Corrections_Today_May_June_2023_Vol.85_No.3

helped correctional agencies to allocate resources more effectively and reduced the number of disciplinary infrac tions among inmates (Higgins & Akers, 2017). Potential roadblocks While ILC can have nu merous benefits, there are also potential drawbacks that should be considered. Some of the roadblocks to implementing ILC include the cost of creating the processes and policies as well as standing up the unit or team that

istock/sesame

Legal requirements and regulations An agency is mandated to comply with 28 CFR Part 23 if it is a criminal justice agency that collects, main tains or disseminates criminal intelligence information. 28 CFR Part 23 sets forth guidelines for the operation of criminal intelligence systems and establishes stan dards for ensuring the privacy and civil liberties of individuals who may be the subject of criminal in telligence information. The regulation applies to all criminal justice agencies that receive federal funding, as well as to state and local criminal justice agencies that voluntarily choose to comply with the regulation. The regulation defines a criminal justice agency as “any agency of the United States, any state, or political sub division thereof, which performs the administration of criminal justice under a statute or executive order and which allocates a substantial part of its annual budget to the administration of criminal justice.” Additionally, the regulation requires agencies that fall under its purview appoint a 28 CFR Part 23 compli ance officer to ensure the agency is complying with the regulation’s requirements. The regulation is designed to ensure the privacy and civil liberties of individuals who may be the subject of criminal intelligence informa tion. Agencies are recommended to work with general counsel, state Attorney General offices, or state Inspec tor General offices to determine the need to comply with 28 CFR Part 23 and to design and implement necessary policies to ensure compliance. →

will be tasked with obtaining, assessing, collating, analyzing and disseminating the intelligence. Developing the neces sary infrastructure, including data management systems and analytical tools, can be expensive, and hiring staff with the necessary expertise to manage these systems can also be costly (Vidmar & Ares, 2020). Additionally, there may be privacy concerns. Collecting and analyzing data on inmate behavior and activities raises privacy concerns, particularly if the data is collected without the consent of the inmates. Correctional agencies must ensure they are collecting and managing data in compliance with all relevant laws and regulations (Higgins & Akers, 2017). As with any new policy or procedure, there may be staff resistance. Implementing ILC may face resistance from staff who are not familiar with the technology or who are resistant to change. Correctional agencies must develop a comprehensive training program that addresses these concerns and ensures all staff is comfortable with the technology and processes required to support ILC effectively (Laycock, 2007). Caution should be taken to avoid an overreliance on data. Correctional agencies could become over-reliant on data in their decision-mak ing processes, potentially overlooking important factors that cannot be captured through data analysis alone (Vidmar & Ares, 2020). Implementing ILC can have numerous benefits, but there are also potential drawbacks that should be considered and can be mitigated with proper planning and oversight to ensure the ILC program is effective and sustainable.

Corrections Today May/June 2023— 35