Title: TechBeat Winter 2003 Series: N/A Author: National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center Published: January 2003 Subject: Technology for Law Enforcement pages: 38 bytes: 87K Figures, charts, forms, and tables are not included in this ASCII plain-text file. To view this document in its entirety, download the Adobe Acrobat graphic file available from this Web site or order a print copy from NLECTC at 800-248- 2742. ------------------------------- National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center TechBeat Winter 2003 Dedicated to Reporting Developments in Technology for Law Enforcement, Corrections, and Forensic Sciences ------------------------------- Counting on Biometrics In November 1987, 1,400 exiled Cubans burned building after building at the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary. The riot was not the spontaneous combustion of tensions among rivals, but a simmering anger sparked by a Federal Government plan to return those who had arrived from Cuba 7 years earlier in the Mariel boatlift. It was the longest prison riot in U.S. history, taking 11 days to resolve through negotiations. Reporters were frustrated in trying to cover the siege, primarily because they were given only meager information about the more than 100 hostages. "Officials wouldn't tell us anything," one opined in a later story. But there was a reason for this lack of information: Nobody knew who the hostages were. "We were trying to identify the people who were in the facility at the time, but it was based on a chit system where you turned in your chit and got your keys when you came to work and returned the keys when you left," says Al Turner, a former warden with the U.S. Bureau of Prisons who was sent to Atlanta to work alongside the facility's warden during the riot. "Like every other similar system, it was subject to human error and people forgetting to turn in their keys. So we had no accurate way of knowing who was inside the penitentiary when the hostages were taken. It became a difficult and time-consuming process of elimination. We called families to locate staff, put pictures on boards to try to identify potential hostages, and identified some through our negotiations with the Cubans." Fifteen years later, a project underway at the Prince George's County Department of Corrections (DOC) in Maryland may help solve the problem of tracking staff in correctional facilities. It uses facial recognition technology for employee verification and access control. The system employs a camera and computer to create a mathematical algorithm, or formula, of an employee's face. When each employee is enrolled in the system, this unique formula is transferred to a chip that is embedded in a proximity card the employee must carry. On arriving at or leaving work, the employee places the card in a card reader and stands in front of a camera. In seconds, the employee's picture pops up on a computer screen. Although the employee's identity can be confirmed by an attending officer, the computer scans the employee's face and compares the resulting mathematical formula to the original. It takes only a few seconds, says DOC Deputy Director Milton Crump. The project is the result of a coalition among the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) Counterdrug Technology Development Program. It has been in place for a little more than a year. Those months have been spent adapting to the new system and learning the capabilities and limitations of facial recognition technology, Turner says. For example, lighting is important. The Prince George's facility set up the system in an area where natural light that shone in through side windows created shadows on the subject's face. To remedy this problem, the windows were covered with adjustable shades and track lighting was installed to put light directly on the subject. Officials also discovered that using facial recognition technology may not be appropriate for tracking or monitoring inmates. In a field test at the Naval Consolidated Brig in Charleston, South Carolina, which houses approximately 300 inmates, the goal was to monitor prisoners' movement around the institution. Officials found, however, that the technology was not yet mature enough to scan faces under less than optimal conditions and search through a large database for a match. Turner says, "Enrolling people in a controlled situation and doing a one-to-one match is one thing. When you try to monitor people in halls or crowds, it is much more complicated." Crump agrees, adding that other biometric technologies, such as iris scans, hand geometry, or fingerprints, may be better for large institutions or jails where inmates move constantly. "We move about 300 to 500 people per day," Crump says. "They're coming in from booking centers or being released. Any morning we have 80 to 100 people going to court. We used to have a barcode system that was supposed to monitor inmate movement, but we literally crashed it daily. It just could not handle the high volume of movement." Overall, the facial recognition project so far has been successful; it has been readily accepted by employees and runs relatively glitch free, with few false positives. It is easy to use and takes only seconds for verification. The system's success has sparked plans for the future. The Prince George's County DOC will continue to test the system as long as DoD and NIJ ask, Crump says. When the project is over, it will remain in the jail. Crump adds that he and Prince George's County DOC Director Barry Stanton hope one day to connect to the State's Department of Motor Vehicles database so the DOC can log in the driver's license of every visitor and simultaneously get a current picture, verify identity, and check for warrants. The DOC would like to add an electronic fingerprint component to ensure that the facility is releasing the right person. Finally, there are plans for seamless access control, whereby a door opens or locks upon the verification, or lack of it, of an employee-a task that currently must be done manually. Turner, who is now an NIJ visiting scientist studying the Prince George's County project, says his plans include an evaluation of the technology's impact on institutional operations. "I'd like to know how it was accepted by the staff, if it changed the daily routine, or if, in instances where they had to account for staff, they were able to do it more quickly. We'd also like to expand it to monitor visitors and to track visitors who go from one institution to another carrying messages or contraband. "We know that we will always need the corrections officer, but we would like to see biometrics and facial recognition technology become another tool to help them do their jobs." For additional information about facial recognition technology, contact Al Turner, 202-616-3509, or turnera@ ojp.usdoj.gov. ------------------------------- Making TraCS With Traffic Safety Time has become a precious resource. Everyone is looking for ways to save it, and law enforcement is no exception. The State of Iowa has come up with a way to save time-not just minutes, but hours, even days and weeks. It's an electronic reporting program known as TraCS (Traffic and Criminal Software) that is available at no cost to law enforcement across the country. In 1994, in an effort to cut down on paperwork, the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) took the lead in developing TraCS. At that time it took up to 24 months for data collected in paper reports to be received, manually entered into a database, validated, and made available. By using TraCS, agencies can now create their own local databases in addition to transmitting reports electronically to the Iowa DOT, making the information available the next day. Use of electronic reporting eliminates duplicate data entry, cuts down on keying errors and problems caused by poor handwriting, and reduces time spent on the scene. "When I first came in contact with the project in its infancy, I was able to bring the time it took to make an accident report on the scene down from 2 hours to 10 minutes," says Rich Conner, Iowa DOT's agency training specialist for TraCS. (From 1994 to 1997, Conner helped field test the software as a member of the West Des Moines Police Department.) "It is customized to be user friendly. In 25 years in law enforcement, I've never seen anything else like it for ease of use." Conner explains that before TraCS, if a jurisdiction wanted a new traffic safety device, such as a traffic light, staff could take months to compile the data needed to justify it. Now, the Iowa DOT can quickly analyze the electronic accident reports and the safety modification can be put into effect much sooner. "There is potential to prevent accidents and even save lives," he says. In addition to saving time and increasing safety, TraCS has the potential to generate enormous savings for other departments. The State owns the source code for the software, which eliminates vendor licensing fees and enables Iowa to provide TraCS to other States and agencies within those States at no charge. "If they developed electronic reporting systems on their own, it would be very expensive," says Mary Jensen, TraCS program manager. "This is literally saving millions of dollars." Although the software is free, agencies still must purchase the hardware needed to run the program, which Jensen acknowledges is a struggle for many departments. But, she adds, TraCS will run on laptops that agencies may already be using for other purposes. More than 15 additional States are in the process of implementing TraCS for some or all of their law enforcement agencies. TraCS' design allows it to generate electronic forms identical to the paper forms an agency now uses, so no department needs to change its forms or procedures. The only change for officers is learning to input data electronically. Jensen says that New York has progressed the farthest of any participating State, running a successful pilot program using TraCS for traffic citations with plans to use it statewide. "Most States start out with one form, and that is the way I would recommend doing it," Jensen says, adding that although New York started with citations, other States started with accident reports. States receive the software free and may test it for a period of time before deciding to sign a royalty-free licensing agreement. These steps are part of the precautions that Iowa takes to keep the software from falling into the hands of third-party vendors who might try to sell it. In addition to receiving inquiries from other States throughout the