December 21, 2001

1. Deliverable # 2:Preliminary Review of Goals and ObjectivesandOverview of Current Technology and Infrastructure December 21, 2001

2. Table of Contents 1.0 Importance of Goals and Objectives 2.0 Approach to Validation 2.1 Document Review 2.2 Key Stakeholder Interviews 2.3 Stakeholder Kick-off Meeting 3.0 Goals and Objectives 3.1 Framework of Understanding 3.2 Overall CJIS Goal 3.3 Guiding Principles 3.4 Objectives 3.5 Intended Results 4.0 High-level Overview of Current Technology and Infrastructure 4.1 Approach to Understanding Current Environment 4.2 Overview and Observations 4.2.1 Department of Safety 4.2.2 Department of Corrections 4.2.3 Judiciary 4.2.4 Overview and Observations

3. 1.0 Importance of Goals and Objectives 1.0 Importance of Goals and Objectives The importance of goals and objectives to any project or endeavor is typically understood. They are formulated at the beginning of the effort to shape its direction and purpose. Typically, goals and objectives: • Serve to define project boundaries with respect to business scope and organizational involvement • Focus efforts around common results • Shape the discussion and investigation of user requirements • Keep activities on track and focused over the course of the project • Provide guidance to prioritizing and sequencing implementation activities • Serve to eliminate that which is not relevant This report is a preliminary review of goals and objectives. As the project progresses, particularly through User Requirements definition, the goals and objectives may change. Therefore, a final statement of goals and objectives will be included within that project deliverable.

4. 2.0 Approach to Validation • 2.0 Approach to Validation For several years, dating back to at least before 1995, New Hampshire has contemplated the creation of a CJIS system. Over the years, various goals and objectives for the CJIS have been discussed and documented. An initial step in the CJIS Logical Design project was to re-visit and validate the goals and objectives of the CJIS with respect to current circumstances. The approach used to validate goals and objectives was comprised of three distinct steps: 1) Document Reviews; 2) Key Stakeholder Interviews; and 3) Stakeholder Kick-off Meeting.

5. 2.1 Document Review 2.1 Document Review As part of the process to validate goals and objectives, two specific documents were reviewed. • Opportunities and Challenges: Building the New Hampshire Criminal Justice Information System, Justiceworks, University of New Hampshire, Benchmarks and Blueprints, Volume IV, April 2001 • CJIS Master Plan, Maximus, February 1995 While at different levels of discussion, each report describes the essence of a CJIS system and highlights many explicit and implicit goals and objectives.

6. 2.1 Document Review Notable insights in the respective documents are: • Opportunities and Challenges: “New advances in information technology allow us to breach the walls that divide the justice system and create a virtual conference room. A virtual conference room is not a single mainframe computer. Rather, it is a network of multiple systems within the criminal justice system, each maintained and operated separately, but linked with each other to allow for the secure exchange of information in real time across the state.” • CJIS Master Plan: “Rather than developing an independent database, the requirements of the NH CJIS can be addressed by developing connectivity among the courts and different criminal justice agencies. Under this approach, the courts and the agencies would maintain exclusive control over the information they generate on offenders and cases, but would participate in a comprehensive automated network in which specific types of data are transmitted among organizations”.

7. 2.2 Key Stakeholder Interviews • 2.2 Key Stakeholder Interviews In order to re-visit goals and objectives, representatives of the four key stakeholder organizations were interviewed. Each interview was attended by at least one member of each of the State CJIS project team and KPMG Consulting. • Judiciary Judge Linda Dalianas, New Hampshire Supreme Court, December 5, 2001 Don Goodnow, Administrative of Courts, December 5, 2001 • Department of Safety John A. Stephen, Esq., Assistant Commissioner, December 3, 2001 Executive Major Fred Booth, December 6, 2001 Virginia Beecher, Director DMV, December 5, 2001 Peter Croteau, Director IT, December 4, 2001 Carol Houle, CJIS Project Manager, December 4, 2001 • Department of Justice Mark Thompson, Director of Administration, December 5, 2001

8. 2.2 Key Stakeholder Interviews • Department of Corrections Phil Stanley, Commissioner, December 6, 2001 Robert Ness, Director IT, December 6, 2001 Joan Schwartz, Ph.D., Admin. of Research & Planning, December 6, 2001 Interviews were from 1-2 hours in length and focused on current statements of goals and objectives. Judicial and agency key stakeholders were asked to articulate specific goals and objectives from their own viewpoint, as well as from the perspective of an overall CJIS system. No discrepancies were uncovered with respect to previously documented goals and objectives. As a result of the review of documents and the key stakeholder interviews, a composite list of goals and objectives was documented. The content of this composite list includes the following. These items are listed in no particular order and may have been articulated by more than one person.

