fbi n-dex program update ed waigand - supervisory special agent fbi/cjis/law enforcement n-dex data...
TRANSCRIPT
FBI N-DEx Program Update
Ed Waigand - Supervisory Special AgentFBI/CJIS/Law Enforcement N-DExData Standards Manager
Steve Ambrosini - Director of OperationsIJIS Institute
Bruce Kelling – Committee ChairIJIS Institute NIBRS/N-DEx Advisory Committee
2
Law EnforcementNational Data Exchange
IJIS Institute Winter BriefingJanuary 7-8, 2009
3
Franklin CountyAuto Thefts
January
0600- 1000-1400- 1800- 2200- 0200-1000 1400 1800 2200 0200 0600
987654321
February
0600- 1000-1400- 1800- 2200- 0200-1000 1400 1800 2200 0200 0600
987654321
Auto TheftPickaway, Fairfield, Union, Licking,
2004 - 2005
Time
#
2
Corruption Case XYZ
SelectSelect
OKOKShare:
Do Not Share:
Conditional Share Options:
Name: John England
SSN: 123-45-6789
Sharing Attributes
Subscribe: NextNext
Entity Relationships
Entity InquiryJames Bluefield 04/15/1968
Recent AddressRecent Address
142 WashburnSeattle Wa 12345 Recent PhoneRecent Phone
123-456-7890
DispositionDispositionParole
AliasesAliases
Other AddressesOther Addresses
Other Phone #sOther Phone #s
J. Blueman
Jesse Bluefield
John Bluefield
Jamie Bluefield
RecordsRecords
AssociatesAssociates
MoreMore
Map ItMap It
Incident – Bank Robbery
Arrest Report - Tacoma
Arrest Report – Seattle
Incident - DUI
Jesse James02-28-2003
MugMug
MoreMore NextNextMoreMore
OR
Crime Characteristics
Offense: Forcible Rape
Suspect: Male
Race:
Sex:
Age:
Height:
Weight:
Hair:
NextNext
Female
White
55 to 65
64to
Blonde
0
Victim:
to
Find Similar:
Subscribe:
1300
Data
Data SubmittedData Submitted Information ReturnedInformation Returned
Collabora-tion
Sub-scription
Visualization
Analytical/Reporting
Search
Notification
ServicesServices CapabilitiesCapabilities
Incident/Case
Correlation
AutomatedProcessing
Entity Resolution
Entity Correlation
N-DExNN--DExDEx
People, Places, Things, Relationships, CharacteristicsPeople, Places, Things, Relationships, Characteristics
Catalog/Catalog/IndexIndex
EntitiesEntities
N-DEx ConceptServices/Capabilities from Concept of Operations
N-DEx Incremental Deployment
Data Types • Incident/Case/Arrest Reports•Booking/Incarceration Data
• (Probation/Parole Data)
Other Features • Data Sharing Policies Control• Role-Based Access Control
• On-Line Training • * Personalized Settings
• * NIBRS Extract (Expansion)
EntityResolution
Entity Correlation
Incident/Case Report
Catalog/Index
Visualization
Analytical Reporting
Leveraged Systems
• III• NCIC
• * Federated
Search
Contributors • Local,
State, Tribal, Federal
Increment 1 – 50,000 users Increment 2 - * - 100, 000 users Increment 3 - ( ) – 200,000 users
*Collaboration (Enhanced)
*Subscription (Enhanced)
*Notification (Enhanced)
*Automated Processing
Search
Increment 1 – March 19, 2008 Increment 2 – June 30, 2009 Increment 3 – June 30, 2010
NIBRS Submission + N-DEx Submission(One Submission)
INFORMATION SHARING SYSTEM
LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
Tribal-City-County-State-Federal
Incident/Arrest Data
NIBRS Data Extracted
(If Agency Requests)
ViCAP Report Populated
(If Eligible)
NCMEC Report Populated
(If Eligible)
Potentially
6
Enhanced CapabilitiesVisualization (Increment 1)
Increment 1 allows users to view Increment 1 allows users to view relationships between entities selected relationships between entities selected from results setfrom results set
7
Enhanced CapabilitiesVisualization Increment 2
Increment 2 will allow users to view:Increment 2 will allow users to view:
• relationships of entities selected from a result relationships of entities selected from a result setset
• locations of entities selected from results set locations of entities selected from results set
• locations of entities selected from a link locations of entities selected from a link visualizationvisualization
GeoSpatial Search
8
• Search for location types: Search for location types: o residenceresidenceo employment employment o last seen last seen o arrestarresto seized (property)seized (property)o etc. etc.
