COPS Interoperable Communications Technology Program
Issue Brief


Number 3 May 2007 

Building a Regional
Communications Plan

By John F. Walker
SEARCH


Introduction 

Why do many local, regional, and state 
communications efforts continue to 
struggle with interoperable communications? 
Do these struggles to achieve 
interoperability involve the way we 
approach relationships of technology 
and operational planning? How do these 
relationships work together in a successful 
interoperable communications effort? 

A key step in integrating technology and 
operational requirements is building a 
regional communications plan. This 
Issue Brief presents the basic steps in 
building such a plan to improve interoperability 
and, ultimately, joint response to 
emergencies. 

Background 

The national post-9/11 focus on national 
preparedness and communications 
among first responders has driven and 
defined numerous federal initiatives. 

Broadly, establishment of a comprehensive, 
all-hazards approach to respond 
to incidents of national significance has 
greatly shaped current needs for regional 
communications. The National Incident 
Management System1 (NIMS) and 
its core element, the Incident Command 
System (ICS), are the key drivers. Their 
relationship to and impact on first 
responder communications is addressed in 
a separate Issue Brief in this series.2 

On the specific issue of first responder 
communications, federal grant programs 
in both the U.S. Department of Justice 
and the Department of Homeland Security 
have been closely aligned with SAFECOM, 
a presidential initiative to improve 
communications interoperability.3 

In 2004, SAFECOM released its first 
statement of requirements for public safety 
wireless communications. Subsequently, 
SAFECOMs RapidCom initiative, undertaken 
to ensure that the nations 10 highest 
risk urban areas had at least a minimal 
level of communications interoperability, 
yielded the first comprehensive depiction 
of critical success factors and progress: 
the Interoperability Continuum.4 

These initiatives and the dramatic effects 
of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 have driven 
the need for regional approaches to 
ensuring communications among public 
safety agencies during incidents small 
and large. 

1 The National Incident Management System was 
established by Homeland Security Presidential 
Directive 5 (HSPD-5),Management of Domestic 
Incidents. See http://www.whitehouse.gov/ 
news/releases/2003/02/20030228-9.html. 

2 Hawkins, Dan, Communications in the Incident 
Command System, SEARCH, 2007. Available at 
http://www.search.org/programs/safety/. 

3 See http://www.safecomprogram.gov/ 
SAFECOM/about/default.htm. 

4 See http://www.safecomprogram.gov/ 
SAFECOM/tools/continuum/default.htm. 

Build a Foundation 

The effort involved in building a foundation 
for a communications plan at the 
local, regional, or state level is 
fundamentally a political one. Why should this 
be, when the more obvious focus would 
appear to be funding, technology, and 
documents of agreement and support? 

The need for agreement, cooperation, 
and participation at many levels is at 
the heart of any plan. Obstacles to this 
cooperative spirit may likely occur as 
changes in responsibility, authority, and 
operational processes within participating 
communities and organizations occur 




during the development of a regional 
communications plan. 

The effort to create a cooperative foundation 
for a communications plan must first 
address three fundamental obstacles of 
every cooperative effort: turf, agendas, 
and trust. These obstacles exist at all 
levels of political and organizational entities 
and must be dealt with in an effective and 
forthright manner. 

These obstacles to cooperation may 
be ingrained in many individuals and 
organizations. Therefore, addressing 
their impact in the building of a foundation 
must occur at the outset of the effort 
and at the highest possible levels of the 
participating organizations. 

Chief executives of each participating 
entity should be educated about the 
elements of a regional communications 
plan, emphasizing the level of cooperative 
effort needed to create the following: 

 
Memoranda of understanding 
(intergovernmental and mutual aid 
agreements that involve shared policy-
making decisions of the political 
entities) 

 
Policies related to operational 
procedures of public safety disciplines, 
equipment purchases, funding, training, 
and exercises. 

Image of Law Enforcement Tech Guide for Communications 
Interoperability: A Guide for Interagency Communications 
Projects provides further information on NIMS in the 
context of interoperability. Produced by SEARCH 
under COPS Office sponsorship, it is available from the 
COPS Office Response Center, 800.421.6770, and at 

http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/ric/ResourceMain. 
aspx?RID=238.


