Putting one foot in front of the other is sometimes not as easy as it sounds, but that's what has to happen if you want to get your integration initiative up and running. There are a series of steps that must be taken to get from where you are today to your vision of the future. Because integration will affect the day-to-day business for so many people, it is important to carefully map out the steps needed to get to where you want to go. Have your game plan ready. And have a Plan B, just in case the players, the resources, or your environment change in the meantime.

Key leaders in your community, whether they are elected officials or justice professionals, are excellent candidates to carry the torch for your initiative. Find a champion who can galvanize support for your business case and for justice information integration. The champion should be someone who holds the respect of others in his or her own agency, as well as counterpart agencies. Champions can help build support by talking about the project among their colleagues, in the community, and to key decision makers.

Your analysis of work processes, practices, and information flow comes into play here. Identify specific changes in policies, processes, and practices that are necessary to achieve your integration goals. For example, if your initiative calls for a central database rather than separate files in individual agencies, the likely changes in technology, information access policies, and data definitions need to be well explained. Staff support is essential to building momentum and furthering the project. The business case has to document efforts to build and show support "within the ranks" for the proposed changes in the way work is done.

Avoid locking in on one solution to the exclusion of all others. Seek alternative approaches that could bring you to your goals, even if they seem less desirable than the one you prefer. Understanding the alternative pathways to your integration objectives will help define and clarify the points you will make in your business case. This kind of analysis is invaluable because it:

• helps you see that there are multiple ways to achieve your goals
• will provide the information you need to fully explain why the path you have chosen seems to be the best one
• enables quick adoption or adaptation of alternative approaches without going back to the drawing board

One alternative is to do nothing, and that's an important alternative to be explored at this point. Doing nothing has its costs. Your case should present the costs and consequences of doing nothing by projecting what your justice system will look like in five or ten years if your initiative is not pursued. What current problems would continue or expand? What new problems are likely to emerge? Will individual agencies pursue separate, uncoordinated agendas? Think also about how your unimproved situation will compare with peers in other states or localities. Identify funding programs or "windows of opportunity" that are open now but may close in the future.

No responsible investor will fail to ask, "What will this cost?" and "Where will the money come from?" Cost estimates for justice integration need to include salaries, training, consulting, hardware and software, networks, equipment, and other categories. A common mistake is to estimate only the cost to build a new system, but not the cost of operating it or the total cost of ownership. Another common problem is estimating the costs related to the technical system, but not the ones related to all the other business activities that are affected by it.

It is often difficult to get complete and accurate dollar figures for new technology projects, particularly for complex integration initiatives that involve multiple agencies. Working out the costs of the project requires careful attention to what cost information is relevant, what's available, and how it can be interpreted and used. Resources, such as vendors or integration committee members in areas that have developed similar initiatives, can provide or help develop cost figures or ways to calculate them.

The price tag is only part of the cost consideration. Students of taxation learn early that "if you broaden the base, you lower the rate." Integration by definition implies the participation of several groups. If the costs can be spread across all participants, the cost for each diminishes. Not all agencies can contribute dollars, but they may be able to contribute staff time, share facilities or networks, or offer linkages to key supporters, all of which can be just as valuable as funding. Perhaps one of the best ways to demonstrate the value of any system is to show in the beginning the willingness of multiple parties to collaborate-and nothing shows willingness better than money and other tangible resources on the table.

The benefit side of the equation is equally important and often harder to produce. For example, a new criminal history database system may be designed to reduce the amount of time it takes for the user to access criminal histories. One cost-performance measure for the new system could be the average personnel costs per retrieval of a history file, such as 15 minutes per retrieval at an average personnel cost of $20/hour, or $5 per retrieval. If the older system took an average of two hours ($40) per retrieval, the new system produces a saving of $35 per retrieval. The costs of implementing and maintaining the old and new systems could then be added to this measurement to give an overall assessment. The softer benefits in quality of life or citizen and officer confidence are much harder to quantify and should at least be identified and described.

Leverage is about taking advantage of elements or events in the environment to strengthen your case. Highlighting the actions of others also creates leverage. Comparing your situation with other states or jurisdictions sets up a bit of healthy competition for investments in good performance. Elections can present unique opportunities to be heard by both citizens and candidates. A human tragedy that occurred because critical data was unavailable can become a powerful call to action. Leverage can also be found in broad assessments of how certain investments can reap multiple benefits. For example, many justice applications benefit from geographic information systems-but so do economic development, environmental quality, and county or municipal services. Elected officials and budget officers are more likely to favor this kind of investment over one that meets only a single need. Look carefully for these kinds of leverage.