Challenges And Choices For Crimefighting Technology: Federal Support Of State And Local Law Enforcement (2001),New

About the Author WILLIAM SCHWABE (Ph.D., Public Policy Analysis, RAND Graduate School, Santa Monica, California) is a senior policy analyst at RAND with broad experience in gaming and other interactive policy planning exercises, as well as computer modeling, decision support, and operations analysis. Lois M. Davis (Ph.D., Public Health, UCLA) is a health policy researcher at RAND, a formerNational Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) postdoctoral fellow, and a former Pew Health Policy Fellow. Brian Jackson (Ph.D., bioinorganic chemistry, California Institute of Technology) is an associate physical scientist at RAND. Product Description This report provides findings of a study of technology in use or needed by law enforcement agencies at the state and local level, for the purpose of informing federal policymakers as they consider technologyrelated support for these agencies. Review A local agency may think they need certain types of technology, but after reading this they may realize some technology could be a hindrance to operations ... Schwabe et al. (2001) created an informative study which could be useful for policy makers, law enforcement agencies, and researchers. This publication was a good example of how research can be transformed into informed policy recommendations.Criminal Justice Policy Review From the Publisher An earlier RAND report, Needs and Prospects for CrimeFightingTechnology: The Federal Role in Assisting State and Local LawEnforcement (Schwabe, 1999), discussed various aspects oftechnologyrelated support the federal government has provided tostate and local agencies and commented on needs and prospects forsuch support in the future. That report recommended a moreexhaustive study of what law enforcement technology is currently inuse across the nation and how the federal government might betterrender technologyrelated support.Subsequently, the White House Office of Science and TechnologyPolicy commissioned RAND's Science and Technology PolicyInstitute to conduct the more exhaustive study recommended by theNeeds and Prospects report. This study was also supported by fundingfrom the National Institute of Justice.This report, Challenges and Choices, presents the overall findings ofthe followon study. A companion volume (Davis, Schwabe, andFricker, 2001) provides more detailed findings from two nationwidesurveys RAND conducted as part of the study.The authors' aim is to provide information that may help federalpolicymakers in the Executive and Legislative branches as they formulategoals and programs to support technology utilization andmodernization for law enforcement over the course of the firstdecade of the 21st century.The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) was created in1976 to provide the President with timely policy advice and to coordinate the science and technology investment. OSTP's TechnologyDivision helps to develop and implement federal policies for harnessingtechnology to serve national goals such as global economiccompetitiveness, environmental quality, and national security. TheDivision's priorities include: sustaining U.S. technological leadershipthrough partnerships to promote the development of innovativetechnologies; research and development (R&D) and policy initiativesfor advanced computing and communications technologies; advancingtechnologies for education and training; and the U.S. space andaeronautics program.The Science and Technology Policy Institute at RAND was created byCongress in 1991 as the Critical Technologies Institute and renamedin 1998. It is a federally funded research and development centersponsored by the National Science Foundation and managed byRAND. The Institute's mission is to help improve public policy byconducting objective, independent research and analysis on policyissues that involve science and technology. To this end, the InstituteSupports the Office of Science and Technology Policy and otherExecutive branch