Agency chief executives must become 
advocates of this cooperative effort and 
define their expectations for all who 
participate in the cooperative process. 
Most important, the chief executives 
must communicate unequivocally, within 
their respective organizations, the 
necessity of regional cooperation as it relates 
to developing and sustaining a regional 
communications plan. Experience has 
shown that without this clearly articulated 
executive policy and action, the ability 
to implement a communications plan 
successfully will, at best, be considerably 
more difficult and lengthy and, at worst, 
doomed to failure. 

Who Are Participants in the 
Plan? 

Another step in building a foundation is 
to identify which disciplines (stakeholders) 
should be a part of the communications plan 
and planning process. 

In 2005, the Department of Homeland 
Security established grant requirements 
for 75 metropolitan regions to develop 
Tactical Interoperable Communications 
Plans (TICP). Guidance for these plans 
identified first responder disciplines of 
public and private agencies that would 
initially respond to the scene of an 
emergency and that need to be 
coordinated during the response. The public 
safety core of first responders in this 
initial incident-scene response would be 
law enforcement, fire, and emergency 
medical services.5 

5 For more information on TICP development, see 
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/docs/ 
TICPGuidanceandTemplate.pdf. 


That guidance recommended the following 
additional disciplines as potential 
first responders: 

 
Emergency management 
 
Explosive ordnance disposal 
 
HAZMAT 
 
Urban area search and rescue teams 
(USAR) 
 
Transportation 
 
Utilities 
 
State and federal agencies that may 
be involved in initial incident-scene 
responses. 


Create a Written Agreement 

Why are written agreements 
important to building a 
regional communications 
plan? For the many 
reasons discussed 
above and to define 
the scope and vision 
of the plan and 
the commitments 
required of the 
participants for 
long-term cooperation and 
participation. 

The first component of a regional 
communications plan is the memorandum 
of understanding (MOU) or agreement. 
This document is general in nature and 
should list the activities and commitments 
participants will be expected to 
undertake and maintain as partners in 
the plan. 

A typical MOU involving a regional 
communications plan contains statements of 
agreement regarding development and 
participation in the following: 

 
A regional communications plan 
involving public safety and support 
services and private responders that 
will prepare the region to respond to 
and mitigate emergency incidents 

 
Regional standard operating procedures 
(SOP) that conform to NIMS 
 
Regular training and exercises at the 
local and regional levels 
 
Regional logistical and financial 
support for the development of SOPs, 
planning, technology compatibility, 
training, and exercises 
 
Coordinating on a regional level the 
purchase and use of communications 
technology to ensure compatibility 
with all regional users 
 
Meeting on an ongoing basis to update 
interoperability plans and directives 
and update/review training and exercises 
 
Incorporating the identified interoperability 
activities into everyday operational 
activities to ensure compatibility and 
familiarity among regional 
users 
 
Accepting and approving, as a region, 
the SAFECOM definition of communications 
interoperability. 


Sample agreements and SOPs are 
provided in SEARCHs Communications 
Interoperability: A Guide for Interagency 
Communications Projects. 

Establish a Governance 
Structure 

All plans require a governance structure to manage the 
planning process and establish accountability 
for the planning outcomes. There 
are four recommended components of project governance: 

 
Executive sponsorship (discussed 
earlier in Build a Foundation) 
 
Steering committee 
 
User (operational) committee 
 
Technical committee. 


The steering committee generally 
comprises high-level managers or supervisors 
from within the stakeholder agencies. 
The steering committee provides 
constant guidance and oversight of the 
planning project and makes most of the 
decisions related to the project. It keeps 
executive sponsors informed of the 
projects progress or requests specific 
action from the executive to remove project 
barriers or provide resources. 

The user (operational) committee 
includes participant agency line personnel 
and key users of the technology. Individuals 
serving on the committee would 
include first responders, supervisors, 
dispatch supervisors and dispatchers, 
emergency managers, and emergency operation 
center representatives. User committee 
members need to be familiar with 
the business and operational requirements 
of the agencies they represent. 

Members of the technical committee 
would include technical staff of the 
participating agencies who are knowledgeable 
about the current technical environment 
and potential industry solutions. 
The technical committee responds to the 



user committees defined business and 
operational needs and analyzes those 
needs against the agencies current 
technical capabilities and potential 
industry solutions. 

