Finding “Brand Trust”
Sponsored by the National Institute of Justice and the
Bureau of Justice Assistance in collaboration with the
Los Angeles Police Department
100 people !om law enforcement and the academic/research communities
were brought together to forma#y discuss the concept of “Predictive
Policing.” I was fortunate enough to be one of the participants in this
symposium, to see the official beginning of a new type of thought in
American law enforcement and how we need to do business in the future.
Participants were asked to share what they learned with others. This report
is my first step down this road. I look forward to sharing the journey with
you. Lance J. Heivilin.
Wednesday, November 18 – Opening Evening Address
The opening evening address was designed to introduce the concept of predictive policing in this
symposium environment. The focus of the symposium was on generating discussion and thought in an
effort to “officia#y” begin the defined concept of Predictive Policing. Central to the discussion was a look
!
1
at the history of policing, the process of policing, view of
civil liberties !om the public’s perspective, and the
marriage of science, data and practice. LJH
Welcome and Key Leader Statements were
made by:
Laurie Robinson, Assistant Attorney General,
Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of
Justice
Charlie Beck, Chief, Los Angeles Police
Department
Keynote Speaker:
George Kelling, Ph.D., Professor, School of
Criminal Justice, Rutgers University-Newark
Thursday, November 19 – A Fu# Day
The day was packed !om 0800 hours to 2000 hours.
With nationa#y recognized speakers and break out
sessions, fo#owed by tours of the new LAPD HQ
Building and the new LAPD Real Time Crime Center,
the day offered tremendous learning and co#aboration
opportunities.
What fo#ows are key perspectives and ideas brought
forward by participants and presenters as they relate to
the concepts of Predictive Policing. LJH
Jim Burch, Acting Director, BJA
“Brand trust is more important than overall
satisfaction of the product itself.” A concept
taken from the business world, it places emphasis
on the process.
!
2
John Morgan, Ph.D., Office Director, Office of Science and Technology, NIJ
Predictive Policing has these five key elements:
1. Integrated information and operations.
!
(No silos; analysts do what patrol and detectives need.)
2. Seeing the big picture.
3. Cutting Edge analysis and technology.
4. Linkage to performance.
5. Adaptability to changing conditions.
!
!
(Flat, networked organizations are needed; training, especially in how to use the
technology and be proactive)
An additional critical point:
Hierarchies have difficulties taking on networks.
Chief Bowman, Arlington (TX) Police Department
Predict to Prevent
“Predictive policing advances the node of police intervention some 3-5 years forward onto
the intersection of social disorganization and routine activities theories.”
He focused on city code violations as an early indicator. Used an empirical evaluation
process to validate this.
Jeremy Crump, Director of Strategy, National Policing Improvement Agency in
the United Kingdom
They haven’t used the term predictive policing in UK yet. The fundamentals of predictive
policing have been a driver for UK for some time though.
Less hierarchy and more networks.
Three issues that are critical to success of predictive policing:
!
1. Prediction isn’t just about places, its about people
2. Accountability is vital
3. Resources and capabilities
!
3
Craig Uchida, Ph.D., President, Justice and Security Strategies, Inc.
Based on some fundamentals from the business world. How do we use corporate ideals for
analytics to policing?
Business Analytics: Based on bottom line and outcomes
-Do we have the appropriate data?
-Leadership that is pre-disposed to using information and making decisions based on facts
-Asses analytic capabilities
!
Work beyond Part 1 crimes. Measures of shots fired calls, domestic violence calls,
!
etc. We have ! the data and these types of measures can assist us in understanding the
!
whole !picture.
-Appropriate strategic focus
-Identify appropriate set of performance metrics
Its still about the data, need to ensure it is good data and that there is data integrity.
Predictive Policing will move various policing concepts forward.
