2021 Symposium Programs & Tracks
The following is the final agenda of the 2021 SEARCH Symposium. Hover your mouse over each session for details on Speakers and Topical Abstracts. Links to videos of all Symposium sessions are available, as well as links to PDFs of most speaker presentations. (Last agenda revision: August 11, 2021)
All times are Central Daylight Time
Day 1 – July 13, 2021
Welcome and Introductions
Overview of the Symposium: Objectives, Perspectives and ApproachMs. Leslie Moore, Chair, SEARCH Board of Directors, and Director, Information Services Division, Kansas Bureau of Investigation
Ms. Kathryn Monfreda, Vice Chair, SEARCH Board of Directors, and Director, Department of Statewide Services, Alaska Department of Public Safety
Mr. David J. Roberts, Executive Director, SEARCH
Keeping Up with Today’s Technology Isn’t Good Enough
TECHNOLOGY KEYNOTE: Keeping Up with Today’s Technology Isn’t Good EnoughMr. Eddie L. Reyes, Director of Public Safety Communications, Prince William County, Virginia
The ongoing evolution in technology and innovation is leading the way all of us do business. Everyone is struggling to keep up with the pace of change, especially in the current labor-strapped world that we live in today. This presentation discusses how innovation and technology can make the difference between success or failure of a mission or organization. Director Reyes, with a lengthy career in public safety technologies, will highlight notable trends in technology and innovation that include hand-held devices, wearables, the cloud, augmented reality, virtual reality, text-to-voice interfaces, and artificial intelligence, just to name a few.
Technology Keynote – Reyes
Technology Keynote Video
|Workshop Series 1||10:00AM-11:00AM||
Improving Interstate Offender Supervision and the Role of CJISTechnology Workshop 1 – Eskridge, Donnelly, Underwood, Mandala
Improving Interstate Offender Supervision and the Role of CJISMr. Mark Perbix, Director of Programs, SEARCH (Facilitator)
Mr. Allen Eskridge, Public Policy and Operations Director, Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision
Mr. Xavier Donnelly, ICOTS Project Manager, Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision
Ms. MaryLee Underwood, Executive Director, Interstate Commission for Juveniles
Mr. Joe Mandala, Chief Information Officer, Kansas Bureau of Investigation
Annually more than 100,000 offenders under supervision move to another state. Supervision then becomes the joint responsibility of the state in which the sentence was imposed and the state in which the offender resides, but it is the legal responsibility of the sentencing state supervision agency to ensure compliance with the terms of the offender’s sentence. Managing the transfer of these offenders is the responsibility of the Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision (ICAOS) and the Interstate Commission for Juveniles (ICJ). To make supervision officials in both states more effective, ICAOS and ICJ have joined with SEARCH to establish several monitoring mechanisms that rely on the use of state and national CJIS system resources. This session discusses why supervision officials need access to certain CJIS information, how it is used, and how they have accomplished this with the state of Kansas Department of Corrections and the Kansas Bureau of Investigation.
Technology Workshop 1 Video
Taking Positive Steps to Improve the St. Louis Justice SystemPolicy Workshop 1 Video
Taking Positive Steps to Improve the St. Louis Justice SystemMs. Debbie Allen, Executive Director, Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, City of St. Louis, MO
Judge Michael K. Mullen, 22nd Judicial Circuit Court, Missouri and Chair, Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee, City of St. Louis, MO
Mr. John Rollins, CJIS Trainer, Missouri State Highway Patrol
Mr. Gregory Ramos, Sherman & Howard
The City of St. Louis, Missouri, is committed to improving the justice process and has established a multi-year and multi-faceted program to make system improvements. Success is built around a collaborative environment embodied in the City’s Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC), which the City formally established by ordinance to engage and empower all stakeholders to improve the justice process. Beginning by establishing a governance structure and process, the CJCC has made several key operational improvements, with many more on the horizon. This session addresses the importance of establishing governance and emphasizing collaboration and communication in order to effectively identify and address problems and develop effective solutions.
