Contact Information

1
Contact Information

• Albert Tripp Selke
• Lieutenant  
• Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office
• [phone]
• aselke_at_hcso.tampa.fl.us

2
Intelligence-Led Policing

• Practical Application
• Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office
• Tampa, Florida

3
Agenda

• Etiology of ILP at the HCSO
• Organizational Impact
• Application

4
Goal for the Presentation
5
Covered Topics

• Knowledge Management
• Reorganization and Dismantling Silos
• Crime Analysis
• Exploitation of Criminal Cultures
• Establishing Priorities
• Benign Neglect
• Practical ILP workflows and processes
• Critical Success Factor

6
Building Blocks
7
Hillsborough County Sheriffs Office

• The 8th Largest Metropolitan County Law
  Enforcement Agency in the United States
• Total Population of Hillsborough County 1,202,011
  (2010 Census)
• Total Population of Unincorporated County 801,981
  (2010 Census)
• HCSO Deputies 2,245 (HCSO February 2011 BOCC
  Report)
• 1,245 Law Enforcement
• 1,000 Detention

8
The Reality Resource constraints dictate that
police forces cannot deliver every item on
thepublics policing wish list and must instead
decide service delivery priorities.
Why did the HCSO Adopt the ILP Model?
ILP offers the best capacity for the HCSO to meet
our commitment to provide for the greatest degree
of safety and security of Hillsborough Countys
citizens in the most effective manner possible.
9
Tampa Tribune August 09, 2009

• Unlike the county government, which will soon
  lay off more than 500 workers, the Sheriff is
  containing costs by freezing his work force.
  Chief Docobo said 150 law enforcement deputy and
  100 detention deputy positions remain vacant. The
  Sheriff has not asked for new deputy positions
  for four budget years, department documents
  show.
• The Sheriff cannot reduce his work force further
  without losing ground in the war against crime,
  Chief Docobo said. The department has 1.67
  deputies per 1,000 residents the national
  average for Sheriff's Departments is 2.67
  deputies per 1,000 residents. Tampa Police have
  2.86 officers per 1,000 residents.

10
Tribune Article Continued

• "Right now, we are probably at a critical point
  in terms of our staffing," Chief Docobo said.
• Despite the vacant positions, the county's crime
  rate has decreased three years in a row, HCSO's
  figures show. Chief Docobo said the office has
  been effective in analyzing the time and days
  when crime is most prevalent and deploying
  deputies accordingly. The agency also focuses on
  habitual criminals who commit the majority of
  crimes.

11
Ratios

• Current HCSO Staffing 1.55 Deputies per 1000
  residents
• National Average for Sheriffs Offices 2.67
  Deputies per 1000 residents 2.3 Police Officers
  per 1000 residents
• Tampa Police Department has 2.86 Officers per
  1000 residents

12
Reality

• (Population based) 2179 (Current) 1245 934
  understaffed from the National Average for
  Sheriffs Offices
• Conservative cost estimate to train a new recruit
  first year all encumbered 125,000
• 934 125,000 116,750,000 personnel first year
  only expenditures not counting benefits
• Capital costs not estimated

13
The ILP Solution

• Instead of tackling crime one laborious
  investigation at a time.
• Place threats and risks into a holistic
  perspective that assesses the social harm of
  criminality.

14
The ILP Solution

• Stated otherwise
• FROM Whack a mole policing in which the
  majority of police resources are directed as a
  reaction to crimes that have already occurred
• TO Preventing and Reducing crime and
  victimization at the top of the crime continuum
  by strategic identification and focus on
  intervening against the prolific 6 of criminals
  who commit 60 of the crime. (The Big Picture)

15
District III ILP Results
16
Another District
17
County-wide Application

• Special Investigation Division (SID) established
  the Law Enforcement Intelligence Nexus Center
  (LINC) in May of 2009.
• The LINC was designed to be the central
  repository for all criminal intelligence and its
  function was to align agency resources to
  proactively target High Priority Offenders /
  Organizations (HPOs).

18
Initial LINC Focus

• Centrally manage the flow in intelligence
• Develop standards for ILP processes at districts
• Centralize all Crime Tips/Confidential Informants
  
• Coordinate with IT to facilitate RMS changes
• Decrease reliance on stand alone databases
• Identify opportunities to automate Intel flow
• Provide Training (Insite, CIs, Intelligence work)
• Establish daily information sharing conference
  calls

19

I have heard it said, ILP is good ole fashion
police work, mixed with technology.