Discussion Section
David Klinger, Ph.D., Senior Research Scientist, Police Foundation
Cautioned on two items: If we are adapting business processes, does this present us a
problem for how we are viewed in light of the current times? If our focus is on the
outcomes, paying too much attention to the numbers could pose an issue?
Discussion on this point about using business models centered on leveraging the strengths of business
models that wi# enhance the function of law enforcement. LJH
!
4
Charlie Beck, Chief, LAPD
Two primary benefits of predictive policing
1. Respond to crimes before they occur
2. Non obvious relationships...they are just that but they can be very powerful. Can be used
to deploy resources.
Colleen McCue, President and CEO MC2 Solutions, LLC
“Just In Time” policing, similar to Wal-Mart supply chain analysis
The analytic process is important, over the technology.
Sean Malinowski, Ph.D., Lieutenant (RACR), LAPD
Discussed the model for LAPD. The process is driven by their Real Time Crime Center.
They have developed a data warehouse, which will include community provided data. The
data will be precessed daily. Disseminate to precinct commanders through video
conferencing. Strategies will be developed and deployed by commanders. Collection of
results by the center. Evaluation of results, follow up investigation, and push back into the
data warehouse. (Includes evaluation of dollar amount of expenses in the solutions /
strategies implemented.)
Justin Eisenberg, Captain (Narcotics), LAPD
All crimes approach, focus on agency wide debriefing of arrestees. On arrest, debrief suspect
on knowledge of crime. Drugs, white collar, terrorism, social networking methods, etc. Put
into a database and work to identify through the database the non obvious relationships.
Will be a web based form, going to base out of the JRIG.
Gang units are going to look at social networking analysis and exploiting the benefits of
social network analysis to target gang crime. Looking to get ahead of the gang decision
process and taking the key players off the street. Gang activity prediction through crime
analysis, looking at the various layers of data to determine deployments.
Discussion Section
The question was asked, “Is the use of predictive policing model, a tactical tool to prevent
crime today or as a strategic model to look at global issues?” Chief Beck responded that we
really are talking about both. Short term is tactical, but strategic will develop as we develop
richer data sources. He provided the example of non-personal hospital data, overdoses of
particular drugs could lead to proactive targeting in street drug enforcement.
William Bratton, Former Chief of the LAPD, and CEO of Altegrity Security
Consulting
Discussed the Predictive Policing Concept for the past two days with his executive board at
Altegrity Security Consulting.
!
5
This symposium is designed to stimulate conversation. Idea is not to have arrived at
solutions, bit to have moved farther down the road.
Partnerships are important, not just in community, but within our profession.
The business of criminal justice system is to prevent crime, a vision we reclaimed in the
1990’s. Had been lost in the 70’s and 80’s.
9/11 changed our perspective on the need to partnership, reinforcing community policing
models. 9/11 forced us to force-multiply.
Most essential element to come out of predictive policing: “The importance of shared
information. Shared information that can be made into intelligence.”
If we do it right, constitutionally, collectively, if we do it together. Then we can lesson the
concerns. If we get it right and we continue to reduce crime, then we will increase the trust
with the community. By reducing crime, we reduce the “tension” (between police and
citizens).
Breakout Sessions / Privacy and Legal Issues
I attended the Privacy and Legal Issues breakout session. The other two included “Policy and Practice”
and “Technical.” LJH
Thomas O’Reilly, Senior Policy Advisor, BJA
When we get to the data on the individual, this is where the privacy concerns occur.
Input is information from community. The more available, the more robust your analytical
abilities. In order to get the cooperation of the community, people have to trust the law
enforcement. This trust issue is pivotal to the privacy approach for our agency.
Discussion of the National Strategy for Information Sharing and the need for privacy policy.
www.isc.gov (all the standards for SARS)
Need to engage privacy advocates and the public so there is not a secretiveness to be dealt
with.
Russell Porter, Director of State of Iowa Intelligence Fusion Center
Asked to discuss history and recent events, sharing his observations of not maintaining a
privacy policy.
