Crime Technology: Federal Assistance to State and Local Law Enforcement
(Letter Report, 06/07/1999, GAO/GGD-99-101).

Crime technology assistance provided by the Departments of Justice and
the Treasury as well as the Office of National Drug Control Policy to
state and local law enforcement between 1996 and 1998 totaled an
estimated $1.2 billion. This figure is conservative because--given that
these federal agencies are not required to, and do not, specifically
track crime technology assistance separately in their accounting
systems--GAO included only amounts that could be identified or
reasonably estimated by agency officials or GAO. The primary type of
crime technology assistance that GAO identified as going to state and
local law enforcement--$1 billion, or about 85 percent of the estimated
$1.2 billion total--was grants, all of which were administered by
Justice. Support service and systems was estimated to be the second
largest category of crime technology assistance provided to state and
local law enforcement agencies. Regarding in-kind transfers, GAO found
that only the Office of National Drug Control Policy had an established,
relevant program.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  GGD-99-101
     TITLE:  Crime Technology: Federal Assistance to State and Local
	     Law Enforcement
      DATE:  06/07/1999
   SUBJECT:  Federal/state relations
	     Law enforcement information systems
	     Technology transfer
	     Grants to states
	     Law enforcement agencies
	     Federal aid for criminal justice
	     Grants to local governments
IDENTIFIER:  DOJ State Identification Systems Grant Program
	     Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement
	     Assistance Program
	     Making Officer Redeployment Effective Grant
	     Byrne Formula Grant
	     DOJ National Criminal History Improvement Program
	     DOJ National Sex Offender Registry
	     DOJ Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program
	     FBI Combined DNA Index System
	     DOJ Regional Information Sharing System
	     FBI Law-Enforcement On-Line System
	     ATF Arson/Explosives Incident System
	     ATF Accelerant Detection Analysis
	     ATF Firearms Tracing System

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  This text was extracted from a PDF file.        **
** Delineations within the text indicating chapter titles,      **
** headings, and bullets have not been preserved, and in some   **
** cases heading text has been incorrectly merged into          **
** body text in the adjacent column.  Graphic images have       **
** not been reproduced, but figure captions are included.       **
** Tables are included, but column deliniations have not been   **
** preserved.                                                   **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************

    United States General Accounting Office GAO               Report
    to The Honorable Mike DeWine, U.S. Senate June 1999         CRIME
    TECHNOLOGY Federal Assistance to State and Local Law Enforcement
    GAO/GGD-99-101 United States General Accounting Office
    General Government Division Washington, D.C.  20548 B-280998 June
    7, 1999 The Honorable Mike DeWine United States Senate Dear
    Senator DeWine: This report responds to your request for
    information about crime technology assistance1 provided by the
    federal government to state and local law enforcement agencies.
    Specifically, for fiscal years 1996 through 1998, you requested
    that we identify the types and amounts of such assistance provided
    by the Department of Justice, the Department of the Treasury, and
    the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). Also, as
    agreed with you, we categorized the assistance into three types:
    (1) direct funding or grants; (2) access to support services and
    systems, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI)
    National Crime Information Center; and (3) in-kind (no cost)
    transfers of equipment or other assets. Identifiable crime
    technology assistance provided by Justice, Treasury, Results in
    Brief                    and ONDCP to state and local law
    enforcement agencies during fiscal years 1996 through 1998 totaled
    an estimated $1.2 billion, as table 1 shows. This total is
    conservative because-given that these federal agencies are not
    required to, and do not specifically track crime technology
    assistance separately in their accounting systems-we included only
    amounts that could be identified or reasonably estimated by agency
    officials or us. As noted in table 1, this estimate was
    particularly conservative regarding multipurpose grants, such as
    Byrne Formula Grants and Local Law Enforcement Block Grants, which
    by design can be used for a variety of purposes. Further, as also
    noted in table 1, regarding applicable support services and
    systems, we did not include personnel costs. 1 In developing the
    information in this report, we defined "crime technology
    assistance" to include federal programs and funding to support a
    broad array of activities, ranging from upgrading criminal history
    records to establishing or improving fingerprint and ballistic
    identification systems (see app. I). Page 1 B-280998 Table 1:
    Estimated Federal Funding for    Dollars in millions Crime
    Technology Assistance, Fiscal       Type of Assistance
    Amount Years 1996 Through 1998                   Direct single-
    purpose grants: Justice
    $ 255.1 Direct multipurpose grants: Justicea
    746.3 Support services and systems: Justiceb
    146.6 Support services and systems: Treasuryb
    15.9 Technology transfers: ONDCP
    13.0 Total
    $1,176.9 aFunding estimates for some purpose areas in the Byrne
    Formula Grants Program are for 10 states (the largest recipients);
    and, funding estimates for the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants
    Program are based on data voluntarily provided to Justice by
    substantially less than all grantees for only 2 fiscal years-i.e.,
    about 60 percent of the 1996 grantees and about 10 percent of the
    1997 grantees. bFor most services and systems, federal agency
    officials made estimates by prorating operating costs (excluding
    personnel costs) based on the number of queries or other usage
    measures. Source: Summary of data presented in appendixes II
    through V. The large majority of identified crime technology
    assistance to state and local law enforcement agencies-$1.0
    billion or about 85 percent of the estimated $1.2 billion total
    during fiscal years 1996 through 1998-was grants, all of which
    were administered by Justice. The three largest crime technology
    assistance grants during the 3 fiscal years were the (1) Office of
    Community Oriented Policing Services' Making Officer Redeployment
    Effective grants ($466.1 million), (2) Bureau of Justice
    Assistance's Byrne Formula Grants ($188.0 million), and (3) the
    Bureau of Justice Statistics' National Criminal History
    Improvement Program ($147.2 million). As table 1 shows, support
    services and systems was estimated to be the second largest
    category of crime technology assistance provided to state and
    local law enforcement agencies. In this category, Justice was the
    major provider, with an estimated $146.6 million in assistance
    compared to Treasury's $15.9 million. Regarding in-kind transfers,
    responses from the three agencies we reviewed indicated that only
    ONDCP had an established, relevant program. ONDCP's technology
    transfer program totaled an estimated $13.0 million in assistance
    during fiscal year 1998, the first year of the program's
    existence. Although states and localities have traditionally held
    the major Background                                responsibility
    for preventing and controlling crime in the United States, a
    significant aspect of the federal government's role has been its
    provision of financial and other assistance to state and local law
    enforcement agencies. Grants are the largest funding source of
    crime technology assistance to state and local law enforcement
    agencies. Page 2 B-280998 Of the three agencies we reviewed, only
    Justice provided grants for crime technology purposes. These
    grants fall into one of two categories: single- purpose and
    multipurpose. Single-purpose grants were clearly or completely for
    crime technology assistance. For example, the purpose of the State
    Identification Systems Grant Program, which was authorized by the
    Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-
    132), is to enable states to develop computerized identification
    systems that are compatible and integrated with certain FBI
    databases. Multipurpose grants can be used by state and local law
    enforcement agencies for a number of purposes including, but not
    limited to, crime technology. For example, the Anti-Drug Abuse Act
    of 1986 (P.L. 99-570) established formula and discretionary grants
    to state and local law enforcement agencies for addressing crime
    related to illegal drugs and other purposes. The Anti-Drug Abuse
    Act of 1988 (P.L. 100-690) expanded the grant programs and named
    them the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement
    Assistance Programs. Byrne programs are to be used to improve
    criminal justice systems, to enhance anti-drug programs, and for
    other purposes. More recently, the Violent Crime Control and Law
    Enforcement Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-322) authorized $30.2 billion
    for law enforcement and crime prevention measures. In addition to
    authorizing additional funding for Byrne programs through fiscal
    year 2000, the 1994 Act established what is known as the Office of
    Community Oriented Policing Services within Justice and authorized
    $8.8 billion in related funding. Also, the Omnibus Consolidated
    Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-134) provided
    funding for the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants Program, which
    provides funding to state and local governments to reduce crime
    and improve public safety. Nongrant federal assistance-such as
    providing state and local law enforcement with access to support
    services and systems-may be specifically authorized by
    legislation. For example, use of the Treasury Department's Federal
    Law Enforcement Training Center by units of state and local
    government is authorized by P.L. 90-351, as amended. There is no
    formal or standardized definition of "crime technology Scope and
    assistance" used throughout the federal government. Therefore, for
    Methodology    purposes of this review, we developed a working
    definition and discussed it with Justice, Treasury, and ONDCP
    officials, who indicated that the definition was appropriate.
    Also, because there is no overall requirement for agency
    accounting systems to track crime technology assistance, we Page 3
    B-280998 largely relied upon agency estimates. We did not fully or
    independently verify the accuracy and reliability of the funding
    data provided by agency officials. However, to help ensure data
    quality, among other steps, we (1) obtained information on and
    reviewed the processes used by agency officials to calculate the
    estimated amounts of crime technology assistance and (2) compared
    agency responses to primary source documents and attempted to
    reconcile any differences with agency officials. Also, as
    mentioned above, the funding totals presented in this report are
    conservative, especially regarding multipurpose grants. That is,
    because agency accounting systems did not specifically track crime
    technology assistance, we included only amounts that could be
    reasonably estimated by agency officials or by our reviews of
    agency information. Appendix I presents more details about our
    objectives, scope, and methodology. We requested comments on a
    draft of this report from the Attorney General, the Secretary of
    the Treasury, and the Director of ONDCP. Justice's, Treasury's,
    and ONDCP's oral and written comments are discussed near the end
    of this letter. We performed our work from August 1998 to April
    1999 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
    standards. As table 1 shows, for the three federal agencies we
    reviewed, single- Grant Programs Were    purpose grants ($255.1
    million) and multipurpose grants ($746.3 million) the Major Type
    of      were the major type of crime technology assistance
    provided to state and local law enforcement agencies during fiscal
    years 1996 through 1998. Federal Assistance We identified 13
    relevant single-purpose grant programs. Of these, one program-the
    National Criminal History Improvement Program- represented about
    58 percent of the $255.1 million total. This program, funded at
    about $147.2 million for fiscal years 1996 through 1998, wholly
    involved crime technology assistance in that its purpose is to
    help states upgrade the quality and completeness of criminal
    history records and to increase compatibility with and access to
    FBI criminal information databases. The other 12 single-purpose
    grant programs represented about 42 percent ($107.9 million) of
    the $255.1 million total and included programs such as a DNA
    Laboratory Improvement Program and the National Sex Offender
    Registry. We identified 10 multipurpose grant programs that had
    some purposes involving crime technology assistance to state and
    local law enforcement agencies. Of these 10, the following 2
    programs accounted for about 88 percent of the estimated $746.3
    million total: Page 4 B-280998 *  Making Officer Redeployment
    Effective Grants ($466.1 million): This program, administered by
    the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, allows law
    enforcement agencies to purchase equipment and technology to help
    expand the time available for community policing by current law
    enforcement officers. *  Byrne Formula Grant Program ($188.0
    million): Three purpose areas in this program-purpose areas 15(a),
    15(b), and 25-specifically involved crime technology assistance to
    state and local law enforcement agencies during fiscal years 1996
    through 1998. Purpose area 15(a) is for improving drug-control
    technology; purpose area 15(b) is for criminal justice information
    systems (including a 5-percent set-aside for improving criminal
    justice records); and purpose area 25 is for developing DNA
    analysis capabilities. The other eight multipurpose grant programs
    represented 12 percent ($92.2 million) of the estimated $746.3
    million total funding through multipurpose grants for crime
    technology assistance. Among many other uses, grant recipients
    used these funds to develop (1) information management systems for
    drug court programs and (2) integrated computer systems for
    tracking domestic violence cases. Appendix II provides more
    details about Justice's single-purpose and multipurpose grants
    that provided crime technology assistance to state and local law
    enforcement agencies during fiscal years 1996 through 1998. The
    second largest category of estimated crime technology assistance,
    as Justice and Treasury      table 1 shows, was access to support
    services and systems provided by Provided Access to        Justice
    and Treasury. Of these two agencies, Justice was the more
    significant provider, with an estimated $146.6 million in
    assistance to state Support Services and      and local law
    enforcement agencies, or about 90 percent of the $162.5 Systems
    million total during fiscal years 1996 through 1998. For these 3
    fiscal years, about 62 percent of Justice's $146.6 million in
    assistance was attributable to 4 of the 21 relevant support
    services or systems we identified: *  Regional Information Sharing
    Systems ($50.3 million): Funded by the Bureau of Justice
    Assistance, six regional criminal intelligence centers provide
    state and local law enforcement with access to an Intelligence
    Database Pointer, a National Gang Database, a secure intranet, and
    other support services. Page 5 B-280998 *  Combined DNA Index
    System ($16.7 million): The FBI's index system contains DNA
    records of persons convicted of crimes. State and local crime
    laboratories can use the system to store and match DNA records. *
    Law Enforcement On-Line ($12.6 million): Managed by the FBI, this
    intranet links the law enforcement community throughout the United
    States and supports broad, immediate dissemination of information.