country, Iowa recently signed an agreement with the U.S. Virgin Islands, has been contacted by New Zealand, and has received interest from the Canadian provinces of Manitoba and Quebec. The licensing agreement allows States to pay for any needed modifications; however, the resulting enhancements are made available to all participating States. "For example, in Iowa, the traffic citation numbers are computer generated," Jensen says. "New York found that they needed to be able to assign blocks of numbers. Now, all States can choose which of these two options they want to use. Another example is Georgia. We had three different diagramming options for accident scene reports, and Georgia wanted a fourth. They negotiated a contract for its development, and all four are now available to everybody." Periodic steering committee meetings, in which representatives of all participating States gather to discuss modifications, bring this cooperation to the national level. According to Jensen, although Iowa developed the software and owns it, future development priorities are decided by consensus. At the four steering committee meetings held thus far, States' needs have proven remarkably similar. A combination of funding from various States (including Iowa) and Federal dollars pays for the enhancements. For more information on this cooperative project, known as the National Model, visit www.dot.state.ia.us/ natmodel. According to the website, the National Model project seeks to "bridge the gap between state-of-practice (paper forms) and state-of-the-art." At approximately the same time the National Model effort began, Conner retired from his law enforcement job and joined the TraCS team. As part of the Iowa DOT, this four-person team provides training and support to users throughout Iowa. Conner adds that users from other States have signed up for the discussion forum on the team's website (www.iowatracs.org), and he has provided them technical assistance. The website also contains extensive support documentation and software upgrades that registered users can download. "This is our best means of support. We try to get an agency to become pretty self-sufficient," Conner says. He also provides technical assistance over the phone and via e-mail and gives both system administrator and user training throughout the State. He adds, however, that the software is so user friendly that a computer-literate person could figure it out without training. Conner also points Iowa agencies toward potential resources for grants, reduced-price hardware, or other forms of assistance. "It's kind of interesting to see the e-mails we get from hardware vendors that refer to 'this TraCS that's sweeping the country,'" Conner says. Sharing the software with other States has been Iowa's goal from the beginning, Jensen adds. "It just makes sense and it's a good way to do business. We get more return for our dollars than if everybody acted independently," Jensen says. "Certainly the opportunity is out there for every State to use it that wants it. Although some States have already developed similar programs on their own, if at some point it's in all 50, that would be great." TraCS' combination of current technology and ease of use has earned it several awards. These include the Federal Highway Safety Administrator's Award in 1996, Vice President Al Gore's National Partnership for Reinventing Government Hammer Award in 1999, and first place in the Best Practices Competition sponsored by the Traffic Records Committee of the National Safety Council in 2000. For more information about TraCS, log on to www.dot.state.ia.us/ natmodel; contact Program Manager Mary Jensen at 515-237-3235, e-mail Mary.Jensen@dot.state.ia.us; or contact Rich Conner at 515-237-3051, e-mail Rich.Conner@dot.state.ia.us. ------------------------------- SPECIAL REPORT Safe Schools: A Technology Primer Columbine has become synonymous with the Nation's most infamous school shooting. But school resource officers (SROs) and other law enforcement professionals know that in spite of the notoriety received by the shootings at Columbine and other schools, they must deal daily with such "lesser" crimes as knifings, beatings, fistfights, and bullying. Eight school shootings in 1998-a year before Columbine-prompted Congress to create the Safe Schools Initiative. This initiative directs the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to "develop new, more effective safety technologies such as less obtrusive weapons detection and surveillance equipment and information systems that provide communities with quick access to information they need to identify potentially violent youth." NIJ responded to this mandate by searching for ways that existing or emerging technologies could make the Nation's schools safer and by creating new applications for those technologies that target school safety. Four years later, NIJ's School Safety Program continues to work with other government agencies, oversees research and development projects, and offers technology assistance as part of an effort to provide SROs and others in the field with tools to help them deal with criminal activity. Ray Downs, past manager of NIJ's School Safety Program, says a more peaceful school environment should reduce the probability of violent crime. "You reduce motivation for weapons to get in. You shouldn't just be looking at homicides alone, but at what can be done to make students safer overall. You need to prevent students from being intimidated, bullied, and insulted." NIJ is helping schools create more peaceful environments by developing, testing, and evaluating technologies to ensure that they are safe, effective, appropriate, and affordable. Downs notes, however, that schools and SROs need to keep in mind that technology only complements the nontechnical components of a comprehensive school safety program: planning, policy, and procedures; committed and trained SROs and other school security staff; information sharing; and crisis management planning and training. The NIJ School Safety Program applies a three-pronged approach to school safety, using needs assessment and partnership development; technology research, development, and evaluation; and technology assistance. When Congress called on NIJ in 1998, it also called on other government departments and agencies, primarily the U.S. Department of Education, to participate in the Safe Schools Initiative. Staff from the Department of Education's Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program and NIJ's School Safety Program routinely exchange information and jointly participate in safe school meetings and conferences. In addition, NIJ formed a relationship with the U.S. Secret Service early in the development of the safe schools program. Following Columbine and other school shootings, the Secret Service and the Federal Bureau of Investigation received many calls from schools looking for advice and technical assistance. NIJ provided funding for a report by the U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center in collaboration with the Department of Education. That report, An Interim Report on Prevention of Targeted Violence in Schools, was published in October 2000. The Final Report and Findings of the Safe School Initiative: Implications for Prevention of School Attacks in the United States came out in 2002. This work led to another joint publication of the Secret Service and the Department of Education, Threat Assessment in Schools: A Guide to Managing Threatening Situations and to Creating Safe School Climates. NIJ's School Safety Program also seeks input from the more than 100 local, State, Federal, and international criminal justice professionals who make up the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers' (NLECTC's) Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Advisory Council (LECTAC). NIJ staff periodically brief LECTAC members on school safety initiatives and ask for their ideas on technology use, research needs, and school safety issues. NIJ then uses these ideas to help identify and assess problems faced by SROs and others in the field. The technology research, development, and evaluation component of the NIJ School Safety Program also has three components: crime prevention, information and communication, and incident management. Many of these projects build on NIJ's established technology-related initiatives for law enforcement, corrections, and the forensic sciences. NIJ is exploring and evaluating crime prevention technologies that include concealed weapons detection, drug detection, and surveillance cameras. Information and communication technologies include "swipe" and other identification cards; language translation devices; school-police information sharing networks; and software for incident reporting, mapping and analysis, critical incident planning, and self-paced, computer-based training. In the area of incident management, NIJ awards have given private companies the chance to develop or enhance interactive learning tools that simulate real-life events and train SROs and other school safety personnel on how to handle them. NIJ is now in the early stages of feasibility testing for two new technology applications that involve biometrics for access control. One uses iris scan technology; the other, facial recognition technology. Biometrics may have advantages over card systems. There is no chance of forgetting to bring cards and staff monitoring requirements may be reduced. The technologies being tested are noninvasive and present no health risks. New incident management tools in development include templates for vulnerability assessments and incident planning that any school can use. "This will give schools tools, put together by experts, that they can use to customize a plan that will best fit their individual needs," Downs says. "If they already have a plan, they can use this to evaluate or improve it." Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico, is updating the NIJ publication, The Appropriate and Effective Use of Security Technologies in U.S. Schools. A planned second volume will cover drug and alcohol detection, sensors and alarms, bomb threat awareness, deterring false fire alarms, communications for crisis response, and deterring crime. School bus security is an area of increasing public and parental concern. Technology can now produce checklists of students who have boarded buses and instantly transmit those checklists back to school offices. Technologies that track the locations of buses and trains for public transit systems also can be applied to school buses. NIJ recommends that school systems begin their efforts to improve school safety by assessing the level of risk and deciding whether a small, focused effort might be enough to make the schools safer. "If your patient isn't bleeding to death, you don't need a tourniquet; that is, if your school situation isn't that bad, you don't need x-ray machines and metal detectors," Downs says. "Maybe you should consider an ID card system. Some ID systems could also make it easier to take attendance and keep truancy records. If the kids are bringing guns and knives and razors to school, you need more." According to Downs, most schools already have conducted safety assessments as part of crisis management planning for fires or natural disasters. Also, the "No Child Left Behind" legislation requires that school safety plans include a crisis management section. Because most school districts have limited resources, they need guidelines on how to build the most effective school safety and security plan. NIJ's School Safety Program includes the following components that can provide detailed technology assistance: o The School Security Technologies and Resource Center (SSTAR) at Sandia National Laboratories serves as a national school safety and security technology resource for schools and police agencies. SSTAR tests and evaluates technology and provides technology assistance. o All NLECTC system facilities have a staff member designated as a school safety resource. NLECTC- Southeast is the lead center for school safety, but all centers provide technology assistance on school safety and several have participated in specific efforts. o The NIJ School Safety Program cosponsored a School Safety Conference in January 2002. Conference topics included current research, existing commercial technologies, and case studies of successful approaches used by schools. For more information about NIJ's School Safety Program initiatives, log on to www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ nij/sciencetech/sst.htm. Or, contact Steve Schuetz, NIJ program manager, 202-305-8697; e-mail schuetzs@ojp.usdoj.gov. ------------------------------- Cause for Alarm At Washington Irving High School in New York City, a weapons detection system detects a razor blade hidden inside a student's mouth. Had the blade gone undetected, it might have been used in another student slashing. To prevent more slashings, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and the city's school district teamed up with the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and its National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC)-Northeast in Rome, New York, to identify equipment to detect razor blades and other small cutting instruments and keep them out of schools. In 2000, NYPD began receiving weekly calls that reported slashing incidents with possible connections to gang activities, says Osborne Frazier, administrative manager of NYPD's School Safety Division. "My team and I started to investigate the reported incidents." Twenty to 30 student slashings a month were occurring in schools citywide. Razor blades, knives, and other weapons were sneaked into schools, threatening safety. Early detection of these weapons was of primary importance. The School Safety Division evaluated current technologies that could detect weapons at a safe distance. Standard metal detectors used in high schools had high sensory levels that led to false detection, requiring more hand searches. Belt buckles, watches and other jewelry, and coins were being detected instead of razor blades and other weapons. Because razor blades have a small quantity of ferrous metal (metal that is attracted to a magnet), students with razor blades often bypassed the metal detector. To help combat the rise in student slashings, NYPD asked NIJ if any of its research and development projects would detect those weapons from a safe distance, Frazier says. (NLECTC-Northeast has a Memorandum of Understanding with the NYPD School Safety Division to facilitate transfer of technologies to detect concealed weapons.) "NLECTC came to our aid in more ways than one: They served as our consultants, helped with our concepts, and obtained what we needed-The SecureScan 2000," Frazier says. The SecureScan 2000 looks only for ferrous metals. Its computer interface shows the exact location of the metal weapon, and it can be operated remotely. "After the first month of use, it already proved extremely beneficial," Frazier says. The device does not react to jewelry, has an increased effectiveness, and does not give false alarms. Deployment of the SecureScan 2000 helped to cut slashings in half. "The possibilities are endless. NLECTC truly came through for us by pushing the device to its full capabilities." "On one occasion, we were sending students through the SecureScan 2000 and suddenly the alarm sounded and the computer screen indicated that there was something in a student's mouth," Frazier says. "We conducted a thorough check and found that he had hidden a 4-inch razor blade in the upper palate area of his jaw. This incident showed us what this sophisticated device could really do." The technology behind SecureScan 2000 was developed by the U.S. Department of Energy's Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, with funding provided by NIJ. It also has been evaluated in other law enforcement settings. For more information about the SecureScan 2000 evaluation project, contact Chris McAleavey, National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center-Northeast, at 888-338-0584 or chris.mcaleavey@L-3com.com. ------------------------------- A "Normal" School Day Responses to past criminal acts committed by elementary, middle, and high school students against classmates, faculty, and staff have taught law enforcement that communication and early detection and intervention are key in heading off future school shootings and other violent incidents. "The National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC)- Southeast and the National Institute of Justice approached the issue with their sleeves rolled up," says Gary Speers, assistant chief of police in Normal, Illinois. "They funded the School-Based Virtual Private Network (VPN) and chose our department here as a test site." The network is a secure, limited-access e-mail network that allows authorized users, such as local schools, law enforcement, and other agencies that serve young people, to share information. "NLECTC designed and engineered the software and provided advanced technology to help support the system," Speers says. "Working alongside NLECTC with the VPN has been a tremendous success. The network links school to school and agency to agency, ensuring timely and secure sharing of school safety information among designated school and agency staff." This system's effectiveness was shown in September 2000, when a Normal student with access to weapons threatened other students, according to Speers. The threats became known to a VPN participant and were disseminated on the network to the pertinent agencies, which took appropriate action. "The School-Based Virtual Private Network enables us to bring all players to the table and do proper intervention," Speers says. "With the help of technical experts, we have been able to link numerous pieces of existing equipment (hardware and software systems), which has allowed for its success. I believe that this type of [secure] e-mail system can be used to decrease the escalating amount of school violence because it can be used for early intervention and prevention of incidents." For more information about the School-Based Virtual Private Network project, contact Bill Nettles, National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center-Southeast, at 800-292-4385 or bnettles@nlectc-se.org. ------------------------------- Making an SRO School-based policing is one of the fastest growing areas of law enforcement. The key figure is the school resource officer (SRO), a police officer assigned full-time to a school. SROs play three roles. They are policemen whose beat is the school. They visit classrooms and make presentations on school safety, traffic laws, general law, and crime prevention. They confer with students, parents, and family members on legal problems and crime prevention. According to NASRO's Executive Director, Curtis Lavarello, a former SRO with 20 years' experience, school-based policing is "the best example of community policing that exists today." With more than 9,000 national and international members, the National Association of School Resource Officers (NASRO) is the Nation's first, largest, and most recognized organization of school-based law enforcement officers. Since its founding in 1989, NASRO has trained SROs to do their jobs better. The organization offers basic and advanced training for SROs and managers and specialized training in legal issues affecting school safety. "We've trained well over 15,000 officers from every 1 of the 50 States and from Canada," says Lavarello. "We assist officers in making the transition from street police officer to school-based officer. We teach them what school-based law is about, help them understand what it's like to be in an educational setting, and provide them with resources, including sample lesson plans that can be downloaded from our website." For more information, including details on how to join NASRO or register for the National SRO Conference, visit the NASRO website at www.nasro.org or call 888-316-2776. ------------------------------- In the Camera's Eye When Patrick Fiel was hired as executive director of school security for the Washington, D.C., public school system 5 years ago, he became responsible for the safety of approximately 70,000 students and 11,000 teachers and administrators at 163 facilities. Almost all the school buildings are old (the average building age is 60 years). In 2001, D.C. built its first new school since the early 1970s. Add to this the district's demographics-many inner city schools, residential neighborhoods and businesses adjacent to school properties, heavy traffic, and a majority of students who walk to school-and providing safety and security on school grounds becomes a challenge. Over the past several years, Fiel and his staff have introduced new procedures and technologies in the D.C. public schools to meet this challenge. Fiel's first task was a needs assessment. He studied incidents in and around schools to understand what was really happening in the schools and their surrounding communities. He then used that information to design a security program intended to provide every student with a safe environment. "When