MSP Special State Police Officer roster

Shawn Musgrave filed this request with the Massachusetts State Police of Massachusetts.
Tracking # 15-542
Est. Completion None
Status
Partially Completed

Communications

From: Shawn Musgrave

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c.66, §10, I hereby request the following records:

The current roster of Special State Police Officers, in its native electronic database format.

I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as we believe this request is in the public interest, as suggested but not stipulated by the recommendations of the Massachusetts Supervisor of Public Records. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.

I expect the request to be filled in an accessible format, including for screen readers, which provide text-to-speech for persons unable to read print. Files that are not accessible to screen readers include, for example, .pdf image files as well as physical documents. The Supervisor of Records has been clear on the point of format for responsive documents for more than 10 years. Per SPR Bulletin 03-96, Application of the Public Records Law to Electronic Records Access (available online at: http://www.sec.state.ma.us/arc/arcrmu/rmubul/bul396.htm): "A records custodian must provide the information in whatever format it is capable of generating."

In light of the above guidance from the Supervisor of Records as well as confirmation from MSP that the requested information is available in an electronic format, MSP is obligated under the Massachusetts Public Records Law to release the requested record in its native database format.

In the event that fees cannot be waived, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 10 calendar days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Shawn Musgrave

From: MuckRock.com

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Nov. 26, 2014. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

From: MuckRock.com

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Nov. 26, 2014. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

From: MuckRock.com

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Nov. 26, 2014. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

From: MuckRock.com

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Nov. 26, 2014. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

From: MuckRock.com

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Nov. 26, 2014. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

From: MuckRock.com

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Nov. 26, 2014. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

From: MuckRock.com

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Nov. 26, 2014. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

From: MuckRock.com

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Nov. 26, 2014. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

From: MuckRock.com

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Nov. 26, 2014. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

From: MuckRock.com

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Nov. 26, 2014. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your help.

From: Shawn Musgrave

Hello -

Please advise whether the below public records request has been received. I will submit an appeal to the Supervisor of Records for constructive denial if I do not receive a response soon.

Best,
Shawn Musgrave
Investigative reporter, MuckRock

From: MuckRock

Supervisor of Records
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
McCormack Building, Room 1719
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108

To Whom It May Concern:

This is an appeal for the constructive denial of my request to the Massachusetts State Police for the current roster of Special State Police Officers, in its native electronic database format. My request was filed in November, but has never been acknowledged by MSP, despite several followups I have sent to the department by email. As this request is now over ten days, I now appeal to the Supervisor of Records.

Please direct MSP to conduct a good faith search for responsive records and to provide documents, in accordance with the department's obligations under the Massachusetts public records statute.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
Reporter, MuckRock

From: Procopio, David (POL)

Mr. Musgrave,

This email is in reply to your June 12 email asking for "the current roster of Special State Police Officers, in its native electronic database format." In your communication you asserted that the Department of State Police has ignored this request.

In actuality, this request is duplicative of one from late 2013 to which the Department responded with responsive records, specifically, an exact printout of the database as prepared by our Management Information Systems Section. The printout was an exact copy of the columns/rows and data as it appeared in the Excel version. In February 2014 you submitted a follow up request seeking the department's electronic database containing those records. At that time I replied that while we do possess the file in an electronic Excel format, we will not disseminate it in any format other than a .pdf file that cannot be altered or a hard paper copy. The reason we took this position was to preserve the integrity and accuracy of the document.

Please be advised that the department's position in that matter has not changed. As such, I direct you to my response from Feb. 3, 2014. We assert that this request has been fulfilled and reiterate that, in order to protect the integrity of official records, we will not release the Excel file, or what you refer to as the "native, electronic format."

As you had communicated to the Supervisor of Public Records regarding this matter, I have copied a representative of that office on this email.

Thank you.

Dave Procopio
Director, Media Relations
Massachusetts State Police
(508) 820-2622
David.Procopio@MassMail.State.MA.US<mailto:David.Procopio@MassMail.State.MA.US>

From: Shawn Musgrave

Mr. Procopio -

Thank you for getting back to me regarding this request for the SSPO roster. This is a request for the roster as of November 2014, when I originally submitted this request. As such, it is not duplicative of my earlier request for the SPPO roster, which MSP fulfilled substantively but insufficiently in light of your agency's refusal to provide the information in its native digital format.