Building public trust, by ensuring privacy, civil liberties,and civil rights, is core to the success
of predictive policing.
!
6
Civil Rights needs to be at the front of the issue /
Bill of Rights
Privacy rulings
Olmstead v US (1928)
Public Utilities Commision v Pollak (1952)
1970’s issues. Numerous guidelines emerged
(reactive) after the fact. We are reliving this
history today. Emergence and growth of fusion
centers. Privacy and Civil Rights needs to go out
front, now.
Joan McNamara, Commander (Homeland
Security), LAPD
Overview of SAR Program (Suspicious Activity
Reporting) in LA and insight as to privacy, civil
liberties issues played out.
Involved the attorneys from the beginning.
Critical to discuss information and intelligence.
Intelligence is very specific and it is critical to
separate the two.
Auditing. Due Diligence. The process needs to be
very good.
Need to identify the pre-indicators:
!
Train the police
!
Train the public
When you can identify and capture the
information that is not crime specific, you
can redeploy and get ahead of the crime.
IntelStat, mixing intel/SAR indicators and the
crime data. Real time focus of information
exchange.
They have provided a lot of training,
differences between information and
intelligence.
!
7
John Wilson, Senior Research Associate, Institute for Intergovernmental
Research
Discussed progression of information from card files to electronic systems. RISS project
oversight in his background.
Discussion of fusion centers and the need of privacy policy. This is a process and not an
event and will be developed over time. The assessment should occur every year and
modifications be made.
Fusion centers have a huge role for the flow of information from the federal government to
state and local government.
ISE guidelines set the standards for policy guidelines in order to receive terrorism related
information.
Global has template of policy and Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for evaluation. This
evaluates the risks, then you build the fixes and implement. (On the BJA and Global
websites.)
Why do LPR’s and other technology tools frighten the civil libertarians? The potential for
abuse. You need to determine how you are going to use the technology, then put it into
policy. You can always adjust that with the development of new uses for the technology.
Global has a policy review team to handle the push of the policy development. The fusion
centers need this to participate in the national SARs program.
David Carter, Ph.D., Professor, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State
University
Privacy confusion? There is a lot of confusion about how agencies are operating and what
they are collecting.
Two weaknesses seen in preliminary efforts at predictive policing:
1. Lack strategic priority (tampa has clear priorities, good example)
2. The lack of good critical thinking in the analysis of both qualitative information and
quantitative data.
In 30 days there will be a new article on SARs, lessons learned from the program on the
website. Additionally, there will be an initiative coming from the , “White House” on a 50
state SARs program through the 70+ fusion centers.
POLICY is paramount for your protection.
Remember, BEHAVIOR is the focal point.
!
8
Trips to LAPD HQ and Real Time Crime Center
The new buildings were beautiful and designed to reflect the character of LAPD and the community it
serves. A stunning memorial wa# for the fa#en officers is next to the HQ building. As you walk into the
HQ building you look at the individual badges of those who made the ultimate sacrifice. 202 officers. A
sober reminder of the cost of this work, it brought a deeper sense of the critical need for the successful
outcome of the effective merging of technology and human interaction to create better inte#igence for our
officers on the street.
The new Real Time Crime Center of the RACR Division recently opened. The first center was in a fa#
out shelter four stories below street level. This new facility is fi#ed with cutting edge technology. The
center wi# continue the original mission !om the first center, to bring real time support to detectives in
the field. When not utilizing and processing information to meet this operational goal, the center focuses
on providing investigative assistance on other cases through various systems and tip processing. The
center is also built to become the EOC for the LAPD when needed. The center runs 24/7 and is staffed
by 65 members of the LAPD. LJH
Friday, November 20 – Closing Day
What We Expect From Predictive Policing:
Perspectives From Three Police Chiefs
Jim Bueermann, Chief, Redlands (CA) Police Department
We need to begin to think about the integration (of data), synthesize almost in an organic
fashion, into our agencies.
