DOJ · DOJ-0226 · record R1654

Facial Recognition Technology

Department of Justice · Department of Justice / USMS

Overview

Development stage: DeployedSource: c) Deployed – The use case is being actively authorized or utilized to support the functions or mission of an agency.
High-impact designation: High-impactSource: a) High-impact
Impact justification: Not reported
Start date: 2022-01 (month precision)Source: 01/2022
Withheld from public reporting: NoSource: a) No

Mission

Topic area: Law Enforcement
Operational functions: Biometrics and identity Derived by keyword rules; see methodology

Problem the AI is intended to solve

Facial Recognition Technology helps to narrow down potential subjects for further investigative analysis. The AI assists with the possible identification of an investigative subject but the AI in this use case is only an investigative lead and never grounds for law enforcement actions. All leads generated with this AI use must be corroborated with additional law enforcement techniques before actioned.

Expected benefits

An increase in investigative efficiency leading to faster apprehension of violent fugitives and sex offenders and more rapid recovery of critically missing children.

System outputs

Matches query photograph with publicly available images.

Technology

AI classification: Computer visionSource: Computer Vision: AI that processes and interprets visual data (e.g., images and videos).
System name(s): Redacted for cybersecurity purposes.
Custom-developed code: No
Public source code: Not reported

Sourcing

How it was built: Purchased from vendorSource: a) Purchased from a vendor
Vendor (as reported): Clearview AI
Vendors (standardized): Clearview AI

A vendor is the supplier named by the agency. It does not identify the underlying model or AI technology.

Data and privacy

Involves PII: Yes
Privacy Impact Assessment: Not reported
Authorization to Operate: Yes
Demographic features: This AI use case utilizes one or more of the demographic variables listed in compliance with all federal laws and agency regulations.
Training and evaluation data: The case owner relied on DOJ AI governance practices to select and prepare data, as well as evaluate performance.
Federal Data Catalog: Not reported

Governance

8 of 8 minimum-practice questions answered. A blank answer means the agency reported nothing; it does not mean the practice is absent.

Pre-deployment testingReported in progressSource: b) In-progress

AI impact assessmentReported in progressSource: b) In-progress

Independent reviewReported in progressSource: d) In-progress

Ongoing monitoringReported in progressSource: b) Development of monitoring protocols is in-progress

Operator trainingReported in progressSource: b) Establishment of sufficient and periodic training is in-progress

Fail-safeReported in progressSource: c) In-progress

Appeal processReported in progressSource: c) Establishment of an appropriate appeal process is in-progress

User and public consultationReported in progressSource: e) In-progress

Potential impacts and how they were identified

Consistent with Executive Orders and OMB guidance, the case owner relied on DOJ AI governance practices to evaluate impacts and risks.