Both the present request and my earlier request for the SSPO roster pertain to similar subject matter, certainly, but this is a wholly separate request. Please provide a copy of the SSPO roster as of November 2014, and please provide it in digital format, per MSP's obligations under the Massachusetts public records statute and its interpretation by the Supervisor of Records, which has consistently held that agencies must provide records in digital format if such a format exists.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
Reporter, MuckRock

From: Procopio, David (POL)

Mr. Musgrave,

Please see attached letter from Attorney Rooney and associated document, which is responsive to your request for the Special State Police roster as of November 2014.

Please note:

1.) In September of 2014 the State Police Certification Unit updated its software system, which not allows the unit to provide a current list of all SSPOs and facilities.

2.) For the reasons outlined in my below response, this information is being provided to you as a hard copy and not in an electronic format.

Thank you.

Dave Procopio
Director, Media Communications
Massachusetts State Police
(508) 820-2622
David.Procopio@MassMail.State.MA.US<mailto:David.Procopio@MassMail.State.MA.US<mailto:David.Procopio@MassMail.State.MA.US%3cmailto:David.Procopio@MassMail.State.MA.US>>

From: Shawn Musgrave

Supervisor of Public Records
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
Public Records Division
One Ashburton Place, 17th Floor
Boston, MA 02108

To Whom It May Concern:

This is an appeal of the substantive response of the Massachusetts State Police in response to my request for a roster of Special State Police Officers (SSPO).

On November 26, 2014, I submitted a request by email to MSP for the following document: "The current roster of Special State Police Officers, in its native electronic database format."

David Procopio of MSP acknowledged my request on June 18, 2015, and provided responsive documents (attached) on June 19, 2015.

I appeal the MSP's insistence on providing these documents in non-native/digital format. While the document provided is machine-readable, MSP refuses to provide the roster in spreadsheet format. MSP has acknowledged on multiple occasions that the document provided is from a database and could be provided in digital format.

In response to a previous request for the roster, MSP wrote on November 24, 2014:

"[...] the Department does have the file in an electronic format but will not be disseminating it in any other format than .pdf or paper format to preserve the integrity and accuracy of the information contained within the document. The record provided to you on January 31, 2014 is an exact printout of the database as it was prepared by the Department’s Management Information Systems section. The alignment of the cells and the data as it is presented in the copy provided to you is exactly as it appears in the Excel version of the roster."

Per MSP's June 19, 2015 response, this is the same rationale behind the agency's refusal to provide a digital copy of the roster in response to the present request.

The Supervisor of Records has been clear on the point of format for responsive documents for more than 10 years. Per SPR Bulletin 03-96, Application of the Public Records Law to Electronic Records Access (available online at: http://www.sec.state.ma.us/arc/arcrmu/rmubul/bul396.htm): "A records custodian must provide the information in whatever format it is capable of generating."

I have seen no provision exempting an agency that is able to provide a document or spreadsheet in electronic format, particularly not on the dubious basis of "preserving the integrity" of said record. As a practical matter, as well, there is no step that an agency can take toward preserving the integrity of a spreadsheet than to provide it in its original format.

In light of the above, MSP is obligated under the Massachusetts Public Records Law to release the requested record in its native electronic database/spreadsheet format. I respectfully insist that the Supervisor remand this request back to the Massachusetts State Police for provision of the roster in keeping with the transparency obligations under state law.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

Cc: David Procopio and Glenn Rooney, Massachusetts State Police

From: Rastellini, Patricia (SEC)

Thank you Shawn.

From: MA Supervisor of Records

A letter stating that the request appeal has been received and is being processed.

From: Shawn Musgrave

Mr. Procopio -

Please advise whether the Massachusetts State Police has changed its position on releasing the SSPO roster in light of Gov. Baker's new procedures for public records requests.