Both the technical and user committees 
provide recommendations and 
evaluations about training and exercises 
required to prepare the region to 
implement and sustain the final 
communications plan. 

One resource to assist in identifying 
project governance structures and business 
needs is the Law Enforcement Tech Guide: 
How to plan, purchase and manage technology 
(successfully!), A Guide for Executives, 
Managers and Technologists.6 

Develop a Concept of 
Operations 

Understanding what currently exists and 
works within the region as it relates to 
cooperative efforts and operational activities 
is important in the effort to develop a 
concept of operations that supports a 
regional communications plan. Inventorying 
and identifying these efforts is an 
important process in developing the plan. 

Inventory Existing Agreements 

The effort to inventory cooperative 
agreements should start with each public 
safety discipline. Disciplines that are 
professionally accredited, such as police 
and sheriffs under the Commission on 
Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies 
(CALEA), require agencies to enter 
into mutual aid agreements and maintain 
current files of these agreements. The 
National Sheriffs Association (NSA) and 
the National Fire Protection Association 
(NFPA) both set professional standards 
that may assist in the identification of 
existing or pending agreements. 

6 Harris, Kelly J. and William H. Romesburg, 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice Office of 
Community Oriented Policing Services, 2002. 

Image of 
Law EnforcEmEnT Tech Guide 
How to plan, purchase and manage technology (successfully!) 
A Guide for Executives, Managers and Technologists 
To view or download the Law 
Enforcement Tech Guide, see 
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/ric/ 
ResourceMain.aspx?RID=243. 

Use Existing Agreements 

The need not to reinvent the wheel is 
important when working to establish 
regional communications. Consideration 
and review of regional efforts among the 
agencies and disciplines can provide 
synergism, and reduce participant resistance 
in joining the plan, by exploiting existing 
agreements, cooperative efforts, and 
relationships within the region. When 
possible, examine and integrate potential 
sources for these documents. Existing 
regional agreements that could assist in 
this effort would be intergovernmental 
agreements, mutual aid agreements, 
and regional memoranda of agreements 
involving specialized units like HAZMAT, 
SWAT, and narcotics task forces, or 
public safety incident responses across 
jurisdictional or political boundaries. 

Inventory Communications 
Resources 

Systems 

A wide range of private, local, state, or 
federal communications systems may exist 
within the region. Identifying all existing 
communications systems and systems 
planned for development is an important 
task in creating the plan. 

When a region inventories its communications 
system, it should consider wireless 
communications systems involving 
VHF-low band, VHF-high band, 800 MHz 
analog and digital, non-Project 25- and 
Project 25-compliant, interoperability 
gateways, data communication, and cellular 
phone capability, or the lack of it, 
along with the wide range of connectivity 
types and capabilities. 

Equipment 

In its February 2003 report, the National 
Task Force on Interoperability identified 
key problem areas that act as a barrier to 
communications interoperability. One of 
these is the lack of equipment compatibility 
because of age, design, or both.7 
This problem is brought about for many 
reasons, many of which may be long-
standing within a region. 

For a regional communications plan to 
function well, the participants must 
possess a clear understanding of the regions 
communication equipment and its 
connectivity or inability to connect. 

How this equipment supports or affects 
the ability of the regions first responders 
to fulfill their operational mission is a 
key component in the development of a 
communications plan. Identifying 
communication gaps created by the regions 
equipment and how operational communications 
would function in relation 
to these gaps is an important part of the 
inventory process. 

7 Why Cant We Talk?: Working Together to Bridge 
the Communications Gap to Save Lives, NCJ 204348 
(Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice, 
2003). See 
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/ 
abstract.aspx?ID=204348.

Talk Paths 

As part of the inventory process, it is 
important to identify and inventory 
available talk paths or frequencies. In 
addition, identify and inventory the 
number and types of frequencies or talk 



paths available to each first responder for 
day-to-day operations, and those used for 
other activities outside of routine events 
(such as planned events or multiagency 
or multijurisdictional responses within 
the region). 

