Paul F. Kendall General Counsel Office of Justice Programs, United States Department of Justice

Defense @ E-Business Executive Summit

”Distributed Networked Computing for a Secure Defense”

Presentation by

The Office of Justice ProgramsInformation Technology Integration Initiative

Paul F. Kendall

General Counsel

Office of Justice Programs, United States Department of Justice

Crystal City Hilton Arlington, Virginia

April 24, 2000

Integrated Information Sharing

Development of an Intergovernmental Justice Information Architecture

Four Topics

• Importance of criminal justice leaders in integration

• Importance for Industry• Department of Justice’s integration and

privacy initiative• Challenges, recommendations, and

possibilities for collaboration

Can America’s Justice Enterprise Be Integrated?

YES

Why?

Crime and Conflict

ResolutionResponse ReentryPrevention

Data/Information/Knowledge

“Community Knowledge Management”

“Information for Safe Communities”

What is “Integration?”

• What is “integration?”– A series of functions designed to enable the

timely and efficient sharing of information within and between agencies.

– Generally, the ability to input and seamlessly access and share critical information at key decision points throughout the justice (or government) process.

What is “Integration?”

• “Integration” encompasses:– horizontal information sharing between justice

and public safety agencies within a jurisdiction or at a certain level of government (I.e. county to county) and

– vertical information sharing between justice and public safety agencies at the local level, state level, and federal level.

What can Integration Do?

• Examples from state and local leaders:– Eliminate redundant data entry by entering information,

once, at the point of origin and sharing this information– Increase accuracy and timeliness of available information– Ensure access to information needed to perform their

jobs• Resource allocation and management• Treatment assessment and provision • Integrated sanctions

– Research for crime prevention– Crime mapping

Why Is Integration Important?

• To improve justice officials’ access to information necessary to respond to criminal activity

• To improve the operation and efficiency of the justice process; Law enforcement, prosecution, defense, courts, corrections, probation and parole to resolve the consequences of criminal activity

Practical Goal

• Mitigate any advantage or disadvantage resulting from inefficiencies in the flow information throughout the justice system.

“Community Knowledge Management”

“Information for Safe Communities”

Criminal Justice Leaders

• State and local criminal justice leaders are positioned to impact the level of information sharing

• In the wake of Y2K, integration is the focus of technology planning and funding

• It is essential for all component leaders to engage in a nation-wide integration effort

Importance to Industry

• DOJ encouraging broad collaboration

• Federal support will become more targeted for interoperable systems

• Federal emphasis on enterprise wide systems will be standards based

• Markets will be less fractured as broad based integration becomes more common

Industry Input

• Industry input is critical to demonstrating technological possibilities

• Industry is key to developing enterprise wide solutions

• Industry ultimately will drive standards development

Department of JusticeInitiative

Justice Integration

•Development of an Intergovernmental Justice Information Architecture

•Integrated Information Sharing

•Interoperability

Department of Justice Initiative

• To propel the criminal justice system into the 21st Century, there must be greater cooperation between all participants, all levels of government and between government and private industry

Information Technology Investment

• 5 years ago: $10 million dollars out of a $600 million dollar budget

• Today: $750 million dollars out of a $4 billion dollar budget

Attorney General’s Focus

• Cooperation between federal, state, and local government and private industry

• An end to smokestack development

• Protection of privacy and security

OJP’s Vision

• To improve the effectiveness and fairness of the criminal justice enterprise through better information sharing among all its components

By

• Leveraging use of grant dollars• Developing strategies for development of

intergovernmental information architectures

Vision to RealityDevelopment of Policy Goals• Bottom up approach

• Listen

• Careful attention to state and local needs

• Incorporate “what is going on”

• Highlight innovation

To Attain Objectives

• Use funding streams as a lever• Build on existing efforts• Maximize collaboration, provide information on

best practices• Mobilize the Department of Justice • Greater autonomy• Minimize federal mandates

What OJP Did

• Outreach to state and local governments and to industry and national organizations

• How--series of conferences as well as additional forums for state and local input

• Building broad based consensus on this collaborative approach toward achieving integration and identifying specific actions needed to facilitate integration.