manpower and resources are limited, you have to use other measures-such as technology-to secure an area," Fiel says, and technological innovations are precisely what he turned to. Budget constraints meant that new technologies were installed in only a handful of schools to start, but positive results have led to more schools receiving those new technologies each year. "Wherever we've applied the technologies, we have reduced incidents by almost 90 percent," Fiel says. One innovative security program has been a closed-circuit video surveillance system started during the 1998-99 school year in eight high schools. The system has been expanded every year since and is now used in 85 schools. Digital video cameras placed in public places, such as school exteriors, hallways, and stairways (never in classrooms or restrooms), provide real-time, 24-hour surveillance. Security personnel and school administrators monitor the video feed (onsite or offsite). They can respond immediately to brewing incidents or forward the video instantly to police or other law enforcement agencies that might need to see it. (Access to the secure system is by key code; approved users can view the video feed on their computer via a secure Internet link.) Video archives go back 14 days, so Fiel and his staff can backtrack as needed to trace the origins of a disruption or event at a monitored school. Support from the community and the students has been key to the success of these new technologies, Fiel says. "We are forming a partnership, not a dictatorship. When you start putting in cameras, you have to have buy-in [from the people who are affected: administrators, students, community members]. We also have good rapport with the metropolitan police and our city emergency management agency." By the end of this school year, all 163 district facilities will have digital camera surveillance systems, upgraded alarm systems, and evaluations of outside lighting and perimeter fencing needs. All secondary schools will have walk-through metal detectors and x-ray machines. "You won't find many schools around the country with these technologies," Fiel says, who adds that school administrators in other school districts have called him to learn more about the security measures in D.C. schools. Fiel welcomes such calls. For more information, contact the District of Columbia Public Schools Division of School Security at 202-576-6962. ------------------------------- Finding the Pattern A Kansas school resource officer (SRO) notes that most incidents in his school occur during the early morning. A Pennsylvania SRO identifies traits of students who participate in specific types of incidents at certain times during the school day. How do they do it? Both officers received a free copy of "School COP," a software program that uses geographic information system (GIS) technology to map and analyze incidents in or near schools. "School COP" allows users to enter detailed information about school rule violations and crimes. It produces maps that show where incidents have occurred, graphs those incidents in a variety of ways, and stores the information in a database. The software comes with a sample database, but schools can customize codes to characterize incidents and the students or others involved. Users can search for incidents that contain a specified value or code (such as all incidents that occurred in the cafeteria) or a combination of values (such as all incidents that took place in the hallways and resulted in a student's suspension). Using this type of search, Deputy Scott Thirkell, SRO at Southeast of Saline School District in Gypsum, Kansas, noted that most incidents in his 600-student, K-12 school occurred between 7 a.m. and 10 a.m. He then adopted a strategy to counter the problem. "While I may have a good idea where things happen, problem areas jump off the screen when plotted on a map and highlighted in color automatically. I can then concentrate on areas of the school that I may not have before," Thirkell says. "I am quite sure it would have taken me a long time to see that trend without the use of the "School COP" program. Simply by making sure at least two staff members greet the students each morning, the mood of the group can be gauged and many problems solved before they get bigger. I believe "School COP" made that change possible." Officer Terry M. Heydt of the Central Berks Regional Police in Reading, Pennsylvania, also has used "School COP" to make his ears and eyes go farther. "As the first and only school resource officer for both my department and the school district, I was charged with the task of developing policy and procedures for almost every aspect of my position, including reporting practices," Heydt says. "Given a shoestring budget, finding an acceptable reporting system was nearly impossible. I received a copy of the "School COP" software at the Sacramento CIS [COPS In Schools] training and, upon my return, installed and began to utilize the program. The simple, straightforward instructions made installation and data entry a breeze." Developed by a private company with National Institute of Justice funding, more than 3,000 copies of "School COP" have been distributed to SROs and school administrators at CIS conferences sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Conference attendees also received the Guide to Using School COP to Address Student Discipline and Crime Problems and training on how to use the software. Nearly 30 more conferences are planned through 2004. Copies of "School COP" can be downloaded at no cost from the "School COP" website at www.schoolcopsoftware.com. The website also offers information on features and new developments and a list of frequently asked questions. "School COP" runs on PCs (but not on Macs) that use Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000, and XP and have at least 16 MB of RAM and 20 MB of available hard disk space. ------------------------------- A Secure Door To Education Door-access technology has been around for years. Many businesses and government agencies use it, as the access cards hanging around our necks attest. But school systems have not implemented this technology until recently. In 2001 the Fairfax County (Virginia) Public Schools launched a pilot program to test variations and combinations of three types of door-access systems-proximity access card readers, keypads, and video intercom devices-at 18 facilities, including elementary schools, administration buildings, and warehouses. According to Frederick E. Ellis, Director of the Office of Safety and Security for Fairfax County Public Schools, door-access systems can be based on what you have (a key or a card), what you know (the combination to a keypad), or who you are (video intercom systems where a receptionist has to recognize you). Ellis says door-access technology helps schools strike a balance between convenience and security. The public recognizes the need to prevent unauthorized persons from getting inside school property, especially elementary schools. Yet teachers or students who participate in extracurricular activities may need to enter the school building after hours or through doors other than the main entrance. If no provision is made for them, they may be tempted to prop doors open. Door-access technology solves these problems. Students who need to get into the building through a back door can push a button on a video intercom and the receptionist can let them in. Teachers or other staff use proximity access cards. Workers who need to use side doors of the food service warehouse can use a keypad. According to Ellis, the technology seems to be working well so far. "The good news is that some of this stuff works and really works well. The bad news is that some of these devices are very expensive." Keypads cost $400 to $600 apiece. Video intercom systems cost $3,000 to $4,000 per application. Proximity access card systems are the most expensive. Installing one at a normal-sized elementary school costs from $10,000 to $20,000, including cards and readers. There also is the potential administrative burden of lost cards and forgotten passwords. Administration is an issue. Keypad or proximity access card systems can be administered centrally or locally. For Fairfax County, which has 235 facilities, more than 20,000 employees, and 170,000 students, centralized administration would be prohibitively expensive. Local administration, on the other hand, requires a strong commitment to security at the local level. A formal evaluation of the program is planned. The county's design and construction staff will incorporate the most successful systems into new construction and renovations. The technology could appear in new construction as early as 2003 and in existing buildings, as needs arise, in 2004. Do these systems make schools more secure? People working in the test sites seem to feel more secure, and the systems appear to be a deterrent, according to Ellis. "These applications provide not just a sense of security but a better, more secure environment. Common sense tells you that if you can't walk up to a building and walk in the back door, that building is more secure," he says. For more information about the door-access pilot program in Virginia's Fairfax County Public Schools, contact Frederick Ellis at 703-658-3763 or fred.ellis@fcps.edu. ------------------------------- Schools and the Fourth The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures . . . ." In Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls, 122 S.Ct. 2559 (decided June 27, 2002), the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, upheld the Tecumseh, Oklahoma, school district's policy subjecting middle and high school students who take part in extracurricular school activities to random urine drug testing. The policy so far has been applied only to high school students in competitive extracurricular activities. Id. at 2560. Justice Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Kennedy, Breyer, and Scalia, held that such random drug testing does not violate the students' Fourth Amendment rights to be protected against unreasonable search and seizure. The Court concluded that the drug-testing policy is a reasonable means of addressing the school district's interest in preventing, deterring, and detecting drug use to protect student health and safety. Id. at 2559. The decision relies heavily on Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995), in which the Court used a fact-specific balancing test to determine if students' Fourth Amendment rights were violated. The Court decided that student athletes