Challenges and Successes of the NIBRS Transition among Large Law Enforcement AgenciesResearch Workshop 1 – Graf, McQuiggan, Schlanger, Badger
Challenges and Successes of the NIBRS Transition among Large Law Enforcement AgenciesMs. Andrea Gardner, Program Manager, NCS-X Implementation, Technical Assistance, and Outreach, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice (Facilitator)
Capt. Fredrick McQuiggan, Philadelphia (PA) Police Department
Mr. Elliot Schlanger, Baltimore City (MD) Police Department
Sgt. Dave Graf, St. Louis County (MO) Police Department
Ms. Diane Badger, Senior IT Project Lawyer, Atlanta (Georgia) Police Department
The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) will host a facilitated discussion about the transition to the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) among the largest law enforcement agencies. The workshop will highlight the challenges these agencies confronted when undertaking a multifaceted and complex systems change such as NIBRS, as well as the innovative ways in which they transitioned successfully. Agency participants will discuss overcoming hurdles such as revamping a homegrown record management system (RMS) that other agencies also use on a shared platform, moving from a fully manual, paper-based process to an entirely electronic system with mobile field entry, and dealing with COVID-related and other setbacks during their transition process.
Research Workshop 1 Video
Pennsylvania Clean Slate Implementation and OperationsCase Study Workshop 1 – Price, Montchal
Pennsylvania Clean Slate Implementation and OperationsMs. Sharon Dietrich, Litigation Director, Community Legal Services of Philadelphia
Mr. David Price, Deputy Chief Counsel, Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts
Mr. Russel Montchal, IT Director, Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts
Major Mark Shaver, Director, Bureau of Records and Identification, Pennsylvania State Police
Cpl. Bradley Timbrell, Supervisor, Records Section, Bureau of Records and Identification, Pennsylvania State Police
Pennsylvania became the first state in the nation to enact a Clean Slate initiative on June 28, 2019. The law established specific eligibility criteria for individuals convicted of ungraded misdemeanors, and misdemeanors punishable by two years or less in prison, summary convictions, and charges not resulting in convictions. In its first year Pennsylvania courts reported that they had sealed nearly 35 million criminal cases and by March 15, 2021, that number had climbed to 36.8 million cases cleared. This workshop features an overview of records clearance practices in Pennsylvania, details regarding Clean Slate provisions, how the state managed implementation, the operational and technical issues they addressed, engagement with consumer reporting agencies, and an assessment of the impact and outcome of Clean Slate records clearance.
Case Study Workshop 1 – Dietrich
Case Study Workshop 1 Video
|Workshop Series 2||11:15AM-12:15PM||
Information Sharing is the Key!Technology Workshop 2 – Silhol
Information Sharing is the Key!Ms. Bonnie Locke, Chief Marketing Officer, Nlets
Ms. Kate Silhol, Chief Information Officer, Nlets
This session reviews the new initiatives related to Nlets – the international justice and public safety network. Topics include: Standardized rap sheet, Cloud computing, XML and NIEM, Criminal history parsing, Law Enforcement Notification System (LENS), IACP CJIS Committee, how to do business with Nlets, and more. Nlets is a private not-for-profit corporation owned by the States that was created more than 50 years ago by the 50 state law enforcement agencies. The user population is made up of all of the United States and its territories, all Federal agencies with a justice component, selected international agencies, and a variety of strategic partners that serve the law enforcement community cooperatively exchanging data. The types of data being exchanged varies from motor vehicle and drivers’ data, to Canadian and Interpol database located in Lyon, France, to state criminal history records and driver license and corrections images. Operations consist of more than 2.6 billion transactions a year to over 1 million PC, mobile and handheld devices in the U.S. and Canada at 45,000 user agencies and to over 1 million individual users.
Technology Workshop 2 Video
Advancements in the National Information Exchange ModelPolicy Workshop 2 – Escobar, Wormeli, Phillips
Advancements in the National Information Exchange ModelMs. Katherine Escobar, Managing Director, NIEM
Mr. Paul Wormeli, Co-Chair, NIEM SLTT Tiger Team
Mr. Michael Phillips, Co-Chair, NIEM SLTT Tiger Team
The National Information Exchange Model is evolving to be more responsive to information sharing needs of the state, local, tribal and territorial communities. New domains are emerging for cyber security, statistics and learning which have the potential to accelerate information sharing. New versions of the model are also being developed to broaden the base of participation. This presentation describes the new releases, domains, and modeling with examples of the new exchanges that are begin created and the developments that are forthcoming.
