Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The sharing of homeland security information is a crucial aspect of modern policing in the United States. This article outlines some of the obstacles to information sharing at the state and local levels, including interagency and intra-agency issues that arise for police agencies. It explores the complexities of information sharing across a highly decentralized policing system. Many police departments lack a formal intelligence function that limits their ability to share information. This article offers an organizational change model using John Kotter’s Leading Change principles that police agencies of any size can follow. It outlines Kotter’s eight-stage process from establishing a sense of urgency through anchoring new approaches in the culture to create a framework for police departments to integrate homeland security information sharing. Its intent is to provide a framework for police agencies to incrementally implement some of the recommendations of the various strategic documents that guide information sharing.

Keywords

information sharing homeland security intelligence intelligence-led policing law enforcement intelligence terrorism

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Civil Liberties Union. (2003). ACLU and Denver officials agree to resolve lawsuit over notorious police “Spy Files.” Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org/news/aclu-and-denver-officials-agree-resolve-lawsuit-over-notorious-police-spy-files

Applegate

(2016). Reassessing the threat of homegrown violent extremism in the United States: Overstated or underestimated? Bethesda, MD: Small Wars Foundation.

Banks

Hendrix

Hickman

Kycklehahn

(2016). National sources of law enforcement employment data. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Braga

Weisburd

(2007). Police innovation and crime prevention: Lessons learned from police research over the past 20 years. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

Bratton

Knobler

(1998). Turnaround: How America’s top cop reversed the crime epidemic. New York, NY: Random House.

Bureau of Justice Assistance. (2016). National gang center. Available from https://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/

Business Executives for National Security. (2016). Domestic security revisited. Washington, DC: Author.

Carter

(2004). Law enforcement intelligence: A guide for state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policings Services.

Carter

(2009). Intelligence-led policing: Conceptual and functional considerations for public policy. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 20, 310-325.

10.

Carter

J. G.

(2015). Inter-organizational relationships and law enforcement information sharing post 11 September 2001. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 522-542.

11.

Carter

J. G.

(2016). Institutional pressures and isomorphism: The impact on intelligence-led policing adoption. Police Quarterly, 19(4), 435-460.

12.

Carter

J. G.

Carter

Chermak

(2013). Intelligence training. Law Enforcement Executive Forum, 13(2), 1-18.

13.

Carter

J. G.

Carter

Chermak

McGarrell

(2017). Law enforcement fusion centers: Cultivating an information sharing environment while safeguarding privacy. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 32(1), 11-27. doi:10.1007/s11896-016-9199-4

14.

Carter

J. G.

Lewandowski

May

G. A.

(2016). Disparity between fusion center web content and self-reported activity. Criminal Justice Review, 41, 335-351. doi:10.1177/0734016816651925

15.

Carter

J. G.

Phillips

S. W.

(2015). Intelligence-led policing and forces of organizational change in the USA. Policing and Society, 25, 333-357. doi:10.1080/10439463.2013.865738

16.

Carter

J. G.

Phillips

S. W.

Gayadeen

S. M.

(2014). Implementing intelligence-led policing: An application of loose-coupling theory. Journal of Criminal Justice, 42, 433-442.

17.

Chermak

Carter

McGarrell

Drew

(2013). Law enforcement’s information sharing infrastructure: A national assessment. Police Quarterly, 16, 211-244.

18.

Cilluffo

Clark

Downing

(2011). Counterterrorism intelligence: Law enforcement perspectives. Washington, DC: Homeland Security Policy Institute, The George Washington University.

19.

Clapper

(2016). Statement for the record—Worldwide threat assessment—Senate armed services committee. Washington, DC: Director of National Intelligence.

20.

Coats

(2017). Statement for the record—Worldwide threat assessment of the US intelligence community—Senate select committee on intelligence. Washington, DC: Director of National Intelligence.

21.

Cope

(2004). ‘Intelligence led policing or policing led intelligence?’ Integrating volume crime analysis into policing. British Journal of Criminology, 44(2), 188-203.

22.

Crank

(2003). Institutional theory of police: A review of the state of the art. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 26, 186-207.

23.

Crowther

(2014). Understanding and overcoming information sharing failures. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 11, 131-154. doi:10.1515/jhsem-2013-0055

24.

Darroch

Mazerolle

(2013). Intelligence-led policing: A comparative analysis of organizational factors influencing innovation uptake. Police Quarterly, 16(1), 3-37.

25.

Darroch

Mazerolle

(2015). Intelligence-led policing: A comparative analysis of community context influencing innovation uptake. Policing and Society, 25(1), 1-24. doi:10.1080/10439463.2013.784312

26.

Desai

(2005). Solving the interagency puzzle. Policy Review, 129, 57-71.

27.

DiMaggio

Powell

(1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 52, 147-160.

28.

Donnermeyer

J. F.

(2002). Local preparedness for terrorism: A view from law enforcement. Police Practice and Research, 3, 347-360.

29.

Executive Office of the President. (2007). National strategy for information sharing in improving terrorism-related information sharing. Washington, DC: Author.

