Independent finding
Chicago’s early SSL pilot increased recorded police contact without demonstrating reduced likelihood of shooting, murder, or related arrest outcomes for selected people. [5][1]
RESEARCH ROUTE 04
Person-Based Risk Lists and Targeting
Chicago SSL, LAPD LASER, Pasco County, HART, London’s former Matrix, Australia’s STMP, and the consequences of a durable designation.
DIRECT ANSWER / EVIDENCE BOUNDARY
Route in brief
- Central claim
- Person-based systems require the highest scrutiny because a designation can travel across encounters and institutions, intensify surveillance, and generate the same administrative data later presented as validation.
- Evidence posture
- The route separates documented operation, official claim, independent evaluation, legal interpretation, unknowns, and conceptual proposals.
- Scope boundary
- Comparative program history and governance; it does not reproduce scoring formulas, targeting criteria, or methods for avoiding police attention.
DEFINITION / UNIT / CONSEQUENCE
Read the system as a decision architecture
Person-based systems require the highest scrutiny because a designation can travel across encounters and institutions, intensify surveillance, and generate the same administrative data later presented as validation.
The route treats operational status, technical capability, official description, independent outcome evidence, legal authority, and human consequences as separate fields. None is inferred from the others.
EVIDENCE-QUALIFIED SYNTHESIS
What the retained reports support
The label remains part of the claim. A citation does not convert a caution, interpretation, or conceptual proposal into verified operation.
Report-supported
LAPD LASER used chronic-offender bulletins and manually administered points; the designation directed officers whom to notice, locate, investigate, and contact. [5]
Report-supported
Pasco County’s original program connected predicted risk to repeated visits, warrant checks, code enforcement, monitoring, and family pressure. [5][1]
Report-supported
HART predicted two-year reoffending categories for arrested people and influenced eligibility for a deferred-prosecution program, while officers formally retained discretion. [7]
Independent finding
London’s Gangs Violence Matrix and Australia’s STMP show that watchlists or discretionary plans can produce serious consequences even without sophisticated machine learning. [7][8][1]
CONNECTED CASES
Programs that make the distinction concrete
These cards summarize the retained reports. They do not disclose operational criteria, scoring formulas, screening thresholds, or evasion methods.
United Kingdom — Durham
Harm Assessment Risk Tool (HART)
2016–2021 publicly confirmed
Random-forest model classifying arrested people into two-year reoffending risk categories.
- Documented use
- Moderate-risk classification informed eligibility for the Checkpoint deferred-prosecution program, with officer discretion.
- Consequence
- Investigation or referral
- Evidence limit
- No sufficiently reliable public evidence in the report established continued operation after 2021; postcode variables and label design raised fairness questions.
- Rights-risk intensity
- High
Retained reports: [7]
United Kingdom
National Data Analytics Solution (NDAS)
2017–present/multi-use capability
Multi-use police analytics infrastructure with person-prediction research and investigative discovery workstreams.
- Documented use
- A serious-violence person model was not deployed after ethics review; modern-slavery work used NLP and network analysis.
- Consequence
- Investigation or referral
- Evidence limit
- NDAS is not one stable pre-crime algorithm; public status and use vary by workstream.
- Rights-risk intensity
- High
Retained reports: [7]
United Kingdom — London
Gangs Violence Matrix
2012–February 2024
Intelligence watchlist ranking named gang nominals using offenses, intelligence, victimization, and association.
- Documented use
- Inclusion affected targeting, stop and search, enforcement, safeguarding, and information sharing.
- Consequence
- Persistent police attention
- Evidence limit
- It was primarily a watchlist rather than machine-learning prediction; governance and disproportionality failures were documented.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Very high
United Kingdom — London
Violence Harm Assessment (VHA)
2024–present
Rules-based successor to the Gangs Violence Matrix with explicit thresholds and central governance.
- Documented use
- Used for quarterly harm assessment and operational prioritization under a published procedure.
- Consequence
- Persistent police attention
- Evidence limit
- The report notes continuing disproportionality and uncertainty about downstream effects despite governance changes.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Very high
Retained reports: [7]
United Kingdom — Kent
Kent PredPol deployment
2013–2018 reported
Operational test of proprietary short-term crime forecasting.
- Documented use
- Predicted place-time boxes informed patrol allocation.
- Consequence
- Planning or resource allocation
- Evidence limit
- Public evidence did not establish durable incremental benefit and the deployment ended.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Moderate
United Kingdom
National AI crime-mapping initiative
2025–2026 initiative
Emerging national effort to improve crime mapping and analytical support.
- Documented use
- Intended to support place analysis and allocation rather than a documented national person score.
- Consequence
- Planning or resource allocation
- Evidence limit
- Program design, validation, operational scope, and current deployment remain incomplete in public evidence.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Moderate
Retained reports: [7]
United States — Chicago
Strategic Subject List / CVRM
2012–2019
Models ranking people for future gun-violence involvement, combining victimization and offending risk.
- Documented use
- Selection produced custom notifications, police contact, and intervention priority.