Under the July 30 procedures (see: http://www.mass.gov/governor/press-office/press-releases/fy2016/new-procedures-for-public-records-requests-introduced.html), state agencies are to "provide information as able, in electronic, searchable formats." The crux of my appeal for this request hinges on the MSP's failure to provide the roster in its original spreadsheet format.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
Reporter, MuckRock

From: Shawn Musgrave

Mr. Procopio -

Checking on the below inquiry regarding MSP's stance following Gov. Baker's guidelines. I am willing to withdraw this appeal should MSP release the spreadsheet in its native, electronic format.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave

From: Procopio, David (POL)

Mr. Musgrave:

The Department has not changed its position on this matter. As you know, we previously provided the materials in a .PDF file that is electronically searchable. As previously explained, we do not release electronic spreadsheets in formats that can altered.

Thank you.

Dave Procopio

From: MA Supervisor of Records

A letter stating that the request appeal has been succesful.

From: Shawn Musgrave

Mr. Procopio -

Per the Supervisor's determination, your office must release the spreadsheet in its native format or provide a sufficient legal justification for withholding it in that format. Please advise as to whether MSP will meet the 10-day deadline established in the SPR order.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

From: Shawn Musgrave

Hello Mr. Procopio -

Checking on the below. Please advise as to the status of this request.

Best,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

From: Shawn Musgrave

Hello -

I have heard no update whatsoever on this request. The SPR has ordered the Massachusetts State Police to release the spreadsheet in electronic format, or else to provide a legally sound justification for refusing to release the spreadsheet in electronic format. Please advise immediately as to the status of fulfilling this request.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

From: Stephen W. Shorey

Hi Shawn,

Per your request for the State Police’s request for reconsideration of the Determination in SPR 15/542, below please find an email from Attorney Glenn Rooney. Attorney Rooney initially sought reconsideration verbally and subsequently provided the below email to elaborate on the reasons for the request.

Best,
Stephen

Stephen W. Shorey
Staff Attorney
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
Public Records Division
One Ashburton Place, Room 1719
Boston, MA 02108
Ph: (617) 727-2832
Fax: (617) 727-5914

From: Rooney, Glenn M (POL) [mailto:glenn.rooney@MassMail.State.MA.US]
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 2:34 PM
To: Shorey, Stephen (SEC) (stephen.shorey@sec.state.ma.us)
Subject: SPR15/542

Attorney Shorey,

Following up on our telephone conversation, based on information this office has received from the Department’s Certification Unit, the SSPO Roster is not available in a native database electronic format to provide to Mr. Musgrave. Instead, Certification uses a web-based application that is merely a vehicle for data entry to create a roster and the only function that the application allows is to print. Thanks,

Glenn M. Rooney, Esq.
Staff Counsel
Massachusetts State Police
General Headquarters
470 Worcester Road
Framingham, MA 01702
Tel: (508) 820-2391
Fax: (508) 820-2649

From: Shawn Musgrave

Hi Stephen -

Thank you for sending this.

MSP has previously indicated on numerous occasions that it has an Excel file or other electronic spreadsheet of the roster of Special State Police Officers:

On February 3, 2014, David Procopio said by email: "The Department does have the file in an electronic format but will not be disseminating it in any other format than .pdf or paper format to preserve the integrity and accuracy of the document. What you have is an exact printout of the database as it was prepared by our Management Information Systems section. The alignment of the cells and the data as it is presented in the copy provided to you is exactly as it appears in the Excel version of the roster."

Mr. Procopio reiterated this point again in November 2014, as well as on June 18, 2015 in a message cc'd to the Supervisor: "The printout was an exact copy of the columns/rows and data as it appeared in the Excel version. In February 2014 you submitted a follow up request seeking the department's electronic database containing those records. At that time I replied that while we do possess the file in an electronic Excel format, we will not disseminate it in any format other than a .pdf file that cannot be altered or a hard paper copy. The reason we took this position was to preserve the integrity and accuracy of the document. [....] Please be advised that the department's position in that matter has not changed. As such, I direct you to my response from Feb. 3, 2014. We assert that this request has been fulfilled and reiterate that, in order to protect the integrity of official records, we will not release the Excel file, or what you refer to as the "native, electronic format."

On September 24, 2015, Mr. Procopio emailed that, "As previously explained, we do not release electronic spreadsheets in formats that can altered."

Each of the above communications asserts that MSP will not release a document in electronic format, and not that MSP does not have such an electronic copy of the document in question.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
MuckRock

From: Stephen Shorey

Hi Shawn,

Thank you for this, received and acknowledged.