Policy Workshop 2 Video
Harmonization and Integration of Criminal Justice Administrative Records to Support Evidence-based PolicymakingResearch Workshop 2 – Mueller-Smith, Papp, Choi, Finlay
Harmonization and Integration of Criminal Justice Administrative Records to Support Evidence-based PolicymakingDr. Michael Mueller-Smith, Director, Criminal Justice Administrative Records System (CJARS), University of Michigan
Dr. Jordan Papp, Project Manager, CJARS, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan
Mr. Jay Choi, Research Assistant, CJARS, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan
Dr. Keith Finlay, Research Economist, U.S. Census Bureau
This workshop reviews recent advances in the harmonization and integration of criminal justice administrative records to support evidence-based policy making. The Criminal Justice Administrative Justice System (CJARS), a joint collaboration between the University of Michigan and the U.S. Census Bureau, will: 1) demonstrate a novel hierarchical machine-learning tool for Text-based Offense Classification (TOC), 2) present a benchmarking validation system that quantifies the quality of data harmonization algorithms against published aggregate statistics from the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, and 3) debut a new public statistical reporting system that integrates criminal justice administrative records with extensive federal socio-economic data.
Research Workshop 2 Video
Planning for Clean Slate: Utah’s ExperienceCase Study Workshop 2 – Willmore, Borgeson
Planning for Clean Slate: Utah’s ExperienceMr. Greg Willmore, Director, Bureau of Criminal Identification, Utah Department of Public Safety and SEARCH Member – UT
Ms. Nicole Borgeson, Assistant Director, Bureau of Criminal Identification, Utah Department of Public Safety
Ms. Noella Sudbury, Owner, Sudbury Consulting, LLC
Utah’s Clean Slate law (H.B. 431) unanimously passed in the Utah State Legislature and was signed into law by Governor Gary Herbert on March 28, 2019. Programming complexity has delayed implementation, which was originally set for May 1, 2020. This workshop features an overview of records clearance practices in Utah, details regarding the state’s Clean Slate provisions, an update on the status of planning and implementation, and discussions of legal, policy, operational, and technical issues.
Case Study 2 Video
Campaign for Criminal Justice Data Modernization
POLICY KEYNOTE: Campaign for Criminal Justice Data ModernizationMs. Jane Wiseman, Innovations in Government Fellow, Ash Center, Harvard Kennedy School
One of the most notorious process problems with America’s criminal justice system is the lack of data. For an institution charged with administering justice and responsible for decisions that profoundly impact people’s lives, it is frighteningly antiquated when it comes to collecting and analyzing data. Experts say long-term, sustainable change is doomed if we cannot our changes and their impacts. Arnold Ventures recently released a list of six recommendations for how the new Biden administration can improve criminal justice data and research to support reform. Ms. Wiseman guided an expert roundtable in developing recommendations for the report, which has been endorsed by 25 national experts. In this keynote presentation, she reviews and discusses these recommendations.
Policy Keynote – Wiseman
Policy Keynote Video
|Workshop Series 3||2:45PM-3:45PM||
How to Effectively Investigate Crimes with Digital Evidence Through a Public-Private PartnershipTechnology Workshop 3 Video
How to Effectively Investigate Crimes with Digital Evidence Through a Public-Private PartnershipMr. Timothy Lott, Director of High-Tech Crime Training Services, SEARCH
The term “cybercrime” often invokes images of hackers who nefariously attack corporations or government entities in an attempt to extort money or other resources from the victim. Often overlooked is the impact that digital evidence has on “traditional” crimes and its profound impact on investigations and prosecutions. Digital evidence can be used to corroborate or refute statements made by victims, witnesses, and suspects of a crime. How to effectively acquire, authenticate, and analyze this digital evidence has become a significant challenge for law enforcement agencies over the past 25 years. These challenges include hiring and training appropriate personnel to handle digital evidence, retaining personnel, and how to keep that personnel up-to-date on these skills that change rapidly. Through private partnerships, law enforcement agencies can effectively manage cases in which digital evidence is a factor. This session provides a roadmap for agencies looking to combat digital evidence and how partnerships with the private sector can be a cost-effective solution.