*  National Crime Information Center ($11.1 million): Managed by
    the FBI, this is the nation's most extensive criminal justice
    information system. The system's largest file, the Interstate
    Identification Index, provides access to millions of criminal
    history information records in state systems. Justice's other 17
    support services and systems represented 38 percent ($55.9
    million) of the agency's $146.6 million total assistance in this
    category. Two examples are (1) the Drug Enforcement
    Administration's National Drug Pointer Index, which has an
    automated response capability to determine if a case suspect is
    under active investigation by a participating law enforcement
    agency and (2) the National Institute of Justice's National Law
    Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers, which offer
    technology and information assistance to law enforcement and
    corrections agencies by introducing promising technologies and
    providing technology training. Appendix III presents more detailed
    information about Justice's support services and systems that
    provided crime technology assistance to state and local law
    enforcement agencies during fiscal years 1996 through 1998.
    Treasury's support services and systems provided $15.9 million of
    assistance during this period, as table 1 shows. This assistance
    involved a total of 29 support services and systems. Of these, 14
    were provided by one Treasury component-the Bureau of Alcohol,
    Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), which accounted for $13.4 million (84
    percent) of Treasury's $15.9 million total assistance in this
    category. Further, as indicated next, 3 of ATF's 14 services and
    systems accounted for about two-thirds of the ATF's support to
    state and local law enforcement: *  Arson/Explosives Incident
    System ($3.5 million): State and local agencies are able to query
    the system for information about component parts, stolen
    explosives, and device placement. *  Accelerant Detection Analysis
    ($2.7 million): This service involves the laboratory analysis of
    fire debris to detect and identify flammable liquids potentially
    used as accelerants in an incendiary fire. Page 6 B-280998 *
    Firearms Tracing System ($2.5 million): The National Tracing
    Center traces firearms (from the manufacturer to the retail
    purchaser) for law enforcement agencies. Treasury's other 15
    relevant support services and systems accounted for the remaining
    16 percent ($2.5 million) of the $15.9 million total assistance.
    Two examples are (1) the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network's
    Project Gateway, which helps state and local law enforcement
    agencies combat money laundering and other financial crimes and
    (2) the Secret Service's Questioned Document Branch, which
    maintains a forensic information system for analyzing handwriting
    samples. Appendix IV presents more detailed information about
    Treasury's support services and systems that provided crime
    technology assistance to state and local law enforcement agencies
    during fiscal years 1996 through 1998. Based on information from
    Justice, Treasury, and ONDCP officials, we In-Kind Transfer
    specifically identified only one established, relevant in-kind
    transfer Programs              program-i.e., an ONDCP technology
    transfer program that began in fiscal year 1998. According to
    ONDCP officials, the program involved 18 projects or systems that
    fit our definition of crime technology assistance, but only 15 of
    these were transferred to state and local law enforcement agencies
    in fiscal year 1998. For that year, as table 1 shows, federal
    funding for the transferred projects or systems totaled $13
    million. Examples of transferred technologies include (1) a vapor
    tracer device for detecting and identifying small quantities of
    narcotics and explosives and (2) a secure, miniaturized
    multichannel audio device for inconspicuous use during covert
    operations. Appendix V provides further details about ONDCP's
    technology transfer program. Justice and Treasury officials told
    us that their agencies routinely make excess equipment available
    to other governmental and nongovernmental users through the
    General Services Administration. However, the officials said they
    had no readily available information regarding how much of the
    excessed equipment was crime technology related and was
    subsequently received by state and local law enforcement agencies.
    Similarly, General Services Administration officials told us that
    their agency's accounting systems could not provide this type of
    information. Treasury officials noted that there have been a few
    isolated or nonroutine instances of direct transfers, as when the
    Secret Service directly excessed Page 7 B-280998 some used
    automated data processing and communications equipment2 to state
    and local law enforcement agencies in 1998. We did not include
    these isolated or nonroutine transfers in the funding amounts
    presented in this report. Officials from Justice's Office of
    Justice Programs and Office of Audit Agency Comments and Liaison
    met with us on May 13, 1999, and provided the following comments
    Our Evaluation                 on a draft of this report: *  In
    their written comments, Office of Justice Programs officials
    provided several technical comments and clarifications, mostly
    centered on funding amounts for certain National Institute of
    Justice programs presented in table II.1 in appendix II. As
    appropriate, we made adjustments to table II.1 and also added some
    clarifying language to our scope and methodology (app. I). *  The
    Director, Office of Audit Liaison, told us that the draft report
    had been reviewed by officials in other relevant Justice
    components (including INTERPOLU.S. National Central Bureau and the
    Marshals Service) and the Office of Community Oriented Policing
    Services, and that these officials had no comments. Also, in
    written comments, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the FBI,
    and the Immigration and Naturalization Service suggested technical
    comments and clarifications, which have been incorporated in this
    report where appropriate. Treasury officials met with us on May
    12, 1999, and provided oral comments. More specifically: *  ATF,
    Customs Service, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, and
    Financial Crimes Enforcement Network officials expressed agreement
    with the information presented in the report. *  Secret Service
    officials had technical comments and clarifications, which have
    been incorporated in this report where appropriate. *  A Treasury
    Office of Finance and Administration official indicated that,
    although not in attendance at the May 12 meeting, IRS officials
    had reviewed the draft report and had no comments. 2 Secret
    Service officials told us that the original acquisition costs of
    this equipment totaled about $535,000 but that no depreciated
    values have been calculated or assigned regarding the transfer.
    Page 8 B-280998 On May 13, 1999, the Director of ONDCP's
    Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center met with us and expressed
    agreement with the information presented in the report. To provide
    additional perspective, he suggested that appendix V reflect the
    fact that, as of December 1998, the 15 relevant ONDCP projects or
    systems involved a total of 202 recipient state and local law
    enforcement agencies. We added this information to the appendix.
    As arranged with your office, unless you publicly announce the
    contents of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution
    until 30 days after the date of this letter. We are sending copies
    of this report to Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Chairman, and Senator
    Patrick J. Leahy, Ranking Minority Member, Senate Committee on the
    Judiciary; Representative Henry J. Hyde, Chairman, and
    Representative John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Minority Member, House
    Committee on the Judiciary; The Honorable Janet Reno, Attorney
    General; The Honorable Robert E. Rubin, Secretary of the Treasury;
    The Honorable Barry R. McCaffrey, Director of ONDCP; and The
    Honorable Jacob Lew, Director, Office of Management and Budget.
    Copies will also be made available to others upon request. The
    major contributors to this report are listed in appendix VI. If
    you or your staff have any questions about this report, please
    contact me on (202) 512-8777. Sincerely yours, Richard M. Stana
    Associate Director Administration of Justice Issues Page 9
    Contents 1 Letter 14 Appendix I                    Objectives
    14 Objectives, Scope, and Definition of "Crime Technology
    Assistance"                                    14 Overview of
    Scope and Methodology                                       14
    Methodology                   Scope and Methodology Regarding
    Grant Programs                          16 Scope and Methodology
    Regarding Support Services and                    20 Systems Scope
    and Methodology Regarding In-Kind Transfers
    22 Data Accuracy and Reliability
    23 24 Appendix II                   Overview of Department of
    Justice Grant Programs                        24 Crime Technology
    Descriptions of Justice Grant Programs
    28 Assistance (Grants) Provided by the Department of Justice 34
    Appendix III                  Overview of Department of Justice
    Support Services and                  34 Crime Technology
    Systems Descriptions of Justice's Support Services and Systems
    36 Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of Justice 41 Appendix IV                   Overview of
    Department of the Treasury Support                          41
    Crime Technology                Services and Systems Descriptions
    of Treasury's Support Services and Systems                 42
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of the Treasury Page 10
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Contents 48 Appendix V
    Mission of ONDCP's Counterdrug Technology
    48 Crime Technology            Assessment Center Overview of
    Technology Transfer Pilot Program                             48
    Assistance (In-Kind       Descriptions of Applicable Systems
    49 Transfers) Provided by the Office of National Drug Control
    Policy 52 Appendix VI Major Contributors to This Report Table 1:
    Estimated Federal Funding for Crime
    1 Tables                      Technology Assistance, Fiscal Years
    1996 Through 1998 Table II.1: Estimated Obligations of Department
    of                        25 Justice Single-Purpose Grants for
    Crime Technology Provided to State and Local Law Enforcement
    Agencies, Fiscal Years 1996 Through 1998 Table II.2: Estimated
    Obligations of Department of                        28 Justice
    Multipurpose Grants With Crime Technology as a Permissible Use
    Provided to State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, Fiscal Years
    1996 Through 1998 Table III.1: Estimated Obligations of Department
    of                       35 Justice Support Services and Systems
    Provided to State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, Fiscal Years
    1996 Through 1998 Table IV.1:  Estimated Obligations of Department
    of the                   41 Treasury Support Services and Systems
    Provided to State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, Fiscal Years
    1996 Through 1998 Table V.1: ONDCP Crime Technology Assistance
    48 Provided to State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, Fiscal
    Year 1998 Page 11                                       GAO/GGD-
    99-101 Crime Technology Contents Abbreviations ATF         Bureau
    of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms CODIS       Combined DNA Index
    System CTAC        Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center DEA
    Drug Enforcement Administration FBI         Federal Bureau of
    Investigation INS         Immigration and Naturalization Service
    INTERPOL    International Criminal Police Organization IRS
    Internal Revenue Service MORE        Making Officer Redeployment
    Effective ONDCP       Office of National Drug Control Policy STOP
    Services Training Officers Prosecutors Page 12
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Page 13    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime
    Technology Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology Senator
    Mike DeWine requested that we identify crime technology Objectives
    assistance provided by the federal government to state and local
    law enforcement agencies. Specifically, for fiscal years 1996
    through 1998, Senator DeWine requested that we identify the types
    and amounts of such assistance provided by the Departments of
    Justice and the Treasury and the Office of National Drug Control
    Policy (ONDCP). As agreed with the requester, we categorized the
    assistance into three types: (1) direct funding or grants; (2)
    access to support services and systems, such as automated criminal
    history records and forensics laboratories; and (3) in- kind (no-
    cost) transfers of equipment or other assets. Initially, we
    conducted a literature search to determine whether there was
    Definition of "Crime             a commonly accepted definition of
    "crime technology assistance." Since Technology
    our search did not yield a definition, we developed our own by
    reviewing (1) a then pending bill (S. 2022), which has since been
    enacted into law,1 Assistance"                      related to
    crime technology assistance introduced by Senator DeWine during
    the second session of the 105th Congress, and its legislative
    history; (2) his request letter to us and subsequent discussions
    with his staff; (3) the General Services Administration's Catalog
    of Federal Domestic Assistance, a reference source of federal
    assistance programs, including crime control programs; and (4)
    Congressional Research Service reports on federal crime control
    assistance. Accordingly, our definition of crime technology
    assistance was the following: "Any technology-related assistance
    provided to state and local law enforcement agencies, including
    those of Indian tribes, for establishing and/or improving (1)
    criminal justice history and/or information systems and
    specialized support services or (2) the availability of and
    capabilities to access such services and systems related to
    identification, information, communications, and forensics." We
    discussed this definition with Justice, Treasury, and ONDCP
    officials, who indicated that the definition was appropriate and
    would be helpful in their efforts to compile the requested
    information. To determine the types and amounts of crime
    technology-related Overview of Scope and assistance for fiscal
    years 1996 to 1998, we reviewed (1) excerpts from the Methodology
    Budget of the United States Government, Appendices and Analytical
    Perspectives for fiscal years 1998, 1999, and 2000, (2) agencies'
    fiscal year budget requests, (3) appropriations acts, and (4)
    budget execution reports provided by the Office of Management and
    Budget. Also, as noted above, we reviewed the General Services
    Administration's Catalog of Federal 1 P.L. 105-251 (October 9,
    1998). Page 14
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and
    Methodology Domestic Assistance (annual editions for 1996 through
    1998) and Congressional Research Service reports on federal crime
    control assistance. We contacted the Justice, Treasury, and ONDCP
    components most likely to provide crime technology-related
    assistance. Within Justice, we contacted *  the Drug Enforcement
    Administration (DEA); *  the Federal Bureau of Investigation
    (FBI); *  the Immigration and Naturalization Service; *  the
    INTERPOL - U.S. National Central Bureau; *  the U.S. Marshals
    Service; *  the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services;
    and *  the Office of Justice Programs and its components (i.e.,
    the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice
    Statistics, the Drug Courts Program Office, the National Institute
    of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
    Prevention, and the Violence Against Women Grants Office). Within
    Treasury, we contacted *  the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and
    Firearms (ATF); *  the Customs Service; *  the Federal Law
    Enforcement Training Center; *  the Financial Crimes Enforcement
    Network; *  the Internal Revenue Service (IRS); and *  the Secret
    Service. Page 15                                         GAO/GGD-
    99-101 Crime Technology Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and
    Methodology Within ONDCP, we contacted the Director of the
    Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center. From Justice, Treasury,
    and ONDCP, we obtained and reviewed relevant program descriptions
    and related explanatory materials, such as catalogs and program
    plans. Specifically, we reviewed (1) descriptions of grant
    programs and support services and systems and (2) corresponding
    funding data prepared by agency officials for this review.