Best,
Stephen

Stephen W. Shorey
Staff Attorney
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
Public Records Division
One Ashburton Place, Room 1719
Boston, MA 02108
Ph: (617) 727-2832
Fax: (617) 727-5914

From: MA Supervisor of Records

An interim response, stating the request is being processed.

From: Shawn Musgrave

Mr. Shorey -

Please advise as to the status of this appeal. I have had no further communication from MSP.

Best,
Shawn Musgrave

From: Massachusetts State Police

A letter stating that the request appeal has been rejected.

From: Shawn Musgrave

Hello -

I see that the Supervisor has come to a subsequent decision as to my appeal of the Massachusetts State Police blatant disregard for its obligation to provide documents in electronic format. As the Supervisor has granted the MSP an opportunity to request reconsideration, I hope that the Supervisor's office will grant me the same courtesy. Below I assert once again that MSP is either acting in bad faith in suggesting that it is unable to provide the requested roster in a fully electronic/native format, or else simply has chosen not to describe the state of its records in a forthright manner. Either is problematic for the agency's transparency to the public, not simply for the present record but for its entire operation.

Apologies for any duplication from previous communications, but I find it necessary to lay out once again the full timeline of my requests to MSP for this documentation, to emphasize MSP's changes of stance as to its provision of the roster in an electronic format.

I first requested a copy of MSP's roster of Special State Police Officers (SSPO) in December 2013 (see: https://www.muckrock.com/foi/massachusetts-1/msp-special-police-roster-9675/). In response, MSP provided in a timely manner the attached PDF, which was indeed fully searchable in a digital format. (See attached: "MuckRock-Shawn_Musgrave-_SSPORequest-_Response_013114.pdf".)

However, as you can see, the roster provided in late 2013/early 2014 did not include the relevant agency, department, etc. for each SSPO, but solely listed each officer's name, Issue Date, and Expiration Date. Furthermore, that roster's data was corrupt. See, for example, the following entries:

08-01-0902/21 7/31/2014 FOURNIER, KEVIN
07/96/95 6/30/2016 CHIPMAN, WILMON D.
03-01-0210/07 8/1/2014 DIBLASI, CHRISTOPHER M
03-0102 3/2/2014 KHUON, PISETH
01/244/89 7/9/2013 VACCARO, ROBERT J.

These are nonsense entries, and unusable for either the public or MSP's own tracking of SSPO certifications, which is one of its statutory obligations. When I asked for corrected and/or electronic copy to sort out these seemingly incorrect entries, Mr. Procopio of MSP provided the following response, in which he referred specifically to a spreadsheet copy of the document:

"The Department does have the file in an electronic format but will not be disseminating it in any other format than .pdf or paper format to preserve the integrity and accuracy of the document. What you have is an exact printout of the database as it was prepared by our Management Information Systems section. The alignment of the cells and the data as it is presented in the copy provided to you is exactly as it appears in the Excel version of the roster."

I am concerned by SPR's conclusion that "previous responses or circumstances do not necessarily have any bearing on the Department's response to this request." Previous responses absolutely bear on an agency's response if such responses give lie to a current response.

In response to the present request, MSP provided on June 19, 2015 two pieces of information that further suggest that the agency does, indeed, have the capacity to provide the requested roster in a fully digital document (see https://www.muckrock.com/foi/massachusetts-1/msp-special-state-police-officer-roster-14344/#comm-156080): "Please note: [....] 1.) In September of 2014 the State Police Certification Unit updated its software system, which not allows the unit to provide a current list of all SSPOs and facilities. [....] 2.) For the reasons outlined in my below response, this information is being provided to you as a hard copy and not in an electronic format."

The "reasons outlined below" pertain to previous communications from MSP's David Procopio (see email dated June 16, 2015: https://www.muckrock.com/foi/massachusetts-1/msp-special-state-police-officer-roster-14344/#comm-155651): "[W]hile we do possess the file in an electronic Excel format, we will not disseminate it in any format other than a .pdf file that cannot be altered or a hard paper copy. The reason we took this position was to preserve the integrity and accuracy of the document. [....] We assert that this request has been fulfilled and reiterate that, in order to protect the integrity of official records, we will not release the Excel file, or what you refer to as the "native, electronic format."