Cutting-Edge Issues in Record ClearingPolicy Workshop 3 – Dietrich, Chien, Cummings
Cutting-Edge Issues in Record ClearingMs. Sharon Dietrich, Litigation Director, Community Legal Services of Philadelphia
Ms. Colleen V. Chien, Professor, Santa Clara University School of Law
Ms. Shayna Cummings, Staff Solutions Engineer, Code for America
With the growth of criminal history record expungement and sealing as remedies to collateral consequences, more sophisticated issues continue to emerge. This workshop addresses three of them: (1) recent empirical research on the value of record clearing and the extent of the “clean slate gap” between eligibility and uptake; (2) state of the art in Clean Slate automation implementation; and (3) emerging issues for clearing records available on the Internet.
Policy Workshop 3 Video
Arizona Statewide eWarrants TransmissionResearch Workshop 3 – Li, Peoples, Sobotka
Arizona Statewide eWarrants TransmissionLeon Li, Systems Analyst, ITD, Arizona Administrative Office of the Courts
Marc Peoples, Senior Program Manager, Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Scott Sobotka, Principal/Owner, Pragmatica, LLC
In 2019, the Arizona Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) initiated a project to develop and provision electronic warrant services throughout the state, using a phased approach, starting with arrest and bench warrants, piloting the application with five law enforcement agencies and applicable courts. Pragmatica created and deployed an eWarrants module as part of its Justice Web Interface (JWI) application, using electronic workflows to support a complete warrant lifecycle, including warrant packing and submission to ACIC and NCIC, warrant rejection due to error or duplication, warrant quash and warrant clearance/execution. The process also provides dashboards, reports, and visual indicators to support AZ CJIS requirements for timely submission of warrants and quashes. The eWarrants process utilizes NIEM-conformant exchange, documented by IEPD. The speakers review the successful effort, which is in production today.
Research Workshop 3 Video
Planning for Clean Slate: Michigan’s ExperienceCase Study 3 – Kuzera, Rosin
Planning for Clean Slate: Michigan’s ExperienceMs. Michelle Kuzera, Division Director, Criminal Justice Information Center, Michigan State Police and SEARCH Member – MI
Ms. Sherry Rosin, Manager, Criminal History Section, State Compact Officer, Criminal Justice Information Center, Michigan State Police
Following Pennsylvania in 2018, and Utah in 2019, Michigan became the third state in the nation to pass legislation to automate the state’s criminal records clearance process when Governor Gretchen Whitmer signed H.B. 4980 into law on October 12, 2020. Six additional bills (HB 4981, HB 4982, HB 4983, HB 4984, HB 4985, and HB 5120) expanded eligibility and access to record clearance. This workshop features an overview of records clearance practices in Michigan, details regarding the state’s Clean Slate provisions, an update on the status of planning and implementation, and discussions of legal, policy, operational, and technical issues.
Case Study 3 Video
|Workshop Series 4||4:00PM-5:00PM||
Debunking Five Key Myths about Clean Slate AutomationTechnology Workshop 4 – Cowden, Cummings
Debunking Five Key Myths about Clean Slate AutomationMr. Michael Cowden, Director of Consulting Engineering, Code for America
Ms. Shayna Cummings, Staff Solutions Engineer, Code for America
Code for America (CfA) has worked with over a dozen states on clean slate automation, addressing and accommodating a wide array of implementation scenarios. In this workshop, CfA representatives share some of the key lessons learned in addressing the challenges that clean slate automation present to repository managers. Questions to be covered include: How to address incomplete or inconsistent criminal history data; how to determine eligibility based on data spread across multiple systems; how to handle non-fingerprinted cases and carve-outs; navigating differences between sealing and expungement; and is this possible in your state? This session covers the most (and least) successful strategies for clean slate automation.
Technology Workshop 4 Video
NICS: Status, Challenges, and Tackling Key Issues through LegislationPolicy Workshop 4 Video
NICS: Status, Challenges, and Tackling Key Issues through LegislationMs. JoAnn Garrison, Liaison Specialist, NICS Section, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation
In this workshop, representatives from the FBI explain how the FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check (NICS) Section performs firearms background checks and how the Bureau is working to process the unprecedented number of requests for these checks. It addresses challenges facing both the NICS Section and states in responding to firearms background checks, and examines efforts to make systemwide improvements to criminal history and related records – including ongoing outreach and “Fix NICS” activities. The session also covers how NICS has been able to successfully create a file within the NICS Indices to house Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) entries so that they are available nationally and reviews plans to introduce a new National Crime Information Center file specifically for ERPOs by 2022.