Trained Communications Unit 
Staff 

The execution of a regional communications 
plan that is compliant with the 
NIMS Incident Command System (ICS)8 
requires the creation and deployment of 
an ICS-based Communications Unit. ICS 
identifies four positions within the 
Communications Unit: the Communications 
Unit Leader, Incident Communications 
Technician, Radio Operator, and Incident 
Communications Center Manager. Most 
regions have personnel among their 
many first responder agencies who serve 
in such roles during routine, day-to-day 
operations. Emergencies managed under 
ICS may need all or none of these functions 
formally designated as part of the 
response, depending on the scope of the 
incident. Regional communications plans 
establish who will serve in these roles 
and under what conditions they will be 
activated. 

Communications Unit Leader 

The Communications Unit Leader in an 
ICS-based response system should be 
activated early in the response. The Unit 
Leader is responsible for integrating 
communications, that is, ensuring that 
operations are supported by communications. 
The position must understand ICS 
and local response systems to support the 
efforts of the command team. The Unit 
Leader is responsible for developing the 
Incident Communications Plan (ICS 205) 
and establishing the Incident Communications 
Center (ICC). 

8 ICS establishes basic principles, practical tools, 
and a definitive structure for supporting communications 
needs during emergency response. 

Incident Communications Technician 

Incidents involving more than 
a few agencies and extending 
for more than a day or two 
often require the skills of an 
Incident Communications 
Technician. The technician 
position is needed to deploy 
advanced equipment and keep 
it operational. 

Radio Operator 

Radio Operators within the 
unit may serve as dispatchers 
or be assigned to the general 
staff to facilitate their 
communications requirements. Many 
agencies are now creating 
dispatcher teams to respond to 
incidents as on-scene Radio Operators. 


Incident Communications Center Manager 

The Incident Communications Center 
Manager position is filled when the 
Communications Unit Leaders span of 
control would be exceeded, typically 
during complex incidents requiring multiple 
Incident Communications Technicians 
and Radio Operators. The Manager 
serves primarily to supervise Radio 
Operators and manage the ICC. 

Establish Policies and 
Procedures 

The greatest challenge to building a 
regional communications plan, beyond the 
executive sponsorship, is the establishment 
of common, NIMS ICS-compliant, 
regional policies and procedures for 
participating disciplines and agencies. 
Once again, many agency executives and 
managers may see this requirement as an 
intrusion into their ability and responsibility 
to direct and manage their individual organizations. 

Use of common directives by all regional 
agency participants on a daily basis is one 
of the critical success factors of the 
SAFECOM Programs Interoperability Continuum 
dimensions, and of a regional 
communications plan.9 

Equipment 

The importance of regional cooperation 
regarding equipment compatibility 
and interoperability is another area that 
may create resistance from participant 
agencies in the development of a regional 
communications plan. 

The National Task Force on Interoperability 
noted five impediments hampering the 
development of interoperable 
communications systems. Two of these 
impedimentsincompatible and aging 
communications equipment, and limited 
and fragmented planning and coordination
are related to the topic of regional 
equipment. 

9 See http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/. 


A regional communications plan may 
require that the agencys equipment 
purchase decisionsand sometimes 
appropriationsbe vetted by an impartial 
party outside the agency, such as the 
technical committee. 

Purchases of equipment and software 
that do not support the regions collective 
communications processes and plan can 
create gaps in interoperability and 
additional costs for partner agencies because 
they may have to modify their equipment 
and infrastructure to compensate for a 
nonvetted purchase by another agency. 

Establishing and retaining regional 
communications capabilities requires 
participant agencies to cooperate and agree on 
communications system infrastructure 
and equipment purchases, modifications, 
and future expansion. This cooperation 
and agreement during the planning 
process will best ensure interoperability 
across the regions system. 

Operational 

One trait that many regional communications 
planning efforts take on early in the 
planning process is to become technology-
centric when discussing and implementing 
the communications plan. The plan, 
however, must be operational-centric; 
in other words, the plan must focus on 
the operational communications needs 
of first responders regarding the who, 
when and how of their operational communications. 

As discussed earlier, the formation of the 
user and technical committees to assist in the 
plans development and management is critical to the plans 
overall success. 

Emphasis is placed on the user committee 
to represent operational first responders 
and on the technical committee to 
work off of the business and operational 
requirements of the user committee. This 
is a critical and key component of an 
effective communications plan. 

An effective communications plan must 
reflect the operational communications 
needs of first responders at incident-
specific events. The technology is then used 
to meet this communication need. Many 
regions reverse this process by defining 
what technology is available, leaving the 
first responder to fit the technology to the 
response. The crux of this issue is best 
reflected in the architectural question, 
Does form follow function, or function 
follow form? 