may be subjected to random urine drug testing to detect illegal substances. Now, the Court has expanded Vernonia to include all high school students who take part in extracurricular activities. The Court emphasized that the drug tests were conducted not to punish the students, but rather to deter drug use, promote intervention, and protect students' safety and health. The only consequence of a positive test is restriction of the student's participation in extracurricular activities. The court also emphasized the minimal invasion of privacy required for urine tests. Id. at 2561. ------------------------------- Spraying for Drugs School security personnel are always looking for a way to detect drugs unobtrusively without the commotion and advance planning required to bring drug-sniffing dogs into a facility. With funding help from the National Institute of Justice, one company has formulated a series of sprays that can detect trace amounts of marijuana, methamphetamine, heroin, and cocaine. These sprays are being tested in one New Jersey school district. According to Jon Gaspich, one of six substance awareness coordinators for the school district, testing with these sprays is simple. "We take a piece of paper about an inch and a half by 3 inches, and we swipe an area. Then we spray the paper with a can that's coordinated for what we're looking to detect. If the paper turns the color of the letter on the can-for example, the can for cocaine has a big cobalt-blue C on it-you know you have traces of cocaine on the paper." Administering these tests requires no special training: "It's very easy. If you can read, if you can count to 10, if you can breathe, if you have a pulse, you can do this." Virtually any flat surface can be tested. "We test lockers, we test books, we test desk surfaces, we've even tested computer mice and come up with positive hits," says Gaspich. The pilot program, which involves three high schools and two intermediate schools, is still in the research stage. Results are sent to the manufacturer's laboratory for verification. "We can't use the tests for disciplinary reasons at this point," he says, "but we can use them for information gathering, to give us an idea of where people who use drugs may congregate." The sprays, Gaspich says, "are definitely more accurate, quieter, more readily available, and more easily used" than drug-sniffing dogs. "You don't have to do a big preparation to bring dogs in, and you don't have to worry about pulling people out of classes and having them stand away from the dogs when they come through." But, Gaspich says, dogs still have their place. "The dogs are a great show, don't get me wrong," says Gaspich. "The dogs are great for the kids to see, because they know that we're doing something, so it keeps the drugs out of the school. But this [a detection spray] can be used in between. It's not a great commotion, and it can be done covertly and quietly." Moreover, the tests are relatively inexpensive. The kits cost a few hundred dollars. Perhaps the biggest benefit of these sprays, according to Gaspich, is that they can offer help to families who suspect that their children may be using drugs. Because of the accuracy, ease of use, and relatively low cost of these sprays, parents can use them at home. For more information about this drug detection spray study, contact Jon Gaspich by e-mail at jgaspich@cs.com. Editor's note: Prior to enacting any drug detection/testing program, seek appropriate counsel. ------------------------------- RESOURCES Because the content and organization of websites change often, the addresses, or URLs, listed usually will take users to the top-level (home page) of the site. In general, to find more specific information, users have three options: explore the site using the navigation buttons available on the home page, search the site using its search engine (usually located on the home page), or look through the site map (a page that lists all pages on the site). The majority of the listed publications are available on the Internet at the listed addresses, in either PDF or HTML format. Please remember that web addresses change frequently; if a listed address no longer works, try locating the site by using a search engine such as Google(tm) or AltaVista(r). In addition to the following resource list, which should not be considered all inclusive, numerous for-profit organizations offer consulting services, security assessments, and school security and crisis preparedness training for law enforcement professionals, school resource officers, public safety professionals, educators, and administrators. Many of these organizations have websites and can be located by using a search engine. If you need additional assistance in locating any of these resources, contact the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center in Rockville, Maryland, at 800-248-2742, or e-mail asknlectc@nlectc.org. Professional Associations o International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators (IACLEA) targets colleges, universities, campus law enforcement professionals, and municipal law enforcement professionals. IACLEA advances public safety for educational institutions by providing educational resources, advocacy, and professional development. www.iaclea.org o National Association of School Resource Officers (NASRO) is a nonprofit organization that offers basic and advanced training for school-based law enforcement officers, school administrators, and school security/safety professionals and specialized training in legal issues affecting school safety. www.nasro.org o National Association of School Safety and Law Enforcement Officers (NASSLEO) promotes appropriate legislation on school violence and the safe school environment, offers safety and security planning and training, and provides school districts and the public with accurate, authoritative information on issues relating to school-based crime and violence. NASSLEO members include school resource officers and police officers, school security officers, and school security consultants. http://www.nassleo.org Government Agencies o Center for the Prevention of School Violence (CPSV) has a section to inform and assist school resource officers. www.ncsu.edu/cpsv o Georgia Emergency Management Agency (GEMA) has resources in its school safety section that may be useful to all law enforcement and public safety professionals. www2.state.ga.us/GEMA o Indiana School Safety Specialist Academy offers training and information resources on school safety, security, and emergency preparedness. http://ideanet.doe.state.in.us/isssa/welcome.html o National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) is a resource provided by the National Institute of Justice and other U.S. Department of Justice agencies and the Office of National Drug Control Policy that has a large variety of research information, including materials on school safety and other issues relevant to the criminal justice community. www.ncjrs.org o National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) system works directly with Federal, State, and local government agencies; community leaders; and scientists to foster technological innovations that result in new products, services, systems, and strategies for the Nation's criminal justice professionals. www.justnet.org o National Resource Center for Safe Schools (NRCSS) offers technical assistance and training on violence prevention and school safety. www.safetyzone.org o National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC), a program of the U.S. Secret Service, provides threat assessment leadership and guidance. www.ustreas. gov/usss/ntac.shtml o U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program is the Federal Government's vehicle for reducing school violence, as well as drug, alcohol, and tobacco use, through education and prevention activities. www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS/index.html o U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) offers grants and programs that serve the needs of school resource officers and school safety programs. www.usdoj.gov/cops o U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, Office of Science and Technology, School Safety Program is profiled in this issue of TechBeat (page 3). http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/sciencetech/ ssi.htm o U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) offers grants, funding, and resources for school safety programs and school resource officers. http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org o White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) provides publications, resources, and grant information on school safety and related issues. www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov Nonprofit Organizations o Hamilton Fish National Institute on School and Community Violence researches, develops, and evaluates school violence prevention strategies. www.hamfish.org o National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) is a source of information on crime prevention. Several educational materials deal with school safety and related issues. www.ncpc.org o National School Safety Center provides training, technical assistance, and school safety site assessments and targets both law enforcement professionals and educators. www.nssc1.org Publications o 2000 Annual Report on School Safety, U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice, 2000, profiles grantees under the Safe Schools/Healthy Students initiative and offers data on the nature and scope of school crime. www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS/annrept00.pdf o Approaches to School Safety in America's Largest Cities, Vera Institute of Justice, August 1999, profiles model programs and strategies. www.vera.org/ publication_pdf/apprchs_school_safety.pdf o The Appropriate and Effective Use of Security Technologies in U.S. Schools, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice; U.S. Department of Education Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program; and Sandia National Laboratories, 1999, provides basic guidelines and strategies on the use of school security technologies. www.ncjrs.org/ school/178265.pdf o "As Real As It Gets," TechBeat, Fall 1999, National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, discusses the Weapons Team Engagement Trainer. Since the publishing of this article, a school safety scenario has been added. www.justnet.org/pdffiles/tbfall1999. pdf or www.justnet.org/txtfiles/TBFall1999.html o "An Attraction for Weapons," TechBeat, Fall 