Implementing a Real-Time Crime Center — Key Considerations

In a previous post, my colleague Jack Dougherty made a strong case for why implementing a real-time crime center generally is a good idea. I say “generally” because some law-enforcement organizations exist in places where the population is very small and crime is virtually nonexistent, especially serious crime, so an RTCC would be overkill for them. But for everyone else, it could have tremendous value.

Of course, wanting something and making happen often are two very different concepts, and implementing an RTCC is no exception. This blog explores some of the key considerations that every law-enforcement organization should contemplate before undertaking an RTCC initiative.

Look before you leap — All too often, public-safety agencies, including law-enforcement organizations, succumb to the “shiny object” phenomenon and RTCCs are no exception. They can be set up in myriad ways and leverage a plethora of technologies, so ensuring that an RTCC will perform optimally depends largely on whether the law-enforcement agency has defined its mission well and then aligned its technological approach equally well.

The devil is in the details —The basics of standing up an RTCC include the platform that will aggregate and then contextualize and make actionable a tremendous amount of data so that it can be leveraged to enhance situational awareness and inform decision-making; video/information screens that will be monitored by personnel; and a method of disseminating what is learned to field responders. The more data feeds that can be brought into an RTCC, the better, but the tricky part is lining up everything that needs to be captured and then ensuring that every data feed can be interpreted rapidly.

For example, do local ordinances allow a police department or sheriff’s office to deploy unmanned aerial vehicles, i.e., drones, to keep tabs on suspects as they flee the scene of the crime? Similarly, do they allow the use of facial-recognition software, which can be leveraged to identify suspects quickly? Are agreements in place that will enable the RTCC to access, in real time, the feeds of camera systems — think business or university camera systems, traffic-management systems, and GPS trackers hidden in bank bait money — that have been deployed by public and private entities? Are agreements in place that will allow them to leverage pertinent systems employed by other public-safety agencies? Will RTCC personnel monitor the data feeds 24/7 (proactive) or only when an incident has occurred (reactive)?

Are data-sharing agreements and mechanisms in place with allied organizations, such as the jurisdiction’s emergency communications center (ECC)? Here’s a hypothetical example that illustrates why this is important. Let’s say that a reckless driver runs a stop sign and in doing so, strikes and kills a pedestrian in the crosswalk. Now let’s say that the ECC receives a dozen 911 calls about the incident. The 911 telecommunicator is concerned only with the first call; the others are superfluous in terms of dispatching the appropriate emergency response. But the RTCC will want to speak to the other 11 callers because they are witnesses to a crime — consequently, it needs to interface with the ECC’s computer-aided dispatch (CAD) system to extract vital data that might lead to an arrest and conviction.

Dozens of questions like these must be answered to maximize an RTCC’s effectiveness — and the answers always come back to the defined mission.

Staffing and training — An RTCC requires personnel with unique skill sets; at the very least, they need to be highly observant and adept at crime analysis. RTCC personnel must be able to take what they see and hear and then connect the dots. This will require law-enforcement organizations to rethink who they recruit and train to fulfill this job function. Even when this is done well, the task still can be daunting given the staffing shortage that continues to afflict the entire public sector.

The facility will need a refresh and maybe a rebuild — One of the first and arguably biggest decisions a law-enforcement organization seeking to implement an RTCC concerns whether it will repurpose an existing facility or build a new one. There are a lot of factors to consider. First, what kind of equipment will be housed in the RTCC? How many consoles and screens? How many personnel will be working in the center? Is adequate space available for them and all the equipment they need? The HVAC system, communications system, and electrical system/grounding likely will need upgrading to industry standards. Sometimes, older facilities that weren’t designed for this purpose can’t be retrofitted. The decision to retrofit or build new will depend on the answers to these questions and more, but most importantly it will depend on the mission that the organization has identified for the center.

Avoid sole-source procurements — The universe of RTCC vendors is limited right now, so it might be tempting to reach out to one of them, in part because competitive procurements are time-consuming. This is a mistake. Vendors often try to sell what they have and not necessarily what the buyer needs. Competitive procurements ensure that the buyer receives the greatest functionality at the best price point. They typically result in best-of-breed systems featuring technology that aligns fully with the buyer’s mission. Avoiding sole-source procurements is important now, but it will become even more so as new vendors enter the RTCC market.

A third-party consultant like MCP can provide extremely valuable guidance regarding all these challenges and considerations — please reach out.

Bob Scott is MCP’s public-safety applications domain leader. Email him at BobScott@MissionCriticalPartners.com.