• Specify radiusSpecify radius
• Show difference between query point and Show difference between query point and locationlocation
• Specify geographic region or geographic Specify geographic region or geographic pointpoint
o AddressAddresso Lat/long Lat/long o Zip codeZip codeo City, County, StateCity, County, State
• Use Boolean combinationsUse Boolean combinations
• Import geographic query point locations Import geographic query point locations from a geo-visualization displayfrom a geo-visualization display
Allows users to perform geospatial Allows users to perform geospatial searchsearch
Populate Search Populate Search Location From Location From VisualizationVisualization
9
New CapabilitiesNotification
Automated Process
Subscription
Notification
Recipient decides howRecipient decides how/how often/how often• E-mailE-mail• PortalPortal
• User Subscribes User Subscribes to entity/record/searchto entity/record/search• User Selects User Selects whowho gets notified gets notified
• Agency Subscribes Agency Subscribes to Automated to Automated ProcessProcess• Agency selects Agency selects whowho gets notified gets notified
Portal
New CapabilitiesCollaboration
Increment 2 will provide a collaboration function to enable N-DExIncrement 2 will provide a collaboration function to enable N-DEx
Users to exchange information with other N-DEx Users.Users to exchange information with other N-DEx Users.
Share information from user’s desktopShare information from user’s desktop Capability to create folders/share files within workspaceCapability to create folders/share files within workspace Creation of collaboration groups (e.g. task force)Creation of collaboration groups (e.g. task force) Capability to send instant messagesCapability to send instant messages Auditing of user actions within the collaboration areaAuditing of user actions within the collaboration area
Suspect: Unknown
Right Hand: SpiderNeck: MariaTatoos
Create Task Force
Create Name: Grand Rapids
Grand Rapids
NextNext
Add Users: User# 12345 User# 12354User# 23445User# 34599
Read:
Write:
AttributesTask Force Message Boards
Walker Drug related robbery in south04/25
Suspect: Unknown
Right Hand: SpiderNeck: MariaTatoos
Suspect: Unknown
Right Hand: SpiderNeck: MariaTatoos
Task Force Work SpaceGrand Rapids
Incident Report
Incident Report
Submitter:Officer Roberts
Suspect: Doug Montrose
Victims:Homer OlsenRandall Milton
Submitter:Officer Roberts
Suspect: Doug Montrose
Victims:Homer OlsenRandall Milton
Assault 8/2/2004Assault 8/2/2004
Incident Report
Incident Report
Submitter:Officer Roberts
Suspect: Doug Montrose
Victims:Homer OlsenRandall Milton
Submitter:Officer Roberts
Suspect: Doug Montrose
Victims:Homer OlsenRandall Milton
Assault 8/2/2004Assault 8/2/2004
Incident Report
Submitter:Officer Roberts
Suspect: Doug Montrose
Victims:Homer OlsenRandall Milton
Assault 8/2/2004
Incident Report
Submitter:Officer Roberts
Suspect: Doug Montrose
Victims:Homer OlsenRandall Milton
Assault 8/2/2004
Incident Report
Submitter:Officer Roberts
Suspect: Doug Montrose
Victims:Homer OlsenRandall Milton
Assault 8/2/2004
Incident Report
Submitter:Officer Roberts
Suspect: Doug Montrose
Victims:Homer OlsenRandall Milton
Assault 8/2/2004
Incident ReportIncident Report
Submitter:Officer Roberts
Suspect: Doug Montrose
Victims:Homer OlsenRandall Milton
Grand Rapids
N-DEx Data StandardsExtensible Markup Language (XML)
Global Justice XML Data Model (GJXDM)
National Information Exchange Model (NIEM)
Logical Entity Exchange Specification (LEXS)
The N-DEx Information Exchange Package Documentation (IEPD)
– Available at: www.it.ojp.gov
AK
WA
CA
ORID
WY
MT
NMAZ
CO
TX
NV UT
NE
SD
MNND
MOKS
IN
IA
MI
OH
WI
GAALMS
WV
LA
AROK
NC
VA
TN
KY
FL
SC
NJ
ME
PA
MD
NYMA
CT
NH
VT
DC
DE Entire State
DELJIS
107,611
RI
San Diego (ARJIS)
Los Angeles (IRIS)
107,466
Sacramento (ARIES)
Harrison County
WV
Increment One Pending
