Bureau of Justice Assistance ofJustice Bureau ofJustice Programs Office U.S. N EW R E A L I TI E S ofJustice Department Law Enforcement in the Post­9/ 11 Era Architecture Intelligence The New Policing: Intelligence-Led Bureau of Justice Assistance U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs 810 Seventh Street NW. Washington, DC 20531 Alberto R. Gonzales Attorney General Regina B. Schofield Assistant Attorney General Domingo S. Herraiz Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance Office of Justice Programs Partnerships for Safer Communities www.ojp.usdoj.gov Bureau of Justice Assistance www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA NCJ 210681 Written by Marilyn Peterson This document was prepared by the International Association of Chiefs of Police under cooperative agreement number 2003–DD–BX–K002 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Pr ograms, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Intelligence-Led Policing: The New Intelligence Architecture September 2005 NCJ 210681 Bureau of Justice Assistance Acknowledgments Post­9/11 Policing Project Staff ■ National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives The Post-9/11 Policing Project is the work of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), Jessie Lee, Executive Director, served as National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA), National NOBLE’s Project Director and conducted most Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives staff work. (NOBLE), Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA), and Police Foundation. Jerry Needle, Director of Programs ■ Major Cities Chiefs Association and Research, IACP, provided overall project direction. Dr. Phyllis McDonald, Division of Public Safety ■ International Association of Chiefs of Police Leadership, Johns Hopkins University, directed the work of the Major Cities Chiefs Association. Phil Lynn served as IACP’s Project Director, The MCCA team included Denis O’Keefe, managed development and publication of the Consultant; Corinne Martin, Program four Promising Practices Briefs, and authored Coordinator; and Shannon Feldpush. Mutual Aid: Multijurisdictional Partnerships for Meeting Regional Threats. Andrew Morabito Dr. Sheldon Greenberg, Director of the Division coauthored Engaging the Private Sector To of Public Safety Leadership, coauthored Promote Homeland Security: Law Enforcement- Engaging the Private Sector To Promote Private Security Partnerships, and analyzed Homeland Security: Law Enforcement-Private Post-9/11 survey data. Col. Joel Leson, Director, Security Partnerships. IACP Center for Police Leadership, authored Assessing and Managing the Terrorism Threat. ■ The Police Foundation Walter Tangel served as initial Project Director. Edwin Hamilton directed Police Foundation Dr. Ellen Scrivner, Deputy Superintendent, project activities and managed Post-9/11 survey Bureau of Administrative Services, Chicago formatting and analysis, assisted by Rob Davis. Police Department, contributed to all phases of Foundation consultants included Inspector Garth project design and cofacilitated the Post-9/11 den Heyer of the New Zealand Police and Steve Roundtables with Jerry Needle. Marilyn Johnson of the Washington State Patrol. Peterson, Management Specialist–Intelligence, New Jersey Division of Criminal Justice, authored this monograph—Intelligence-Led Promising Practices Reviews Policing: The New Intelligence Architecture. Promising Practices drafts were critiqued and enriched by a series of practitioners/content experts, including ■ National Sheriffs’ Association Richard Cashdollar, Executive Director of Public Fred Wilson, Director of Training, directed Safety, City of Mobile, AL; George Franscell, NSA project activities, organized and managed Attorney-at-Law, Franscell, Strickland, Roberts and Post-9/11 Roundtables, and worked closely with Lawrence, Los Angeles, CA; Mary Beth Michos, State IACP staff throughout the course of the project. Mutual Aid Coordinator, Prince William County, VA; NSA project consultants included Chris Tutko, David Bostrom, Manager, Community Policing Director of NSA’s Neighborhood Watch Project; Consortium, IACP; John P. Chase, Chief of Staff, John Matthews; and Dr. Jeff Walker, University Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection, of Arkansas, Little Rock. Department of Homeland Security; John M. Clark, iii Assistant Vice President/Chief of Police, Burlington ■ Thomas N. Faust, Executive Director, National Northern Santa Fe Railroad; John A. LeCours, Sheriffs’ Association Director/Intelligence, Transport Canada; Ronald W. Olin, Chief of Police, Lawrence, KS; ■ Jessie Lee, Executive Director, National Ed Jopeck, Analyst, Veridian; Jerry Marynik, Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives Administrator, State Terrorism Threat Assessment Center, California Department of Justice; and Bart ■ Thomas C. Frazier, Executive Director, Major Johnson, Office of Counter-Terrorism, New York Cities Chiefs Association State Police. ■ Hubert Williams, President, The Police Foundation Executive Oversight Bureau of Justice Assistance Guidance The Post-9/11 Policing Project was initially We gratefully acknowledge the technical guidance conceptualized by the Office of Justice Programs, and patient cooperation of executives and program U.S. Department of Justice. Since its inception, the managers who helped fashion project work: James H. project has been guided throughout by the chief Burch II, Deputy Director; Michelle Shaw, Policy executive officers of the partner associations: Advisor; and Steven Edwards, Ph.D., Senior Policy Advisor for Law Enforcement. ■ Daniel N. Rosenblatt, Executive Director, International Association of Chiefs of Police iv Contents Acknowledgments . .iii Executive Summary . .vii Introduction . .1 Intelligence Issues . .3 How We Got Where We Are Today: An Overview of Intelligence History . .5 Where We Stand Today . .9 What We Need To Do . .15 Appendix A: Information Sharing and Information Technology Resources . .25 Appendix B: Sources of Intelligence Products . .29 Appendix C: Intelligence Training and Resources . .35 Appendix D: Criminal Intelligence Model Policy . .39 Endnotes . .45 Bibliography . .49 v Executive Summary he terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 revealed community infrastructures such as those related to Tthe life-and-death importance of enhancing U.S. food, agriculture, public health, telecommunications, intelligence operations. Since that day, a tremendous energy, transportation, and banking are now seen as amount of attention has been focused on the need for potential terrorist targets. As a result, parts of the constructive changes in law enforcement intelligence. community that previously did not receive much notice from state and local law enforcement agencies Intelligence operations have been reviewed, studied, now require keen attention. Personnel who work in and slowly but steadily transformed. Most efforts have these and other key industries are now partners in focused on reorganizing intelligence infrastructures at terrorism prevention and crime control. Similarly, the federal level; however, corresponding efforts have community- and problem-oriented policing must been made to enhance state and local law enforcement be integrated into intelligence operations to address intelligence operations. Such enhancements make it conventional crime issues. Engaging and collaborating possible for state and local law enforcement agencies with the community at all levels are essential. to play a role in homeland security. Perhaps more important, improvements to intelligence operations Intelligence-led policing is a collaborative enterprise help local law enforcement respond to “traditional” based on improved intelligence operations and crimes more effectively. community-oriented policing and problem solving, which the field has considered beneficial for many Because effective intelligence operations can be years. To implement intelligence-led policing, police applied equally well to terrorist threats and crimes in organizations need to reevaluate their current policies the community, homeland security and local crime and protocols. Intelligence must be incorporated into prevention are not mutually exclusive. Officers “on the planning process to reflect community problems the beat” are an excellent resource for gathering and issues. Information sharing must become a policy, information on all kinds of potential threats and not an informal practice. Most important, intelligence vulnerabilities. However, the intelligence operations must be contingent on quality analysis of data. The of state and local law enforcement agencies often are development of analytical techniques, training, and plagued by a lack of policies, procedures, and training technical assistance needs to be supported. for gathering and assessing essential information. Because of size and limited budgets, not all agencies To correct this problem, fundamental changes are can employ intelligence analysts or intelligence officers. needed in the way information is gathered, assessed, Nonetheless, all law enforcement agencies have a role and