    Generally, in this report, our references to state and local law
    enforcement agencies may include recipients of federal assistance
    in (1) the 50 states; (2) the District of Columbia; (3) the
    Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and (4) where applicable, the U.S.
    territories of American Samoa and Guam, the Commonwealth of the
    Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. During our
    review of grant programs, we identified many crime technology
    Scope and                projects that were funded by federal
    grants distributed to entities other Methodology              than
    state and local law enforcement agencies. These recipients
    included federal agencies, private firms, colleges and
    universities, and others. Regarding Grant          Specifically,
    under the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants Program, 1 Programs
    percent of authorized appropriations ($20 million per year) was
    for law enforcement technologies. According to a National
    Institute of Justice official, this 1-percent set-aside supported
    153 projects during fiscal years 1996 through 1998; and, of this
    total, 145 projects involved grant funding in which state or local
    law enforcement agencies did not participate in the specific
    project at all. Therefore, we did not include grant funding for
    these 145 projects in the data tables presented in appendix II.
    However, the other eight projects directly involved state or local
    law enforcement agencies.  For these eight projects, we included
    grant funding (a total of $2,325,600) in table II.1. We determined
    that, of the three agencies we reviewed, only Justice provided
    direct grant funding to state and local law enforcement agencies
    for crime technology assistance. Within Justice, the Office of
    Community Oriented Policing Services and the Office of Justice
    Programs administered the majority of grant programs that included
    crime technology assistance. We divided crime technology
    assistance grants into two categories--single-purpose grants and
    multipurpose grants. We defined single-purpose grants as those
    that clearly or completely fell Single-Purpose Grants    within
    the definition of crime technology assistance. For single-purpose
    Page 16                                        GAO/GGD-99-101
    Crime Technology Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
    grants, Justice was able to identify applicable grants and
    specifically quantify funding amounts (see table II.1 in app. II).
    As table II.1 shows, the National Institute of Justice is one of
    Justice's components that provided crime technology assistance.
    The Institute's role includes allocating funds for certain
    research and development projects that may directly or indirectly
    involve crime technology assistance to state and local law
    enforcement agencies.  For purposes of our review and table II.1,
    we included the Institute's research and development project costs
    for only those projects wherein the Institute was able to identify
    that a state or local law enforcement agency was directly involved
    or partnered with private firms, companies, universities, or
    federal agencies.  In commenting on a draft of this report,
    National Institute of Justice officials noted that: *  Such
    partnerships are difficult to identify and quantify unless the
    state or local agency is a subgrantee, which is something that is
    not electronically tracked by the Office of Justice Programs or
    the National Institute of Justice. *  Also, there are inherent
    difficulties in using research and development project costs to
    quantify direct benefits to state and local law enforcement
    agencies.  For instance, partnering arrangements can result in a
    diffusion of funds among various entities, in contrast to grants
    made directly to a state or local law enforcement agency.   Also,
    direct benefits may not be immediately realized given that
    research and development efforts may involve extended time frames
    and/or may not result in practical implementation. In further
    commenting on a draft of this report, National Institute of
    Justice officials emphasized that, in providing funding input for
    table II.1, they focused on crime technology assistance that
    involved information systems or information-sharing systems.  The
    officials noted that the Institute is involved in other crime
    technology-related projects--such as concealed weapons detection
    systems and less-than-lethal technologies-- that were not included
    in the funding figures provided to us. We defined multipurpose
    grants as those that could be used for two or Multipurpose Grants
    more purposes, including crime technology assistance. Since
    Justice did not have a system to track crime technology
    assistance, it was unable to determine the exact amount of crime
    technology assistance provided to state and local law enforcement
    agencies through multipurpose grants. Page 17
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and
    Methodology However, in many cases, Justice officials were able to
    estimate the portions or amounts of multipurpose grants that
    involved technology assistance, as indicated in following sections
    and reflected in table II.2 in appendix II. Byrne Formula Grants
    Byrne Formula Grants may be used for a total of 26 purpose areas,
    8 of which could involve crime technology. According to the Bureau
    of Justice Assistance, three of these eight purpose areas clearly
    consisted of crime technology-related activities: *  Purpose area
    15(a) was for improving drug-control technology. *  Purpose area
    15(b) was for improving criminal justice information systems. *
    Purpose area 25 was for developing DNA analysis capabilities.
    However, for the other five potentially relevant purpose areas,
    Justice was unable to estimate the amounts of crime technology
    assistance provided by the Byrne Formula Grants.2 Therefore,
    regarding these 5 purpose areas, we conducted a file review of
    Byrne Formula Grants to determine the amount of crime technology
    assistance provided to the 10 states that received the most Byrne
    Formula Grants funds during fiscal year 1998. The 10 states
    (California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, New
    York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas) received nearly half of all
    Byrne Formula Grants funds during fiscal year 1998. Our findings
    concerning these 10 states are not statistically projectable to
    the total universe of recipients. Local Law Enforcement Block
    According to the Office of Justice Programs, one of seven purpose
    areas of Grants Program                   the Local Law
    Enforcement Block Grants Program involves crime technology
    assistance to state and local law enforcement agencies. This
    purpose area is entitled "equipment and technology" and includes
    both traditional law enforcement equipment (such as guns, vests,
    and batons) and crime technology. During fiscal years 1996 through
    1998, the Office of Justice Programs obligated approximately $628
    million for equipment and technology. Since the Office of Justice
    Programs did not specifically track how funding was allocated in
    the equipment and technology purpose area, it was unable to
    determine how much of the approximately $628 million 2 The 5
    potentially relevant purpose areas are numbers 6, 7, 9, 10, and
    26. Purpose area 6 is for improving the investigations of white-
    collar crime; purpose area 7 is for improving the operational
    effectiveness of law enforcement; purpose area 9 is for enhancing
    financial investigative capabilities; purpose area 10 is for
    improving the operational effectiveness of the courts; and purpose
    area 26 is for developing antiterrorism training and procuring
    equipment. Page 18
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and
    Methodology obligated for fiscal years 1996 through 1998 was for
    traditional law enforcement equipment and how much was for crime
    technology. Although the Office of Justice Programs does not
    specifically track crime technology assistance provided through
    the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants Program, it asked grantees
    to complete reports describing how grantees expended equipment and
    technology funds. Grantees completing the reports classified their
    equipment and technology expenditures into 10 subcategories, 5 of
    which were most likely to include expenditures for crime
    technology,3 according to the Office of Justice Programs. However,
    since completion of the expenditure reports was not mandatory, at
    the time of our review the Office of Justice Programs had received
    these reports from only 60 percent of the 1996 grantees, about 10
    percent of the 1997 grantees, and none of the 1998 grantees. The
    grantee expenditure reports showed that approximately $63 million
    was obligated for equipment and technology during fiscal years
    1996 and 1997; and, of this amount, about $33 million (or 52
    percent) was for the 5 crime technology- related categories. Drug
    Courts Program Office      This office awarded three categories of
    grants under the Drug Court Discretionary Grant Program: planning,
    implementation, and enhancement. According to the Drug Courts
    Program Office, based on experience to date, "enhancement" grants
    is the category most likely to involve crime technology,
    especially grants for management information systems. The Office
    of Justice Programs conducted a word search for "crime technology"
    of Drug Court Discretionary Grants. The word search identified six
    Drug Court grants that involved crime technology. Office of
    Justice Programs staff examined the six grants to determine how
    much funding the grantees planned to allocate specifically for
    crime technology purposes. Funding for these programs, three in
    fiscal year 1997 and three in fiscal year 1998, is depicted in
    table II.2 in appendix II. Office of Community Oriented    The
    Office of Community Oriented Policing Services had four programs
    Policing Services               that included funding for crime
    technology assistance: (1) Making Officer Redeployment Effective
    (MORE), (2) Advancing Community Policing, (3) Problem-Solving
    Partnerships, and (4) Community Policing to Combat Domestic
    Violence. Under MORE, grant funds could be used for hiring 3 The
    Office of Justice Programs described the five relevant
    subcategories as: (1) communications equipment, (2)
    lab/forensic/drug-testing equipment, (3) systems hardware, (4)
    software, and (5) systems improvements. Page 19
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and
    Methodology civilian personnel or obtaining crime technology.
    However, for purposes of our review, agency officials specifically
    excluded personnel funding and identified the funding obligated
    for crime technology during fiscal years 1996 through 1998.
    Violence Against Women Grants      This Justice office
    administered two multipurpose grant programs that Office
    could involve funding for crime technology: (1) Formula Grants for
    Law Enforcement and Prosecution, also known as the STOP program,
    and (2) Discretionary Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies. The
    Office of Justice Programs conducted a word search for "crime
    technology" that identified 4 STOP grants and 62 Grants to
    Encourage Arrest Policies during fiscal years 1996 through 1998.
    The Office of Justice Programs reviewed these grants to determine
    how much grantees planned to specifically allocate for crime
    technology purposes. For applicable support services and systems
    in Justice and Treasury, we Scope and
    asked responsible officials to provide us with funding data
    regarding usage Methodology                        related to
    meeting the needs of state and local law enforcement agencies.
    That is, for criminal history databases, forensics laboratories,
    and other Regarding Support                  crime technology-
    related services and systems, we wanted to know what Services and
    Systems               portions of the federal operating costs were
    used to support state and local law enforcement. In response,
    Justice and Treasury officials provided us with estimates for each
    applicable service and system. (See apps. III and IV.) Table III.1
    in appendix III presents the 21 relevant Justice support services
    Justice: 21 Support Services and systems that we identified.  For
    15 of these services and systems--that and Systems
    is, those provided by DEA, FBI, the Immigration and Naturalization
    Service, and the INTERPOL-U.S. National Central Bureau--Justice
    officials told us that in most cases they calculated funding
    estimates by prorating total operating costs (excluding federal
    salaries and other personnel costs) between federal and
    state/local law enforcement agencies based on the number of
    queries or other usage measures. Justice's other six relevant
    support services and systems are under three components--the
    Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics,
    and the National Institute of Justice--that are not directly
    involved in conducting criminal investigations. According to
    Justice officials, these services and systems were established
    explicitly to benefit state and local law enforcement agencies. As
    such, the officials said that Page 20
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and
    Methodology the funding figures provided to us represent total,
    nonprorated operating costs (excluding personnel costs), even
    though federal law enforcement agencies can be participants, as is
    the case with the Regional Information Sharing Systems program.