1999, National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, presents information on the development and testing of a walk-through weapons detector that was the forerunner of the SecureScan 2000. www.justnet.org/ pdffiles/tbfall1999.pdf or www.justnet.org/txtfiles/ tbfall1999.html (Also reference "Cause for Alarm" in this issue of TechBeat, page 4.) o Creating Safe and Drug-Free Schools: An Action Guide, U.S. Department of Education, September 1996, offers action steps and information on making schools safer. www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles/safescho.pdf o Cutting Edge of Technology: The Use of CCTV/Video Cameras in Law Enforcement, Executive Brief, International Association of Chiefs of Police, May 2001, assesses the current use of video cameras and their impact on law enforcement issues, including school safety. www.theiacp.org/documents/pdfs/Publications/ UseofCCTV.pdf o Early Warning, Timely Response: A Guide to Safe Schools, U.S. Department of Education, 1998, presents a summary of research on violence prevention, crisis intervention, and school safety. http://cecp.air.org/ guide/guide.pdf o The Final Report and Findings of the Safe School Initiative: Implications for the Prevention of School Attacks in the United States, U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education, May 2002, offers the results of a detailed study of recent school shootings in the United States. www.ed.gov/offices/ OESE/SDFS/preventingattacksreport.pdf (The National Institute of Justice published a summary of the report, titled "Preventing School Shootings: A Summary of a U.S. Secret Service Safe Schools Initiative Report," in its March 2002 NIJ Journal. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ nij/journals/jr000248.htm) o Guide for Preventing and Responding to School Violence, International Association of Chiefs of Police, 1999, presents strategies for safer learning environments. www.theiacp.org/pubinfo/pubs/pslc/ schoolviolence.pdf o Guide for the Selection of Drug Detectors for Law Enforcement Applications, NIJ Guide 601-00, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, August 2000, discusses various issues and technologies related to the detection of contraband drugs. www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/nij/ 183260.pdf o Guide to the Technologies of Concealed Weapon and Contraband Imaging and Detection, NIJ Guide 602-00, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, February 2001, offers information on technologies to detect hidden weapons and information on related issues. www.ncjrs. org/pdffiles1/nij/184432.pdf o Hand-Held Metal Detectors for Use in Concealed Weapon and Contraband Detection, NIJ Standard- 0602.01, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, September 2000, specifies performance and other standards for using handheld detection equipment in law enforcement settings. www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/ 183470.htm o Indicators of School Crime and Safety, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2001, presents data on rates of school crime and school safety. www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ bjs/pub/pdf/iscs01.pdf o "Interoperability AGILE-ity," TechBeat, Fall 2002, National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, focuses on interoperability issues, which can affect school safety. www.justnet.org/pdffiles/ tbfall2002.pdf or www.justnet.org/txtfiles/tbfall2002. html o Newer Technologies for School Security, U.S. Department of Education, ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, February 2001, examines technology advances and issues related to their use in school settings. www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ ed449550.html o Promoting Safety in Schools: International Experience and Action, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance, August 2001, provides an international perspective on school shootings and school safety issues. www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/bja/186937.pdf o Report on State Implementation of the Gun-Free Schools Act, School Year 1998-99, U.S. Department of Education, October 2000, summarizes data on how States are implementing the government mandate to expel students who bring guns to school. www.ed.gov/ offices/OESE/SDFS/GFSA o Safeguarding Our Children: An Action Guide, Implementing Early Warning, Timely Response, U.S. Department of Education, April 2000, helps schools develop and implement a violence prevention plan using the principles of the guide, Early Warning, Timely Response: A Guide to Safe Schools. http://cecp.air.org/guide/aifr5_01.pdf o Safer Schools: Strategies for Educators and Law Enforcement to Prevent Violence, National Crime Prevention Council, 1998, provides assistance with violence prevention programs and strategies. www. ncpc.org/eduleo.htm o School-Based Policing and SROs, National Resource Center for Safe Schools, Fall 2000, looks at the role that school resource officers play in maintaining safe schools. www.safetyzone.org/pdf/fact8.pdf o School Critical Incident Planning: An Internet Resource Directory, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, is an online resource directory developed under a grant by Eastern Kentucky University, Justice and Safety Center. It collects resources to help with preparation, resolution, and response related to school critical incident planning. www.justnet.org/assistance/ schoolsafety.html o School Resource Officer Training Program, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Fact Sheet, March 2001, provides information on the Comprehensive School Safety Leadership Initiative to provide training and technical assistance to SROs. www.ncjrs. org/pdffiles1/ojjdp/fs200105.pdf o School Resource Officers and School Administrators: "Talking and Walking" Together to Make Safer Schools, Research Bulletin, Center for the Prevention of School Violence, June 2002, provides information on how to enhance the relationship between school administrators and SROs. www.ncsu. edu/cpsv/Acrobatfiles/research_bulletin_sro_6_02.pdf o School Safety Emergency Procedures Guide, Delaware Emergency Management Agency, outlines procedures for responding to school emergencies, including situations that involve school violence. www.state.de.us/dema/EmerProc.htm o "The School Shooter: One Community's Experience," FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, September 2001, details the results of a case study of the school shooting in Fort Gibson, Oklahoma. www.fbi.gov/publications/ leb/2001/september2001/sept01p9.html o The School Shooter: A Threat Assessment Perspective, FBI Academy, National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime, Critical Incident Response Group, 1999, reports on key indicators that may help prevent a school shooting incident. www.fbi.gov/publications/ school/school2.pdf o Surveillance Tools for Safer Schools-Final Report, Institute for Forensic Imaging, January 2002, offers the findings of a study of surveillance technology for use in schools. The study, funded by the National Institute of Justice, was conducted by the Institute for Forensic Imaging, Naval Surface Warfare Center, and Indiana University Purdue University of Indianapolis (IUPUI), Schools of Informatics, Law, and Public and Environmental Affairs. www.ifi-indy.org/security.htm o Threat Assessment in Schools: A Guide to Managing Threatening Situations and to Creating Safe School Climates, U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education, May 2002, outlines a process for identifying, assessing, and managing students who may present a threat of school violence. www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS/threatassessmentguide.pdf o Violence and Discipline Problems in U.S. Public Schools: 1996-1997, U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, March 1998, reports the results of a survey of U.S. schools about issues related to crime, violence, and school safety. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/98030.pdf o Walk-Through Metal Detectors for Use in Concealed Weapon and Contraband Detection, NIJ Standard- 0601.01, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, September 2000, offers information on walk-through technologies to detect hidden weapons and other forms of contraband, and information on related issues. http://www.ojp. usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/183471.htm o What You Need to Know About Drug Testing in Schools, Office of National Drug Control Policy, August 2002, is designed to assist educators, parents, and community leaders in determining whether student drug testing is appropriate for their schools. http:// www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/news/press02/ 082902.html ------------------------------- The NLECTC Center System The National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) system, a program of the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), offers no-cost assistance in helping agencies large and small implement current and emerging technologies. The NLECTC system was established in 1994 by NIJ's Office of Science and Technology to deliver information and technology assistance to the more than 18,000 police departments; 50 State correctional systems; thousands of prisons, jails, and parole and probation departments; and other public safety organizations. With a network of regional centers and specialty offices located across the country, the NLECTC system has been able to deliver expertise in a number of technologies by forming partnerships with such host organizations as the Air Force Research Laboratory, the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, and The Aerospace Corporation. Through these partnerships, NLECTC staff have access to the latest innovations in research and development. The NLECTC system serves as an "honest broker" resource for technology information, assistance, and expertise that includes the following services: Technology Identification The NLECTC system provides information and assistance to help agencies determine the most appropriate and cost-effective technology to solve an administrative or operational problem. We deliver information relating to technology availability, performance, durability, reliability, safety, ease of use, customization capabilities, and interoperability. Technology Assistance Our staff serve as proxy scientists and engineers. Areas of assistance include unique evidence analysis (e.g., audio, video, computer, trace, and explosives), systems engineering, and communications and information systems support (e.g., interoperability, propagation studies, and vulnerability assessments). Technology Implementation We develop technology guides, best practices, and other information resources that are frequently leveraged from hands-on assistance projects and made available to other agencies. Property Acquisition We help departments take advantage of surplus property programs that make Federal excess and surplus property available to law enforcement and corrections personnel at little or no cost. Equipment Testing In cooperation with the Office of Law Enforcement Standards (OLES), we oversee the development of standards and a standards-based testing program in which equipment such as ballistic- and stab-resistant body armor, double-locking metallic handcuffs, and semiautomatic pistols is tested on a pass/fail basis. NLECTC also conducts comparative evaluations--testing equipment under field conditions--on patrol vehicles; patrol vehicle tires and replacement brake pads; and cut-, puncture-, and pathogen-resistant gloves. NLECTC also has evaluated emerging products to verify manufacturers' claims. The primary focus of OLES is the development of performance standards and testing methods to ensure that public safety equipment is safe, dependable, and effective. Technology Demonstration We introduce and demonstrate new and emerging technologies through such special events, conferences, and practical demonstrations as the Mock Prison Riot (technologies for corrections), Operation America (bomb detection technologies), and an annual public safety technology conference. On a limited basis, NLECTC facilitates deployment of new technologies to agencies for operational testing and evaluation. Capacity Building We provide hands-on demonstrations of the latest technology to address such operational issues as crime and intelligence analysis, geographic information systems, explosives detection and disablement, inmate disturbances and riots, and computer crime investigation. Technology Information NLECTC disseminates information to the criminal justice community at no cost through educational bulletins, equipment performance reports, guides, consumer product lists, news summaries, meeting/conference reports, videotapes, and CD-ROMs. NLECTC also publishes TechBeat, an award-winning quarterly newsmagazine. Most publications are available in electronic form through the Justice Technology Information Network (JUSTNET) at www.justnet.org. Hard copies of all publications can be ordered through NLECTC's toll-free number, 800-248-2742, or via e-mail at asknlectc@nlectc.org. Technology Commercialization Our law enforcement and corrections professionals, product and commercialization managers, engineers, and technical and market research specialists work together to identify new technologies and product concepts. They then work with innovators and industry to develop, manufacture, and distribute these new, innovative products and technologies. Technology Needs Assessment Our national body of criminal justice professionals--the Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Advisory Council (LECTAC)--ensures that we are focusing on the real-world needs of public safety agencies. Because most of the country's law enforcement and corrections services are provided at the local level, the NLECTC system is composed of five regional centers and is complemented by several specialty offices and a national center. Most centers and offices are co-located with or supported by federally funded technology partners so they can leverage unique science and engineering expertise. NLECTC-National 2277 Research Boulevard Rockville, MD 20850 800-248-2742 asknlectc@nlectc.org NLECTC-Northeast 26 Electronic Parkway Rome, NY 13441-4514 888-338-0584 nlectc_ne@rl.af.mil NLECTC-Southeast 5300 International Boulevard North Charleston, SC 29418 800-292-4385 nlectc-se@nlectc-se.org NLECTC-Rocky Mountain 2050 East Iliff Avenue Denver, CO 80208 800-416-8086 nlectc@du.edu NLECTC-West c/o The Aerospace Corporation 2350 East El Segundo Boulevard El Segundo, CA 90245-4691 888-548-1618 nlectc@law-west.org NLECTC-Northwest 4000 Old Seward Highway, Suite 301 Anchorage, AK 99503-6068 866-569-2969 nlectc_nw@ctsc.net Border Research and Technology Center (BRTC) 1010 Second Avenue, Suite 1920 San Diego, CA 92101-4912 888-656-2782 info@brtc.nlectc.org Rural Law Enforcement Technology Center (RULETC) 101 Bulldog Lane Hazard, KY 41701 866-787-2553 ruletc@aol.com Office of Law Enforcement Technology Commercialization (OLETC) 2001 Main Street, Suite 500 Wheeling, WV 26003 888-306-5382 oletc@oletc.org Office of Law Enforcement Standards (OLES) 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8102 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8102 301-975-2757 oles@nist.gov ------------------------------- TechShorts Technology News Summary TechShorts is a sampling of article abstracts published weekly as part of the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center's (NLECTC's) online information service: the Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology News Summary. Offered through JUSTNET, the website of NLECTC, this weekly news summary provides synopses of recent articles relating to technology developments and initiatives in law enforcement, corrections, and the forensic sciences that have appeared in newspapers, newsmagazines, and trade and professional journals. The summaries also are available through an electronic e-mail list, JUSTNETNews. Each week, subscribers to JUSTNETNews receive the summary directly via e-mail. To subscribe to the JUSTNETNews/Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology News Summary, e-mail your request to asknlectc@nlectc.org or call 800-248-2742. Note: Providing synopses of articles or mentioning specific manufacturers or products does not constitute the endorsement of the U.S. Department of Justice or NLECTC. Reproduction of this text is encouraged; however, copies may not be sold. The NLECTC Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology News Summary should be cited as the source of the information. Copyright 2003, Information Inc., Bethesda, Maryland. Sounding the Alarm Sheriff Mike Milstead, the sheriff of Minnehaha County, South Dakota, came up with a new task for the radio system traditionally used by the National Weather Service to warn cities and counties of severe weather. Post September 11, 2001, Milstead decided it was a good idea to use the radio system for any type of threats to public safety, including terrorist attacks and accidents. The idea caught on and South Dakota Gov. Bill Janklow, the National Weather Service, other sheriff's departments, and the media jumped on the bandwagon in what has now become a statewide campaign. They mean to see that every home has a weather radio. To implement the plan, the Governor negotiated a deal for the purchase of 10,000 weather radios at half price. Five thousand or more radios will be donated to schools, hospitals, nursing homes, day-care centers, and other organizations and institutions, and the balance will be sold to private citizens for a discounted price. The National Weather Service initiated the infrastructure needed to operate this warning system throughout the State in 1998, after a tornado nearly obliterated the town of Spencer. Prior to that, only five transmitters existed in the State. Milstead's idea has sparked national interest since a National Public Radio broadcast about the South Dakota program aired last year. 65.227.106.78 St. Louis Post-Dispatch Alleged serial killer Maury Troy was apprehended after law enforcement was able to track him through his computer. Troy had sent an Internet map to a St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter indicating where the body of a slain prostitute could be located. Microsoft told the FBI the Internet protocol address of the only person who had mapped the area, while WorldCom was able to pinpoint the physical location of the address. Civil libertarians are worried about the ability of law enforcement to easily track people through the Internet without the public knowing how simple the process is. Officers are mandated by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 to present a subpoena or a court order for a search warrant before being given information from Internet companies. WorldCom's Sudie Nolan asserts that her company follows the proper legal channels when it helps law enforcement agencies. Few court cases have tested the applications of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. Teaching Machines To Hear Your Prose and Your Pain New York Times Speech recognition software's ability to detect prosody in human speech is severely limited, and researchers around the world are working to make programs more capable of interpreting pauses, timing, pitch, volume, and other cues that can be translated into punctuation, jokes, and questions. Some speech synthesis programs incorporate prosody to evoke a feeling of friendliness to people who listen to electronic messages, but recognizing prosody is a far more complicated matter, notes Mari Ostendorf of the University of Washington. Psycholinguist Elizabeth Shriberg is leading prosody detection initiatives, including one involving how changes in pitch indicate sentence boundaries. Another project involves studying false starts and disfluencies-"ums," "ands," and "oops"-that are common in natural speech but may confuse speech recognition programs. The applications for software that can identify prosody include intelligence gathering, such as analysis and transcription of monitored broadcasts and conversations, which could prove critical in espionage and security initiatives. A more prosaic use for such technology is being looked into at the University of Erlangen-Nurnberg in Germany, where a team is developing programs that can detect cues that indicate frustration, or even inebriation. Automated customer service and call centers could benefit from such software. Will Thugs Be Scarred Straight? San Diego Union-Tribune Ocean Beach, California, grandmother Pat Robertson has invented a personal safety device that will enable victims to collect their attacker's DNA. The 911Jack, a handheld brush with metal bristles, could be used to scratch an attacker and retain DNA for his identification and as evidence. Robertson has spent $60,000 over 4 years to develop the 911Jack. She began selling the personal safety device for $6 at the Ocean Beach and Pacific Beach coffee kiosks she owns and at trade shows. Robertson says she consulted forensics and liability experts while developing the 911Jack, which she believes will be more effective