9. 2.2 Key Stakeholder Interviews Composite List of Goals and Objectives resulting from Document Review and Key Stakeholder Interviews • Provide for a more efficient and effective criminal justice system • Reduce or contain costs associated with the criminal process • Make information more accessible from the key aspects of the criminal justice process thereby enabling law enforcement and the judiciary to be more effective in their efforts • Help individual agencies and the judiciary to perform their functions more efficiently • Provide the technical infrastructure to directly support information sharing with the New Hampshire justice community • Allow for infrastructure growth and change over time as both business needs and technologies change • Provide a data sharing framework that will support the implementation of secure data systems that will protect the integrity and privacy of all information in the system • Ensure information on criminal cases and offenders is as accurate and up-to-date as possible • Ensure that information is readily available to all authorized agencies and organizations in a timely manner who are involved in the criminal justice system – automate the flow of data and reduce keystrokes • Enable accelerated case processing within the courts • Enable timely and accurate disposition reporting from the courts to criminal records • Enable offender status to be tracked as the offender moves through the criminal justice process

10. 2.2 Key Stakeholder Interviews • Provide more information on offenders and cases that is timely and accurate • Enable a greater degree of safety for law enforcement officers in the streets • Improve the identification and processing of criminal offenders • Promote more effective law enforcement • Support the timely provision of information to victims of crime • Capture data electronically at its source and share data electronically to improve its timeliness and accuracy • Do not enable the electronic sharing of information to reverse due process • Do not disable open access to information that is now readily accessible by the public • Enable the technical infrastructure to share non-criminal information • Put necessary information at the fingertips of law enforcement • Support the sharing of information between agencies per State regulations • Provide access to Domestic Violence restraining orders and warrants • Enable County Attorneys to have electronic access to criminal history records • Enable employers, attorneys, and others who have a right to have electronic access to criminal history records • Enable agencies and the judiciary to maintain and control their respective data while enabling data sharing • Provide for the analysis of crime and criminals in the criminal justice system • Create a criminal justice data dictionary to standardize the definition of data shared among the participants

11. 2.3 Stakeholder Kick-off Meeting 2.3 Stakeholder Kick-off Meeting As a third step, a work session on goals and objectives was held at the Stakeholder Kick-off Meeting on December 14, 2001. Invitees to this meeting included State, county, and local government personnel, as well as interested 3rd parties who will be involved in some manner with the CJIS Logical Design project. A structured set of goals and objective (see Section 3.0 of this document), based on an analysis of the goals and objectives compiled from the document reviews and key stakeholder meetings, was presented for discussion at the meeting. The purpose of the discussion was to validate the goals and objectives as regards: • Are they complete (are they all there)? • Are they worded correctly? • Should any be removed?

12. 2.3 Stakeholder Kick-off Meeting Attendees at the Stakeholder Kick-off Meeting who participated in the goals and objectives work session are listed below: Cheryl Bennett, AOC Executive Major Fred Booth, DOS Tim Brackett, DOJ Cindy Crompton, DOC Peter Croteau, DOS Judge Linda Dalianis, Supreme Court Reg Drapeau, DOS Arthur Durette, LOGIN Tom Edwards, AOC Don Goodnow, AOC Denise Heath, DOC Tom Hettinger, DMV Carol Houle, DOS Julie Howard, Superior Court Chris Keating, PD Tricia Lucas, Juvenile Justice Don Lund, Justiceworks Norman Major, House of Representatives Phil McLaughlin, DOJ Walter Murphy, Superior Court Bob Ness, DOC Mike Prozzo, County Sheriffs John Stephen, DOS Larry Smukler, Superior Court Jim Sullivan, DOC Mark Thompson, DOJ Don Veno, DOC David Welch, House of Representatives Joseph Arcidiacono, DCYF Charles Putnam, Justiceworks Joan Schwartz, DOC KPMG Consulting team

13. 2.3 Stakeholder Kick-off Meeting As a result of the work session, the following attendee comments were recorded (in no particular order or importance): • The system needs to track bail and bail conditions • Protection of constitutional rights and privacy must be preserved • The system should enable crime trend analyses to be performed • The technologies employed in the solution must be able to accommodate changes in available technologies and changes within the participating organizations • County-level needs must be addressed • The system should support public access, particularly to judicial information that is now accessible through the courts • Security and privacy representatives within the agencies (public information officers) and the judiciary should be engaged in the project to determine what data is accessible and by whom • The value to the general public of the CJIS system should be clearly stated • Need to balance public access to data v. privacy • The CJIS must exist within the “NH culture” • The CJIS should serve the public and public officials

14. 2.3 Stakeholder Kick-off Meeting • The CJIS should make it easier for the court staff to do their work • Accuracy of information is important Comments expressed at the Kick-off Meeting have been incorporated into the goals and objectives discussed in Section 3 of this document.

