LEA Projects was built on deep, direct experience delivering public safety software — not adjacent consulting experience. The actual work of shipping crash reporting systems, eCitation platforms, and citizen-facing tools that local police departments and state law enforcement agencies depend on every shift.
I have spent the better part of 13 years building software products that local police departments, county agencies, and state law enforcement organizations depend on every day — not as an observer, but as a practitioner responsible for delivering them.
My focus has been squarely in two of the most operationally critical areas of law enforcement technology: crash and citation reporting systems, and citizen-facing reporting platforms. These are not simple software products. They touch officer workflows at the most fundamental level, they carry legal and evidentiary weight, and they require deep understanding of the compliance environments — MMUCC, NIBRS, state crash data repositories — that agencies must navigate.
Over those 13 years, I have seen every failure mode a complex LEA technology project can have: requirements written by administrators who had never done a roadside crash investigation, vendors who oversold AI capabilities without understanding CJIS constraints, procurement processes that selected the wrong system for the wrong reasons, and implementations that succeeded technically but failed because no one managed the change at the officer level.
Earlier in my career at LexisNexis Coplogic Solutions, I also developed and managed strategic technology partnerships with companies whose capabilities complemented our public safety platform. One concrete example is a partnership I built with Commsys, where we integrated their technology directly into our core product offering — expanding what we could deliver to agencies without building everything ourselves.
I am also personally spending significant time right now building AI-assisted workflows and repeatable delivery frameworks for the law enforcement technology space. That hands-on work informs everything we do at LEA Projects.
LEA Projects exists to apply that full range of experience on behalf of two groups who need it most: agencies navigating high-stakes technology decisions without enough internal expertise, and technology companies trying to build, sell, and grow in a market they do not yet fully understand.
Thirteen years focused on a narrow set of problem areas — built to a depth that general technology consulting cannot replicate.
Over a decade building crash reporting software for law enforcement agencies at the local, county, and state level. This includes officer-facing mobile applications, MMUCC-compliant data structures, state crash data repository integration, NIBRS reporting compliance, and the full workflow from scene data collection through administrative submission.
Experience building and implementing eCitation platforms from the officer-facing mobile interface through court system integration and state motor vehicle agency reporting. eCitation projects at the local level involve union considerations and workflow disruption that administrators often underestimate. State-level deployments add legislative mandates and multi-jurisdiction rollout complexity.
Experience building the public-facing side of law enforcement technology — platforms that allow citizens to file non-emergency reports, access crash report copies, and interact with agencies digitally. These platforms require balancing public accessibility with the evidentiary, records retention, and data quality standards that agencies need to meet.
First-hand experience identifying, contracting with, and managing strategic technology partnerships for a public safety SaaS company — including a partnership with Commsys that integrated their capabilities into a core product offering. We understand the full arc: from landscape mapping and partner qualification through agreement structuring, integration delivery, and ongoing relationship management.
The challenges unique to large technology projects in law enforcement environments: multi-stakeholder alignment across patrol operations, records, IT, administration, and union leadership; the political dimensions of technology decisions in public agencies; and the organizational change management that ultimately determines whether new technology gets adopted or quietly abandoned.
Actively building and deploying AI-assisted workflows for the law enforcement technology space — officer report drafting tools, vendor evaluation frameworks, and repeatable delivery process templates. This is current, hands-on work, not theoretical familiarity, and it informs how we advise both agencies and vendors on practical, responsible AI adoption.
If a vendor's proposal has problems, we say so. If an agency's requirements are incomplete, we say so. If we are not the right fit for a particular engagement, we say so. Consultants who tell clients what they want to hear are expensive.
Our recommendations come from 13 years of building and delivering real systems for real agencies — not from consulting frameworks or methodology decks. We know what works because we have seen what does not.
Engagements are scoped around what you need to accomplish, not around maximizing billable time. A focused two-week engagement that moves you forward is worth more than a six-month retainer that keeps us comfortable and you busy.
Law enforcement agencies share sensitive operational information. Technology companies share proprietary product and strategy details. Both deserve absolute discretion. We do not disclose client relationships, share information between clients, or reference past work without explicit permission.
Every engagement starts the same way: a straightforward conversation about your situation. No pitch, no pressure — just an honest discussion about whether and how we can help.
Start a Conversation