1 / 29

The Changing Shape of Intelligence Led Policing

The Changing Shape of Intelligence Led Policing. David L. Carter, Ph.D. School of Criminal Justice Michigan State University. Topics to Be Covered. Intelligence Led Policing Public-Private Partnerships Homeland Security (All Hazards) Intelligence Baseline Capabilities for Fusion Centers

destiny-espinoza
Download Presentation

The Changing Shape of Intelligence Led Policing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Changing Shape ofIntelligence Led Policing David L. Carter, Ph.D. School of Criminal Justice Michigan State University

  2. Topics to Be Covered • Intelligence Led Policing • Public-Private Partnerships • Homeland Security (All Hazards) Intelligence • Baseline Capabilities for Fusion Centers • Intelligence Requirements • Information Sharing Environment • Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Initiative (NSI) • Controlled Unclassified Information • National Open Source Enterprise • FBI Strategic Execution Teams (SET) • Privacy and the intelligence function • Intelligence training and technical assistance • Online resources

  3. Intelligence Led Policing • Definitions • Executive implementation of the intelligence cycle to support proactive decision making for resource allocation and crime prevention • The collection and analysis of information related to crime and conditions that contribute to crime resulting in an actionable intelligence product intended to aid law enforcement in developing tactical responses to threats and/or strategic planning related to emerging or changing threats

  4. Intelligence Led Policing • Some agencies are struggling with ILP because: • They have not taken the time to learn it • It is conceptual, not prescriptive or “plug and play” • It is requires a commitment to change • Agencies must: • Identify problems and strategic priorities • Conduct a self-assessment of policies and resources • Re-allocate resources • Amend operating policies to meet new needs • ILP helps meet new challenges and responsibilities • Michigan State University ILP Self Assessment

  5. Commitment Training Infrastructure Operations Records Analytic Information Management Capability Sharing

  6. Public-Private Partnerships & National Plans • Virtually all initiatives and sources support public-private partnerships • Integration of the private sector with government initiatives is critical for effective homeland security • Information sharing must be two way • All public-private information sharing must take measures to protect privacy and civil rights • Public sector must be cognizant of the need to protect private sector information

  7. The Community and Private Sector - Issues • Sharing information • Law enforcement agencies sharing Personal Information about individuals with private sector partners • Private sector sharing proprietary information with law enforcement • What unique expertise is possessed by the private sector that would be of value to law enforcement? • Terrorism Liaison Officer/Intelligence Liaison Officer program • Civil libertarians opposed to public-private partnerships with law enforcement because of privacy issues • Providing community education • BJA Communities Against Terrorism Program

  8. Homeland Security/All Hazards Intelligence • The collection and analysis of information concerned with non-criminal domestic threats to critical infrastructure, community health and public safety for the purpose of preventing the threat or mitigating the effects of the threat. • Examples: Bird Flu, natural threats, vulnerable infrastructure • Developing areas include: • Fire Service Intelligence Enterprise • Public Health/Medical Intelligence • Critical Infrastructure/Key Resource (CIKR) Intelligence

  9. Homeland Security/All Hazards Intelligence • Challenges • Thinking about and addressing issues that have law enforcement implications but have not been traditional priorities • Requires law enforcement to learn about new disciplines • In some ways, it “goes against” traditional law enforcement occupational culture • Training becomes a critical element to deal with these issues

  10. Baseline Capabilities for Fusion Centers • Minimum operational standards for fusion centers • Meeting these standards “is considered to have reached a baseline level of capability” • Standards include: • Approved: Law Enforcement/Criminal Intelligence • Drafted: CI/KR • In Development: Public Health • In Development: Fire Service Intelligence Enterprise

  11. Baseline Capabilities • “Achieving the baseline level of capability ensures that a fusion center has the necessary structures, standards, and tools in place to support the gathering, processing, analysis, and dissemination of terrorism information, homeland security information, and law enforcement information.” • Set performance criteria for the Intelligence Cycle • Capabilities include establishing “intelligence requirements”

  12. Intelligence Requirements • A “requirement” is information that is needed to: • Answer a question related to a terrorist or criminal threat or • Make a decision • It is information you do not have andare “required” to get in order to: • Better understand the threat or • To make a more informed decision

  13. Intelligence Requirements • Threat requirements • Standing requirements – information that needs to be collected on an ongoing basis to monitor known threats • Case requirements – information that is needed to determine the existence and character of a threat based tips or SARs • Legal requirements – evidence that is needed to establish reasonable suspicion to create an intelligence record on an individual or organization • Remember: The reason that law enforcement can be in the “intelligence business” is based on their statutory authority to enforce the criminal law

  14. Information Sharing Environment • Mandated by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 • Intent: To increase two-way sharing of terrorism information between intelligence community, law enforcement at all levels and private sector • Critical elements: • Local intelligence capacity • Designated state fusion center • A “consistent lexicon”