    Table IV.1 in appendix IV presents the 29 relevant Treasury
    support Treasury: 29 Support    services and systems that we
    identified. Personnel costs were not included Services and Systems
    in any of the funding figures provided us by the Treasury
    Department agencies. ATF provided 14 of the 29 support services
    and systems to state and local law enforcement. For 10 of these 14
    support services and systems, ATF prorated the obligated costs of
    crime technology assistance to state and local law enforcement
    agencies. For the remaining four ATF support services and systems,
    obligated costs were not prorated because all of these costs
    supported state and local law enforcement. The Customs Service
    provided one relevant support service and system, the Treasury
    Enforcement Communications System, to state and local law
    enforcement agencies. Customs prorated its expenditures based on
    the number of state and local law enforcement transactions
    relative to the total number of system transactions for each
    fiscal year from 1996 through 1998. The Federal Law Enforcement
    Training Center provided 2 of Treasury's 29 support services and
    systems to state and local law enforcement agencies. The Center
    calculated the actual costs of the two training programs provided.
    The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network provided one support
    service and system--the Gateway System--to state and local law
    enforcement agencies. Since the Gateway system was designed to
    help state and local law enforcement agencies pursue criminal
    investigations, all obligations during fiscal years 1996 through
    1998 applied to state and local law enforcement. IRS' National
    Forensic Laboratory supports criminal investigations related to
    tax and financial statutes. However, the laboratory has few
    resources to support state and local law enforcement and does so
    only under exceptional circumstances. Although no precise records
    existed regarding assistance to state and local law enforcement
    agencies, an IRS official estimated that during fiscal years 1996
    through 1998, the laboratory incurred annual costs of less than
    $1,000. Page 21                                       GAO/GGD-99-
    101 Crime Technology Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
    The Secret Service provided 10 of Treasury's 29 support services
    and systems. The Secret Service prorated costs for eight of its
    support services and systems and provided us full or actual costs
    for the other two (Identification Branch Training and Operation
    Safe Kids). Also, it should be noted that the support services and
    systems listed in Other Federal Support Not       appendixes III
    and IV do not include certain multiagency intelligence Included in
    Funding Tables      organizations, such as the El Paso
    Intelligence Center, which was established to collect, process,
    and disseminate intelligence information concerning illicit drug
    and currency movement, alien smuggling, weapons trafficking, and
    related activity. The Center's 15 federal members include various
    Justice (e.g., DEA and FBI), Treasury (e.g., Customs Service and
    IRS), and Department of Transportation (e.g., Coast Guard and the
    Federal Aviation Administration) components; the Departments of
    the Interior and State; and liaison agencies such as the Central
    Intelligence Agency and the Department of Defense. In addition,
    all 50 states are associate members. The Center accepts queries
    from federal and state member agencies. For their respective
    organizations, we asked officials at Justice, Treasury, Scope and
    and ONDCP to identify any in-kind transfer programs that provided
    crime Methodology                     technology assistance to
    state and local law enforcement agencies during fiscal years 1996
    through 1998. Responses from the three agencies Regarding In-Kind
    indicated that only ONDCP had an established, relevant in-kind
    transfer Transfers                       program (see app. V).
    Justice and Treasury officials told us that their agencies
    generally do not directly transfer excess equipment--whether for
    crime technology or any other purpose--to state and local law
    enforcement agencies.  However, Treasury officials noted that
    there have been a few isolated or nonroutine instances whereby
    some equipment has been given directly to a state or local law
    enforcement agency. For example, the officials noted that, during
    fiscal year 1998: *  The Secret Service directly excessed about
    $535,000 worth of automated data processing and communications
    equipment (based on original acquisition cost) to state and local
    law enforcement agencies. *  The Financial Crimes Enforcement
    Network directly excessed 186 pieces of computer equipment to
    state and local law enforcement agencies.  The original
    acquisition cost of this equipment was about $367,000. *  The
    Secret Service directly excessed two polygraph instruments
    (original acquisition costs totaled about $8,900); one instrument
    was given to the St. Joseph (MO) Police Department and the other
    to the Chicago (IL) Police Department. Page 22
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and
    Methodology Also, Justice and Treasury officials told us their
    agencies routinely make excess equipment available to other users
    through the General Services Administration, which is to make
    dispositions in the following priority order: (1) distribution to
    other federal agencies, (2) donation to state and local agencies,
    (3) sale to the general public, and (4) donation to nonprofit
    organizations through a state agency for surplus property.  The
    Justice and Treasury officials said they had no readily available
    information regarding how much of the excessed equipment was crime
    technology related and was subsequently received by state and
    local law enforcement agencies. Similarly, General Services
    Administration officials told us that their accounting systems
    could not provide this type of information. Generally, we relied
    on funding information that agency officials provided Data
    Accuracy and      to us. Since agency accounting systems typically
    did not track crime Reliability            technology assistance,
    agency officials used a number of methods to estimate crime
    technology assistance. For example, the Office of Justice Programs
    had its program managers calculate how much crime technology
    assistance was in the multipurpose grant programs. We did not
    fully or independently verify the accuracy and reliability of the
    funding data provided by agency officials. However, to help ensure
    the overall quality of the funding data, we *  compared agency
    responses to primary source documents and attempted to reconcile
    any differences with agency officials, *  obtained information on
    and reviewed the processes used by agency officials to calculate
    the estimated amounts of crime technology assistance, and *
    compiled the program and funding information we obtained into
    matrices and asked agency officials to verify the accuracy of this
    information. Finally, we note that the funding figures presented
    in this report are conservative, particularly regarding
    multipurpose grants, such as Byrne Formula Grants and Local Law
    Enforcement Block Grants, because we included only amounts that
    could be reasonably estimated by agency officials or by our
    reviews of agency information. Page 23
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix II Crime Technology
    Assistance (Grants) Provided by the Department of Justice This
    appendix presents information about the types and amounts of crime
    Overview of                     technology-related grants provided
    by the Department of Justice to state Department of Justice and
    local law enforcement agencies during fiscal years 1996
    through1998. Generally, as reflected in the following two
    sections, we categorized Grant Programs
    applicable grants as being either single-purpose or multipurpose:
*  Single-purpose grants are clearly for crime technology
    purposes--which can include any number of a wide array of
    activities under the definition of "crime technology assistance"
    provided in appendix I. *  Multipurpose grants, distributed funds
    that could be used by state and local law enforcement agencies for
    a variety of purposes including, but not limited to, crime
    technology assistance. Justice officials provided us with
    estimates of the funding amounts related to crime technology
    assistance. The last section in this appendix provides brief
    descriptions of applicable grant programs. Table II.1 shows the
    types and amounts of grants provided by Justice Single-Purpose
    Grant            components to state and local law enforcement to
    be used expressly for Programs                        crime
    technology-related purposes during fiscal years 1996 through 1998.
    Grants for these purposes totaled about $255.1 million for the 3-
    year period. Page 24
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix II Crime Technology
    Assistance (Grants) Provided by the Department of Justice Table
    II.1: Estimated Obligations of Department of Justice Single-
    Purpose Grants for Crime Technology Provided to State and Local
    Law Enforcement Agencies, Fiscal Years 1996 Through 1998 Dollars
    in thousands Component and program
    1996                    1997                     1998
    Total Bureau of Justice Assistance Drugfire
    $2,166.9              $1,954.6                   $945.3
    $5,066.8 Local Law Enforcement Block Grants Program:
    0              2,103.2                   9,843.8
    11,947.0 Technical assistance and training allocation National
    White Collar Crime Center
    1.3                30.1                      74.8
    106.2 State Identification Systems Grants Program
    0              8,300.0                   9,908.0
    18,208.0 Subtotal
    $2,168.2               $12,387.9                 $20,771.9
    $35,328.0 Bureau of Justice Statistics National Criminal History
    Improvement Program                   48,895.0
    48,048.0                  50,230.0               147,173.0
    National Sex Offender Registry
    0                     0                 24,255.0
    24,255.0 State Justice Statistics Program for Statistical
    1,920.0                1,779.0                   1,939.0
    5,638.0 Analysis Centers Subtotal
    $50,815.0               $49,827.0                 $76,424.0
    $177,066.0 National Institute of Justice Counterterrorism
    Technology Program                                        0
    1,127.0                   1,506.0                 2,633.0 Crime
    Act 1-Percent Set-Aside (funded by Local
    159.6                 1,096.8                   1,069.2
    2,325.6 Law Enforcement Block Grants Program) Forensic DNA
    Laboratory Improvement Programa                       8,750.0
    2,952.0                  12,281.0                23,983.0 Science
    and Technology Programs (funds from the                    3,331.7
    0                        0                 3,331.7 Office of
    Community Oriented Policing Services) Southwest Border States
    Anti-Drug Information                              0
    588.0                   5,821.5                 6,409.5 Systemb
    Subtotal
    $12,241.3                 $5,763.8                $20,677.7
    $38,682.8 Office of Justice Programs Improved Training and
    Technical Automation                         4,062.2
    0                        0                 4,062.2 Grants Justice
    total                                                   $69,286.7
    $67,978.7               $117,873.6               $255,139.0 aThe
    DNA Laboratory Improvement Program is a joint program with the
    FBI. bFiscal year 1998 funding was based on a reimbursement from
    the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Source: GAO
    summary of data provided by Justice components. Table II.2 shows
    estimates of the funding amounts involving crime Multipurpose
    Grant                                  technology assistance in
    multipurpose grants for fiscal years 1996 through Programs
    1998. As shown, the funding totaled about $746.3 million for the 3
    years. However, for some of the grant programs, including the
    Byrne Formula Grant Program and the Local Law Enforcement Block
    Grants Program, the amounts shown in the table do not represent
    all of the applicable funding Page 25
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix II Crime Technology
    Assistance (Grants) Provided by the Department of Justice
    involving crime technology. Rather, as indicated below, the
    amounts are only a partial accounting. Byrne Formula Grants:
    State and local law enforcement agencies can use Byrne Formula
    Grant Complete Data for Some            funds for a total of 26
    purpose areas. Sample uses include demand- Purpose Areas and Data
    for 10     reduction education programs and improving corrections
    systems. Eight of States for Other Purpose Areas    the 26 purpose
    areas could involve crime technology. According to the Bureau of
    Justice Assistance, three of these eight purpose areas clearly
    consist of crime technology-related activities (see app. I for
    more information). The Bureau of Justice Assistance provided us
    with funding amounts for these 3 purpose areas for all recipients,
    which totaled about $183.0 million for the 3 fiscal years, as
    presented in table II.2. However, because its accounting systems
    do not specifically track crime technology assistance as a
    separate category, the Bureau of Justice Assistance was unable to
    provide us with an estimate for the other five purpose areas.
    Thus, for these five purpose areas, we reviewed grant files at the
    Bureau of Justice Assistance. Due to time constraints, we limited
    our review to the 10 states that received the largest amounts of
    Byrne Formula Grant funding in fiscal year 1998. Collectively,
    these 10 states received 48 percent of total Byrne Formula Grant
    funding in fiscal year 1998. For these 10 states, we reviewed
    grants files for fiscal years 1996, 1997, and 1998. The relevant
    funding for these five purpose areas (about $5.0 million total for
    the 3 years) is also included in table II.2.  An analysis of grant
    files for the other 40 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S.
    territories would likely result in a higher funding total. Local
    Law Enforcement Block       As shown in table II.2, the funding
    figures for the Local Law Enforcement Grants Program: Partial Data
    Block Grants Program totaled about $32.7 million and are based on
    data from Grantees for Only 2 Years    from about 60 percent of
    fiscal year 1996 grantees and about 10 percent of fiscal year 1997
    grantees. No data were available for fiscal year 1998.  As
    indicated below, a more thorough accounting would likely result in
    a higher funding total for this grant program. According to the
    Bureau of Justice Assistance, only one purpose area of the Local
    Law Enforcement Block Grants Program involves crime technology
    assistance--that is, the purpose area called "equipment and
    technology." However, by the Bureau's definition, the "equipment"
    portion of this purpose area does not constitute crime technology
    assistance. Nonetheless, in response to our request, a Bureau of
    Justice Assistance official said that the Bureau's accounting
    systems could not differentiate this portion of the purpose area
    from the "technology" portion. Alternatively, the official
    provided us with the following information: Page 26
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix II Crime Technology
    Assistance (Grants) Provided by the Department of Justice *  The
    equipment and technology purpose area has 10 subcategories. Of
    these, five subcategories--i.e., those pertaining to systems
    improvements (data linkage, criminal history records, etc.)--are
    most likely to include expenditures related to crime technology. *
    For these five subcategories, actual expenditure data have been
    reported by some grantees for fiscal years 1996 and 1997.
