Inter-organizational relationships and law enforcement information sharing post 11 September 2001

Abstract

The lack of information sharing among law enforcement agencies leading up to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks has been well documented. An emphasis on interaction among law enforcement agencies with other government and private sector organizations has been reinforced in contemporary counter-terrorism efforts. Despite this emphasis, very little is known with respect to which law enforcement agencies are collaborating with which public works and private sector organizations to fulfill this critical mission gap. The present research utilizes two federally-funded national surveys to explore the collaborative relationships between law enforcement, other government organizations, and private sector organizations. Findings suggest collaboration across sectors exists, however it appears significant room for improvement remains. [B]ut the truth of the matter is, nobody bats 1,000, and I think as a nation we need to come to terms with it and do everything we can to prevent it, but also recognize that fusion centers and intelligence…are part of our future." -Boston Police Commissioner Edward Davis, Testifying before the House Committee on Homeland Security, May 9, 2013 Inter-Organizational Relationships among Law EnforcementOrganizations develop external relationships for a host of reasons, ranging from political to resourceful to tactical. For context of the current discussion, law enforcement utilizes relationships with external organizations as a tactical means to achieve desired ends; to prevent and mitigate threats of terrorism and crime. Such external organizations included (but are not limited to) public health, private security, and transportation organizations as well as multiple federal entities. In August 2011, the White House published a document titled Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the UnitedStates that specifically outlined the need to develop and sustain relationships across all sectors within U.S. communities to prevent acts of terrorism. Specifically, this initiative identified the need for government to:…not narrowly build relationships around national security issues alone…there are instances when the government needs to build new relationships to address security issues, but these must be predicated upon multifaceted engagement…local, state, and tribal governments; prison officials; and law enforcement must receive intelligence based on, research, and accurate information…(5-6)These partnerships are at the heart of successful information sharing for law enforcement intelligence and threat prevention; whether the threat is terrorism, extremism, crime, health epidemic, or natural disaster. It is important to note that national security intelligence and law enforcement intelligence vary in concept and practice. In conjunction with these reports, the extant literature is beginning to understand the philosophy and operations of law enforcement intelligence; however gaps remain related to these relationships. This research seeks to inform this gap. The findings to...

The role of people in information-sharing: perceptions from an analytic unit of a regional fusion center

“…While these studies have leant great insight into changes in information sharing, the activities of centers, and the attributes of end-users across the United States, for what these methods gain in generalizability, they lack in detail (Carter, 2015). Chermak, et al (2013) note that while their study allows them to identify patterns of information sharing that hold across various fusion centers and fusion center end-users, it does not allow them to dig deeper into the reasons for their findings.…”

“…While much attention has been paid to the experiences of end-users (Carter, 2015;Chermak et al, 2013;Cooney et al, 2011;Lewandowski & Carter, 2014) and state fusion center employees (Gaphia-Joyal, 2010;Lewandowski & Carter, 2014;Saari, 2010), research has yet to address the experiences of regional fusion center employees. Regional 8 fusion centers are representative of a third of existing centers and merit greater academic attention.…”

“…Chermak, et al (2013) note that while their study allows them to identify patterns of information sharing that hold across various fusion centers and fusion center end-users, it does not allow them to dig deeper into the reasons for their findings. Carter (2015) urged for such in-depth studies to better identify the determinants of information sharing. Few studies have explored fusion center functioning through in depth interviews; those that do have shed valuable insights.…”

“…To date, much of the fusion center research has taken the form of survey research (Carter, 2015;Chermak et al, 2013;Lewandowski & Carter, 2014;Cooney et al, 2011).…”

“…The most robust literature on fusion centers focuses on the experiences of end-users -the agencies that receive intelligence from fusion centers (Carter, 2015;Chermak et al, 2013;Lewandowski & Carter, 2014;Cooney, Rojek, & Kaminski, 2011). Far less is known about the experiences of fusion center employees within primary state fusion centers, much less regional fusion centers.…”