Responses should be a minimum of 250 words and include direct questions. You may challenge, support or supplement another student’s answer using the terms, concepts and theories from the required readings. Also, do not be afraid to respectfully disagree where you feel appropriate; as this should be part of your analysis process at this academic level.

Forum posts are graded on timeliness, relevance, knowledge of the weekly readings, and the quality of original ideas. Sources utilized to support answers are to be cited in accordance with the APA writing style by providing a general parenthetical citation (reference the author, year and page number) within your post, as well as an adjoining reference list. Refer to grading rubric for additional details concerning grading criteria.

Respond to Brian:


The biggest strength of a distributed homeland security system is that it “provides access to the expertise and unique capabilities and authorities held by each partner, resulting in benefits not only to those involved but also to the nation as a whole” (Clapper 2016, 8). The vast size of the United States means the span of control needs to be appropriately matched by the span of the organization. A federal organization supplemented by a largely autonomous state organization is key for that, but also because of the increased ability to draw expertise to the right areas and allow these organizations to access it. Different areas of the country struggle with different threats to homeland security. Southern states may need more expertise with immigration and drug trafficking, while states with large dense urban areas may need more of a focus on domestic and international terrorist threats. This ability to attract and implement expertise across the nation as needed is crucial.


One of the biggest limitations may be the overcorrection of information sharing following the integration of the intelligence community: “If the quantity and frequency of information dissemination is believed to be the desired end for the intelligence and information sharing process, the effectiveness of these efforts are likely to be undermined” (Lewandowski and Carter 2017, 481). With every adjustment comes the need to calibrate. I am still under the impression over sharing is better than under. It gives those who need the information an opportunity to have it. Ideally this wouldn’t require them to sift through much, but that leads me to the potential improvement.


“A reliance on private sector collaboration for improved security is also identifiable in the contemporary emergence of real-time crime centers (many times operated in tandem with fusion centers). These real-time crime centers rely on vendors such as Microsoft, Motorola and IBM to provide data analysis, real-time video and communication functions” (Lewandowski and Carter 2017, 483). As Lewandowski and Carter point out, artificial intelligence and new software can help better sort information and distribute to those who need it. As more information is processed it will hopefully get to a point where the software itself can make inferences and alert the appropriate authorities to information they may have missed.

Fusion Center

Washington State’s fusion center is located Seattle, WA. Its mission is “to support the public safety and homeland security missions of state, local, tribal agencies and private sector entities” (Washington State Fusion Center 2019). Its vision states, “The WSFC is a unified counterterrorism, “all crimes,” fusion center, incorporating agencies with intelligence, critical infrastructure, public safety and preparedness, resiliency, response and recovery missions; the WSFC is Washington State’s single fusion center and concurrently supports federal, state, and tribal agencies, regional and local law enforcement, public safety and homeland security by providing timely, relevant and high quality information and intelligence services; technology will be used as an efficiency enabler of the WSFC’s work processes to provide services quickly, effectively and efficiently, to protect privacy and civil liberties, ensure information and operational security, and to support communications and collaboration” (Washington State Fusion Center 2019).

These two statements help stress the overall goal of coordination of effort across all levels, agencies, and domains. Their focus on protecting against crime and terrorism from response to prevention and from the private to the public sectors shows the ideal impact fusion centers are designed to provide.




2019. “Washington State Fusion Center.” WSFC.

Clapper, James R. 2016. “Domestic Approach to National Intelligence.” Office of the Director of National Intelligence, 1–32.

Lewandowski, Carla G, and Jeremy G Carter. 2017. “End-User Perceptions of Intelligence Dissemination from a State Fusion Center.” Security Journal 30 (2): 467–86. doi:10.1057/sj.2014.38.