    Specifically, based on reports from about 60 percent of fiscal
    year 1996 grantees, actual expenditures by these grantees for the
    five subcategories totaled about $28.9 million in 1996. Based on
    reports from about 10 percent of fiscal year 1997 grantees, actual
    expenditures by these grantees for the five subcategories totaled
    about $3.7 million. There has been no reporting by fiscal year
    1998 grantees. Thus, for the five subcategories, the reported
    actual expenditures at the time of our review totaled about $32.7
    million, as reflected in table II.2. From these same 1996 and 1997
    grantees, the total expenditures reported for all 10 subcategories
    at the time of our review was about $63.4 million. The reported
    actual expenditures for the five crime technology-related
    subcategories ($32.7 million) represent about 50 percent of the
    total reported actual expenditures for the "equipment and
    technology" purpose area ($63.4 million). During fiscal years 1996
    to 1998, funds obligated for this purpose area totaled about $628
    million. However, the 50-percent figure cannot be used to
    statistically project how much of this total involved crime
    technology assistance during fiscal years 1996 through 1998. Page
    27                                              GAO/GGD-99-101
    Crime Technology Appendix II Crime Technology Assistance (Grants)
    Provided by the Department of Justice Table II.2: Estimated
    Obligations of Department of Justice Multipurpose Grants With
    Crime Technology as a Permissible Use Provided to State and Local
    Law Enforcement Agencies, Fiscal Years 1996 Through 1998 Dollars
    in thousands Component and program
    1996                        1997                      1998
    Total Bureau of Justice Assistance Byrne Discretionary Grants
    $3,667.0                   $1,313.0                  $5,485.0
    $10,465.0 Byrne Formula Grants Purpose areas 15(a), 15(b), and 25a
    60,536.0                   62,196.0                  60,273.0
    183,005.0 Purpose areas 6,7,9,10, and 26b
    337.5                    3,033.8                   1,585.6
    4,956.9 Local Law Enforcement Block Grants Programc
    28,936.8                     3,745.1           Not estimated
    32,681.9 Subtotal
    $93,477.3                  $70,287.9                 $67,343.6
    $231,108.8 Drug Courts Program Office Drug Court Discretionary
    Grant Programd                                   0
    190.6                     726.3                     916.9 Office
    of Community Oriented Policing Services Advancing Community
    Policing Grants                                       0
    12,997.6                           0                 12,997.6
    Community Policing to Combat Domestic Violence
    7,640.8                           0                      N/A
    7,640.8 Grants Making Officer Redeployment Effective Grants
    126,937.1                  115,581.7                 223,532.6
    466,051.4 Problem-Solving Partnerships
    0             20,571.7                           0
    20,571.7 Subtotal
    $134,577.9                $149,151.0                $223,532.6
    $507,261.5 Violence Against Women Grants Office Grants to
    Encourage Arrest Policiesd                                5.7
    5,953.0                     974.0                    6,932.7 STOP
    Violence Against Women Formula Grantsd                       14.0
    0                    104.4                     118.4 Subtotal
    $19.7                  $5,953.0                  $1,078.4
    $7,051.1 Justice total
    $228,074.9               $225,582.5                $292,680.9
    $746,338.3 a The amounts shown represent funding for three purpose
    areas: Purpose area 15(a) is for improving drug-control
    technology; purpose area 15(b) is for criminal justice information
    systems (including a 5- percent set-aside for improving criminal
    justice records); and purpose area 25 is for developing DNA
    analysis capabilities. b The figures shown are based on our review
    of grant files for 10 states that received the largest amount of
    Byrne Formula Grant funding.  Funding for these 10 states
    represented approximately 48 percent of total Byrne funding for
    fiscal year 1998. c The figures shown represent actual
    expenditures reported by 60 percent of the 1996 grantees and 10
    percent of the 1997 grantees. At the time of our review, 1998
    grantees had not reported. d The figures shown are not
    obligations. Rather, they are planning amounts submitted by
    grantees during the application process. The Office of Justice
    Programs ascertained these amounts by (1) electronically
    conducting a word search (using the term "crime technology") of
    applicable grant programs and (2) manually reviewing those files
    identified by the word search. Source: GAO summary of data
    provided by Justice components. Brief descriptions of Justice's
    single-purpose and multipurpose grant Descriptions of Justice
    programs are given next. Grant Programs Page 28
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix II Crime Technology
    Assistance (Grants) Provided by the Department of Justice
    Following are brief descriptions of the Justice single-purpose
    grants listed Single-Purpose Grants             in table II.1. The
    grant programs are grouped by the applicable Justice component.
    Bureau of Justice Assistance      The Bureau of Justice Assistance
    provided the following grants for crime technology assistance to
    state and local law enforcement agencies. *  Drugfire: This
    program consists of a "reimbursable agreement" from the FBI under
    which the Bureau of Justice Assistance administers grants to state
    and local law enforcement to purchase Drugfire software,
    equipment, and training. Drugfire is a database system providing
    the ability to exchange and compare images of fired ammunition
    casings and bullets. The database is capable of connecting
    shootings based on a comparison and matching of firearms-related
    evidence. *  Local Law Enforcement Block Grants - Technical
    Assistance and Training Allocation: This allocation supports
    investigative personnel in using surveillance equipment and
    information systems applications. The program also provides for
    technology training. *  National White Collar Crime Center: The
    Center provides limited "case funding" assistance to states and
    localities to track and investigate white- collar crimes. The
    focus is on improving information-sharing capabilities in
    multijurisdictional investigations. *  State Identification
    Systems Grants Program: These are formula grants to states to
    develop computerized identification systems integrated with FBI's
    national identification databases. The FBI reimburses the Bureau
    of Justice Assistance to administer programs to integrate state
    systems with the national DNA database (CODIS), the National Crime
    Information Center, and the Integrated Automated Fingerprint
    Identification System. Bureau of Justice Statistics      The
    Bureau of Justice Statistics provided the following grants for
    crime technology assistance to state and local law enforcement
    agencies. *  National Criminal History Improvement Program: This
    program helps states upgrade the quality and completeness of
    criminal records and provides increased compatibility with and
    access to national crime information databases. A priority is to
    ensure that state criminal history records are complete and ready
    for access through the National Instant Criminal Background Check
    System. *  National Sex Offender Registry: This is a component of
    the National Criminal History Improvement Program but is
    separately funded.  States use funds to identify, collect, and
    disseminate information on sexual Page 29
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix II Crime Technology
    Assistance (Grants) Provided by the Department of Justice
    offenders within their jurisdictions. Funds are also available to
    enhance state access to the FBI's sex offender database. *  State
    Justice Statistics Program for Statistical Analysis Centers: This
    program is designed to provide financial support to supplement
    state funding of a central state criminal justice statistics
    capability to carry out data collection and research that can
    benefit both the state and the nation. Grants are awarded to state
    statistics centers for data collection and analysis relating to
    identifiable themes, including technology-based research focusing
    on the analysis and use of machine-readable criminal history
    record data for tracking case-processing decisions, evaluation of
    record systems management, or studies related to the use of
    records to limit or control firearms acquisition by ineligible
    individuals. National Institute of Justice      The National
    Institute of Justice provided the following grants for crime
    technology assistance to state and local law enforcement agencies.
*  Counterterrorism Technology Program: This program assists state
    and local law enforcement by developing technologies to combat
    terrorism and improve public safety.  The funding amounts
    presented in table II.1 are for a project (the "InfoTech" project)
    to develop a technology to allow law enforcement agencies to share
    information using their existing systems and networks. *  Crime
    Act 1-Percent Set-Aside: Under the Local Law Enforcement Block
    Grants Program, 1 percent ($20 million) per year--of the $2
    billion annual authorizations for fiscal years 1996 through 1998--
    were set aside for use by the National Institute of Justice for
    new law enforcement technologies. According to National Institute
    of Justice officials, this 1-percent set-aside supported 153
    projects during the 3 fiscal years; and, of this total, 8 projects
    directly benefited state or local law enforcement agencies.1
    Funding for these eight projects (about $2,325,600) is reflected
    in table II.1. *  Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program:
    This program is for improving the quality and availability of DNA
    analysis for law enforcement identification, such as by expanding
    on-line capabilities with the national DNA database. *  Science
    and Technology Programs: This broad grant category supports
    research, development, and evaluation of approaches, techniques,
    and systems to improve the criminal justice system. Funded by a
    transfer of funds from the Office of Community Oriented Policing
    Services, state and local law enforcement grantees test and
    implement crime-fighting technologies that serve a community
    policing function. 1 Regarding the other 145 projects, as
    mentioned in appendix I, grant recipients were federal agencies,
    private firms, colleges and universities, and others. Page 30
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix II Crime Technology
    Assistance (Grants) Provided by the Department of Justice *
    Southwest Border States Anti-Drug Information System: These grants
    can be used to construct or improve state databases, build
    interface capabilities with the overall information system, and
    help procure hardware and consulting services. Office of Justice
    Programs        Improved Training and Technical Automation Grants:
    This is a general technology assistance program focusing on
    communications and information integration. Grant purposes include
    improving communications systems, establishing or improving
    ballistics identification programs, increasing access to automated
    fingerprint identification systems, and improving computerized
    collection of criminal records. This program transferred funds for
    the FBI's Law Enforcement On-Line program in fiscal year 1996,
    which are reflected in table III.1. Following are brief
    descriptions of Justice's multipurpose grants listed in
    Multipurpose Grants               table II.2. Multipurpose grants
    have numerous criminal justice purposes established by law. State
    and local law enforcement can use the respective funds for a
    number of activities, including crime technology. The grant
    programs are grouped by the applicable Justice component. Bureau
    of Justice Assistance    *  Byrne Discretionary Grants: These
    grants are authorized to be awarded to state and local law
    enforcement, as well as private entities, for crime control and
    violence prevention activities. The grant program focuses
    specifically on education and training for criminal justice
    personnel, technical assistance, multijurisdictional projects
    (e.g., state records integration), and program demonstrations.
    Grants also support research and development projects. *  Byrne
    Formula Grants: States receive federal funds to improve the
    functioning of criminal justice systems. Amounts are based on a
    set percentage (0.25) per state, with the remaining funds
    allocated based on state population. Eligible uses of funds are
    categorized by 26 program purpose areas. Of these, eight contain
    or could encompass crime technology assistance. Three of these
    purpose areas--criminal justice information systems, drug-control
    technology, and DNA analysis--are singularly allocated for crime
    technology assistance. Included in the criminal justice
    information systems purpose area is the 5 percent of Byrne funds
    that states must allocate toward improving criminal justice
    records. In the remaining five purpose areas, a portion of funds
    could potentially be spent on crime technology. *  Local Law
    Enforcement Block Grants Program: General purpose law enforcement
    grants are distributed directly to localities. The amounts are
    determined by the number of violent crimes reported in the
    jurisdiction. The program has seven broad purpose areas. Of those,
    one contains a Page 31
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix II Crime Technology
    Assistance (Grants) Provided by the Department of Justice specific
    funding stream for procuring equipment and technology. Funds
    cannot be used to purchase or lease tanks, fixed-wing aircraft, or
    other large items without direct law enforcement uses. Drug Courts
    Program Office         Drug Court Discretionary Grant Program:
    This program provides financial and technical assistance to states
    and localities to develop and implement drug treatment courts that
    use a mix of treatment, testing, incentives, and sanctions to
    remove nonviolent offenders from the cycle of substance abuse and
    crime. Grant recipients can use funds to support the development
    of information management systems and accompanying software. Data
    sharing among drug courts is a primary focus. Office of Community
    Oriented *  Advancing Community Policing: These grants assist
    state and local law Policing Services                  enforcement
    in further developing community policing infrastructures. Grants
    can be used to purchase technology and equipment, statistical and
    crime-mapping software, and training services. Also, grants can be
    used to help law enforcement agencies overcome organizational
    obstacles and to establish demonstration centers that model
    current community policing methods. *  Community Policing to
    Combat Domestic Violence: These grants fund innovative community
    policing efforts to curb domestic violence by developing
    partnerships between law enforcement agencies and community
    organizations. *  Making Officer Redeployment Effective Grants:
    This program serves a broad purpose of increasing the deployment
    of law enforcement officers devoted to community policing by
    expanding available officer time without hiring new officers.