30.

Executive Office of the President. (2012). National strategy for information sharing and safeguarding. Washington, DC: Author.

31.

Government Accountability Office. (2013). Information sharing: Agencies could better coordinate to reduce overlap in field-based activities. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office.

32.

Gilmore

(2003). Forging America’s new normalcy: Securing our homeland, protecting our liberty. Washington, DC: Gilmore Commission.

33.

Greenwood

P. W.

(1979). The RAND criminal investigation study: Its findings and impacts to date. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P6352.html

34.

Guyot

(1979). Bending granite: Attempts to change the rank structure of American police departments. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 7, 253-284.

35.

Henry

(2002). The need for a coordinated and strategic local police approach to terrorism. Police Practice and Research, 3, 319-336.

36.

Holden

(2003). Building a homeland security strategy: State and local law enforcement on the line. Washington, DC: Jerry Lee Center of Criminology, University of Pennsylvania.

37.

Institute for Intergovernmental Research. (2017). Criminal intelligence systems operating policies 28 CFR part 23. Retrieved from https://28cfr.iir.com/Resources/Executive-Order

38.

Information Sharing Environment. (2015). Framework of considerations for streamlining the terrorism-related information sharing and access agreement development process and incorporating privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties best practices. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.dni.gov/files/ISE/documents/DocumentLibrary/Framework_Streamlining_Terrorism-Related_Info_Sharing_Agreements_0.pdf

39.

Jenkins

Liepman

Willis

(2014). Identifying enemies among us. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.

40.

Joyal

(2012). How far have we come? Information sharing, interagency collaboration, and trust within the law enforcement community. Criminal Justice Studies, 25, 357-370.

41.

Kadleck

(2003). Police employee organizations. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 26, 341-351.

42.

Kean

Hamilton

(2004). The 9/11 Commission report: Final report of the national commission on terrorist attacks upon the United States. Washington, DC: National Commission on Terrorist Attacks.

43.

Kelley

(2003). Overcoming information sharing obstacles and complexity. The Police Chief, pp. 24-28. Retrieved from http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/overcoming-information-sharing-obstacles-and-complexity/

44.

Kotter

(2012). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review.

45.

Kruger

Haggerty

(2006). Review essay: Intelligence exchange in policing and security. Policing and Society, 16, 86-91.

46.

Law Enforcement Intelligence Unit. (2002). Law enforcement intelligence unit file guidelines. Sacramento, CA: Author.

47.

Lewandowski

Carter

J. G.

(2017). End-user perceptions of intelligence dissemination from a state fusion center. Security Journal, 30, 467-486.

48.

Lewandowski

Carter

J. G.

Campbell

W. L.

(2017a). The role of people in information- sharing: Perceptions from an analytic unit of a regional fusion center. Police Practice and Research, 18, 174-193. doi:10.1080/15614263.2016.1250631

49.

Lewandowski

Carter

J. G.

Campbell

W. L.

(2017b). The utility of fusion centers to enhance intelligence-led policing: An exploration of end-users. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 12, 177-193. doi:10.1093/police/pax005

50.

Lipsky

(1980). Street-level bureaucrats: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

51.

Lurigio

Skogan

(1994). Winning the hearts and minds of police officers: An assessment of staff perceptions of community policing in Chicago. Crime and Delinquency, 40, 315-330.

52.

Major Cities Chiefs Association. (2010). Major cities chiefs criminal intelligence enterprise. Washington, DC: Author.

53.

McNeill

(2010). More than lip service: Why private sector engagement is essential. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation.

54.

Nagin

D. S.

Solow

R. M.

Lum

(2015). Deterrence, criminal opportunities, and police. Criminology, 53, 74-100.

55.

National Capital Region Fusion Centers. (2016). National capital region fusion centers concept of operations. Washington, DC: Author.

56.

National Information Exchange Model. (2016a). About NIEM. Retrieved from https://www.niem.gov/aboutniem/Pages/niem.aspx

57.

National Information Exchange Model. (2016b). Who uses NIEM? Retrieved from https://www.niem.gov/Pages/who-uses-niem.aspx

58.

Northeast Regional Intelligence Group, and Project Manager—Information Sharing Environment. (2016). Northeast regional intelligence group regional integration and coordination plan draft. Washington, DC: Northeast Regional Intelligence Group, and Project Manager—Information Sharing Environment.

59.

Office of the Director of National Intelligence. (2006). Guidelines to ensure that the information privacy and other legal rights of Americans are protected in the development and use of the information sharing environment. Washington, DC: Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Retrieved from https://www.dni.gov/index.php/ic-legal-reference-book/guidelines-to-ensure-that-the-information-privacy-and-other-legal-rights-of-americans-are-protected-in-the-development-and-use-of-the-information-sharing-environment

60.

Offices of the Inspectors General. (2017). Review of domestic sharing of counterterrorism information. Washington, DC: Offices of the Inspectors General—Intelligence Community, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice.

61.