OJP’s Response

• Develop a strategic plan to facilitate integration through grant funding guidelines

• Develop targeted technical assistance• Develop a national clearinghouse for integrated

justice information• Support standards establishment• Develop guidelines and tools to address

information privacy issues associated with integrated systems

Current OJP Projects

• National Integration Resource Center• Industry Working Group• Interoperability Standards

– Collaboration between OJP, the Global Criminal Justice Information Network, NIJ, NIST, PSWN

• Identifying the IJIS Market• Privacy Initiative

National Information Resource Center

• Key component of Integration Initiative

• Centerpiece for information on best practices and virtual community for supporting integration

• Communication foundation for project collaboration

• Start-up anticipated Summer 2000

Industry Working Group

• Initiated in 1999 - Headed by Mr. Paul Wormeli of Viking Technology, Inc.

• Projects:– Industry presentation on how to design an integrated

justice system

– White paper on improving procurement process

– Participation in standards initiative and NASIRE architecture project implementation

– Development of an IJIS Institute

Standards Initiative

• Focus is to identify current interoperability standards and develop consensus within the justice and public safety communities around wireless and information technology standards

Standards Initiative

• Related Standards Projects– NCSC/COSCA/NACM Functional Standards

Initiative– Court XML Initiative - COSCA/NACM/Legal

XML partnership to develop XML standard for e-filing

– Global Criminal Justice Information Network Infrastructure Subgroup

– NASIRE Architecture Template

Identifying the IJIS Market• National Conferences

– solidifying “niche” markets, e.g., NAJIS conference for prosecutors, NCSC Court Technology Conference

• OJP’s National Associations Conference– 28+ justice and affiliated associations all with

integrated information systems as a top priority

• Governance Structure Survey & Follow-on– Look into state and local government to determine level

of planning and organization

OJP Privacy Initiative

• When encouraging the integration of justice systems and sharing of justice information, it is necessary to consider information privacy policy

Can America’s Justice Enterprise Be Integrated?From a Privacy Perspective

Should it?

Answer

YES

Technology has Created a Tension

• Between– The needs of the justice system– The new capabilities of interoperability– The current rules governing collection and

sharing of information

• And– The privacy concerns of citizens and

organizations

Privacy Initiative

• Integrated Justice is creating a new climate of information collection, use, and sharing.

• The information privacy discussion must be broadened to address the capabilities of today’s (and tomorrow’s) information technology.

Privacy Initiative

• Traditionally, justice information privacy policy has focused on the criminal history record, intelligence information, and juvenile justice information

• There are existing laws and policies that govern these types of information and traditional methods of its use

OJP Privacy Initiative• Collaborative Effort:

– OJP Integrated Justice Privacy Initiative

– Office of the Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner

– National Criminal Justice Association

– Center for Society, Law and Justice (UNO)

– FBI

– Global Criminal Justice Information Network Advisory Committee Privacy Subgroup.

OJP Privacy Initiative

• GOAL:– to provide tools to the field to facilitate the

successful implementation of privacy principles in new and ongoing justice information systems in state, local, federal, and tribal government [FIELD PRODUCTS]

– to initiate a national and international debate on justice information privacy [NATIONAL DIALOGUE]

OJP Privacy Initiative 2000 Projects

• Field Products:– Privacy Design Principles for Integrated Justice

[available - comments welcome]– Integrated Justice System Privacy Impact

Assessment [Workshop 6/8&9]– Justice and Public Safety Public Access

Guideline [Workshop Fall, 2000]

OJP Privacy Initiative 2000 Projects

• National Dialogue Projects:– Ethical and Privacy Implications for Integrated

Justice - Think Tank– Justice Anecdotes - Marketing Integrated

Justice and Privacy.

Security Concerns

• State and local governments do not fully recognize security risks

• State and local governments tend to operate in denial – lack of resources to cope with security

• State and local governments need to plan for security and privacy protections up front

• More education is needed on these technology solutions

Currently Available Products

• Business Case for Integration

• NASIRE Architecture Design

• State and Local Governance Structure Survey [May 2000]

• Privacy Design Principles for Integrated Justice

Challenges to Achieving Integrated Justice

• Institute appropriate representative bodies to govern integrated justice

• Develop enterprise plans – Partner with other components to develop

strategic plans– Pay close attention to regional strategic plans

and architectural approaches when choosing products

Challenges

• Seek and obtain active participation from the user community– Training– “Buy-in”

• Plan for the future of integrated Justice– Funding– Policy, including privacy and security

So? Can it be Done?

• Focus on the needs of the users• Focus on the needs of the users• Craft leadership as support and facilitation• Pay close attention to issues of Security and Privacy • Collaboration on enterprise wide information

architectures

[email protected]