Increment One Ingested
Nebraska Entire State NCJIS
45,051
VA LInX Hampton
Roads
22,681
Oregon Entire State
ONIBRS
587,234
Texas Entire
State T-DEx
New York
Oneida Indian Nation
1
Increment Three or Beyond
Ohio Entire State
OLLEISN
Increment Two
FBI - 482,434
BOP - 290,317
August 2, 2008
IL
AFOSI
Total Records 1,640,795
AK
WA
CA
ORID
WY
MT
NMAZ
CO
TX
NV UT
NE
SD
MNND
MOKS
IN
IA
MI
OH
WI
GAALMS
WV
LA
AROK
NC
VA
TN
KY
FL
SC
NJ
ME
PA
MD
NYMA
CT
NH
VT
DC
DE Entire State
DELJIS
149,868
RI
San Diego (ARJIS)
1,086,449
Los Angeles (IRIS)
2,577,539
Sacramento (ARIES)
Harrison County
WV
997
Increment One Pending
Increment One Ingested
Nebraska Entire State NCJIS
51,665
VA LInX Hampton
Roads
21,256
Oregon Entire State
ONIBRS
587,711
Texas Entire
State T-DEx
30,789,311
New York
Oneida Indian Nation
4
Increment Three or Beyond
Ohio Entire State
OLLEISN
Increment Two
FBI - 647,228
BOP - 12,093,767
ATF - 69,566
DEA - 3,086,475
January 4, 2009
IL
AFOSI
Total Records 51,161,839
WA
CA
ORID
WY
MT
NMAZ
CONV UT
HI
AK
TX
GAALMS
WV
LA
AROK
NC
VA
TN
KY
FL
SC
NE
SD
MNND
IL
MOKS
INIA
MI
OH
WI
NJ
ME
PA
MD
NYCT
VT
DCDE
RI
SOUTHERNSSA Edward C. Waigand
LS Debra Louk [email protected] 304-625-4737
LS Brian [email protected]
304-625-4860
NORTH CENTRALSupervisory LS Brian Edgell
LS Melissa Farrell [email protected]
304-625-5568
WESTERNSupervisory LS Ann Hall
LS Rita Jo [email protected]
304-625-4822
LS Christina [email protected]
N-DEx REGIONAL ASSIGNMENTS
TRIBALSSA Larry Jennings
LS Brian [email protected]
304-625-2958
NORTHEASTERNSSA Damon Villella
LS Belinda [email protected]
304-625-4398
FEDERALSupervisory LS Brian Edgell
LS Beth [email protected]
304-625-4482
MANH
Case Study:
A National Standard for Sharing Law Enforcement
Incident and Arrest Information
Standards – Why?
16
Improve Communications Help Set Expectations Enable People and Systems to Talk
to Each Other Avoid Errors and Misunderstandings Save Time and Money!
Standards – Progress…
17
N-DEx - Industry Position April 2006
The benefits derived from the use of N-DEx by the contributing agencies must be commensurate with the effort necessary to participate
There must be broad based use of N-DEx from the largest to the smallest agencies – including local, tribal, state and federal agencies
There must be resources available to assist agencies in building the infrastructure to participate in N-DEx – these resources must include technical support, training and funding
N-DEx participation must be standards based to preclude the high cost of one-off solutions
Industry must have current information on the program to be able to assist client agencies in participating in N-DEx
Role of States
States play a key and critical role in national reportingThere are variations in state specific data elements and codesThere are variations in state specific controls for retention and release of information There are currently several state-level versions of incident reporting RMS providers support multiple versions of their products to meet state specific requirements
Consequence of Having Several State-Level
Versions Serves as a cost multiplier
– Larger initial cost to implement N-DEx nationwide
– Higher on-going maintenance costs
Creates opportunity for delays and errors in reporting and information sharing Limits RMS options in some states
N-DEx IEPD
The N-DEx IEPD has been designed with the goal of meeting the needs of local, state and tribal law enforcement agencies. It currently encompasses hundreds of data elements. Industry firmly believes that the N-DEx IEPD, properly configured, can solve the dilemma of satisfying state needs using a single national standard.
Industry Recommendation
“It is therefore recommended that all states (representing their respective local agencies) adopt the N-DEx IEPD as the standard to be followed for in-state as well as national incident reporting.”
