Section 11 Information Systems and Technology

The Commonwealth's focus on the RMS and EIS continued as needed given the importance of both tools. In light of the focus on both RMS and EIS, PRP's legacy IT ratings are being deferred as agreed to until both are implemented. Programmatically, management artifacts continue to be developed and have been made available to the Monitor's Office signaling better discipline and attention to detail by the Bureau of Technology (BT) and Program Management Office (PMO). Regardless of progress thus far PRP must stay focused and leverage its planning efforts to execute its projects and programs as detailed in its plans. As noted in previous CMRs, PRP must also heed the experiences of their support and advisory experts from whom they should draw lessons learned with regard to large scale technology implementations similar to what they are attempting now.

Management, Discipline, and Cadence

1. Regarding the Information Technology Corrective Action Plan (ITCAP), the Commonwealth should consider more aggressive tiering of its thresholds, targets, and stretch goals in order to implement the best possible versions of IT to ensure functional data capture and analysis and agency review. Currently, many of the accomplishments recorded in the ITCAP too often refer to hygiene activities such as holding meetings rather than completing critical tasks, reaching decisions, or removing obstacles and risks. Doing so skews the accomplishment measures. Further, claims of being on schedule or complete, lack credibility because schedules have been changed to accommodate delays. The Monitor's Office has made recommendations to this effect and strongly recommends that the IT Executive Committee metrics be revised to add granularity, thresholds, actionable tasks, and timelines.
2. The Executive Committee should drive “the plan” and expectations as aggressively as possible.
3. The Monitor's Office provided Data Network Maintenance Plan recommendations to the PMO that included additional details regarding planning, budgeting, risk, etc.
4. Communication between PRP H.Q. and the field must continuously be exercised and improved. The Monitor's Office has referenced this in previous CMRs.
5. Positively, the Master Integrated Plan was finally made available as were the Benchmark Analytics Charter and Axon Data Dictionary. Unfortunately, although requested by the Monitor's Office monthly since March 2025, the Gartner Inc. PMO Assessment was not made available until September 2025.
6. The PMO is fully staffed and much can be expected from its operation.
7. AHDatalytics, the Commonwealth's contractor, continues to fulfill a vital role as data steward in providing data extracts for dashboards. Much can be leveraged from AHDatalytics, including the establishment of data operations, processes and stewardship beyond their current analysis on legacy systems, Axon, and Benchmark Analytics.

Document and Artifact Management

1. Although completed in March 2025, the PMO did not provide the Gartner Inc. Assessment until September 2025.
2. A clear and distinct portfolio of technical functionality and capabilities is not yet available although noted in prior CMRs. A portfolio is essential for solutioning, planning, and prioritizing.
3. A singular discreet Master Integration Plan was finally established in the summer of 2025.
4. An Enterprise/Systems Architecture is not yet drafted.
5. A clear and distinct plan to combat cyber threats remains unclear.
6. Although raised previously, PRP has yet to formally establish its plan and methodology to validate data, which is critical during the migration from RMS to Axon and EIS to Benchmark Analytics. It also important for sustainability after the Agreement is complete.

The above is essential for long term formalization of PRP's infrastructure and systems architecture.

Data Entry and IT Use

1. With respect to Axon, FRB members noted that the migration of UOF data was not consistently accurate. The example provided indicated that in one of the system migrations the use of handcuffs was not entered into Axon.
2. Timely data entry in GTE was reportedly impacted by the steps that require a commanding officer (CO) to release a file according to field visit interviews. The example given was that if a sergeant begins an investigation, an officer cannot enter data until the CO assigns the case. This can take several days and, if over a weekend, data entry accuracy can be affected. The applicable GO states that only the CO can initiate and assign the file in GTE. This policy and procedure should be reconsidered. This issue may also be related to training not being as effective or complete as is needed to understand the process. This state could be considered an opportunity for improvement or missed timely implementation in Version 1.0 of Axon.
3. A GTE demonstration indicated that it is only populated if an arrest is being made. While logical, this protocol may not meet the need for gathering traffic stop data where an arrest is not made.
4. GTE does not fully accommodate unique data entry specifics. For example, on PPR 126.2 (Complaint Card), the data is not linked where multiple perpetrators at an incident may be transported in different vehicles going to different locations.
5. Lack of mileage data is related to the procedure that requires Centro Mando to enter mileage.
6. Positively, the Sexual Assault Module timeout issues in Utuado are no longer occurring but were reportedly occurring in Guayama and San Juan. In Bayamon there were unanswered questions about supervisors being notified when a file has been created.