15. 3.0 Goals and Objectives 3.0 Goals and Objectives This section presents the goals and objectives of the CJIS system for the State of New Hampshire. Numerous state, county, and local officials have contributed to the formulation of the goals and objectives. To assist in understanding and positioning the comments that have been made, a framework for categorizing them is presented below. 3.1 Framework of Understanding Several of the goals and objectives that have appeared in documents or that have been articulated, fall into one of four categories: • Overall Goal of the System • Guiding Principles • Objectives • Intended Results

16. 3.1 Framework of Understanding Overall Goal Guiding Principles Intended Results Objectives • Overall Goal – The overall goal is the primary aim, or intent, of the system. It expresses the underlying goal of what is to be achieved. • Guiding Principles – Guiding principles are considered “givens”. Statements or sentiments that are non-negotiable. They must be achieved or preserved by the project. • Objectives – Objectives are measurable achievements/milestones that can be prioritized. The prioritization of objectives establishes a strategy for phasing-in the system implementation. • Intended Results – These statements more properly indicate the future-state environment once the system is implemented.

17. 3.2 Overall CJIS Goal Intended Results Guiding Principles Objectives Overall Goal • 3.2 Overall CJIS Goal • The overall CJIS goal is to… • Improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the CJ agencies and the Judiciary through the capture of data at its source and the sharing of information electronically. • This goal embodies the intent to capture data that is to be shared at its first entry into the criminal justice process and to share that information among the judiciary and CJ agencies thereby eliminating the need to re-key the data at subsequent processing steps.

18. 3.3 Guiding Principles Intended Results Guiding Principles Objectives Overall Goal • 3.3 Guiding Principles • The CJIS logical design needs to be based on the following guiding principles: • Data security, integrity, privacy, and constitutional rights must be achieved and/or preserved • Data Owners, CJ agencies and the Judiciary, must maintain and control their own data while enabling interagency data sharing • Access to data that now is available must be preserved • The CJIS system should support the NH culture of restrained government and respect for individuals • These principles will serve to guide the user requirements and design of the system.

19. 3.4 Objectives Intended Results Guiding Principles Objectives Overall Goal • 3.4 Objectives • A number of specific objectives have been expressed by the project participants. All of the statements previously documented, articulated by key stakeholders in recent interviews, and expressed by the participants at the Stakeholder Meeting in December 2001 have been condensed into the following objectives. • While objectives of the CJIS system, not all may be realized at the time of initial implementation. As such, these objectives will need to be prioritized during the project such that a phased approach to implementation can be planned.

20. 3.4 Objectives Intended Results Guiding Principles Objectives Overall Goal • Provide accurate, up-to-date and timely information on offenders, including identification and status, as they move through the CJ process • Put necessary information at the fingertips of law enforcement • Enable accelerated case processing within the courts; make it easier for court staff to do their jobs • Enable timely electronic transmittal of dispositions to CHR • Provide timely access to Domestic Violence Restraining Orders • Track bail and bail conditions • Support the timely provision of information to victims of crime • continued...

21. 3.4 Objectives Intended Results Guiding Principles Objectives Overall Goal • Provide the technical infrastructure to support information sharing • Allow for the infrastructure to grow over time as business and technology change • Support data sharing of common data across all agencies and the courts to facilitate timely and dependable exchange • Provide for public access to authorized information

22. 3.5 Intended Results Intended Results Guiding Principles Objectives Overall Goal • 3.5 Intended Results • Through the implementation of the CJIS system, the resultant environment is intended to provide for the following: • Improved public safety • More effective law enforcement • Improved safety for law enforcement officers • More accurate identification and timely processing of offenders • More expedient judicial processing • Improved trend analysis of crime and criminal justice processing • Reduced or contained operational costs associated with inter-agency Public Safety and Criminal Justice processes • Public support for the purpose and intent of the CJIS • The CJIS serves both the general public and public officials

23. 4.0 High-level Overview of Current Technology and Infrastructure 4.0 High-level Overview of Current Technology and Infrastructure The purpose at this time to examine the current technologies and infrastructure in place is to determine to what extent the environment has evolved since the CJIS Master Plan was prepared in 1995. That plan spoke to the state of automation at that time and recommended automation projects related to the CJIS system. This section describes the current state of automation as the CJIS Logical Design project gets underway. The present technical environment was re-visited regarding: • Department of Safety • Department of Corrections • Judiciary This section begins with a discussion of how the investigation was performed.

