristics and the concerns callers raise during their calls. The proportion of callers at risk for suicide varied from 3 to 57%. Compliance with asking about current suicide risk, past ideation, and past attempts also ranged considerably. Callers to centers that were part of the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline (NSPL) were more likely to experience reduced distress than callers to centers that were not part of the NSPL.


Because callers do not generally choose the center or responder that will take their call, it is critical to promote quality across call centers and minimize the variability that currently exists. Accrediting bodies, funders, and crisis centers should require that centers continuously monitor calls to ensure and improve call quality.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.