Mastering Data Management

More in Government

• More Mobile, More Competitive Government
• We Are Our Own Columbos
• The End of the Social Security Number?
• Five Rules of Successful Identity and Social Network Analysis

More from Jonathan McDonald

• Keeping Entity Resolution Cost Effective
• More Nuts and Bolts for Entity Resolution Success
• What’s Needed for Entity Resolution Success?
• Immigration and Border Control – Keeping Out the Bad Guys

Share this Post

Recent Comments

• ICMCC News Page » Where East Meets West: ehealth in China and the US on Where East Meets West: ehealth in China and the US
• Kim’s Training Podcast on Training as a Safety Net: Kim May
• TDWI Chicago Preview: Data Warehousing, Analytics & More | Mastering Data Management on New ebook: Understanding Big Data

To identify potential threats, border security agencies must identify passenger intent from a limited set of available data.

For most western countries, growing numbers of air passenger movements are increasing pressures at the border – particularly at immigration checks. Processing all these travelers – especially those that are non-compliant – increases both security risks and costs.

In the current security environment, there is a potential threat even from residents/citizens of ‘friendly’ countries (Canada, the UK or others, for example) which have electronic visa approval processes in place. In addition, there is increasing pressure to extend the border to the point of departure to prevent the threat before a person boards an aircraft.

To identify potential threats, whether they are to security or compliance, border security agencies must identify passenger intent from a limited set of available data. Namely, agencies need to establish whether the reasons given for travel in a visa application are consistent with booked travel arrangements and actual movements – all to identify threats before they arrive at the border.

This is particularly challenging given that 80% of applicants are likely to be unknown to the border agency – that is, they are new applications.

In many countries, there is currently only fairly simple checking of visa applicant names against watch list names. It is being increasingly recognized that watchlist checking is insufficient, and a more rigorous approach to risk profiling is required to determine passenger intent and whether arrangements are consistent with intent declared at visa application.

Currently, there is only a limited amount of data available during the electronic visa application process: name, date of birth, passport number and date of issue/expiry. This limited data set typically does not allow effective risk profiling.

In order to improve the effectiveness of risk profiling, additional data is required. Travel history is particularly helpful to establish whether the new visit consistent with patterns of previous activity. Additional data sources which may be used for this include advanced passenger processing information and passenger name record (PNR) data.

Ideally, enhanced risk profiling will extend not just to visa issue, but will be triggered at significant events throughout the entire passenger life cycle (including: on visa issue, travel booking, itinerary change, crossing the border and at departure).

Serious threats typically ensure that a visa application and travel plans appear consistent, but may change itinerary and movements at the last minute.

At the same time, agencies are under pressure to at least maintain or improve service standards, both in visa issue and at the border, typically within current resourcing or even while having to deliver on efficiency-dividends or delivering other savings.

Hence, the requirements for additional data must come not from the client during the application process, but from data captured in existing systems. How can you accomplish this?

In my next post, I will explore some of the requirements while also reviewing some common attributes of risk profiles. This post is now available.