Not all integration initiatives are the same. Some focus on a specific problem, others on building systemic capacity. Table 1 shows one way to classify integration initiatives in terms of their focus and the associated level of organizational involvement. Analysis of the cases supports the observation that there is a logical, yet highly simplified, progression of complexity. Specific characteristics of the initiatives such as the number of participants or the institutional framework will influence the final result. However, in general terms, moving from an initiative of type A to one of type F introduces a wide range of new issues.

Table 1. Types of Information integration initiative

Organizational Level	Focus on meeting a specific need or problem	Focus on building a systemic capacity
Inter-Governmental	E	F
Inter-Organizational	C	D
Intra-Organizational	A	B

These two dimensions help to illuminate the challenges being faced. For example, inter- governmental initiatives that focus on building systemic capacity can be generally understood as more complex than intra-organizational initiatives that focus on a specific need or problem. Most of the cases selected for this report can be identified as being in cells D, E, or F. Therefore, they are considered initiatives that involve high complexity and the way they overcome different challenges provides valuable lessons for other similar or less complex information integration initiatives.

Initiatives can also be classified based on the objectives of their integration; comprehensive, incremental, and selective. These groups are not mutually exclusive. Initiatives categorized as comprehensive can have some characteristics of selective or incremental strategies. In fact, many counties and states have complex initiatives with a mix of comprehensive, selective, and incremental components. In addition, some initiatives start as selective or comprehensive and become incremental due to the changing nature of the technology and the needs of the justice community.

Comprehensive integration initiatives attempt to integrate information from many different organizations and levels of government in a relatively short period of time. They are the most likely to be both inter-organizational and inter-governmental in nature and typically involve building systemic capacity rather than solving a specific problem. Colorado Integrated Criminal Justice Information System, initially developed over a four-year period, is an example of such a strategy.

Selective integration initiatives integrate information only in certain areas or types of organizations (e.g.: courts, law enforcement, etc.). Normally, these projects attempt to gather information about one function from different levels of government. However, sometimes the projects focus on different functions in the same level of government. The Oklahoma Offender Data Information System (ODIS) which is focused on managing the state’s law enforcement agencies’ data, is an example of a selective integration initiative.

Incremental integration initiatives take an incremental approach to developing information integration in a limited number of organizations and levels of government, typically pursuing a more comprehensive information integration project in the long-run. An example is Harris County’s Texas Justice Information Management System. This system has been in place for over 20 years and the plans for system enhancement extend well beyond basic law enforcement and court procedures to include open warrants, address records, pawnshop data, gangs and gang members, and vehicle registrations.