Measuring Computerized Criminal History Data Quality to Improve Accuracy and CompletenessResearch Workshop 4 – Ruel, Perbix, Goggins, Jacobson, Chawla
Measuring Computerized Criminal History Data Quality to Improve Accuracy and CompletenessMr. Matthew Ruel, Director, Maine State Bureau of Identification, Maine State Police and SEARCH Member-ME
Mr. Mark Perbix, Director of Programs, SEARCH
Ms. Becki Goggins, Director of Law and Policy, SEARCH
Mr. Michael Jacobson, Information Sharing Specialist, SEARCH
Mr. Yogesh Chawla, Manager, Software and Data Engineering Program, SEARCH
Criminal history records provide the most reliable and complete picture of an individual’s criminal activity. Ensuring data accuracy and completeness is the mission of the criminal history repository. This session examines key data quality measures applicable to all criminal history systems; the panel discusses steps taken to improve data quality and completeness and demonstrates a data quality assessment tool to enable continuous improvement.
Research Workshop 4 Video
Public Safety Assessment in Arizona: Administrative Office of the Courts EnhancementsCase Study 4 – Wooley, Clark
Public Safety Assessment in Arizona: Administrative Office of the Courts EnhancementsMs. Kristie Wooley, Pretrial Services Manager, Adult Probation Services Division, Arizona Administrative Office of the Courts
Mr. Dan Clark, Senior Developer, Pragmatica, LLC
To mitigate risk to Arizona’s communities, the state Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) implemented a Public Safety Assessment (PSA) module within its AOC Justice Web Interface (JWI) application. The PSA, developed by the Arnold Foundation, measures the likelihood that an individual will commit a new crime, particularly a violent crime, upon release, and the likelihood that he/she will appear at a future court hearing. The PSA considers nine factors related to a defendant’s age, criminal history and current charge that research has shown to accurately predict risk. The AZ AOC implemented a PSA data feed module within its AOC JWI application. The single JWI PSA query produces CHRI, DOC and Court information, displaying all in the response to support staff preparation of pretrial risk assessments. In this session, the speakers review project challenges and successes.
Case Study 4 Video
Day 2 – July 14, 2021
|Continental Breakfast||7:00AM-8:00AM||Conference Foyer|
Culture Clash: Why is More Research Not Being Done with Criminal History Data?
RESEARCH KEYNOTE: Culture Clash: Why is More Research Not Being Done with Criminal History Data?Dr. James P. Lynch, Professor, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Maryland and Director (former), Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has invested more than a billion dollars in building and improving state and federal criminal history records, and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has identified recidivism as one of the most important indicators of success in the criminal justice system. Given the investments made in these data, and their importance in evaluating the system’s performance, why do these data not figure more prominently in social science research?
I argue that current incentives for both repositories and researchers function to minimize the amount of research that will be done with criminal history data. Access to the data is slowed by the burden on the states of vetting and responding to individual requests for data, while protecting confidentiality. The investment required of researchers to obtain and become familiar with the data encourage those researchers who do gain access to hold the data close rather than sharing it broadly. Documentation of the information generation process is not readily available and very little research has been done on the error structure of the data.
A national data center for criminal history data that focuses on the curation of criminal history records for research purposes would reduce the costs of using and making these data available. This type of approach has been taken with other complicated, but valuable data sets, like the Panel Survey of Income Dynamics (PSID), to facilitate and increase their use.
Research Keynote – Lynch
Research Keynote Video
|Workshop Series 5||9:30AM-10:30AM||
NGI Rap Back Service: Enhancing Public Safety — One Notification at a TimeTechnology Workshop 5 – Neason, Romeo
NGI Rap Back Service: Enhancing Public Safety — One Notification at a TimeMr. Robert Neason, Management and Program Analyst, Biometric Services Section, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Ms. Rachel Romeo, Management and Program Analyst, Identity Management Unit, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation
The FBI Criminal Justice Information Services Division deployed the Next Generation Identification (NGI) Noncriminal Justice (NCJ) and the Criminal Justice (CJ) Rap Back Services as major tools for suitability and investigative purposes that propel agencies to the next level with immediate electronic notifications to the Submitter. Once the initial fingerprint is retained in NGI and a Subscription is set on the NGI identity, any subsequent activity on the identity history will result in immediate notification to the subscribing agency. This workshop provides a high-level overview of the NGI Rap Back Services, including the requirements to participate and the benefits of participation. Panelists also examine the types of information available from NGI with Rap Back participation. Materials and resources will be provided at the workshop.