We have an obligation to share these perspectives with not only our colleges, but other
stake holders. This is not the “Minority Report” and we should not head that way.
Organizational change: The power of Predictive Policing is a great thing, but it could be
bad. The power we are trying to harness. Knowledge Management: Informs us on how we
use, capture and share the information that is available. We need to think about Predictive
Policing in these terms to explaining this to the stake holders.
The holistic approach to the data; how do we bring that information together from different
parts of the community.
The notion of police legitimacy: Whether the actions we take as LE are perceived by the
community as legitimate. This paradigm has the ability to enhance this, it could also harm it.
We need to change this through change in our organizations and leadership training.
Tom Casady, Chief, Lincoln (NE) Police Department
Hasn’t heard anything new in the past two days. Predictive Policing is a broader look at
several different crime tools. Bringing the concepts together is what is new.
!
9
What is new: The availability of data and how much there is available. We can use this data
to do Predictive Policing.
Can we do more with this data, or are we just doing what we know? His focus is since the
1890’s we really aren’t doing anything different. (If they had this technology back then the
methodology would be the same.) It is basically the same process, just quicker.
If we are really going to create a new paradigm, we have to think about it in a new
way.
How do we do something completely different? His interest in primary prevention.
Whispering Meadows: New subdivision going in. They need several exceptions to the
zoning codes. The design will lead to criminality in 15-20 years. This is how we need to use
the data available and impact our future. The key is how do we get the city to follow with
this. He emphasized that a math equation could be designed to show this.
Crime is a small part of our work. Discussion of traffic deployment. The re-engineering of a
trouble intersection is more effective than writing tickets. Basing this on data is Predictive
Policing.
George Gascón, Chief, San Francisco Police Department
Emphasized that the tools we are developing are mindful of civil rights. Development of
existing tools is important.
He focused on the cost of crime and the economic impact on our communities.
Not a popular topic when he was in LA, as they were in a growth mode then. The current
economic models used by police departments will not work in the future. Proportionally the
funding is being taken away and this will have an impact on the quality of life. We are
becoming increasingly a “police state”, as police and fire are taking the money from the
parks, libraries and other social services and limiting the community benefit.
Predictive Policing becomes a purposeful tool to assist in putting police in the right place at
the right time or bring other resources (community) to bare.
If we don’t do it, others will do it for us. We need to be able to deliver services, but do it
more efficiently. We may not have the hook of pension down the road to maintain our
invested officers.
He’s working with Oracle to use the technology to be able to crunch the volume of data that
we have.
“Community” is not about a large police department. It is about parks, libraries, yards and
the community we live in. If we are effective, we will need less of us. That is where we
need to go.
!
10
Discussion Section
New developments in research are “scotched taped” onto an existing organization. How do
we change the organizations to handle the change? Predictive Policing calls for a different
form of deployment. How do you change the organization?
Chief Bueermann- He changed the rewards system and changed the promotional process to
reflect new ideals. He has dumped the beat system and focus on hotspots, driven by data.
Chief Casady- He see’s lots of departments that have handled the organizational change.
Several agencies have moved away from beats.
Chief Gascón- He agrees. He has focused on the use of Six Sigma. The innovations are
coming from other walks of life and we are bringing them to policing.
Edward Tenner discussed the unintended effects of technology in his writing. How do we
prepare for the unintended consequences?
Chief Casady- This is a concern.
Chief Bueermann- Has used the cost notion of policing in California as a motivator for open
discussion with the community. The co-production of public safety is key so we are not the
only ones responsible. It needs to be a community discussion and a community decision.
Chief Gascón- The LAPD McCarthur Park project...called ACLU. Sophisticated camera
system in Mesa, went to ACLU to discuss again. They didn’t sign off on the projects, but
they didn’t take them on either. You need their perspective to ensure you have the proper
focus.