    Grants can be used to purchase equipment and technology to free up
    community policing resources. Grants fund up to 75 percent of the
    cost of equipment and technology, with a 25-percent local match. *
    Problem-Solving Partnerships: These grants fund problem-solving
    partnerships between police agencies and community organizations
    to address persistent crime problems, such as drug dealing and
    other public disorder problems. Grants can be used for technology
    training and procurement of equipment. Violence Against Women
    Grants Office                    *  Grants to Encourage Arrest
    Policies: This grant program encourages states and localities to
    increase law enforcement attention to domestic abuse. Grants can
    support development of integrated computer tracking systems as
    well as provide training for police to improve tracking of
    domestic violence cases. Page 32
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix II Crime Technology
    Assistance (Grants) Provided by the Department of Justice *  STOP
    Violence Against Women Formula Grants: These formula grants are
    for creating a "coordinated, integrated" strategy involving all
    elements of the criminal justice system to respond to violent
    crimes against women. Broad program purposes include training for
    law enforcement and developing and implementing "services" to
    effectively address violent crimes against women. Page 33
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix III Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of Justice Department of Justice components provided
    crime technology assistance Overview of                      in
    the form of access to and use of specialized support services and
    Department of Justice systems. Table III.1 shows the specific
    types of assistance provided by the Bureau of Justice Assistance,
    Bureau of Justice Statistics, DEA, FBI, the Support Services and
    Immigration and Naturalization Service, the INTERPOL-U.S. National
    Systems                          Central Bureau, and the National
    Institute of Justice. As shown, regarding support services and
    systems, Justice's crime technology assistance to state and local
    law enforcement agencies for fiscal years 1996 to 1998 totaled
    about $146.6 million. Marshals Service officials told us that
    their organization did not have support services and systems that
    provided crime technology assistance to state and local law
    enforcement. The last section of this appendix provides brief
    descriptions of the support services and systems presented in
    table III.1. Page 34
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix III Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of Justice Table III.1: Estimated Obligations of
    Department of Justice Support Services and Systems Provided to
    State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, Fiscal Years 1996
    Through 1998 Dollars in thousands Justice component
    Assistance
    1996             1997           1998          Total Bureau of
    Justice Assistance               National Cybercrime Training
    Partnership                              $            0    $
    0    $  3,278.0    $  3,278.0 National White Collar Crime Center
    864.3         1,822.1          2,400.6       5,087.0 Regional
    Information Sharing Systemsa
    13,610.6          13,407.8         23,295.0      50,313.4 Subtotal
    $14,474.9         $15,229.9        $28,973.6     $58,678.4 Bureau
    of Justice Statistics               National Incident-Based
    Reporting System                                          0
    0         955.4         955.4 Forensic laboratory analysis for
    District of Columbia DEA                      Metropolitan Police
    94.6            103.3           110.8         308.7 National Drug
    Pointer Index
    0           45.0            35.5          80.5 Training
    647.1         1,580.7          1,215.2       3,443.0 Subtotal
    $741.7         $1729.0          $1,361.5      $3,832.2 FBI
    Combined DNA Index System
    5,334.8          5,247.9          6,144.1      16,726.8 Computer
    Analysis Response Team
    694.8         1,180.0          1,387.3       3,262.1 Criminal
    Justice Information Services Wide Area Networkb
    0                0         153.7         153.7 Express
    0                0          20.8          20.8 Fingerprint
    Identification Programb
    422.2         3,236.3          3,001.2       6,659.7
    Identification Automated Systemb
    401.6            644.0         1,042.4       2,088.0 Law
    Enforcement On-Line
    4,932.8             200.0         7,500.0      12,632.8 National
    Crime Information Centerb
    3,631.0          3,664.3          3,783.0      11,078.3 National
    Integrated Ballistics Information Network
    1,476.3          1,424.4          2,712.5       5,613.2 Trainingc
    407.5            569.3           628.5       1,605.3 Subtotal
    $17,301.0         $16,166.2        $26,373.5     $59,840.7 INS
    Law Enforcement Support Center
    1,177.2             583.6         1,656.1       3,416.9 INTERPOL -
    U.S. National Central Bureau                   State Liaison
    Program
    654.0            583.0           773.0       2,010.0 National
    Institute of Justice                  National Law Enforcement and
    Corrections Technology Centers
    2,598.4          3,954.5          4,747.5      11,300.4 Southwest
    Border States Anti-Drug Information Systemd
    0       2,705.6          3,840.2       6,545.8 Subtotal
    $ 2,598.4        $ 6,660.1        $ 8,587.7     $17,846.2 Total
    $36,947.2         $40,951.8        $68,680.8 $146,579.8 aThe
    figures shown do not include program income (user fees)--about
    $3.2 million in total--collected by the six centers during fiscal
    years 1996 through 1998. bThe amounts shown are actual
    expenditures. Page 35
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix III Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of Justice c Training consists of Forensic Services
    training (in obligations) and Criminal Justice Information
    Services training (in expenditures). d Fiscal year 1997 funding
    was based on an earmark from the Local Law Enforcement Block
    Grants Program.  Fiscal year 1998 funding was based on an earmark
    on grant funds administered by the Office of Community Oriented
    Policing Services. Source: GAO summary of data provided by Justice
    components. Following are brief descriptions of Justice's crime
    technology assistance Descriptions of           programs listed in
    table III.1. The descriptions are based on information Justice's
    Support         that the Justice components provided to us. The
    services and systems are grouped by the component providing them.
    Services and Systems *  National Cybercrime Training Partnership:
    To address the changing role of Bureau of Justice
    computers and the Internet in the commission of crimes, the
    National Assistance                Cybercrime Training Partnership
    supports all levels of law enforcement with "cyber-tools,
    research, and development." The Partnership is developing a
    nationwide communications network to serve law enforcement by
    providing secure "interconnectivity" over the Internet. Also, the
    Partnership focuses on training by (1) developing a cadre of
    instructors capable of training law enforcement and (2)
    distributing nontraditional modes of curricula, such as CD-ROMs,
    among other things. In addition, the Partnership plans to serve as
    a clearinghouse for information and experts available to law
    enforcement. *  National White Collar Crime Center: Headquartered
    in Richmond, VA, the center maintains a national support system
    for state and local law enforcement to facilitate
    multijurisdictional investigations of white-collar and economic
    crimes. The center operates a training and research institute that
    serves as a national resource for fighting economic crime. *
    Regional Information Sharing Systems: Six regional criminal
    intelligence centers focus on multijurisdictional criminal
    activities. Each center operates in a mutually exclusive
    geographic area, a division designed to more effectively support
    investigation and prosecution of regional crimes. State and local
    law enforcement support services and systems include an
    Intelligence Pointer Database, a National Gang Database (under
    development), and a secure intranet. All six centers are
    electronically connected, and state and local members (about 87
    percent of total membership as of December 31, 1997) are provided
    with access to the secure intranet, which facilitates secure E-
    mail transmissions and access to other databases. The centers also
    sponsor technical training Page 36
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix III Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of Justice conferences. Member jurisdictions can be
    assessed a nominal annual fee that varies by center. National
    Incident-Based Reporting System: This system represents the Bureau
    of Justice Statistics      next generation of crime data from
    federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.  Designed to
    replace the Uniform Crime Reporting Program initiated by the FBI
    in 1930, the development of the National Incident-Based Reporting
    System represents a joint effort of the Bureau of Justice
    Statistics and the FBI to encourage the presentation of higher
    quality data on a wider variety of crimes.  The Bureau of Justice
    Statistics has played a significant role in fostering
    participation and developing techniques to assist jurisdictions in
    conforming to program requirements. Also, the Bureau of Justice
    Statistics funds the operation of a dedicated website and the
    formulation of model analytic strategies. DEA provided the
    following crime technology assistance to state and local Drug
    Enforcement                  law enforcement agencies.
    Administration *  Forensic laboratory analysis, District of
    Columbia Metropolitan Police: One of eight forensic laboratories
    located throughout the United States, the DEA's Mid-Atlantic
    Laboratory provides forensic support to the District of Columbia
    Metropolitan Police. *  National Drug Pointer Index: This system
    provides participating law enforcement agencies with an automated
    response capability to determine if a case suspect is under active
    investigation by any other participating agency. If a match
    occurs, the system provides point-of-contact information for each
    identified record. Simultaneously, the system notifies each record
    owner that point-of-contact information has been released to the
    entry maker for that particular target. If the search finds no
    matching records, a negative response is returned. *  Training:
    DEA provided three training courses that were applicable to our
    definition of crime technology assistance. The Clandestine
    Laboratory Unit and the Specialized Training Unit both provided
    training on topics such as how to use technological devices to
    assess risks presented by chemicals found in laboratories. DEA
    also provided briefings to state and local law enforcement
    personnel on the National Drug Pointer Index and its benefits.
