Many state and local officials who work at fusion centers report problems logging onto federal networks and have difficulty handling the high volume of information they receive from federal authorities, according to a recent survey by government auditors.

Nonfederal authorities started forming fusion centers to improve information sharing after the 2001 terrorist attacks. Since then the national authorities have become increasingly involved — particularly the Homeland Security Department and FBI, who have field agents assigned to some of the centers.

Officials from 31 of the 58 fusion centers contacted said they had trouble getting access to federal systems, according to the October report, which was released by the Government Accountability Office Nov. 29. Twelve centers reported challenges meeting security requirements, while officials at 18 said they had trouble handling the high volume of information coming in. Furthermore, 11 said that the redundancy of data from multiple sources was challenging.

The report does state DHS and FBI have taken some steps to remedy logistical issues and improve access. Additionally, the Program Manager for the Information Sharing Environment (PM-ISE), the office responsible for improving governmentwide information sharing, has been working to address the issue of duplicate or redundant information on unclassified systems.

But sharing intelligence fluidly among local state and federal agencies means they all must speak the same language, something that different levels and branches of government traditionally have not done.

ODNI’s National Counterterrorism Center has been working to solve the consistency issues by coming up with standards for communicating among fusion centers through consultations with state and local authorities in NCTC’s Interagency Threat Assessment and Coordination Group, said John Cohen, a spokesman for the PM-ISE. The office is part of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

DHS has also been working to streamline and merge its classified networks into a single, integrated system called the Homeland Secure Data Network so the department can better provide classified access to state, local and tribal governments.

And while consolidating all the agencies' systems into one big database or eliminating databases altogether that contain duplicate information may seem like a simple fix to some, that could have unintentional consequences, Cohen said.

Eliminating a database could mean that some law enforcement capabilities will be lost as each database was created for specific reasons, he said.

Roxann Ryan, a criminal intelligence analyst at the Iowa Intelligence Fusion Center, said multiple sources are important because each system can provide unique context that can aid an investigation.

“The biggest problem generally is that with the technology we have today it is easy to have info overload and the goal of intelligence is always to provide analysis, context,” she said. “That’s why I think it is so important for each fusion center to set priorities and look for the things that matter for each fusion center.”