Does the name “Predictive Policing” cause a problem? How does it relate researchers and
police?
Chief Bueermann-We have to be community specific on the sales.
Chief Casady-Depends on NIJ solicitations.
Chief Gascón: We need to be comfortable with the ambiguity. It will evolve and it will
mean different things to different people.
NIJ Grantees Panel Presentation
The award grantees include: Boston PD, Chicago PD, Maryland State Police, Metropolitan
PD (DC), NYPD, Shreveport PD, and the RAND Center for Quality Policing. They
presented a broad range of studies which will attempt to empirically evaluate various
Predictive Policing Concepts.
!
11
John Miller, Assistant Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Analytic
Transformation and Technology, Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Talked about the “history” that is UCR data back at NYPD, pre-CompStat.
Turned around a multi-million dollar agency on items they bought at Staples.
Noted how “George” pushed this to the next level with RACR. This put the detectives
several hours ahead of where they were.
“Frank’s murder board” (Miami)...holistic approach. Discussion of the domestic violence
situation.
Everybody takes this concept and adds another layer.
Discussion of FBI. Standardized positions. FedStat development.
Screwdriver story...you do your work with a screw driver for years. Use it as a hammer. Then
one day you discover Home Depot. Predictive Policing/technology is Home Depot.
It has to evolve every day, it cannot be the same old situation.
Discussion of Milwaukee Homicide case. Milwaukee PD went to FBI for help. FBI not the
best at homicides, but they went to Home Depot.
Terrorism discussion. Our new models are turning how we look at things on the head.
“Predictive Perpetrator” - Looking at what the bad guys are doing. What are they
accessing, they are going to Home Depot too. This changes how we need to look at them,
what data we need.
Focus at what the label means, not what the label says. Are we looking every day to take it to
the next level?
What is predictive policing? The difference is when you have enough information to do
something about the problem, that is intelligence.
Report Outs on Thursday Breakouts
Discussion of what they were currently doing. “Hot spots” was mentioned to be common
place now. We should be less focused on violent crime and more focus on the rest of what
police do (quality of life issues.)
Can we predict/prevent....answer is yes. When we can do this, what will we do to intervene
and how do we measure that? Are we looking at individuals and how are doing this?
Individuals should likely be a focus.
!
12
High touch and High tech, merging community and predictive concepts. Gap in
management that is creating a barrier? View of every officer is the crime analyst for their
beat. Technology will not replace the human component of analysis.
Discussion of privacy. The public is the source of information, therefore you must
have their trust to have the data. Need to engage the community up front. Specifically
need to engage the privacy advocates up front to level the playing field. Also, the
attorneys need to be on board from the beginning as well.
The behaviors researched need to be identified with a tie to criminality. Mission directives
to focus the work. Many lessons learned from the SAR’s project. Maybe Global should
develop a specific model privacy policy to address the predictive policing project?
Large list of possible use examples and further breakdown of additional items.
There is a lot of analysis that can be done, but what kind of data do you need?
Police organizations are too hierarchical to be able to effectively utilize Predictive Policing?
What are the barriers already in the way? Are agencies using information well?
You need to have an in-house analytical capability and training.
We need to put traffic cops in the room to make the discussion work for Predictive Policing.
RMS concept is 40 years old. That definition needs to be destroyed and the data that
needs to be collected in a broad way so we can tell the venders what we need. Need a
new definition of what automation data is required for police.
This document was prepared by symposium participant Lance J. Heivilin, M.Ed., Sergeant, Mesa
Police Department. He directs operations for the East Valley Gang and Criminal Information Fusion
Center in Mesa, Arizona. He also provides executive law enforcement consultation through his
company Fusion Center Concepts (www.getfcc.com or 602-312-8436).
A discussion board is posted at:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Fusion-Center-Concepts/111629584945
You can reach Lance directly at 480-717-7157 or lance.heivilin@gmail.com.
!
13