    Page 37                                              GAO/GGD-99-
    101 Crime Technology Appendix III Crime Technology Assistance
    (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the Department of
    Justice The FBI Laboratory, which is one of the largest and most
    comprehensive Federal Bureau of      forensic laboratories in the
    world, and the FBI's Criminal Justice Investigation
    Information Services Division provided various support services
    and systems to state and local law enforcement agencies. *
    Combined DNA Index System: An index containing DNA records from
    persons convicted of crimes. State and local crime laboratories
    are able to store and match DNA records. *  Computer Analysis
    Response Team: Technical assistance regarding computer technology
    and computer forensics is provided to federal as well as state and
    local law enforcement agencies. *  Criminal Justice Information
    Wide Area Network: This network supports the electronic capture,
    submission, processing, matching, storage, and retrieval of both
    criminal and civil fingerprints received by the FBI for use in the
    Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System
    environment. *  Express: An explosives reference database, Express
    provides and correlates information from bombing crime scenes and
    undetonated explosive devices. *  Fingerprint Identification
    Program: An identification process that scans fingerprint cards
    and captures fingerprint features for classification and selects
    candidates for future manual comparison. *  Identification
    Automated System: A system containing the criminal history records
    of persons arrested for the first time and reported to the FBI
    since July 1974, as well as selected manual records that have been
    converted to the automated system. *  Law Enforcement On-Line: As
    the intranet for the U.S. law enforcement community, Law
    Enforcement On-Line links all levels of law enforcement throughout
    the United States and supports broad, immediate dissemination of
    information. Learning programs through electronic sources are also
    delivered to local, state, and federal law enforcement through
    this intranet. *  National Crime Information Center: This is the
    nation's most extensive computerized criminal justice information
    system. It consists of a central computer at FBI headquarters,
    dedicated telecommunications lines, and a coordinated network of
    federal and state criminal justice information Page 38
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix III Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of Justice systems.  The center provides users with
    access to files on wanted persons, stolen vehicles, and missing
    persons. The system's largest file, the Interstate Identification
    Index, provides access to millions of criminal history information
    records contained in state systems. *  National Integrated
    Ballistics Information Network: A joint effort between the FBI and
    the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, this national
    database computer system allows laboratories across the country to
    exchange and compare images of fired ammunition casings. The
    images of microscopic marks that result after a gun is fired are
    stored in this database. *  Training: The FBI Laboratory and the
    Criminal Justice Information Services Division's
    Education/Training Services Unit provide training to the law
    enforcement community. Forensic laboratory training includes a
    variety of topics such as management of forensic and technical
    services; identification and comparison of latent fingerprints;
    explosives detection; postblast bombing investigations; and
    responding to and resolving the scientific, forensic, and
    technical elements of incidents involving chemical, biological,
    and nuclear materials. The Criminal Justice Information Services
    Division provides training on, among other things, the National
    Crime Information Center, Uniform Crime Reports, and the
    Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System. The Law
    Enforcement Support Center is accessible 24 hours a day to the
    Immigration and             criminal justice community. The center
    provides state and local law Naturalization Service
    enforcement agencies with the ability to exchange information on
    the immigration status of foreign-born suspects under arrest or
    investigation. Information requests are submitted through the
    National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System. Upon receipt
    of an inquiry, the center searches INS and other criminal
    databases and transmits the findings to the requester.  Also, the
    center provides an important source of information to each state
    conducting firearms purchaser inquiries stemming from the Brady
    Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Brady Act). State firearms points
    of contact may query the center on prospective gun purchasers and
    receive a "proceed" or "deny" recommendation using the
    disqualifying criteria mandated by the Brady Act. Page 39
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix III Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of Justice INTERPOL- U.S. National Central Bureau is a
    resource for state and local INTERPOL  U.S. National           law
    enforcement agencies to conduct international investigations. The
    Central Bureau                     bureau is electronically
    connected through a secure network to the national police agencies
    of 177 INTERPOL member countries and the INTERPOL General
    Secretariat (headquarters) in Lyons, France. Also, the bureau
    communicates with state offices that have liaisons responsible for
    contacting foreign police. Coordination between the liaison
    offices and member countries is maintained through the National
    Law Enforcement Telecommunications System. *  National Law
    Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers: The five National
    Institute of Justice regional centers and one national center
    identify and evaluate available technologies to determine law
    enforcement suitability, facilitate public/private partnerships to
    develop new technologies, and provide technology and information
    assistance to law enforcement and corrections agencies by
    introducing promising new technologies and providing technology
    training.  According to a National Institute of Justice official,
    while the centers do not directly transfer crime technology, they
    serve as (1) brokers between crime technology manufacturers and
    state and local jurisdictions and (2) an information resource for
    law enforcement agencies. *  Southwest Border States Anti-Drug
    Information System: A secure law enforcement information sharing
    system that connects intelligence databases of four southwest
    border states (Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas); the
    three Regional Information Sharing Systems centers in that area;
    and the El Paso Intelligence Center. This system provides for
    secure E-mail transmissions and includes a preestablished query
    system. The system allows all participants to query the databases
    of all other participants and is composed of an administrative web
    server that offers key electronic services, such as providing
    agency contact information and system usage statistics. Page 40
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix IV Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of the Treasury Department of the Treasury components
    provided crime technology Overview of
    assistance to state and local law enforcement agencies in the form
    of Department of the                            access to, and use
    of, specialized support services and systems, such as computerized
    databases and forensics laboratories. Treasury components Treasury
    Support                             also provided training on the
    use of technology-related equipment to state Services and Systems
    and local law enforcement agencies. Table IV.1 shows the specific
    types of crime technology assistance provided by the Bureau of
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; the Customs Service; the Federal
    Law Enforcement Training Center; the Financial Crimes Enforcement
    Network; IRS; and the Secret Service. As shown, Treasury's crime
    technology assistance for fiscal years 1996 to 1998 totaled about
    $15.9 million. The last section in this appendix provides brief
    descriptions of applicable support services and systems. Table
    IV.1:  Estimated Obligations of Department of the Treasury Support
    Services and Systems Provided to State and Local Law Enforcement
    Agencies, Fiscal Years 1996 Through 1998 Dollars in thousands
    Treasury component             Assistance
    1996                  1997                  1998
    Total Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
    Accelerant Detection Analysis                   $ 816.0
    $639.0             $1,292.0            $2,747.0 Advanced Serial
    Case Management                      46.0                  37.0
    58.0               141.0 Arson CD-ROM
    0                     0              375.0               375.0
    Arson/Explosives Incident System                     97.0
    2,614.0                  835.0            3,546.0 Consolidated
    Gang Database                             4.0
    0                     0                4.0 Dipole Study
    150.0                 150.0                 150.0
    450.0 Electronic Facial Identification Technique
    15.0                  15.0                  15.0
    45.0 Explosive Forensics                                163.0
    127.0                 258.0                548.0 Federal Firearms
    License System                         9.0                    0
    9.0                18.0 Firearms Tracing System
    768.0                 507.0              1,216.0
    2,491.0 Integrated Ballistics Identification System
    0             499.0                 902.0             1,401.0
    National (Arson and Explosives) Repository
    0             243.0                 243.0                486.0
    National Response Team                             250.0
    250.0                 250.0                750.0 Youth Crime Gun
    Interdiction Initiative
    0              255.0                 150.0               405.0
    Subtotal
    $2,318.0              $5,336.0              $5,753.0
    $13,407.0 Customs Service                Treasury Enforcement
    Communications System                                  1.2
    1.6                   1.7                4.5 Federal Law
    Enforcement        Advanced Airborne Counterdrug Training Center
    Operations Training Program                               07 . 6
    07 . 6 Airborne Counterdrug Operations Training Program
    30.7                  46.0                  76.8
    153.5 Page 41
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix IV Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of the Treasury Treasury component
    Assistance                                             1996
    1997               1998              Total Subtotal
    $30.7              $53.6              $76.8             $161.1
    Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
    Project Gateway                                       472.7
    621.6              518.3            1,612.6 Internal Revenue
    Service        National Forensic Laboratory
    negligiblea        negligiblea        negligiblea
    negligiblea Secret Service                  Audio/Image
    Enhancement                                  1.2
    1.3                2.8                   5.3 Automated Fingerprint
    Identification System
    5.9                5.8                4.5              16.2
    Cellular Tracking Project                                  0
    0               65.0              65.0 Computer Forensic Support
    0               40.0             220.0              260.0
    Electronic Crimes Branch Support                        60.0
    30.0               20.0             110.0 Encryption
    0                  0               70.0              70.0
    Identification Branch Training                          21.8
    33.3                9.1              64.2 "Operation Safe Kids"
    0               15.4                5.1              20.5
    Polygraph examinations                                   6.4
    8.5                7.0              21.9 Questioned Document
    Branch                              33.1               23.3
    27.0              83.4 Subtotal
    $128.4             $157.6             $430.5             $716.5
    Total
    $2,951.0           $6,170.4          $6,780.3          $15,901.7
    aAccording to an IRS official, the cost of providing laboratory
    assistance was less than $1,000 per year. Source: GAO summary of
    data provided by Treasury components. Following are brief
    descriptions of the Treasury's crime technology Descriptions of
    assistance programs listed in table IV.1. The descriptions are
    based on Treasury's Support                            information
    that the Treasury components provided to us. The services and
    systems are grouped by the component providing them. Services and
    Systems ATF provided the following types of crime technology
    assistance to state Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and local law
    enforcement agencies: and Firearms *  Accelerant Detection
    Analysis: The laboratory analysis of fire debris to detect and
    identify flammable liquids potentially used as accelerants in an
    incendiary fire. ATF has offered on-site training in fire debris
    analysis to analysts from state and local laboratories and is
    currently assisting in fire debris analysis training provided by
    the National Fire Safety Training Center. *  Advanced Serial Case
    Management: A case management and lead-tracking database designed
    to accept large volumes of data. The database analyzes information
    to assist investigators in identifying trends, patterns, and
    investigative leads for major federal or state incidents. Page 42
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix IV Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of the Treasury *  Arson CD-ROM: An interactive
    training tool, the CD-ROM/virtual reality training program is
    designed to elevate the overall investigative competency levels of
    all fire investigators in the United States and establish a
    consistent standard for fire investigation. *  Arson/Explosives
    Incident System: A clearinghouse for data collected from several
    agencies. The system produces statistical and investigative data
    that can be used real-time by arson and bomb investigators.  State
    and local agencies can query the system for things such as
    component parts, stolen explosives, and device placement. *
    Consolidated Gang Database: A database to track various types of
    information about outlaw motorcycle gangs, street and ethnic
    gangs, and antigovernment groups involved in criminal activity.
    Data are compiled from ATF investigative reports and state and
    local law enforcement agencies. *  Dipole Study: The Dipole Study
    is intended to assist state, local, and federal explosives
    investigators and building designers. For courtroom presentation
    purposes, the study produced a software package that will allow
    investigators to support their theory of an explosion and explain
    blast damage and fragmentary damage. *  Electronic Facial
    Identification Technique: A specialized software program that
    allows operators to create composite sketches of suspected
    perpetrators or unidentified persons who surface as suspects or
    potential witnesses during an investigation. *  Explosive
    Forensics: Examination of debris collected at the scene of an
    explosion or of suspected explosive material obtained from
    recovery or undercover purchase. *  Federal Firearms License
    System: The primary objective of this system is to produce a
    relational database of firearms and explosives licensing
    information. This system allows users to search for licensing
    information. On a semiannual basis, information is provided to
    state and local police departments identifying the federal
    firearms licensees in their geographical area of responsibility. *
    Firearms Tracing System: The National Tracing Center traces
    firearms for federal, state, local, and foreign law enforcement
    agencies. The firearms are traced from the manufacturer to the
    retail purchaser. *  Integrated Ballistics Identification System:
    A system that allows firearms technicians to digitize and
    automatically correlate and compare bullet and shell casing
    signatures. The equipment quickly provides investigators with
    leads to solve greater numbers of crimes. *  National (Arson and
    Explosives) Repository: A database, the repository contains
    information regarding arson incidents and the actual and suspected
    criminal misuse of explosives throughout the United States. Page
    43                                              GAO/GGD-99-101
    Crime Technology Appendix IV Crime Technology Assistance (Support
    Services and Systems) Provided by the Department of the Treasury
    The information will be available for statistical analysis and
    research, investigative leads, and intelligence. *  National
    Response Team: The National Response Team was established to
    assist state and local police and fire departments in
    investigating large- scale fires and explosions. *  Youth Crime
    Gun Interdiction Initiative: This initiative is a focused
    component of the federal effort to combat firearms trafficking.
    Working with state and local law enforcement agencies, the tracing
    of crime guns provides leads to interdict the trafficking of
    firearms to youths and juveniles. Among other things, this
    initiative makes ATF's firearms trace capabilities and data more
    accessible to state and local law enforcement agencies. The
    Treasury Enforcement Communications System has three programs
    Customs Service              that provide crime technology-related
    assistance to state and local law enforcement agencies: *
    Diplomatic Licensing and Registration Program: Users may query
    vehicle registration and drivers license information for persons
    and vehicles licensed by the Department of State. *  Aircraft
    Registration and Tracking: Users may query information about
    aircraft registered with the Federal Aviation Administration. *
    Bank Secrecy Act Program: Provides information to state agencies
    responsible for enforcing state money laundering statutes. The
    Federal Law Enforcement Training Center provides two training
    Federal Law Enforcement      programs involving use of crime
    technology-related equipment: Training Center *  Advanced Airborne
    Counterdrug Operations Training Program: This program provides
    students with the opportunity to use technical equipment in
    darkness. *  Airborne Counterdrug Operations Training Program:
    This program teaches students how to use equipment such as global
    positioning hand-held devices and thermal imaging systems. Page 44
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix IV Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of the Treasury Project Gateway: Established to
    facilitate the exchange of Bank Secrecy Financial Crimes
    Act information with state and local law enforcement agencies.4
    Gateway Enforcement Network      incorporates custom-designed
    software to provide designated state coordinators with rapid and
    direct on-line electronic access to Bank Secrecy Act records,
    including suspicious activity reports. National Forensic
    Laboratory: The laboratory primarily supports IRS Internal Revenue
    criminal investigations involving violations of federal tax law
    and related Service                  financial crimes. According
    to IRS officials, a limited or negligible amount of support (less
    than $1,000 per year) is provided to state and local law
    enforcement. However, when provided, forensic support or
    assistance may include (1) document and handwriting analyses, (2)
    polygraph examinations, and (3) audio/video surveillance tape
    enhancements. The Secret Service provided the following types of
    crime technology Secret Service           assistance to state and
    local law enforcement agencies: *  Audio/Image Enhancement: Audio
    enhancements include 911 calls, telephone answering machine
    recordings, court recordings, and gunfire analysis. Image
    enhancements include images obtained from surveillance cameras
    that recorded robberies of stores, banks, and ATMs, as well as
    devices that recorded homicides in a variety of locations. *
    Automated Fingerprint Identification System: This hybrid network
    of state and local digitized fingerprint databases provides in
    excess of 20 million fingerprint records to be searched by the
    Secret Service's Identification Branch. *  Cellular Tracking
    Project: Equipment is used to track cellular telephones. The
    system is capable of identifying the suspect's location. This
    system is made available to federal, state, and local law
    enforcement agencies upon request and, according to Secret Service
    officials, has proven to be very successful in cases where state
    and local law enforcement officials have requested this Secret
    Service equipment and expertise in murder, carjacking, and
    kidnapping cases. *  Computer Forensic Support: Forensic
    examination of electronic evidence is provided through the
    Electronic Crimes Special Agent Program. Special agents, among
    other things, assist state and local law enforcement 4 Enacted in
    1970, the Bank Secrecy Act requires, among other things, financial
    institutions to maintain records and report certain domestic
    currency transactions and cross-border transportation of currency.