  15. Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) • ISE-SAR: Information Sharing Environment-Suspicious Activity Report • Limited to terrorism and crimes with a terrorism nexus • Suspicious Activity - “observed behavior that may be indicative of intelligence gathering or pre-operational planning related to terrorism, criminal, or other illicit intention” • “Other illicit intention” must be criminal • The focus is on behavior • SAR –Official documentation of the observed behavior

  16. Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Issues • Should there be SARs for “all crimes”? • Is a SAR a “criminal intelligence record”? • SAR process must: • Avoid “profiling” • Ensure privacy • Have a criminal nexus • Critics claim that SARs are an excuse to record and retain expressive activity • In some cases this has happened • It has been the basis for lawsuits and complaints

  17. Sensitive But Unclassified Information (SBU) • Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) information – information that does not meet the standards and control requirements of classified information, but should not publicly disseminated for a variety of reasons • Two broad types: • Law Enforcement Sensitive (LES) – may be shared with anyone in law enforcement who has the “right to know” and “need to know” • For Official Use Only (FOUO) – may be shared with anyone who has the “right to know” and “need to know” • 100+ SBU labels among all federal agencies

  18. Transition to Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) • As part of the ISE, new guidelines have been developed for SBU information • Dissemination – sharing information on purpose • Controlled – Making certain information is not inadvertently shared; protecting information • SBU is being replaced with “Controlled Unclassified Information” (CUI) • Recipient must have the “Right to Know” and “Need to Know” the information

  19. Controlled Unclassified Information • Controlled with Standard Dissemination – information must use standard safeguarding procedures and may be shared may be shared with anyone who has the “right to know” and “need to know” • Controlled with Specified Dissemination – information must use standard safeguarding procedures and may be shared may be shared with anyone who is in the specified dissemination category (i.e., designation of “right to know”) and “need to know” • Controlled Enhanced with Specified Dissemination – information must use enhanced safeguarding procedures and may be shared may be shared with anyone who is in the specified dissemination category (i.e., designation of “right to know”) and “need to know”

  20. CUI Policy Issues • The local, state, or tribal law enforcement agency must implement a privacy policy consistent with the Information Sharing Environment privacy guidelines • While CUI cannot be mandated for adoption by state, local and tribal governments, it will become a de facto protocol • Presents new policy and training challenges • The National Archives and Records Administration is responsible for managing CUI • http://www.archives.gov/cui/

  21. Open Source information • Open Sources – Information that is lawfully obtained that does not require legal process or consent • Note: Criminal predicate rule applies to open source information that identifies individuals or organizations • National Open Source Enterprise (NOSE) • All members of the Intelligence Communityrequired to develop open source exploitation • http://www.opensource.gov

  22. FBI Strategic Execution Team (SET) • Enhances Field Intelligence Groups • A more intelligence-driven national and regional approach to the FBI’s criminal investigations • More FBI intelligence reports about criminal matters • Intelligence-based uniform structures, positions, and processes across all FBI field offices, making it easier to work with the FBI • Increased tactical and strategic intelligence assessments for dissemination to local agencies • Overall, more FBI intelligence products

  23. Privacy Issues • “Privacy” actually includes: • Protection of civil liberties • Restrictions on government power • e.g. First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments) • Protection of civil rights • Rights and privileges of citizenship • e.g., Fourteenth Amendment Due Process and Equal Protection clauses • Personal information (both that which identifies individuals and that which describes individuals’ behaviors)

  24. Privacy Issues and ILP • Public concerns • Transparency of intelligence activities • Safeguards to protect rights • Accountability for intelligenceactivities • Application of 28 CFR Part 23 toa criminal intelligence records system • Federal lawsuits under 42 U.S.C., Section 1983, Civil Action for Deprivation of Civil Rights against a law enforcement agency's intelligence practices, including intelligence records

  25. Intelligence Training & Technical Assistance • Master Criminal Intelligence Training Calendar • http://mastercalendar.ncirc.gov/ • Michigan State University Intelligence Program • http://intellprogram.msu.edu • State and Local Anti-Terrorism Training (SLATT) • http://slatt.org • Fusion Center Technical Assistance Program • Accessible via http://www.llis.dhs.gov • National White Collar Crime Center • http://www.nw3c.org • Federal Law Enforcement Training Center • http://www.fletc.gov • International Association of Law Enforcement Intelligence Analysts • http://www.ialeia.org

  26. Intelligence and ILP Resources • BJA National Criminal Intelligence Resource Center • Accessible on RISSNET Portal and LEO • http://www.ncirc.gov • Global Intelligence Working Group • http://it.ojp.gov • Lessons Learned Information Sharing • http://www.llis.dhs.gov • National Criminal Justice Reference Service • http://www.ncjrs.gov • Program Manager-Information Sharing Environment • http://www.ise.gov • Law Enforcement Intelligence Unit • http://leiu-homepage.org/index.php

  27. QUESTIONS and COMMENTS David L. Carter, Ph.D. School of Criminal Justice Michigan State University carterd@msu.edu

More Related