- Consequence
- Persistent police attention
- Evidence limit
- Independent evaluation did not demonstrate violence reduction and documented increased police contacts.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Very high
United States — Los Angeles
LAPD LASER chronic-offender program
2011–2019
Manually administered points and chronic-offender bulletins supported by analytical platforms.
- Documented use
- Bulletins directed officers to locate, contact, investigate, and collect additional information.
- Consequence
- Persistent police attention
- Evidence limit
- Selection, removal, documentation, and causal outcome evidence were weak or inconsistent.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Very high
United States — Pasco County, Florida
Intelligence-Led Policing program
2011–successor practices
Person and youth lists presented as identifying prolific or at-risk people.
- Documented use
- Selected people and families received repeated visits, monitoring, warrant checks, code enforcement, and heightened accountability.
- Consequence
- Persistent police attention
- Evidence limit
- No public evaluation established predictive validity of the original lists; operational attention itself generated confirming records.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Very high
United States and other deployments
PredPol / Geolitica
2011–2024 company closure
Commercial self-exciting place-time forecasting product deployed in multiple cities.
- Documented use
- Generated short-term patrol boxes for selected offenses.
- Consequence
- Planning or resource allocation
- Evidence limit
- Vendor claims and favorable experiments do not establish consistent incremental crime reduction; company operations ended.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Moderate
China — Xinjiang
Integrated Joint Operations Platform (IJOP)
documented 2010s; current configuration unclear
Region-specific platform aggregating records, checkpoints, sensors, household information, and rule-based warnings.
- Documented use
- Generated investigation tasks and flags concerning named people, relationships, places, and behavior.
- Consequence
- Detention or coercive intervention
- Evidence limit
- Public evidence is granular about an associated mobile application but not complete server logic, current configuration, thresholds, or all downstream decisions.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Extreme
Australia — New South Wales
Suspect Targeting Management Plan (STMP)
about 2000–December 2023
Long-running preventive-policing program selecting people believed likely to reoffend for individualized management.
- Documented use
- Plans could direct stops, searches, visits, bail checks, monitoring, warnings, arrest, referrals, and coordination.
- Consequence
- Persistent police attention
- Evidence limit
- Oversight found systemic documentation, youth, legality, and disproportionality problems; model and discretion changed over time.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Very high
Australia — New South Wales
Prevention, Disruption, Response (PDR)
2024–present successor
Successor issue-management procedures after STMP discontinuation.
- Documented use
- Police describe data-informed local tasking and management.
- Consequence
- Persistent police attention
- Evidence limit
- Exact predictive capability, internal compliance review, selection, and effects remain incompletely public.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Very high
Retained reports: [8]
Australia — Queensland
Queensland place-forecasting research
research studies
Research comparing short-term forecasts for burglary and vehicle-related theft across local areas.
- Documented use
- Evaluated forecast performance, not the causal effect of operational patrol deployment.
- Consequence
- Research or conceptual output
- Evidence limit
- Optimal parameters varied by place and offense; research does not establish statewide operational use.
- Rights-risk intensity
- Moderate
Retained reports: [8]
FAILURE MODES
What can go wrong
- Police-generated contacts can become inputs that perpetuate priority status.
- Association, victimization, or presence in a report can be misread as offending risk.
- Young people and racialized or Indigenous groups can bear disproportionate attention.
SAFEGUARDS
What responsible governance requires
- Require notice, documented inclusion criteria, expiration, removal, and meaningful challenge.
- Separate victimization risk, offending risk, intelligence relevance, and service need.
- Prohibit police contacts generated by the list from automatically validating continued inclusion.
- Evaluate legal grounds and outcomes for each downstream intervention, not only the model score.
OPEN QUESTIONS
What the current public record does not settle
Unknown is an evidence state, not an invitation to assume either a safeguard or a hidden capability.
- Which successor practices retain the same operational consequences after a program is renamed or ended?
- How many listed people were victims, witnesses, or associates rather than suspected offenders?
- What independent evidence shows public benefit after accounting for increased police exposure?
RETAINED REPORTS
Source inputs for this route
The repository preserves the full submitted Markdown. The public page presents a bounded synthesis and keeps report claims distinct from later independent verification.
Submitted Case Study
Hot People: Chicago’s Strategic Subject List, LAPD LASER, and Pasco County’s Intelligence-Led Policing Program
Comparative audit of three U.S. person-based systems and the operational consequences of designation, contact, and feedback loops.
Submitted Country Report
Predictive Policing in the United Kingdom: NDAS, HART, the Gangs Violence Matrix, and AI Crime Mapping
United Kingdom program history covering person prediction, analytical infrastructure, intelligence matrices, successor governance, and place mapping.
Submitted Country Report
Policing Future Risk in Australia: The NSW Suspect Targeting Management Plan, Operation Tepito, and Successor Practices
Australia case study centered on STMP, youth and Indigenous impact, police powers, oversight, discontinuation, and successor practices.
Submitted Comparative Report
The Real-World “Pre-Crime” Landscape: A Comparative Inventory and Governance Framework for Predictive Law Enforcement
Comparative inventory covering 36 programs in 15 countries. It supplies the collection-wide decision-architecture model, intensity distinctions, and governance framework.