Five Stages. One Correctional Journey.
Governance, Data & Accountability
Named responsibility, limited access and dependable operations.
ALPRP proposal ยท October 4, 2026. Pilot 100 is a proposed pilot. Agency names describe existing resources or potential coordination; they do not imply endorsement, funding, signed partnerships, access to agency records, or authorization to operate inside a facility.
Governance, data and accountability
Sharing information does not transfer legal authority. Pilot 100 requires a written charter and decision register before launch, identifying who owns each process, who may change records, who approves decisions and who responds when a service or system fails. The roles below are proposed; appointments and agreements are not yet established.
| Proposed role | Responsibility and boundary |
|---|---|
| Steering committee | Approve scope, budget, partner agreements and expansion or suspension recommendations; cannot override statutory decision-makers. |
| Operational lead and facility leadership | Own daily coordination, staff capacity, incident response, training and downtime procedures; facility leadership retains command. |
| Record custodian and agency data owners | Specify authoritative source records, permitted use, access, retention, corrections and sharing. A coordinated view does not require copying every record into one database. |
| Qualified care and education providers | Validate clinical or educational information within professional authority; protect clinical confidentiality and continuity of care. |
| Authorized multidisciplinary reviewers | Document proposed stage progression and classification recommendations. ADOC retains classification authority; ABPP and courts retain applicable parole and release authority. |
| Independent evaluator and designated oversight reviewer | Assess outcomes, data quality, workload and adverse effects; document independence and conflicts of interest and review corrective action. |
Technology supports operations; it must not become the single point of failure
- Physical counts continue. Wearable identification and location tools supplement officers; indoor location accuracy, battery life, tamper resistance and maintenance require field testing. GPS availability indoors cannot be assumed.
- Healthcare providers retain independent downtime procedures for medication, clinical records, urgent care and treatment continuity. Network failure cannot suspend essential care.
- Classification, discipline, stage progression, parole and release require authorized human review. AI may organize information; it does not determine liberty or substitute for clinical judgment.
- Encrypt approved data in transit and at rest, restrict access by role and purpose, authenticate users and log access and changes. Proposed controls must be verified before deployment.
- Separate clinical, security, family and victim information. Share the minimum necessary data under approved agreements and applicable requirements; agency coordination does not justify unrestricted access.
- Investigate inaccurate records and false alerts. Document corrections, affected decisions, notification to authorized reviewers and a process to challenge disputed information.
- Test recovery, backups, outages, identification failures and manual procedures before adding live data. Assign a support owner and a defined incident escalation path.
- Prefer documented interfaces and usable exports where practical. Evaluate existing platforms first and include vendor exit, maintenance and lifecycle costs in procurement decisions.
What becomes public
Publish aggregate measures, definitions, costs, limitations, failures and corrective-action status. Suppress small groups or other details that could identify individuals. Do not publish identifiable resident or victim records, clinical details, sensitive location histories, or facility security information.
Victim services remain independent and victim-led. Forgiveness, contact, reconciliation and restorative dialogue are never required. Officers receive support, fair procedures and training alongside documented accountability. Residents retain access to essential services while disputed records are reviewed.
Access and retention rules must be specific to each data category and approved before collection. A data-flow map and access matrix must name the custodian, authorized roles, sharing purpose, correction route, retention period and audit owner.