FBI Is the Worst FOIA Performer

krou writes "The National Security Archive at George Washington University has awarded its 2009 Rosemary Award to the FBI for worst freedom of information performance (PDF of the award). Previous winners have been the CIA and the Treasury. The NSA notes that 'The FBI's reports to Congress show that the Bureau is unable to find any records in response to two-thirds of its incoming FOIA requests on average over the past four years, when the other major government agencies averaged only a 13% "no records" response to public requests.' The FBI's explanation, according to the NSA, is that 'files are indexed only by reference terms that have to be manually applied by individual agents,' and even then, 'agents don't always index all relevant terms.' Furthermore, 'unless a requester specifically asks for a broader search, the FBI will only look in a central database of electronic file names at FBI headquarters in Washington.' Any search will therefore 'miss any internal or cross-references to people who are not the subject of an investigation, any records stored at other FBI offices around the country, and any records created before 1970.'"

Comments

So basically...

[Thelasko]

the FBI can't find anything, because their agents didn't tag their reports.

Re:So basically...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Dilemma, both options bad: Either

The FBI's recordkeeping and information handling internally are as poor as for FOIA requests, which would mean that it has no coherent idea what is going on, and is thus only effective in cases where minimally coordinated local offices can do the job.

Or,

The FBI finds it convenient to know nothing when those pesky people with their "rights" come knocking; which would mean that they are a cabal of hooverite scum and a threat to liberty and transparency.

Re:So basically...

[Registered Coward v2]

Dilemma, both options bad: Either The FBI's recordkeeping and information handling internally are as poor as for FOIA requests, which would mean that it has no coherent idea what is going on, and is thus only effective in cases where minimally coordinated local offices can do the job.

Actually, that's not that unusual in large organizations; and is acerbated by government bureaucracy and funding methods. For eh really serious stuff, organizations are generally good at coordination, but there's a lot of other lower level stuff that gets done pretty much on a local level and never is seen elsewhere; so unless you know it exists through experience or an informal network (let me call Bob in New York and see what he knows) it is lost to the broader organization. Most government organizations would love google-like access and searching to their files because it would make their job easier and they'd be more effective; the reality is they don't have the money to buy the technology that enables that capability; TV and Movies aside many organizations are years behind the tech curve.

Or, The FBI finds it convenient to know nothing when those pesky people with their "rights" come knocking; which would mean that they are a cabal of hooverite scum and a threat to liberty and transparency.

My experience with government organizations is they really care about things like rights and liberty; probably more so than many of their fellow citizens and are willing to risk their lives defending their fellow citizens. Sure, there are a few bad apples, but that's not representative of the whole organization.

In the end, never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by bureaucracy.

Re:maybe they need a search appliance...

[Thelasko]

sounds like the need to buy one of those Google search appliances...

Yeah, but then they would have to hire someone to censor all of the search results manually, and would no longer have a good reason to deny FOIA requests.

On a side note, this explains how so much intel falls through the cracks of our nation's intelligence agencies, only to be discovered after something tragic occurs.