Regional communications directives 
should also designate the types and 
numbers of talk paths in the participating 
agencies radios, gateways, and communication 
center consoles, and how and 
when they will be used. 

Funding 

Funding to implement the regional 
communications plan can reflect a wide 
range of needs. The most common fiscal 
support provided by participating agencies 
comes in the form of staff time and 
expenses. The personnel costs should be 
understood and anticipated. Staff time 
across jurisdictions is needed to draft and 
prepare final regional directives, cooperative 
planning activities, technology compatibility 
analysis, training and exercises, 
and to hold meetings to update/review 
the communications plan, directives, and 
ongoing regional training and exercises. 

Train and Exercise 

Training and exercise activities are often 
considered a low priority when jurisdictions 
implement a regional communications 
plan. As has been noted by some 
police first responders, the relation to the 
quantity of firearms training versus the 
quantity of communications training is 
not nearly proportional to the number of 
times those skills are relied on and how 
critical both are to job performance and 
sometimes survival. 

Communications interoperability is 
achieved through the routine use of 
interagency capabilities. The skills needed 
to respond to large and small emergencies 
are instilled through day-to-day use, 
basic, and in-service training and routine 
exercises. 

Train in Context 

Training in context simply means training 
personnel in practical skills by doing 
it within the context of how the skills will 
be used, for example, training a police 
officer to conduct a traffic stop. This kind 
of contextual training requires the officer 
to pick a safe location for the stop, use 
his radio to communicate his location, 
vehicle description and the number of occupants 
in the vehicle, while at the same 
time positioning his vehicle to provide 
him with protection and to protect the 
stopped vehicle from oncoming traffic. 
This form of training evaluates several 
skill levels beyond the activities of how to 
use the radio to effect a traffic stop. 
Trainees are, in effect, not being trained how to 
use the radio, but how to communicate to 
accomplish their job. 


The Department of Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program 
(HSEEP) states: 

The most effective way to evaluate 
preparedness prior to an actual 
incident is by conducting and evaluating 
threat- and performance-based 
exercises.10 

Discussion-Based Exercises 

The HSEEP provides detailed guidance 
for designing, conducting, and evaluating 
exercises, including discussion-based 
exercises. 

Tabletop exercises give regional participants 
a method, through discussion, for 
applying new procedures or policies and 
to determine if there are any gaps and 
conflicts that would cause disconnects 
during an incident response. The tabletop 
exercise provides an opportunity to apply 
the communications plan processes and 
protocols in incident communications 
as they relate to the receipt, dispatching, 
and response of first responders and the 
cooperation and support of on-scene 
commanders and emergency operation 
centers. Tabletop exercises often precede 
operations-based exercises. 

Operations-Based Exercises 

HSEEP also discussed operations-based 
exercises in detail. These bring first 
responders to the field for actual practice 
and training. It is a practical level 
of training and provides the means to 
validate policies and procedures that were 
part of the discussion-based tabletop 
exercise. 

Functional exercises generally are 
limited in scope. Usually, a particular 
team or unit is brought to the field to test 
its deployment and the direction and control 
of its assets; for example, deploying 
a HAZMAT unit to a public arena to test 
for biological or chemical contamination. 
Communication would be tested in a limited 
capacity to evaluate team control and 
coordination. Evaluation of a particular 
capability is the primary focus of the 
functional exercise. 

Generally, full-scale exercises involve 
multiple jurisdictions in a full system 
response. Communication is tested as part 
of the overall response capability and as 
part of a system of systems in how it is 
used during real-life conditions. This level 
of exercise provides the best opportunity 
to test and evaluate entire systems within 
the agencies or region. 

10 Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation 
Program, Volume II: Exercise Evaluation and 
Improvement, NCJ 202198 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security, October 2003) 
p. iii. Available at https://hseep.dhs.gov/. 


Measure Performance 

One area that many regions and organizations 
overlook when conducting training 
and exercises is a performance measurement 
to determine how effective their 
training and exercise was in meeting its 
stated purpose. 

The HSEEP addresses in detail the processes 
and importance of stating expected 
outcomes, measuring the performance 
in meeting those outcomes, and conducting 
follow-up to close the performance 
gaps. 