Technology Assets and Availability – Positively, during the on-site review in September, the FRB noted that they have ample access to dedicated computers and that adequate workstations were available for general use and training. Further, during the reporting period the Monitor's Office was informed that the radio and BWC inventories were near full, a solid indication of the needed preparation supporting officer and citizen safety.

Impact to Training - Observed during the August on-site review and the Virtual Training demonstration provided by PRP, the Monitor's Office confirmed the promising performance of the training system, delivery approach, and content. User acceptance during implementation will be assessed by the Monitor's Office as indications are promising for a successful deployment.

Looking Forward

Confidence is warranted as the Commonwealth has shown progress and improvement during the reporting period. However, PRP must demonstrate ability to formally achieve and sustain the success instrumental to systems and enterprise architecting and long term solutioning. Noting the essential need for continued progress the following recommendations and opportunities for improvement should be considered.

1. Plans and Status Reports could be improved and streamlined by incorporating fewer hygiene details (i.e. meetings held) and focusing on and providing status (i.e. schedules) via Red/Yellow/Green format. Current claims of progress without evidence undermine credibility when resources are limited.
2. A critical component of project decision making, risk management needs to be addressed comprehensively and formally statussed as routinely and often as possible.
3. Continuously minimizing risks will require actively eliminating distractions and low return on investment (ROI) activities. The initial implementation of Axon's RMS has slipped to July 2026 with required solutioning and improvement of the RMS continuing beyond its launch. It is the Monitor's Office's opinion that risk to successful implementation remains high and should be managed as such.
4. The plan for data administration and purification through implementation and beyond for Axon and Benchmark Analytics remains unclear. This concern has been raised in previous CMRs.
5. Contract Management experienced delays. Timely processing must be ensured to avoid work stoppages. Leadership support is critical.
6. Transparency will benefit PRP. Answers to well-intentioned questions must be timely.
7. PRP must stress itself. Sustainability beyond the Agreement will require a willingness to endure failure and to commit appreciable resources. Implementation of Axon and Benchmark Analytics solutions are merely foundational first steps and not the end of the effort.
8. The Cyber Practice and a formally recognized IT Portfolio/Registry are not yet in focus or published.
9. The PMO provided Network Maintenance Plan while a good start, should incorporate more detail and include planning, budgeting, and risks.
10. Management artifacts read more as descriptions of tasks than firm commitments to cost, schedule, and performance. Long term self-management after the Agreement will depend on a high level of management rigor.
11. The Commonwealth would be well served to exercise a lessons learned practice.

Finally, the Monitor's Office urges the Commonwealth to, 1) the fullest extent possible continue to use advisory services and subject matter experts when optimal, 2) embrace third party validation and verification in technology and process development and delivery, 3) prepare for long term sustainability and rely on succession planning and knowledge transfer strategies to staff the IT cadre, 4) continue to employ aggressive and rigorous management and planning practices to ensure optimal and predictable outcomes for the Commonwealth, and 5) dedicate itself to rigorous cyber planning and hardening as well as continuing infrastructure assessments.

Overall, the Commonwealth's compliance with the six Information Systems and Technology paragraphs remains unchanged due to the agreement between the Parties to defer ratings until Axon and Benchmark Analytics implementations are complete.