Editor’s note: This article is part of Police1’s Investigation Week, which examines how real time crime centers, crime analysis centers and connected law enforcement partners help investigators reconstruct events, develop leads and identify connections among crimes that cross jurisdictional lines. Thanks to our Investigation Week sponsor, Flock.
Not every law enforcement agency has the resources to operate its own real-time crime center. But that doesn’t mean officers and investigators have to work without access to crime analysis, investigative intelligence and information from neighboring jurisdictions.
New York State has developed a network of 11 crime analysis centers (CACs) that provides local, state and federal law enforcement agencies with crime analysis, intelligence and investigative support. The network allows departments to access shared resources and expertise while retaining control over their own data.
In 2025, the centers supported more than 130,000 requests from law enforcement agencies.
Police1 spoke with Mark Heller, deputy commissioner of crime analysis and strategic partnerships for the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS), about how the network operates, the services available to agencies and what other states or regions can learn from New York’s approach.
DOWNLOAD: RTCC investigation-ready checklist: Will your analyst-to-detective handoff hold up?
Police1: New York State’s Crime Analysis Center network includes 11 centers, and any law enforcement agency in the state can request help, not just those in a center’s coverage area. What does that look like in practice? How does an agency make a request, and which agencies use the centers most?
Heller: The crime analysis centers have formal information-sharing partnership agreements with law enforcement agencies across their geographic areas of responsibility. However, all CACs will assist any law enforcement agency, including prosecutors, with their cases as long as they have an active investigation with a valid case number.
Agency officers, investigators and detectives contact the CAC by phone, email or in person to discuss the case and their needs. Our staff have developed strong relationships with officers, who don’t hesitate to come directly to them.
In many cases, departments have standing requests with their CAC to provide daily, weekly or monthly reports based on case needs. Additionally, police administrators often rely on crime analysts to provide administrative reports to help them understand areas of need and assist with resource deployment.
In terms of who uses the CACs most, that varies. While larger departments might account for the bulk of activity, many smaller departments find even more value in the CACs because they are often under-resourced and have a greater need for support. Activity reflects these needs.
In 2025, the CACs provided support for more than 130,000 requests.
Police1: Beyond hot spot analysis, what does real-time investigative support look like for a detective working an active case? What are the most common requests, and how quickly can a detective expect results?
Heller: Across the crime analysis center network, real-time crime analysis services vary, although they have many components in common.
All CACs are equipped with large video walls where they can display information such as computer-aided dispatch (CAD) feeds, dashboards, ballistic detection maps, city cameras and other resources.
All CACs monitor, in some form, dispatch and radio feeds and/or CAD feeds to maintain awareness of calls for service as they are received.
As call information comes in, staff immediately begin researching any addresses, vehicles, individuals or associates connected to the call location or the nature of the call. This information is relayed through dispatch to responding officers and officers on scene.
Following the initial response, analysts continue working on the case and providing relevant information to the officer or assigned detective.
Request types vary widely, from name searches and past history to known associates and license plate reader activity in the area. There are few limits to the information our analysts can provide.
Police1: The centers can draw on records from a large number of agencies across the state. How do you make that work when agencies use different records systems, policies and data-sharing agreements, and where does it still get difficult?
Heller: Our model is built not on data collection and retention, but on data access. Our systems connect to data where it exists, and we use the needed data without collecting or storing it. This allows the agency that owns the information to secure and control its own data.
Our partners agree to share their data only within the CAC network to assist with their cases and the cases of our other partners and requesting agencies through an information-sharing agreement. We currently have more than 400 such agreements in place.
We have been successful in building these partnerships because agencies retain control over access to and security of their records. The only real difficulty exists with some of the more obscure data sources, but through technological solutions, we have been able to overcome these hurdles.
Police1: Can you share an example of a case where the network connected dots that no single agency could have seen on its own? How did analysts spot the pattern, and what did it change for the investigation?
Heller: One example involved a series of thefts and fraudulent credit card purchases across the Northeast in 2025.
Between June and September, a couple from Colombia was linked to at least eight incidents in which victims’ credit cards were stolen and subsequently used to make significant fraudulent purchases.
The activity first came to our attention following an incident in Saratoga County, where an elderly woman’s wallet was stolen. A Crime Analysis Center Network intelligence analyst recognized that the suspects might be involved in similar activity elsewhere and distributed an identification bulletin from the Capital Region Crime Analysis Center across the network.
Analysts at the Suffolk Crime Analysis Center recognized the suspects from cases in their own area and began coordinating with the Capital Region center and the statewide intelligence analyst. As they monitored additional activity, they identified related incidents in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.
On July 30, the suspects committed another theft in Albany County. This time, investigators obtained an image of their vehicle and were able to identify it. License plate reader information placed the vehicle in New York City, and the Suffolk Crime Analysis Center coordinated with NYPD partners to stop the vehicle and identify the suspects.
Over the following weeks, network staff continued coordinating with local agencies, sharing information that helped strengthen their cases and establish probable cause for arrest.