24. 4.1 Approach to Understanding Current Environment 4.1 Approach to Understanding Current Environment In order to understand how the technical environments within the aforementioned agencies and the judiciary may have changed since 1995, a series of interviews were held specifically to discuss technologies being used, applications in production or planned, databases and accesses, and networks. The following interviews were conducted with this purpose: Department of Safety (SPOTS, DMV, and related systems) • Executive Major Fred Booth, December 3, 2001 • Peter Croteau, Director IT, December 5, 2001 Judiciary (Superior and District court systems) • Tom Edwards, Director IT, AOC, December 4, 2001 Department of Corrections (State Correctional systems) • Anita Wiswell, December 11, 2001

25. 4.2 Overview and Observations 4.2 Overview and Observations Observations regarding the current IT environments within the Department of Safety, Department of Corrections, and the Judiciary are presented in the context of how the environments have evolved since the 1995 CJIS Master Plan report was published. The observations are matrixed by the following categories: • Applications and/or databases as reported in the 1995 CJIS Plan • Anticipated growth of capabilities outlined in the CJIS Plan • Actual capabilities at present time • Observations/Comments Initially, a hi-level profile for each of DOS, DOC, and the Judiciary is presented.

26. 4.2.1 Hi-level Profile of DOS • The Department of Safety operates the State Police Online Telecommunications System (SPOTS) for all criminal justice agencies, local and federal. • SPOTS provides access to the following • Vehicle registration, drivers licenses, titles, and acts & violations data at DMV • NCIC for stolen vehicles, wanted persons, and missing persons • III for interstate criminal history • NICS for hand gun and long gun checks • NH Criminal Records (CHRI) • Misdemeanor and warrants files • Electronic Bench warrants issued by the courts • Domestic Violence petitions • NLETS • SPOTS operates over a WAN with 180+ access points for • State Police barracks • County Sheriffs • Local Police Departments • County Attorneys • Corrections • Attorney General’s office • Courts

27. 4.2.1 Hi-level Profile of DOS • The State Police operate an AFIS system • Tri-state compact between New Hampshire, Maine, and Vermont • Interfaced to 28 LiveScan devices located at • All State Police barracks • Ten (10) County jails • Men's State Prison • Women's State Prison • Highest contributing LLE jurisdictions in the state • All FP cards submitted to State Police HQ are scanned into the AFIS system • Troopers • Each is equipped with a laptop computer serving as a MDT • Wireless communications through Tenbase T or modem • Dispatch • Under contract with PrintTrack for CAD • Dispatch at HQ and each of five barracks in field

28. 4.2.2 Hi-level Profile of DOC • Network of 15 remote sites connected over the Department of Safety’s frame relay network • DOC subnet consists of • Concord Men’s State Prison • Concord Headquarters • Goffstown facility • Laconia facility • Berlin facility • Operate the Automated Prison System (APS) providing the following functionality: • Inmate processing • Visitation processing • Sentence Management processing • Inmate accounting • Canteen • Housing and Classification processing

29. 4.2.3 Hi-level Profile of the Judiciary • AOC maintains information relating to Bench Warrants, Restraining Orders, Prosecutions, and Case Scheduling • Automation within a court building is supported by a Novell, MS-DOS environment on the desktop • Currently operate DOS version of Case Management System for • Superior Courts • District Courts • In the process of implementing a Case Management system for Supreme Court • Provide nightly batch transfer of electronic bench warrants to DOS • Current project funded to: • Upgrade the courts to Windows 2000 servers and Windows 2000 desktops • Acquire and implement a new case management system • Utilize SPOTS network to share data among courts • Connect 600 personal computers in 67 NH courts in 53 facilities to the AOC through SPOTS

30. 4.2.4 Overview and Observations Department, Judicial Entity, or System Existing System or Planned Growth from 1995 Plan Present December 2001 Situation Observations & Comments

31. 4.2.4 Overview and Observations Existing System or Planned Growth from 1995 Plan Department, Judicial Entity, or System Present December 2001 Situation Observations & Comments

32. 4.2.4 Overview and Observations Department, Judicial Entity, or System Existing System or Planned Growth from 1995 Plan Present December 2001 Situation Observations & Comments

33. 4.2.4 Overview and Observations Department, Judicial Entity, or System Existing System or Planned Growth from 1995 Plan Present December 2001 Situation Observations & Comments

34. 4.2.4 Overview and Observations Department, Judicial Entity, or System Existing System or Planned Growth from 1995 Plan Present December 2001 Situation Observations & Comments

35. 4.2.4 Overview and Observations Department, Judicial Entity, or System Existing System or Planned Growth from 1995 Plan Present December 2001 Situation Observations & Comments

36. 4.2.4 Overview and Observations Department, Judicial Entity, or System Existing System or Planned Growth from 1995 Plan Present December 2001 Situation Observations & Comments