Technology Workshop 5 Video
The Role of State Courts in Criminal Records ExpungementPolicy Workshop 5 – Schauffler
The Role of State Courts in Criminal Records ExpungementDr. Richard Schauffler, Principal, Justice Solutions TRS, LLC and SEARCH Member – At-Large
Mr. Nial Raaen, Principal Court Management Consultant, National Center for State Courts (ret.)
Mr. Paul Embley, Technology Services Director, National Center for State Courts
State courts vary widely in their organizational structure and IT infrastructure. This workshop outlines key issues for jurisdictions contemplating the automation of criminal records and highlights the role of the state courts in that initiative.
Policy Workshop 5 Video
Digital Punishment and Criminal Record Access and AccuracyResearch Workshop 5 – Lageson, Stewart
Digital Punishment and Criminal Record Access and AccuracyDr. Sarah Lageson, Assistant Professor, Rutgers University-Newark, School of Criminal Justice
Dr. Robert Stewart, Assistant Professor, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Maryland
The proliferation of data-driven criminal justice operations has created millions of criminal records each year in the United States. Documenting everything from a police stop to a prison sentence, these records take on a digital life of their own as they are collected by law enforcement and courts, posted on government websites, re-posted on social media, online news and mugshot galleries, and bought and sold by data brokers. This workshop discusses the result of these data dissemination practices for individuals through the lens of “digital punishment,” where mere suspicion or a brush with the law can have lasting consequences.
This presentation addresses several empirical, mixed methods studies of digital criminal records, with a focus on criminal record accuracy, disclosure, and public policy solutions. The speakers present new results from a study that analyzes the integrity of criminal record data as it is collected and aggregated by local criminal justice agencies, then released as public records and background check data. Study design is mixed methods, consisting of quantitative analyses of approximately 2,400 criminal history events documented on official New Jersey state rap sheets for 104 participants, which are then tracked across several additional digital platforms: two online court dockets, a mugshot website, one unregulated background checking service, and three regulated background checking service sources. Quantitative data are contextualized by qualitative interviews with all 104 participants. Major findings show how data quality issues within rap sheets, as well as court-specific interventions (such as deferred adjudications and probation violations) increase across private data platforms. Findings illustrate reliability issues for criminological research that relies on “official” criminal record data and due process and informational privacy issues for individuals who have a record.
Research Workshop 5 Video
Digital Officer Safety: What Breadcrumbs are you Broadcasting?Case Study 5 Video
Digital Officer Safety: What Breadcrumbs are you Broadcasting?Mr. Timothy Lott, Director, High-Tech Crime Training Services, SEARCH
Attacks on law enforcement agencies and personnel have become an almost daily occurrence. These attacks profoundly impact day-to-day business operations from bad actors attempting to gain access to sensitive law enforcement material and to prevent access to systems through ransomware. This workshop examines how employees of law enforcement agencies leave traces of themselves when visiting websites, what information can be traced, and how to ensure that they are not compromising their safety by broadcasting this information. This session covers website data, IP tracing, cell phone considerations, Bluetooth snarfing, and home wireless networks. Most importantly, this session demonstrates how personnel can search social media and find the traces of themselves that can be found online by suspects, defense experts, and the media. The session features examples from various media sites that could cause ethical issues and highlights common pitfalls of social media use by professionals.
|Workshop Series 6||11:00AM-12:00PM||
Innovations in Conquering Missing DispositionsTechnology Workshop 6 Video
Innovations in Conquering Missing DispositionsMr. Chuck Collins, Vice President, Public Safety, Mission Critical Partners
Advances in technology have greatly reduced incidences of incomplete, inaccurate, and untimely criminal history records. However, many central repository agencies still struggle with heavy investments in manual labor to address missing dispositions in criminal history records. Some repository agencies have approached the problem with surprisingly innovative approaches. This session explores the reasons dispositions are missing and how some innovative repositories are overcoming the missing disposition gap in an environment with little to no control over reporting agencies.