To the June 19 email, MSP's David Procopio attached a scan of a physical printout that was converted into a barely "searchable" format using Optical Character Recognition, or OCR. (See attached: "Musgrave_PRR_0618151.pdf").

This shoddy rendering just barely qualifies as providing the document in electronic format. First, multiple entries spill across pages. See, for instance, entry #15, wherein the agency's address and phone number spill over from one page to the next. In a digital spreadsheet, all entries for a given line remain as one line. Any web application worth upgrading to stores its information in spreadsheets or databases, which associate relevant entries by their relation to each other. This is standard information organization since the advent of the spreadsheet, and it is how MSP stores such data if the agency and its clerks subscribe to modern information practices.

Furthermore, the visual characters on the provided copy are not encoded properly in the digital format of the document. This is likely because of the OCR software used, as well as the dubious redaction of each individual's license number. See, for instance, the same entry #15. Visually, this line reads, in part (the "|" character representing new columns):

15 | Amherst College | 6 East Street, Amherst, MA | 413-542- | Ominsky, Theresa M

However, the digital encoding of these characters is the following gobbledygook:

t5 Amherst C<Jl!ege
6 East Street, 413- Ominsky,
Amherst, NV\ 542- TheresaM
-- -

Such entries are utterly unusable. Again, it would be unnecessary for MSP to use any character recognition on the document, provided that the agency has the data in a native, digital format.

In light of the above deficiencies, I by no means consider the document that MSP has provided to be searchable or usable in a digital format, as I have requested repeatedly and now appeal to the Supervisor.

Furthermore, MSP has not sufficiently articulated just how its web application is designed so as to allow standardized data entry but not provision of data in a standardized digital format. Given Mr. Procopio's previous assertions that his agency has the roster in a spreadsheet, but would not provide said spreadsheet, I remain baffled. It is concerning to me that your office would close this appeal without kicking the tires a bit more, or at least without clarifying the extent to which said tires were kicked.

It is imperative that agencies leap into the bold future of providing records in electronic format. This is not solely for this reporters' convenience, but as a simple metric that government agencies take seriously their obligations to provide information to the public in formats that are accessible, usable and, frankly, sane by modern standards. This requirement to provide information in its native, electronic format lies at the heart of efforts to reform Massachusetts law to conform with public records best practices nationwide.

The Supervisor's office is already charged with holding agencies to their present obligations under the current statute. I urge you to reconsider this response, to further investigate MSP's capacity to provide records in the format which I've requested, and to hold all Massachusetts agencies to the fundamental standard of releasing records electronically which are maintained electronically.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave

From: Shawn Musgrave

Mr. Shorey -

Please advise whether your office will honor my request for reconsideration, as you did for the Massachusetts State Police when they requested reconsideration. I understand that you received a separate letter from another journalist, John A. Hawkinson, who outlined the dubious nature of MSP's claims not to have the requested data in spreadsheet format.

I would appreciate a prompt response on this matter.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave
New England Center for Investigative Reporting

From: Shorey, Stephen (SEC)

Mr. Musgrave,

Received and acknowledged. This office will review the information you provided below regarding SPR15/542. You will be notified of this office’s determination.
Best,
Stephen

Stephen W. Shorey
Staff Attorney
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
Public Records Division
One Ashburton Place, Room 1719
Boston, MA 02108
Ph: (617) 727-2832
Fax: (617) 727-5914

From: Boston Police Department

A letter stating that the request appeal has been received and is being processed.

From: Shawn Musgrave

Mr. Shorey -

Please provide an update on this appeal.

Best,
Shawn

From: Shorey, Stephen (SEC)

Hi Shawn,

This appeal is currently being reviewed as a reconsideration.
Best,
Stephen

Stephen W. Shorey
Staff Attorney
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
Public Records Division
One Ashburton Place, Room 1719
Boston, MA 02108
Ph: (617) 727-2832
Fax: (617) 727-5914

From: Shawn Musgrave

Mr. Shorey:

Please find attached materials I obtained via a separate records request to MSP. These pertain specifically to the ability of the Massachusetts State Police to access — and presumably export — data from within the personnel management system it uses to oversee the Special State Police Officers.