20
Knowledge Management

• Leveraged existing Records Management System
  (RMS)
• General Offense (GO) report type
  ILP-Investigative Lead (Non-case specific field
  tips)
• Suspicious Activity Report (SAR)
• Career Criminal and other High Priority Offender
• Citizen Informant designation
• Analysis Crime Street Check
• Civilian/Detention Internet Link

21
Knowledge Management

• Leveraged established Intelligence Database
• InSite (Florida Department of Law Enforcement)
• Premonitory Information Repository
• 28 CFR Part 23 compliant
• Allows for selective sharing and/or dissemination
  of intelligence
• Maintained by FDLE free of charge

22
Knowledge Management

• Human Intelligence (HUMINT)
• Centralization and automation of Confidential
  Informants
• Centralization of Tips and Leads
• Crime Stoppers
• WeTips
• Internet Tips
• Random telephone calls

23
Knowledge Types

• Tacit
• (as opposed to formal or explicit knowledge) is
  knowledge that cannot be easily transferred to
  another person as a result of it being written
  down or verbalized.
• Explicit
• is knowledge that has been or can be articulated,
  codified, and stored in certain media. It can be
  readily transmitted to others.

24
LINC Accomplishments

• The creation of an effective Knowledge Management
  System
• Developed a comprehensive ILP plan to include
  structures, processes and policies to support
  both tactical and strategic ILP initiatives
• Facilitated the availability of covert resources
  for offender targeting (U/C cars, GPS,
  Telephones)
• Solidified the proactive resources carved from
  the reactive
• Provided proactive components with job
  descriptions and offender focus
• Dedicated 2 SAO Liaison Detectives to monitor and
  influence the processing of HPOs
• Established a daily conference call including all
  relevant agency components for purposes of
  deconfliction and ensuring the proper focus on
  offender targets.

25
Problems

• No consistent resource devoted to mass gathering
  of human intelligence (HUMINT) which is
  essential to identifying HPOs and their
  activities
• Analysts lose the ability to fill important
  intelligence gaps when making targeting decisions
  as a result
• Not central to the decision-making process, thus
  not effective in driving resources
• Districts defaulted more toward the reactive
  service-oriented mission, yet had the most
  manpower and resources to effectively gather
  information to identify and target HPOs
• Became support for the reactive components,
  forcing it to be reactive as well

26
The Next Level
27
Key Changes

• The reactive separated from the proactive
• SID (proactive) will operate independent of the
  Districts and Criminal Investigations Division
  (reactive) to eliminate the constant pull of
  manpower
• SIDs focus will be on intelligence gathering to
  target HPOs (Part I Crimes)
• Intelligence will be shared to assist reactive
  components to respond more efficiently

28
Intelligence Team(s)

• The amalgamation of specialty silos
• 1 Sergeant
• 2 Corporals
• 4 Vice Detectives
• 4 Gang Detectives
• 4 Narcotics Detectives
• Responsibility To identify and target HPOs that
  affect their geographic area of assignment
  (District aligned) and collect intelligence on
  their activities and that of their associates

29
Intelligence Teams

• Methodology To exploit the nexus of narcotics,
  gangs, and vice for the purposes of gathering
  intelligence to identify HPOs and their
  activities
• Focus on the reduction of Part I Crimes

30
Intelligence Coordination Unit

• 2 LINC Detectives
• 1 Intelligence Analyst
• Responsibility To facilitate the flow of
  information from the Intelligence Team through
  the analysis cycle and to ensure the Intelligence
  Team is briefed on all intelligence collected
  from other sources that may affect their area

31
Operations

• 3 Intelligence Support Personnel (LINC)
• STAR A
• STAR B
• Major Violators
• Responsibility To target the HPOs selected by
  the leadership of the LINC utilizing quality
  tactical intelligence analysis

32
Covert Sources
Collection
Intake/Analysis
Operational
LINC Intel Coordinators
Jail Culture CRU/Portal Re-entry
Detention/Jail Intel Detective
STAR
Responsible for targeting all high priority
offenders career criminals, prison releases, and
prolific or otherwise priority offenders that
meet the guidelines for targeting
FDLE/Career Criminal
DOC
CIs GPS Surveillance HUMINT Sources
TIN Teams
MVU
TIPS
TIP COORDINATORS
Responsible for targeting all high priority
criminal organizations that are identified by TIN
or STAR
OVERT SOURCES
33
SID Organizational Framework
Special Investigations Division Major
Crime Analysis Unit Manager
Law Enforcement Intelligence Nexus Center
(50) Lieutenant
Intelligence Operations Bureau (69) Lieutenant
Deputy Division Commander Captain
Intelligence Coordination Unit Sergeant/Corporal
STAR A Sergeant/Corporal
District 1 Team Corporal/6 Detectives
STAR B Sergeant/Corporal
Tactical Intel Team West Sergeant
District 3 Team Corporal/6 Detectives
Major Violators Unit Sergeant/Corporal
District 2 Team Corporal/6 Detectives
Tactical Intel Team East Sergeant
Warrants Section Sergeant/Corporal
District 4 Team Corporal/6 Detectives
Selective Ops Sergeant/Corporal
Tip Coord Unit Deputy/Researcher
34
Anticipated Benefits