during an attack than pepper spray or alarm whistles. Putting Vision Systems Into Perspective CNet A California startup company is working to enable computers to see in 3D by using stereo vision video cameras, which would merge two views to gain depth perception, just as humans do. The company says its products could be used by vehicles and robots to better navigate and perform tasks that depend on visual sensory. Currently, computers equipped with visual sensors have a difficult time separating important objects out from the background, but stereo vision could help them focus. Stop That Cart CIO Shopping cart theft costs supermarkets in the United States more than $800 million a year, not just in replacement costs, but in abandoned cart liability, fines for nuisance complaints, and investments in carriage retrieval services. Some retailers have taken matters into their own hands with the acquisition of high-tech gadgets designed to prevent cart theft. One San Diego-based company has developed a system that incorporates a digital receiver, braking device, frequency transmitter, and antenna to automatically cause a brake to be released when a cart nears a predetermined perimeter. Small Fry Robots Becoming Big Law Enforcement Deal Law Enforcement Technology Rescue teams at both the Pentagon and the World Trade Center used remote control robots to search for victims immediately following the September 11, 2001 attacks. Robots roughly the size of a shoebox searched areas in the rubble where dogs or humans could not reach. Larger robots were used later to investigate the structural status of walls damaged during the attacks. Robin Murphy, a professor at the University of South Florida, provided the smaller, tethered robots, while larger robots used a wireless transmission system and an onboard computing system. The law enforcement applications of robots, including vision-guided remote helicopters, is enormous. Robots are unaffected by some of the difficulties experienced by rescue teams, such as stress and the dangers of inhaling smoke or toxic fumes. Robots can also greatly reduce the danger experienced by bomb technicians who are attempting to disarm or handle an explosive package or device. Robots could eventually be used to help officers detect the presence of illegal drugs. Virtual Mobs, Terrorists for Troop, Police Training UniSci Computer scientists at the University of Pennsylvania have created a training system with computer-generated figures that copy behavior of real-life enemies. Lead researcher Barry G. Silverman unveiled the project at the annual Computer-Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation Conference in Orlando, Florida. The goal of the system, he says, is to build emotional and cultural factors into the computer-generated figures and to make simulated training more realistic and more successful for troops being sent overseas or police charged with maintaining order in the United States. Silverman hopes the realistic simulations will teach trainees not to make decisions that provoke crowd aggression. The project took 3 years and a $1.4 million grant from the Pentagon's Defense Modeling and Simulation Office to complete. ------------------------------- www.justnet.org Online News Summary includes article abstracts on law enforcement, corrections, and forensics technologies that have appeared in major newspapers, magazines, and periodicals and on national and international wire services and websites. Publications from NIJ and NLECTC that you can view or download to your system. Frequently Asked Questions that offer detailed information based on thousands of calls to our information specialists. Calendar of Events that lists upcoming meetings, seminars, and training. Links that can take you to other important law enforcement and corrections websites. For help in establishing an Internet connection, linking to JUSTNET, or finding needed technology and product information, call the NLECTC Information Hotline at 800-248-2742. ------------------------------- National Criminal Justice Reference Service In addition to funding the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) supports the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), an international clearinghouse on crime and justice information. NCJRS staff respond to reference questions, provide referrals to other resources, distribute NIJ and other Office of Justice Programs (OJP) documents, and maintain a mailing list of more than 45,000 registered users. In addition, NCJRS sponsors a calendar of events at www.eventcalendar.ncjrs.org, which lists conferences and meetings of interest to the criminal justice community. If you are interested in signing up for the NCJRS mailing list, you may request a registration form using any of the following methods: Fax-on-Demand. Dial 800-851-3420, select option 1, then option 1 again. The registration form is #1 on the document index. The form will be faxed to you immediately. Fax. Fax your request for a registration form to 410-792-4358. You will receive a form promptly in the mail. Online. Go to www.ncjrs.org/puborder and request registration form BC640. It will be sent to you in the mail. Or register online at www.ncjrs.org/register. Write. Send a written request to NCJRS, P.O. Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849-6000. Call. Call an NCJRS information specialist at 800-851-3420 and request a registration form. As a registered user, you will receive the bimonthly NCJRS Catalog, the NCJRS Users Guide, and news and announcements of new publications and resources based on your criminal justice interests. For more information about NIJ and NCJRS, visit their websites: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij and www.ncjrs.org. ------------------------------- The National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center is supported by Cooperative Agreement #96-MU-MU- K011 awarded by the U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Analyses of test results do not represent product approval or endorsement by the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice; the National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce; or Aspen Systems Corporation. Points of view or opinions contained within this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and Office for Victims of Crime. ------------------------------- Make It Standard Issue Individual Subscriptions: TechBeat is available at no cost. If you are not currently on our mailing list, please call us at 800-248-2742, fax 301-519-5149, or e-mail us at asknlectc@nlectc.org. Domestic Department Subscriptions: If your division, department, or agency has more than 25 individuals, we can drop ship as many copies as you require. All you have to do is provide us with the quantity needed, a shipping address (no post office boxes, please), and a contact name and telephone number. Your only obligation is to disseminate them once they arrive. If you require fewer than 25 copies, please provide us with the names and addresses of individuals who are to receive the newsmagazine and we will send copies directly to them. Contact Rick Neimiller, TechBeat managing editor, at 800-248-2742, for additional information or to subscribe. Address Correction: Please notify us of any change in address or point of contact. Call 800-248-2742; fax 301-519-5149; or e-mail asknlectc@nlectc.org. Article Reproduction: Unless otherwise indicated, all articles appearing in TechBeat may be reproduced. We do, however, request that you include a statement of attribution, such as: "This article was reproduced from the winter 2003 issue of TechBeat, published by the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, a program of the National Institute of Justice, 800-248-2742." Questions/Comments/Story Ideas: We welcome all questions, comments, and story ideas. Please contact Rick Neimiller, TechBeat managing editor, at 800-248-2742 or e-mail rneimiller@nlectc.org. Awards: TechBeat has received numerous awards, including the 1998 Best of Category, Excellence in Printing Award from the Printing & Graphic Communications Association; the first-place 1998 Blue Pencil Award for Most Improved Periodical from the National Association of Government Communicators; the 1999 Silver Inkwell Award of Merit from the International Association of Business Communicators; and the APEX 2001 Award of Excellence for Magazines and Newspapers-Printed. Photo Credits: Photos used in this issue of TechBeat copyright (c) 2002 PhotoDisc, Inc.; Corbis Stock Market; Eyewire; Digital Vision; Getty Images, Inc.; and Aspen Systems Corporation. TechBeat is the award-winning newsmagazine of the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) system. Our goal is to keep you up to date with technologies currently being developed by the NLECTC system, as well as other research and development efforts within the Federal Government and private industry. TechBeat is published four times a year. Managing Editor, Rick Neimiller; Contributing Writers, Becky Lewis, Pattiann Aardema, Mark Eckert, Lisa Knight, Lois Pilant, and Kate Poindexter; Editor, Michele Coppola; Assistant Editor, Brian Higgins; Graphic Designers, C. Denise Collins and Tina Kramer. ------------------------------- New Publications The following publications are available from the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center-National: Michigan State Police Tests 2003 Patrol Vehicles. This bulletin summarizes the test results from the Michigan State Police 2003 model year patrol vehicle evaluations. 2003 Model Year Patrol Vehicle Testing. This report contains the complete results of comprehensive tests conducted by the Michigan State Police of 2003 model year police patrol vehicles. Vehicles were subjected to major tests and evaluations, including vehicle dynamics testing, acceleration and top-speed testing, brake testing, ergonomics and communications evaluations, and fuel economy evaluations. To obtain any of the above publications, write NLECTC, 2277 Research Boulevard, Mail Stop 8J, Rockville, MD 20850; telephone 800-248-2742; or e-mail asknlectc@nlectc.org. Publications also can be downloaded from JUSTNET at www.justnet.org. ------------------------------- Walk This Way-- to the 7th annual Mock Prison Riot April 27-30, 2003 at the former penitentiary in Moundsville, West Virginia For more information or to register online, log on to www.oletc.org or call 888-306-5382. ------------------------------- Homeland Security: Protecting America's Future Force Protection Equipment Demonstration IV May 6-8, 2003 United States Marine Corps Base Quantico, VA www.fped4.org