Office of Justice Programs. (2004). Justice information sharing initiatives: A white paper prepared for the attorney general’s advisory committee of United States attorneys. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

62.

Office of Justice Programs, & U.S. Department of Justice. (2016). Criminal Intelligence Coordinating Council (CICC). Retrieved from http://it.ojp.gov/global/working-groups/cicc

63.

Ortiz

Hendricks

Sugie

(2007). Policing terrorism: The response of local police agencies to homeland security concerns. Criminal Justice Studies, 20, 91-109.

64.

Osborne

(2006). Out of bounds innovation and change in law enforcement intelligence analysis. Washington, DC: Joint Military Intelligence College.

65.

Randol

(2013). An exploratory analysis of terrorism prevention and response preparedness efforts in municipal police departments in the United States: Which agencies participate in terrorism prevention and why? The Police Journal, 86, 158-181.

66.

Ratcliffe

J. H.

(2007). Integrated intelligence and crime analysis: Enhanced information management for law enforcement leaders. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.

67.

Ratcliffe

J. H.

(2008). Intelligence-led policing. Cullompton, UK: Willan.

68.

Ratcliffe

J. H.

Guidetti

(2008). State police investigative structure and the adoption of intelligence-led policing. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 31, 109-128.

69.

Ratcliffe

J. H.

Strang

S. J.

Taylor

R. B.

(2014). Assessing the success factors of organized crime groups. Policing, 37, 206-227. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-03-2012-0095

70.

Sanders

Henderson

(2013). Police “empires” and information technologies: Uncovering material and organisational barriers to information sharing in Canadian police services. Policing and Society, 23, 243-260.

71.

Sanders

Weston

Schott

(2015). Police innovations, “secret squirrels” and accountability: Empirically studying intelligence-led policing in Canada. British Journal of Criminology, 5, 711-729.

72.

Schafer

Burruss

Giblin

(2009). Measuring homeland security innovation in small municipal agencies: Policing in a post-9-11 world. Police Quarterly, 12, 263-288.

73.

Schaefer Morabito

(2010). Understanding community policing as an innovation: Patterns of adoption. Crime & Delinquency, 56(4), 564-587.

74.

Sheptycki

(2004). Review of the influence of strategic intelligence on organized crime policy and practice. London, England: Home Office, Crime and Policing Group.

75.

Shernock

(2009). Introduction to the special issue on policing and homeland security. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 1249-1258.

76.

Skolnick

Bayley

(1986). The new blue line: Police innovation in six American cities. New York, NY: The Free Press.

77.

Sparrow

Moore

Kennedy

(1990). Beyond 911: A new era for policing. New York, NY: Basic Books.

78.

Taylor

Russell

(2012). The failure of police “fusion” centers and the concept of a national intelligence sharing plan. Police Practice and Research, 13, 184-200.

79.

Thacher

(2005). The local role in homeland security. Law & Society Review, 39, 635-676.

80.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2007). Target capabilities list: A companion to the national preparedness guidelines. Washington, DC: Author.

81.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2013). National response framework (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

82.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2003). National criminal intelligence sharing plan. Washington, DC: Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative.

83.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2005). Fusion center guidelines: Developing and sharing information and intelligence in a new era. Washington, DC: Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative.

84.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2008). Baseline capabilities for state and urban area fusion centers: A supplement to the fusion center guidelines. Washington, DC: Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative.

85.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2012). Privacy, civil rights and civil liberties policy development guide for state, local, and tribal justice entities. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative.

86.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2013). The national criminal intelligence sharing plan version 2.0. Washington, DC: Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative.

87.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2015). Analyst professional development road map. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative.

88.

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, & Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2011). Law enforcement management and administrative statistics (LEMAS) 2007. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 20. doi:10.3886/ICPSR31161.v1

89.

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, & Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2015). Law enforcement management and administrative statistics (LEMAS), 2013. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. doi:10.3886/ICPSR36164.v2

90.

U.S. Department of Justice / U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2005). Fusion center guidelines: Developing and sharing information and intelligence in a new world. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative.

91.

U.S. Senate. (2013). Lessons learned from the Boston Marathon bombing: Preparing for and responding to the attack. Washington, DC: Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

92.

Walker

Katz

(2001). The police in America. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

93.

Walsh

(2015). Building better intelligence frameworks through effective governance. International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence, 28, 123-142.

94.

Weisburd

Braga

(2007). Police innovation: Contrasting perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

95.

Weiss

(1997). The communication of innovation in American policing. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 20(2), 292-310.

96.

White

(2004). Defending the homeland: Domestic intelligence, law enforcement and security. Belmont, CA: Thomson-Wadsworth Publishing.

97.

Wormeli

(2014). Developing policies for countering terrorism. Criminology and Public Policy, 28, 493-497.

98.

Zhao

Thurman

Q. C.

Lovrich

N. P.

(1995). Community-oriented policing across the U.S.: Facilitators and impediments to implementation. American Journal of Police, 14(1), 11-28.

Addressing Challenges to Homeland Security Information Sharing in American Policing: Using Kotter’s Leading Change Model

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References