    One purpose of such records and reports was to create a paper
    trail for investigators' use in tracing illicit funds. Page 45
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix IV Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of the Treasury agencies in the examination of
    computers, computer systems, electronic communication systems,
    telecommunication systems and devices, electronic organizers,
    scanners, and other devices manufactured to intercept or duplicate
    telecommunications services. *  Electronic Crimes Branch Support:
    This branch supports law enforcement investigations involving
    computers, computer systems intrusions, electronic communication
    systems, and telecommunication systems and devices. Among the
    branch's duties are the oversight of all telecommunications and
    computer fraud cases; establishment and operation of a forensic
    laboratory to process electronically stored data and
    telecommunications devices; and coordination of training
    initiatives for field office investigators, state and local
    police, and industry representatives. *  Encryption: Assistance is
    provided to state and local law enforcement agencies in decoding
    encrypted computer files. *  Identification Branch Training: This
    branch provides training to state and local law enforcement
    agencies on appropriate methods for operating computerized
    fingerprinting systems. *  Operation Safe Kids: This program is
    sponsored by the Secret Service at the request of state and local
    law enforcement agencies. Operation Safe Kids uses digital cameras
    and fingerprint scanning technology to provide parents with a
    printed document that contains a photograph and thumbprints of
    their child. *  Polygraph examinations: The Secret Service's
    Polygraph Branch conducts polygraph examinations regarding
    criminal activities ranging from embezzlement to child molestation
    and homicide. *  Questioned Document Branch: Four branch sections
    (document examination, instrumental analysis, document
    authentication, and automated recognition) provide forensic
    science support. The branch maintains three databases that can
    support state and local law enforcement: 1.  The Forensic
    Information System for Handwriting is a software system where
    known and unknown writing samples are scanned, digitized, and
    subjected to mathematical algorithms against authors maintained in
    the database. Page 46
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix IV Crime Technology
    Assistance (Support Services and Systems) Provided by the
    Department of the Treasury 2.   The Watermark Collection database
    contains over 23,000 watermarks enabling the identification of
    partial as well as complete watermarks. This database is updated
    several times a year as the paper industry submits new and updated
    watermarks. 3.   The Ink Collection database contains over 7,500
    inks dating back to the 1920s.  Chemical analysis of these inks
    allows for differentiation and identification of the first date a
    particular entry could have been made based on the first
    commercial availability date of the writing ink. This database is
    updated yearly through submissions from the ink industry. Page 47
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix V Crime Technology
    Assistance (In-Kind Transfers) Provided by the Office of National
    Drug Control Policy ONDCP's Counterdrug Technology Assessment
    Center (CTAC) was Mission of ONDCP's
    established to serve as the central counterdrug enforcement
    research and Counterdrug
    development organization of the U.S. government. CTAC was
    established by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
    Year 1991 (P.L. 101- Technology
    510), which amended the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 and placed
    CTAC Assessment Center                            under the
    operating authority of the Director of ONDCP and required that
    CTAC be headed by a Chief Scientist of Counterdrug Technology. 1
    CTAC's mission is to advance technologies that support the
    national drug control goals by improving the effectiveness of law
    enforcement, drug interdiction, and substance abuse treatment
    research. As part of its mission, CTAC is to identify and define
    the scientific and technological needs of federal, state, and
    local drug enforcement agencies. According to ONDCP officials, in
    fiscal year 1998, CTAC implemented the Technology Transfer Pilot
    Program to assist state and local law enforcement agencies.
    According to ONDCP officials, for fiscal year 1998, the Technology
    Overview of                                  Transfer Pilot
    Program involved 18 projects or systems that fit our Technology
    Transfer                          definition of crime technology
    assistance. However, only 15 of these projects or systems were
    transferred or provided to state and local law Pilot Program
    enforcement agencies.  According to the CTAC Director, as of
    December 1998, these 15 projects or systems involved a total of
    202 recipient state and local law enforcement agencies.  As table
    V.1 shows, the fiscal year 1998 obligations for these 15 projects
    or systems totaled $13 million. Table V.1: ONDCP Crime Technology
    Assistance Provided to State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies,
    Fiscal Year 1998 Dollars in thousands Systems Provided Under the
    Technology Transfer Pilot Program
    Obligations Air-Ground Surveillance Management System
    $ 1,500.0 Body Worn
    550.0 Borderline with VoiceBox System
    1,750.0 Data Locator System
    250.0 Drugwipe
    150.0 GLADYSa
    350.0 Mini-Buster Contraband Detector
    1,300.0 Money Laundering Software
    250.0 Signcutter
    $250.0 Small Look
    850.0 Tactical Speech Collection and Analysis System
    150.0 Thermal Imagers
    1,500.0 Vapor Tracer
    1,800.0 Video Stabilization System
    200.0 1Drug Control: Planned Actions Should Clarify Counterdrug
    Technology Assessment Center's Impact (GAO/GGD-98-28, Feb. 3,
    1998). Page 48
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix V Crime Technology
    Assistance (In-Kind Transfers) Provided by the Office of National
    Drug Control Policy Systems Provided Under the Technology Transfer
    Pilot Program
    Obligations Wireless Interoperability System
    1,400.0 Total
    $13,000.0 a According to an ONDCP official, GLADYS is not an
    acronym; rather, the system's title is based upon a fictional
    person's name. Source: GAO summary of data provided by ONDCP. The
    Technology Transfer Pilot Program matched CTAC-sponsored systems
    with state or local law enforcement agency requirements and
    arranged for the transfer of those systems. In order to
    participate in the program, state and local law enforcement
    agencies submitted letters and a completed ONDCP questionnaire.
    When awarded, the recipients received a technical team, training,
    and technical assistance that was directly related to the
    technology product. The U.S. Army Electronic Proving Ground at
    Fort Huachuca, AZ, assisted CTAC by managing the Technology
    Transfer Pilot Program and providing engineering expertise in
    communications and electronics. The following are descriptions of
    the 15 CTAC crime technology assistance Descriptions of
    systems (see table V.1) that were transferred to state and local
    law Applicable Systems                      enforcement agencies
    in fiscal year 1998. *  Air-Ground Surveillance Management System:
    This technology provides the ability to track and locate both
    field units (friendly assets) and suspects (targets) using a
    variety of remote sensors.  Tracking and other information is
    graphically displayed and archived on a moving map display at the
    base station. *  Body Worn: A miniaturized audio device (body
    wire). The secure multichannel transmitter, with voice privacy and
    low probability of detection capabilities, can be worn
    inconspicuously during covert operations. *  Borderline With
    Voicebox System: A telephone intercept monitoring and recording
    system. The system digitally records telephone conversations,
    faxes, and computer data, plus any short notes typed by the
    monitor/operator. The recordings are then available for review and
    transcription and use in investigations. *  Data Locator System: A
    software package that provides secure exchange of electronic mail,
    database input and extraction, and police intelligence analysis
    information over a standard internet connection. *  Drugwipe: A
    surface residue test kit that identifies trace amounts of
    cannabis, cocaine, opiates, and amphetamines.  Evidence of
    narcotic materials is identified by color change. Page 49
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix V Crime Technology
    Assistance (In-Kind Transfers) Provided by the Office of National
    Drug Control Policy *  GLADYS: A computer-based system that uses
    telephone company billing records to analyze cellular phone
    traffic. *  Mini-Buster Contraband Detector: A portable contraband
    detection kit. A "Buster"detector indicates differences in density
    encountered when moved across a surface. The kit includes an
    ultrasonic range finder that measures distances up to 90 feet
    within 1-inch accuracy for detection of false walls or bulkheads.
    The flexible fiber optic scope contains a portable light source
    for remote viewing inside inaccessible spaces such as fuel tanks.
*  Money Laundering Software: A software package used to detect
    suspicious financial transactions. The software identifies
    underlying patterns and trends associated with money laundering,
    including suspicious financial transactions within complex data
    sources, such as state and bank activities involving money
    transfers and currency exchanges. *  Signcutter: A system that
    tracks and locates vehicles using a tracking unit based on Global
    Positioning System technology. The unit may be used to track law
    enforcement vehicles or covertly track a "suspect" vehicle. *
    Small Look: A miniaturized video surveillance system consisting of
    a miniature, solid-state electronic camera system. It captures,
    processes, and stores hundreds of digital picture images in
    nonvolatile memory. *  Tactical Speech Collection and Analysis
    System: A voice identification system that can store up to 25
    voice samples on the system's hard drive. *  Thermal Imagers: An
    infrared imaging surveillance system that provides night vision
    capabilities. Real-time video pictures are generated in all
    lighting conditions when the unit senses heat. *  Vapor Tracer:  A
    hand-held detection system, this device is capable of detecting
    and identifying extremely small quantities of narcotics and
    explosives. This system works by drawing a sample of vapor into
    the detector where it is heated, ionized, and identified. *  Video
    Stabilization System:  A surveillance video enhancement system.
    The system is used to eliminate jitter and camera motion,
    typically associated with surveillance video. *  Wireless
    Interoperability System: A computer-based interagency radio
    communications switching system. Computer-aided switching
    technology is used to connect numerous law enforcement agencies to
    a central radio system console for the purpose of improving
    interagency communications during counternarcotic investigations.
    Although available in fiscal year 1998, three other crime
    technology-related systems sponsored by ONDCP were not transferred
    to state and local law enforcement agencies: Page 50
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix V Crime Technology
    Assistance (In-Kind Transfers) Provided by the Office of National
    Drug Control Policy *  Secure Messaging and Investigative
    Information Transmission System: A system using a secure web
    server to upload, search, and distribute images using wireless
    transmission between field and police headquarters. *  Suspect
    Pointer Index Network: A relational database application to be
    used for the entry, retention, and analysis of multimedia data,
    such as images and text, supporting counterdrug operations,
    general case investigations, and crime analysis requirements. *
    Tactical Video Communication System: An analog communication
    system for transmitting live video and audio from a forward area
    back to a command post. Page 51
    GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime Technology Appendix VI Major Contributors to
    This Report Danny R. Burton, Assistant Director General Government
    Mark A. Tremba, Evaluator-in-Charge Division, Washington,    Seto
    J. Bagdoyan, Senior Evaluator Chan My J. Battcher, Evaluator D.C.
    Andrew B. Hoffman, Evaluator David P. Alexander, Senior Social
    Science Analyst Denise M. Fantone, Assistant Director Accounting
    and Information Management Division, Washington, D.C. Jan B.
    Montgomery, Assistant General Counsel Office of the General
    Geoffrey R. Hamilton, Senior Attorney Counsel, Washington, D.C.
    Page 52                                     GAO/GGD-99-101 Crime
    Technology Ordering Information The first copy of each GAO report
    and testimony is free. Additional copies are $2 each. Orders
    should be sent to the following address, accompanied by a check or
    money order made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when
    necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.
    Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are
    discounted 25 percent. Order by mail: U.S. General Accounting
    Office P.O. Box 37050 Washington, DC 20013 or visit: Room 1100 700
    4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW) U.S. General Accounting
    Office Washington, DC Orders may also be placed by calling (202)
    512-6000 or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-
    2537. Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and
    testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any
    list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a
    touch-tone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how
    to obtain these lists. For information on how to access GAO
    reports on the INTERNET, send e-mail message with "info" in the
    body to: [email protected] or visit GAO's World Wide Web Home Page
    at: http://www.gao.gov United States General Accounting Office
    Bulk Rate Washington, D.C. 20548-0001     Postage & Fees Paid GAO
    Permit No. G100 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300
    Address Correction Requested (182062)

*** End of document. ***