On Sept. 11, NYPD located the pair again and coordinated with law enforcement agencies across the Northeast to make the arrests.
Another example involves a large-scale Felony Lane Gang pattern that our network has been tracking throughout 2026.
The investigation began with a January incident in Erie County involving stolen personal information that was used to rent vehicles. Those vehicles were subsequently connected to thefts in other parts of the state.
As crime analysis centers shared bulletins, reviewed evidence and compared incidents, analysts began recognizing connections among cases that might otherwise have remained isolated.
The network ultimately identified 27 potentially related cases in New York involving 29 theft and fraud victims, six identified persons of interest or suspects, and eight vehicles.
Crime analysis center personnel also coordinated with the FBI and New York Attorney General’s Office to present the broader pattern and investigative findings.
These cases illustrate the value of sharing information across jurisdictions. An incident that appears isolated to one department may be part of a much larger pattern, and connecting those cases can provide investigators with leads they might not otherwise have developed.
Police1: How is the network staffed and funded? Some analysts are state-funded and others are assigned by partner agencies, so how does that mix work day to day, and what makes it sustainable?
Heller: Each crime analysis center varies slightly in its staffing composition, but generally speaking, civilian crime analysts are employed by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS), which oversees the CAC network.
Additionally, many of our law enforcement partners assign a field intelligence officer, civilian crime analyst or detective/investigator to their CAC. Other partners also assign staff based on their ability to do so. These partners include the New York State Police (investigators), the New York Air National Guard, New York/New Jersey High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA), various district attorney offices and others as available across the network.
This mix works extremely well, as crime analysts have become an integral part of the public safety puzzle. Their results speak for themselves, which is also what makes the model sustainable.
Analysts and other CAC staff work side by side with investigators, detectives, patrol officers and police executives every day.
Our network is funded by Gov. Kathy Hochul through an annual legislative appropriation.
Police1: The network earned a national award from the Bureau of Justice Assistance in 2024. Beyond that recognition and individual case successes, how does DCJS measure whether the centers are working, and what outcomes have you seen?
Heller: CAC leadership, both centrally and in the field, constantly engages with our partners to ensure their satisfaction and that their analytical needs are being met.
Each CAC has a board of directors that assists in strategic decision-making at that specific CAC. This helps ensure our partners’ satisfaction with our services. Additionally, we regularly conduct customer satisfaction surveys to gauge our success and receive input on strategic direction and potential future needs.
When looking at our success, we also need to consider the CACs as one piece of Gov. Kathy Hochul’s overall violence and crime reduction strategies. Through that lens, New York has seen a 10% decrease in index crime, with reductions across all seven crime categories and a more than 60% decline in shooting deaths since the governor’s first full year in office in 2022.
This includes the four violent offense classifications — murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault — which fell by 15%, and the three property offense classifications — burglary, larceny and motor vehicle theft — which decreased by 9%.
Additional highlights include a 57% decrease in murders, a 28% decrease in burglaries and a 19% decrease in motor vehicle thefts.
From January through July 2026, compared with the same period in 2022, New York State saw a 57% reduction in shooting incidents with injury, a 57% decline in the number of individuals shot and a 62% decrease in shooting deaths.
Police1: What should other states or regions know before building a similar model, and what would you do differently if you were starting over? Where is the network headed next?
Heller: If a state or region is considering implementing a similar model, the key is to remember that it will take time. Initial buy-in must be earned through small successes leading to bigger successes. Look to tackle a problem, even a multijurisdictional one, to prove your value.
Funding is also critical. Staffing, technology and tools all cost money, and finding the right mix of all three will dictate your sustainability and your partnerships.
Remember that your goal isn’t to take anything over, but to be a resource to your partners. It isn’t about “getting credit” for a success; it’s about getting the case solved by providing information and analysis that moves the case forward and helps law enforcement.
In terms of what we might have done differently, probably not staying “behind the scenes” for so long. It’s difficult to gain positive attention and subsequent funding if those in positions to build your resources aren’t aware of what you do. Track successes and share them in an annual report or through other means when it makes sense.
Where we’re headed is generally dictated by our partner agencies. What are they looking for? What do they need? Where are the gaps? For our network, we develop a three- to five-year strategic plan with input from our staff, partners and leadership, based on an understanding of their needs.
We are planning to expand our training capabilities, ensuring that our staff and other crime analysts are as prepared as possible to take on the challenges of supporting law enforcement. We are also trying to remain at the forefront of law enforcement technology so that we can serve our law enforcement partners as quickly, thoroughly and efficiently as possible. This presents its own unique challenges as technology continues to evolve at such a rapid pace.
We are an ever-evolving network with a single mission: to partner with law enforcement and other criminal justice agencies in making optimal decisions involving responses to crime problems, clearance and prevention, while demonstrating professionalism, strong inter-center partnerships and a measurable impact that is valued by and integral to all our partners.