• More effective and efficient deployment of
  limited personnel and budget resources
• Greater impact on crime/public safety within
  district
• Reduction in agency Part 1 crime levels
• Increased coordination among multi-specialty
  investigative resources
• More effective intelligence gathering, analysis,
  and dissemination
• Better success at incapacitating HPOs,
  dismantling criminal organizations, and abating
  high priority crimes

35
Problems
36
Problems

• Team Concept broke down almost immediately
• Human source development and collection became a
  secondary (if any) focus of the Intelligence
  Teams
• Lost the ability to fill important intelligence
  gaps
• Resources were primarily aligned around the
  snowball effect

37
The Limitations Of Arrest Strategies

• Even though many police officers profess to
  wanting to catch the criminal elite, they are
  constrained by an organizational system that
  rewards them for the volume of arrests rather
  than the quality of their captures
• As a result of observations of over 300 crack
  dealers, and interviews with over 120, Johnson
  and Natarajan estimate that experienced and
  higher-level dealers can minimize the risk of
  arrest to one for every thousand drug
  transactions or more (See Johnson and Natarajan
  1995 54)
• Conviction rates in the UK from suspicious
  transaction reports during the early 1990s were
  as low as one for every thousand suspicious
  reports(See Levi, 2002)

38
Leadership

• Is the Critical Success Factor!!!

39
District ILP Processes
40
District II

• 250 sq. miles
• Population 190,000
• 226 Sworn Deputies
• 2 Analysts

41
District Business Priorities

• Efficient and effective response to calls for
  service
• Crime suppression, i.e. Part I Crimes Robbery,
  Burglary Auto Theft, Larceny
• Eliminate opened drug and prostitution markets

42
Necessary Commitments

• The Reactive components must be separated from
  but complementary to the Proactive components
• Cannot pull resources from Proactive component to
  react to the problem of the day.
• Need to make provision for each element of the
  intelligence process
• Collection
• Evaluation
• Analysis
• Dissemination

43
Implementation Initiatives

• Return to the original strategic focus, i.e.
  Reduction in Part I Crimes
• Exploit the nexus of gangs, vice, narcotics and
  jail to Part I crimes
• Create an analytical assessment/Territory Report
• Inventory data sources and plan for adequate
  analytical products/coverage

44
Implementation Continued

• Develop standardized District ILP Goals and
  Objectives
• Develop standardized Intelligence Products
• Implement the Top 20 Adult and Juvenile
  Offenders program
• Information gaps/intelligence requirements
  established for all D2 components

45
Implementation Continued

• Require participation of all components
  (including Patrol) in the Intelligence Cycle
• Establish Criteria for Evaluating Field Tip and
  Intelligence Entries

46
District Intelligence Coordinationwithin the DIU

• Responsibility To facilitate the flow of
  information from the community, patrol, GO
  detectives, and other agency components into the
  district analysis cycle and to ensure deputies,
  detectives and analysts are briefed on all
  intelligence collected from other sources that
  may affect their area (Regular and Routine
  Feedback)

47
(No Transcript)
48

49
Social Harm

• Social Harm is the negation, endangering, or
  destruction of an individual, group or state
  interest which was deemed socially valuable
• Primary filter to determine priorities.

50
District PrioritiesResidential Burglaries and
A/C Thefts
51
Intelligence-Led PolicingExpected Benefits

• More effective and efficient deployment of
  limited personnel and budget resources.
• Greater impact on crime/public safety within D2.
• Reduction in D2 Part I crime levels.
• Increased coordination among district components.
• More effective intelligence gathering, analysis
  and dissemination.
• Better success at incapacitating high-priority
  offenders and abating high-priority problems.

52
Some New Tools of the Trade

• Trend Mapping
• Surrogate Development
• Geographic Information Systems
• Team Configuration

53
Tools of the Trade Continued

• Top Twenty Targeted Offender List
• Intelligence Briefings
• Dynamic Operational Tracking System
• Customized District II Webpage
• Weekly Tactical Intelligence Meetings

54
(No Transcript)
55
(No Transcript)
56
(No Transcript)
57
Contact Information

• Albert Tripp Selke
• Lieutenant  
• Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office
• [phone]
• aselke_at_hcso.tampa.fl.us