Benefits of a National Standard
Less overall cost for initial system retrofit Less cost for on-going maintenance Faster implementation on a national basisLess confusion when sharing information using a common standardFewer errors and delays in sharing information
A Voice in the Process
There must be a process in place to ensure that state, local and tribal needs are met both initially and as information sharing needs evolve.
Therefore…
“It is recommended that the FBI provide a mechanism for states (on behalf of local agencies) to review the N-DEx IEPD and submit, via the APB, requests to add data elements particular to their state.”
The Suggested Process
States formally submit request to the APB to add data elements to the IEPD
Once approved by the APB, the FBI would submit the data elements to the justice XML structure task force (XSTF) for inclusion in the justice domain of NIEM
The End Result
“Adoption of a single standard for all
states would save law enforcement
agencies in the aggregate many
millions of dollars for future system
acquisitions and upgrades. Perhaps
more importantly, the risk to both
agencies and companies would be
radically reduced.”
An Update On The Process:
Concept developed jointly by IJIS NIBRS/N-DEx Advisory and IPSTSC committees and submitted to IJIS Board and membership
IJIS Board formally supports the process Concept presented to APB Information
Sharing Subcommittee Presented to LEITSC Presented to IACP CJIS Committee Presented to and endorsed by all APB
Regional Working Groups (CSOs) Presented to APB Information Sharing
Subcommittee with regional endorsement Motion supporting concept passed by IACP
CJIS Committee APB endorses the concept (December 2008)
NIBRS & N-DEx Committee Update
Model Data Flow Incident submitted to N-DEx Flagged Incidents are copied for NIBRS before being applied to N-DEXIncident may be updated and supplemented as necessary – updates are copied for NIBRSNIBRS/UCR Edit and Statistical Programs run locally to insure data qualityIncidents may be updated as necessary – all updates are treated as replacementsAt preset date UCR Division processes NIBRS/UCR data received via N-DEx submission
N-DEx – Getting Started
Be Willing!
Be Able!
“Git Er Done”
The Steps: Contact FBI CJIS Liaison Specialist Contact State CSO – for coordination Process MOU with FBI/CJIS Agency will need LEO Accounts Use Computer Based TrainingUse N-DEx Connectivity Check List to insure that agency is ready to connect Map data to N-DEx IEPD
The Steps:(continued)
Request ConTesA Account and PasswordRun test submission through ConTesA and resolve all error conditionsRun initial N-DEx load with about 100 recordsAfter successful initial load – run a large submission – like 10,000 recordsAfter successful large submission load, submit historical data (5 years is a good goal) Submit on regular basis – daily is preferred
Lessons Learned: Mapping effort for initial agencies
ranged from 80 to as much as several hundred hours
Generally the mapping process will take a week or two
The entire process going through planning, set-up, tests and initial data loads will probably take 4-6 months
The process becomes easier and more streamlined as experienced is gained
N-DEx Cost Model Project
N-DEx Cost Model Project Develop a budgetary cost projection for national
deployment
Develop a budgetary cost projections for local, regional, and state LEA’s
Establish a cost model and estimation capability
Support development of future funding requirements
Project ApproachGuided by the “contract” between CJIS and
the four professional law enforcement associations.
FBI CJIS partnered with IIR and the IJIS Institute to develop the cost model
In conjunction with the N-DEx program office, IIR established the Cost Model Task Force – the voice of LE
Project Status = Complete
N-DEx Management Review August 27, 2008
Review Initial Findings September 10, 2008
CM Task Force Update September 24, 2008
APB Subcommittee Update October 21, 2008
IACP CJIS Update November 8, 2008
Model Software to FBI December 30, 2008
Analysis and FindingsBaseline Estimated Deployment Cost
– Formula – Cost Factors - Surveys– Statistical Baseline– Composite Scenarios
Per Agency Scenarios– LEA direct life cycle– LEA’s reduced life cycle cost via regional / state reporting– Extended regional / state agency life cycle cost– Other - Remote N-DEx user
Study Methodology The Formula
Fundamental Estimation Building Block = The LEA
The Cost Factors (LOE / Rates)
The Surveys
The Process
The Model
The Model Provides standard basis for modeling multiple cost
scenarios.
Allows for the input of multiple variables
Supports the formulation / customization of LEA estimated costs at all levels
Supports the extension of averages to national deployment cost scenarios
Provides a baseline for assessing “What If” scenarios
Flexible via configuration management
Q&A From Excited Audience!