Records Management System StandardsPolicy Workshop 6 – Miller, Thompson, Cody, Bussert
Records Management System StandardsMs. Catherine Miller, NCR-LInX Manager, Montgomery County (MD) Police Department
Mr. Todd Thompson, Vice President, Strategic Development, Caliber Public Safety
Ms. Crystal Cody, Public Safety Technology Director, City of Charlotte Innovation & Technology, Charlotte, North Carolina
Capt. Jason Bussert, Information Technology, Oklahoma City Police Department
The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) CJIS Committee and IJIS Institute formed the Records Management System (RMS) Standards Task Force to review and update the RMS Functional Specifications documents that were released in 2006 and updated in 2009. These are still important to law enforcement and RMS software providers but required updating to include the latest technological advancements to the architecture and deployment of these systems. The 25-member international task force worked diligently to review, update, and publish the latest 2021 version. In this panel discussion, lead members of the Task Force provide details on how the document was modified, including what is part of an RMS now or may be in the future, what components no longer made sense, and what has been added.
Policy Workshop 6 Video
NIBRS Implementation Status, Research Agenda, Tools, and EnhancementsResearch Workshop 6 – Smith
NIBRS Implementation Status, Research Agenda, Tools, and EnhancementsMs. Drema Fouch, Management and Program Analyst, CJIS Division, FBI
Current status of NIBRS Implementation
Ms. Erica Smith, Chief, Law Enforcement Incident-Based Unit, Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice
BJS project on NIBRS estimation and analysis
Mr. Mark Perbix, Director of Programs, SEARCH
NIBRS Tools—Precertification, NIBRS to Summary, Quick Dashboard
Ms. Cynthia Barnett-Ryan, Statistician, FBI
Beyond 2021—an overview of potential expansion/extension of NIBRS
This session addresses implementation status of the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), as well as research projects, tools, and future expansion and extension of NIBRS.
Research Workshop 6 – Fouch
Research Workshop 6 – Barnett-Ryan
Research Workshop 6 Video
Implementing Body Cameras: “Lessons Learned from the Land of Lincoln”Case Study Workshop 6 – Zoufal, Allen, Ziman
Implementing Body Cameras: “Lessons Learned from the Land of Lincoln”Mr. Donald Zoufal, Legal Adviser, Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police
Lt. Col. Craig Allen (ret.)/Chair, Illinois State Police (ret.)/International Association of Chiefs of Police Communications and Technology Committee
Illinois offers an approach to body cameras characterized by centralized policy guidance and local execution. Adopted in 2016, the Illinois approach features statewide policy mandates with decisions on the use of body cameras left to each jurisdiction. Despite the uniform guidance (or perhaps because of it), relatively few jurisdictions implemented body cameras. In a 2021 omnibus police reform act, Illinois established a schedule of mandatory body camera adoption. The statute also eliminated the ability of officers to review their body camera images before writing a report and made officer failure to comply with departmental body camera policies a felony offense. This panel examines the advantages and disadvantages of the Illinois approach; its successes and failures; and its legal and practical implications.
Case Study 6 Video
Providing Another Chance: Resetting Recidivism Risk in Criminal Background Checks
ROUNDTABLE: Providing Another Chance: Resetting Recidivism Risk in Criminal Background ChecksMr. David J. Roberts, Executive Director, SEARCH (Chair)
Dr. Nidhi Kalra, Senior Information Scientist, RAND Corporation
-Important, But Little-Known, Facts About Recidivism Risk for Those With Records
Dr. Brian Vegetabile, Statistician, RAND Corporation
– The Reset Principle: Rethinking How we Understand Risk in Background Checks
Dr. Shawn Bushway, Senior Policy Researcher, RAND Corporation – Data Infrastructure Needs for a New Approach to Background Checks
Employers use criminal background checks to make hiring decisions but have little concrete guidance on how to do so. Their approach is often modeled on risk assessments used in the criminal justice system, but the employment context raises fundamentally different questions. For example, criminal justice professionals want to know the risk the person will recidivate after their conviction or release from prison, while employers need to know the risk that people recidivate in the years immediately after their background check.
With funding support from Arnold Ventures, RAND Corp has been examining the following key questions:
Roundtable Plenary Video