Evaluation of Local Policies and Strategies for Intelligence Analysis

This assignment evaluates the impact of local policies and strategies on intelligence collection, sharing, coordination, and analysis. It begins with an introduction highlighting the critical role of intelligence in securing states and maintaining public safety, emphasizing the need for effective collection, coordination, analysis, and sharing. The assignment then delves into policy implications, drawing parallels to the early stages of community and problem-solving policing, and notes the uneven implementation of sound policies despite the recognition of intelligence's importance post-9/11. Factors contributing to this include the broadening of intelligence's philosophical underpinnings and the delayed emergence of new standards and training programs. The assignment examines strategy implementation, highlighting the role of the Global Intelligence Working Group and Criminal Intelligence Coordinating Council, as well as the challenges agencies face in adapting to changes. It also notes the development of guidelines for intelligence officers and the benefits of intelligence-led policing in identifying threats. The assignment also addresses the challenges of reconciling with these standards, resource shortages, and privacy/civil rights concerns. It emphasizes the role of fusion centers in instituting intelligence-led policing and fostering relationships with other agencies. The conclusion summarizes the key points, emphasizing the turning point of 9/11, the restructuring of policies, and the ongoing need to address gaps in intelligence information sharing.

Evaluate the impact of local policies and strategies on collection, sharing, coordinating
and analyzing intelligence
Introduction
Intelligence information plays one of the most critical roles in securing the states and
maintaining enhanced public safety. In order to provide high safety standards and manage a
secure environment, it is essential that better intelligence is collected, coordinated, analyzed,
and shared. In order to ensure appropriate safety measures are maintained with analysis of
intelligence, within the United States, there are numerous state, local, and tribal agencies
functional. The incident of the September 11th attack can be regarded as one of the vital
points which have changed expectations regarding intelligence practices and it has emerged
as a critical point of consideration for prevention of terrorist attacks. Majority of the SLT law
enforcement agencies have stretched their intelligence capacity and over the years, there have
been significant fundamental changes in information sharing infrastructure in state, as well as
in local level.
Policy Implications:
The status of policy implication and law enforcement may be compared with the early
developmental stage of the community and problem solving policing which was witnessed in
the early 1990s. It is stated due to the fact that even though the policy makers and executives
have realized and given recognition to the criticality of intelligence, yet the implementation
of sound policies and appropriate strategies for abiding by the policies still remain uneven
even after eighteen years of 9/11 (Ratcliffe, 2016). There are several factors which may be
recognized to be contributing to this. First, it may be stated that the philosophical
underpinning of intelligence was stretched and broadened. Therefore, a process is necessary
to be implemented among the intelligence personnel. Secondly, it is also needed to be seen
that even though 9/11 is largely regarded as a benchmark for any type of change
implementation, it was seen that in real context new standards like the National Crime
Intelligence Sharing Plan as well as other training programs started emerging much later after
2003.
In regards with the National Security Act 1947 was amended in the year 2004 in order to
ensure that the intelligence functioning undertaken were more effective and the potential

chances of terrorist acts are reduced. It may be seen that the necessity of establishment of
National Counterterrorism Center was recognized in the Presidential documents which
highlighted the major functions necessary to be undertaken by the center along with the roles
which the Director of Central Intelligence required maintaining (D'Souza,, 2017).
Strategy implementation in practical context
Following the intelligence summit in March 2002 by International Association of Chief
Police and Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, creation of comprehensive and
effective barriers to future terror attacks by re-engineering the current capacities and in many
cases building the capacity from scratch was regarded as one of the most essential steps
needed to be undertaken (Ronczkowski, 2017). The concept of law enforcement application
were driven by newer concepts and standards introduced by Global Intelligence Working
Group and Criminal Intelligence Coordinating Council. Training and resources have become
available and the occurrences of changes have been significantly fast. However, the critical
issue is that most of the agencies faced difficulties in accepting the changes.
Nevertheless, it appears that significant progress has been made post 9/11 in installation of
fundamental policies and strategies relating to strengthen or building capacity of intelligence
of law enforcement and fusion agencies. Appropriate guidelines have been developed which
the intelligence officers are required to be followed, which enabled them to develop standard
working knowledge (Lowenthal, 2016). In addition to this, it becomes easier to identify the
prevalent threats within communities with the help of proper intelligence-led policing. Wide
ranges of training have been made available which the intelligence personnel consider taking
advantages of the same for proper collection and coordination of intelligence information,
which would substantially eliminate the potential risk of terrorism in a proper way.
Noted effects
In regards that despite there has been progress in development of guidelines and standards, it
is also noted that the agencies are yet to reconcile with these standards (Clark, 2019). Even
though the awareness regarding the threats among the intelligence personnel have increased
due to the coordination and collection of intelligence information in overwhelming amount
that ever before, it may be seen that there is a clear requirement for building a capacity to
mitigate these threats which is difficult to achieve due to shortages of resources in
accomplishment of goals as such. In addition to this, it is also seen that there are questions

concerning privacy issues and civil rights which are prevalent in different policies and
legislative aspects which are necessary to be maintained, and are often contradictory to the
guidelines and standards which are expected to be maintained by them. Therefore, in order to
ensure that the intelligence agencies are fully compliant, appropriate steps are needed to be
taken.
In addition to this, it is also noted that the fusion centers are responsible for instituting
philosophy of intelligence-led policing, being compliant with the issues concerning privacy,
and ensuring that relationship with other agencies are properly fostered. Thus, federally
supported strategies are generally followed which provides them with better assistance to
carry out the distinct activities of collecting and utilizing intelligence information for
providing enhanced and more holistic overall security (Petersen& Tjalve, 2018). It is
regarded important to foster relationship with other agencies since wide ranges of
community, government and private businesses, and so on may have information which may
be critical for the intelligence fusion process. More informational linkages are, thus,
established through application of proper strategies.
Conclusion
On the basis of the above mentioned discussion it is apparent that the 9/11 was one of the
turning points for intelligence operations in the US. In order to mitigate such risks in future,
appropriate sharing and coordination of information has been given recognition. Therefore,
restructuring of policies and systems have been done. However, these remain uneven due to
the lack of ability among personnel to adapt with the rapid changes. However, there has been
substantial improvement in functions in recent times with more knowledge regarding
guidelines and standards being achieved. The threat prevalent are better identified, along with
the gaps which are needed to be addressed for proper and unhindered intelligence information
sharing.

References:
Ratcliffe, J. H. (2016). Intelligence-led policing. Routledge.
Lowenthal, M. M. (2016). Intelligence: From secrets to policy. CQ press.
Ronczkowski, M. R. (2017). Terrorism and organized hate crime: Intelligence gathering,
analysis and investigations. CRC press.
Clark, R. M. (2019). Intelligence analysis: a target-centric approach. CQ press.
Petersen, K. L., & Tjalve, V. S. (2018). Intelligence expertise in the age of information
sharing: public–private ‘collection’and its challenges to democratic control and
accountability. Intelligence and National Security, 33(1), 21-35.
D'Souza, J. (2017). Terrorist financing, money laundering, and tax evasion: Examining the
performance of financial intelligence units. CRC Press.