Based on its title — "MSP Certification Unit System Business Requirements Document" — this portion of documents seem to contain requirements established by the MSP Certification Unit for its new record and personnel management system. Presumably, the required capabilities enumerated within this document are now available to the MSP's Certification Unit. Footers for the attached portions of this document indicate it was last saved on January 20, 2016.

On p12 of the PDF of these documents, as part of a section titled "SSPO-05: MANAGE FIELD INSPECTIONS" :

LIST THE KEY ACTIONS A USER AND/OR THE SYSTEM MUST BE ABLE TO PERFORM AND ANY ASSOCIATED BUSINESS RULES.

[....]
· Pre-populate Employee List: The system will prepopulate the list of SSPOs employed by a Qualified Facility based on the employee list in the Qualified Facility’s profile. Updates to SSPO demographic information will be performed from within the Person profile.

The above specifically indicates that the system has the capacity to "prepopulate" a "list of SSPOs" for a given "Qualified Facility". Since the database in question is able to track both facilities and SSPOs assigned to a given facility, it follows that the database can likewise provide a comprehensive listing of all such SSPOs assigned to all such facilities. Alternatively, MSP could query the database for a listing of SSPOs assigned to each respective facility. But for the MSP to contend that it does not have a digital roster in light of the above contradicts the basic tenets of digital information storage. In order to "prepopulate" a list, the system must have a relational dataset that contains the entire universe of possible officers with indicators as to his or her assigned facility.

The above argument is further substantiated by other enumerated requirements of the system:

From p.1 of the PDF, in a section titled "SSPO-01: MANAGE PERSON DETAILS" :
LIST THE KEY ACTIONS A USER AND/OR THE SYSTEM MUST BE ABLE TO PERFORM AND ANY ASSOCIATED BUSINESS RULES.

[....]

· Maintain Person Information: A user will be able to maintain basic information about a person including but not limited to the following:
o - Personal Information (Name, DOB, SSN, Home Address, Home Phone, etc.)
o - List of all licenses (Active & Inactive)
o - List of applications (original in review & denied)

From p.5 of the PDF, in a section titled "SSPO-03: MANAGE QUALIFIED FACILITIES" :
LIST THE KEY ACTIONS A USER AND/OR THE SYSTEM MUST BE ABLE TO PERFORM AND ANY ASSOCIATED BUSINESS RULES.

[....]

· Maintain List of Qualified Facilities: A user will be able to view a list of all facilities approved to employ SSPOs. A user will be able to add, edit and view a Qualified Facility and maintain information about the facility including:
o - Facility tracking number
o - Facility name
o - Facility address
o - Facility phone number
o - Name of qualified agent
o - Facility status (e.g., active/inactive)
· 􏰀 View Qualified Facility: A user will be able to navigate to view detailed information about the qualified
· facility, including:
o - Basic facility information (e.g., facility tracking number, facility status, facility name, facility address, facility phone number, qualified agent name, etc.)
o - List of SSPOs employed by Qualified Facility
o - Facility injunction status history

Relevant examples run throughout: a user of the system in question can identify the number of warrants a given officer has applied for and received, check on all officers' certification status, track a given officer's name history, and so many more functions that a modern database can and should be able to perform. What is unfathomable is that the system cannot either export a simple spreadsheet of SSPOs, or else provide the raw data underlying its relational database from which the system draws in order to "prepopulate" various officer lists.

For weeks, the MSP records officer has argued against basic principles of data management. The documents I've obtained point unquestionably toward the agency's being able to supply the requested data. Please order them to do so, as your office has already done months ago.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave

From: Shawn Musgrave

Mr. Shorey:

Please find attached materials I obtained via a separate records request to MSP. These pertain specifically to the ability of the Massachusetts State Police to access — and presumably export — data from within the personnel management system it uses to oversee the Special State Police Officers.

Based on its title — "MSP Certification Unit System Business Requirements Document" — this portion of documents seem to contain requirements established by the MSP Certification Unit for its new record and personnel management system. Presumably, the required capabilities enumerated within this document are now available to the MSP's Certification Unit. Footers for the attached portions of this document indicate it was last saved on January 20, 2016.

