Altoona Police Department Strength through Excellence

1
Altoona Police DepartmentStrength through
Excellence

• Chief Todd W. Chaney
• Officer Dana D. Brown

2
City of Altoona

• Total Population of 7,181 (US Census website,
  2000)
• City Land Area 4.7 sq. mi
• Located in Eau Claire County, West Central
  Wisconsin
• (County Pop. 93,142, Land area 637.6 sq. mi. )
• Adjacent to the City of Eau Claire
• (Approx. Pop. 61,704, Land area 30.3 sq. mi.)
• Fourteen (14) Sworn Law Enforcement Officers
• (12 Full-time, 2 Part-time)

3
Obstacles to Implementing Technology Initiatives
and IT Security measures

• Budget Restraints
• Lack of really understanding whats available and
  actually applicable to your agency

4
Budget Restraints

• Budget cuts are common place
• Demands to do more with less are ever increasing
  by councils and constituents

5
familiar saying comes to mind

• We have done so much for so long with
• so little, We are now qualified to do anything
  with nothing.
• part of the Blue Color Creed
• very fitting at times

6
Limited Understanding Knowledge

• The technology landscape as it affects law
  enforcement is very dynamic and changing
• Also an understanding of the essential policing
  aspect inherent in the implementation of new
  technologies poses its own issues

7
Dealing with these Obstacles

• Working together toward a common goal.
• a phrase often overused, but we have tried to
  regularly put the adage into practice as we
  pursue technology initiatives

8
Dealing with these Obstacles

• Working together, with other agencies, is exactly
  what we have done and continue to do to deal with
  the obstacles to Technology Advancements and IT
  Security measures
• Cooperation and Consortium Building

9
Cooperation and Consortium Building

• We brought together agencies of similar size and
  circumstances for specific purposes
• Pooled grant funding requests
• Shared Technology Resources

10
Pooled Grant Funding Requests

• Most of our Technology Initiatives began with
  funding from Grant Proposals with various sized
  Consortiums
• In Squad Delivery System (L.E.A.P.)
• Began with three agencies in 2004 Budget Year
• Additions and improvements made with additional
  consortium grant funding
• Record Management System (RMS) Upgrade with added
  functionality
• Currently involving 19 agencies
• Upgrading computer equipment
• Shared Technology Resources
• Outgrowth of initiatives funded by consortium
  grants
• Partially funded by consortium grant funds

11
Shared Technology Resources

• Most small mid-sized agencies have
• similar IT needs
• Our Shared Technology Resources
• Recently purchased Citrix server technology with
  the intention to remotely share with other
  agencies in a hosted application environment
• In the process of migrating the first agencies
  complete RMS and installing wireless TraCS
  (Traffic and Criminal Software) for their squad
  cars
• Seamlessly accessing their data and applications
  from there office computers and squad car on our
  server
• Shared Cost of Ownership

12
Accessing Technology Advancements IT Security
Measures

• Through Cooperation and Consortium Building
• we have been able to deal effective with these
  common obstacles
• creating different platforms that allow us to
  continue leveraging additional Cooperation and
  Consortium Building opportunities including
  additional grant funding
• also putting us in a better position to partner
  with solutions providers rather than just seeking
  vendors, with an informed and comprehensive
  technology vision

13
Cooperation and Consortium Building

• (Web Video of Protective Service Professional
  Grant Readers)
• (from Idea Bank-fire prevention website)

14
Consortium Building for Grant Funding Proposals
Technology Resource Sharing

• Participants to consider
• Other departments within Jurisdiction
• Other law enforcement agencies
• Locally/Regionally
• Others outside region
• Additional staff with a role in the
• decision-making process
• Community Groups

15
Consortium Building for Grant Funding Proposals
Technology Resource Sharing

• Consider External Stakeholders for outside
  support
• Any individual, group, or organization that may
  have and influence (on proposal or
  implementation) or affected by the potential
  Technology Initiative.

16
Consortium Building for Grant Funding Proposals
Technology Resource Sharing

• Potential External Stakeholders
• County/City Board Committee members
• Consultants
• Target audiences or users
• Professional associations
• Media

17
Consortium Building for Grant Funding Proposals
Technology Resource Sharing

• Consider all possible Roles of these External
  Stakeholders in the grant application
  Implementation process
• Promoter of the Technology Initiative
• Evidence of support
• Adviser or provider of feedback
• Resource provider i.e. additional funding,
  volunteers,
• sub-contractor, etc.
• Assist in application preparation
• If 501(c)(3), eligible for other associated
  grant
• funding, unavailable to law enforcement
• User or beneficiary of the Technology Initiative
  results

18
Consortium Building for Grant Funding Proposals
Technology Resource Sharing

• Bringing Stakeholders on board and keeping them
• Communication, communication, communication, etc.
• Things to consider in consortium building
  process, in both formal and informal
  relationships
• Clear consensus
• Mutual expectations
• Track and document the process thoroughly
• Document key decisions and how they were
  determined
• Establish measurable timetables

19
Consortium Building for Grant Funding Proposals

• Key Questions before beginning the process
• Time Is it realistically possible to meet
  required deadlines?
• Political sensitivity
• Are there any Political issues associated?
• Can they be mitigated or ignored altogether?
• Community support
• Is community support needed?
• If so who are potential community partners?
• Local funding
• Availability for the Technology Initiative and
  needed Security Measures?
• Sustainability

20
Primary Reasons Grant Proposals are Rejected

• Applicant did not follow the guidelines
• Proposal lacked credibility, with limited
  collaboration and consortium.
• Technology Initiative was not adequately or
  clearly defined and explained
• There simply was not enough money to go around
• Need to keep communication open

21
Grant Proposals

• To Do List
• Follow instructions to the letter
• Match grantors mission and priorities w/o
  question
• Write for the reviewer (avoid police jargon)
• Be realistic
• Engage the community
• Review critically
• Meet the deadline
• Remember the WHY

22
Top Reasons for SuccessfulTechnology Grant
Applications

• Applicant adheres to all grant proposal
  guidelines
• Applicants Initiative fits grant agency mission
  and priorities
• The need is clearly defined with collaborated
  support
• Proposal identifies measurable results
• Budget is realistic and consistent with narrative
• Applicant demonstrates capacity to deliver
• Application is well-organized and easy for the
  evaluator to understand

23

• Thank you!
• Chief Todd W. Chaney
• Officer Dana B. Brown
• Altoona Police Department