GAO Report Shows Intelligence Sharing Centers Not Focused on Terror

A newly released Government Accountability Office report concluded that local intelligence-sharing centers set up after the Sept. 11 attacks have had their anti-terrorism mission diluted by a focus on run-of-the-mill street crime and hazards like hurricanes.^[1] According to the report, only 2 of the 43 ''fusion centers'' focus exclusively on preventing terrorism; center directors complain that they were hampered by lack of guidance from Washington and they were flooded by often redundant information from multiple computer systems.^[2]

The original concept behind fusion centers was to coordinate resources, expertise and information of intelligence agencies so the country could detect and prevent terrorist acts.^[3] The concept has been widely embraced, particularly by the Sept. 11 commission, and the federal government has provided $130 million to help get them off the ground; but until recently, there were no guidelines for setting up the centers and as a result, the information shared and how it is used varies.^[4]

Centers in Kansas and Rhode Island are the only two focused solely on counterterrorism. Other centers focus on all crimes, including drugs and gangs.^[5] The state of Washington’s fusion center, for instance, has an all-hazards mission so it can focus on natural disasters and public health epidemics in addition to terrorism.^[6]

''States are at different levels because there wasn't the preconceived game-plan on how to do this,'' said George Foresman, a former undersecretary at the Department of Homeland Security who oversaw the awarding of startup money for many of the centers.^[7]

Most of the centers are run by state police or other law enforcement agencies, but many also have representatives from a wide range of other agencies, including fire and public works departments and state gambling regulators.^[8] Most of the centers also include federal officials such as analysts from the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. Some centers are even housed together with federal agencies, which can be a benefit.^[9] Minnesota's fusion center, for example, is in the same building as the FBI, which makes it easier for local officials to access the FBI's networks.^[10]

The GAO report also found that the centers can potentially tap into five separate federal databases containing case files on investigations, reports on suspicious incidents and research material on terrorist weapons and tactics.^[11] But not all of the facilities are in buildings that have adequate security to access those databases. Each fusion center is independent and not controlled by the federal government, and it was only last month that the Bush administration finally offered guidelines for the centers' missions and operations.^[12]

The GAO also found that some fusion centers have had a hard time hiring and training analysts, and many say they need federal guidance on what skills the analysts should have.^[13] Fusion centers have found it hard to get security clearances for their personnel, and find that even with appropriate clearances, information continues to be withheld.^[14]

Nineteen centers told GAO that federal agencies, most often the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, wouldn't accept each others' clearances even though the law says they're supposed to. This would not be the first time the FBI refused to co-operate with other law enforcement offices, federal criminal defense attorney Douglas McNabb has blogged about this issue here.

---

^[1] Eileen Sullivan GAO: Local Anti-Terror Centers Lose Focus, Associated Press Newswire, November 28, 2007, available at LEXIS, News Library, Wire News Services
^[2] Id.
^[3] Id.
^[4] Id.
^[5] Id
^[6] Id.
^[7] Id.
^[8] Id.
^[9] Id.
^[10] Id.
^[11] Id.
^[12] Id.; The White House published a strategy paper advising fusion centers to share information about all criminal activity, saying the information could lead to uncovering a terrorist plot. The GAO report asserted though that the federal government still needs to do a better job of explaining what information it can share and how much money it will provide.
^[13] Id.
^[14] Id.