On p12 of the PDF of these documents, as part of a section titled "SSPO-05: MANAGE FIELD INSPECTIONS" :

LIST THE KEY ACTIONS A USER AND/OR THE SYSTEM MUST BE ABLE TO PERFORM AND ANY ASSOCIATED BUSINESS RULES.

[....]
· Pre-populate Employee List: The system will prepopulate the list of SSPOs employed by a Qualified Facility based on the employee list in the Qualified Facility’s profile. Updates to SSPO demographic information will be performed from within the Person profile.

The above specifically indicates that the system has the capacity to "prepopulate" a "list of SSPOs" for a given "Qualified Facility". Since the database in question is able to track both facilities and SSPOs assigned to a given facility, it follows that the database can likewise provide a comprehensive listing of all such SSPOs assigned to all such facilities. Alternatively, MSP could query the database for a listing of SSPOs assigned to each respective facility. But for the MSP to contend that it does not have a digital roster in light of the above contradicts the basic tenets of digital information storage. In order to "prepopulate" a list, the system must have a relational dataset that contains the entire universe of possible officers with indicators as to his or her assigned facility.

The above argument is further substantiated by other enumerated requirements of the system:

From p.1 of the PDF, in a section titled "SSPO-01: MANAGE PERSON DETAILS" :
LIST THE KEY ACTIONS A USER AND/OR THE SYSTEM MUST BE ABLE TO PERFORM AND ANY ASSOCIATED BUSINESS RULES.

[....]

· Maintain Person Information: A user will be able to maintain basic information about a person including but not limited to the following:
o - Personal Information (Name, DOB, SSN, Home Address, Home Phone, etc.)
o - List of all licenses (Active & Inactive)
o - List of applications (original in review & denied)

From p.5 of the PDF, in a section titled "SSPO-03: MANAGE QUALIFIED FACILITIES" :
LIST THE KEY ACTIONS A USER AND/OR THE SYSTEM MUST BE ABLE TO PERFORM AND ANY ASSOCIATED BUSINESS RULES.

[....]

· Maintain List of Qualified Facilities: A user will be able to view a list of all facilities approved to employ SSPOs. A user will be able to add, edit and view a Qualified Facility and maintain information about the facility including:
o - Facility tracking number
o - Facility name
o - Facility address
o - Facility phone number
o - Name of qualified agent
o - Facility status (e.g., active/inactive)
· 􏰀 View Qualified Facility: A user will be able to navigate to view detailed information about the qualified
· facility, including:
o - Basic facility information (e.g., facility tracking number, facility status, facility name, facility address, facility phone number, qualified agent name, etc.)
o - List of SSPOs employed by Qualified Facility
o - Facility injunction status history

Relevant examples run throughout: a user of the system in question can identify the number of warrants a given officer has applied for and received, check on all officers' certification status, track a given officer's name history, and so many more functions that a modern database can and should be able to perform. What is unfathomable is that the system cannot either export a simple spreadsheet of SSPOs, or else provide the raw data underlying its relational database from which the system draws in order to "prepopulate" various officer lists.

For weeks, the MSP records officer has argued against basic principles of data management. The documents I've obtained point unquestionably toward the agency's being able to supply the requested data. Please order them to do so, as your office has already done months ago.

Respectfully,
Shawn Musgrave

From: Stephen W. Shorey

Mr. Musgrave,

Thank you, received and acknowledged.

Best,
Stephen

Stephen W. Shorey
Staff Attorney
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
Public Records Division
One Ashburton Place, Room 1719
Boston, MA 02108
Ph: (617) 727-2832
Fax: (617) 727-5914

From: Stephen W. Shorey

Mr. Musgrave,

Thank you, received and acknowledged.

Best,
Stephen

Stephen W. Shorey
Staff Attorney
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
Public Records Division
One Ashburton Place, Room 1719
Boston, MA 02108
Ph: (617) 727-2832
Fax: (617) 727-5914

From: Shorey, Stephen (SEC)

Mr. Musgrave,

Thank you, this office is currently reviewing this matter.
Best,
Stephen

Stephen W. Shorey
Staff Attorney
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
Public Records Division
One Ashburton Place, Room 1719
Boston, MA 02108
Ph: (617) 727-2832
Fax: (617) 727-5914

From: Massachusetts State Police

A letter stating that the request appeal has been rejected.

Files

pages

Close