Evaluate Exercises 

Prepare evaluations for all exercises 
conducted within the agency and region. 
Key elements of an evaluation are the 
following: 

 
Train evaluators and facilitators and 
debrief these individuals at the conclusion 
of the exercise. 
 
Conduct a hot wash or after-action 
critique with the other participants of 
the training exercise. 


 
Debriefs and hot washes are used 
for both tabletop and operations-
based exercises. 

 
An After-Action Analysis and 
Report is completed to capture 
broader details of the evaluation 
and to recommend improvements. 

Assess Regional Progress 

The primary purpose of exercise and 
training evaluation is to improve 
performance. Improvement will not happen 
without an effective evaluation program 
that embraces follow-up and follow-
through on recommended changes. 
Support for development of performance 
measurements can be obtained through 
SEARCH.11 

11 Law Enforcement Tech Guide for Creating 
Performance Measures That Work: A Guide for 
Executives and Managers, by David J. Roberts, 
SEARCH, 2006. Available from the COPS Office at 
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/ric/ResourceMain. 
aspx?RID=275. See also Law Enforcement Tech 
Guide for Communications Interoperability: A Guide 
for Interagency Communications Projects, Chapter 
15,Measuring Interoperability. 



Communication is a unique response 
capability. It cannot truly be tested and 
evaluated outside the context of integrated 
exercises. Given the uniqueness 
of this capability, a regional communications 
plan, if it is to continually improve, 
should include a comprehensive, contextual 
training and exercise program with 
an effective evaluation component. 

Conclusion 

Building a regional communications 
plan is a multifaceted, time-consuming, 
cooperative effort. 

A review of many incidents and exercise 
debriefings and hot washes consistently 
reveals a recurring frustration exhibited 
by first responders, supervisors, dispatchers, 
managers, executives, and political 
figures: Why are there always serious 
problems with communications and 
interoperability at the first responder and 
command levels? 


Many will have us believe that problems 
with local, regional, and state 
interoperability are caused primarily by a lack 
of technology. A review of numerous 
agencies and regions, large and small, 
throughout the country, however, reveals 
one consistent shortcoming: a lack of 
effective preparation and planning regarding 
communications and interoperability 
for first responders. 

Analysis of this problem reveals a common 
communications gapthe absence 
of a comprehensive, operationally driven, 
NIMS ICS-compliant, well-trained and 
well-exercised, cooperative communications 
plan within and among individual 
agencies and the region. 

Intra-agency and interagency communication 
within an individual community 
is hampered without a communications 
plan. The belief that interagency, inter-
jurisdictional interoperable communication 
can occur in response to large-scale 
emergencies without a well-planned, 
well-exercised, and well-executed regional 
communications plan is a fallacy. 
 

This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement #2004-IN-WX-K002 by the U.S. Department 
of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Points of view or opinions contained in 
this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies 
of the U.S. Department of Justice. 

Francis X. Aumand III 
Chairman 

Ronald P. Hawley 
Executive Director 

Kelly J. Harris 
Deputy Executive Director 

SEARCH 
THE NATIONAL CONSORTIUM FOR JUSTICE 
INFORMATION AND STATISTICS 

7311 Greenhaven Drive, Suite 145 
Sacramento, CA 95831 
916.392.2550 
www.search.org 

Technical Assistance Available 


SEARCH is the technical 
assistance (TA) provider to the 

U.S. Department of Justice Office 
of Community Oriented Policing 
Services (COPS) Interoperable 
Communications Technology 
Program (ICTP). SEARCH is a 
national nonprofit organization 
that has provided more than 37 
years of expert assistance to state 
and local criminal justice agencies 
on the use of information and 
identification technology. SEARCH 
has a long-standing program of 
providing direct, no-cost, tailored 
TA to law enforcement and public 
safety agencies in planning 
for, procuring, implementing, 
and managing information 
technology. 

Areas of Assistance: 

 
Effective governance structures 
development 
 
Strategic planning 
 
Infrastructure assessment and 
development 
 
Needs analysis and assessment 
 
Operational requirements 
development 
 
Policy and procedure 
development 
 
Risk management 


To apply for TA in these areas 
or review additional SEARCH 
TA focus areas, see http://www. 
search.org/services/ta/.