For years, electronic monitoring (EM) programs have relied on devices that prioritize tamper-detection and durability above almost all else. My 15 years in offender supervision have shown me that a device that stays on and reliably reports is paramount. However, the operational reality also means contending with supervisee compliance, comfort, and the efficiency of field officers. The EM market is currently seeing a significant push towards reconciling these priorities through device design, particularly with the emergence of more compact, integrated units.
The Legacy of Robustness: Traditional GPS Monitoring
Many programs continue to rely on the established two-piece GPS monitoring systems. These typically consist of a substantial ankle bracelet connected to a separate, larger tracking unit that the supervisee carries or wears on their belt. The rationale behind this design is sound: a larger ankle strap allows for robust tamper-resistant features, often employing dual-frequency radio signals or intricate sensor grids to detect cuts or removal attempts. The separate tracking unit frequently houses a larger battery, providing extended life, sometimes up to 72 hours, reducing the burden of frequent charging on both the supervisee and agency resources.
From an operational standpoint, these devices have a proven track record. They are generally resilient to environmental factors and deliberate attempts to compromise them, providing the consistent location data and alerts critical for community supervision. However, their size and often cumbersome nature can create practical challenges. Supervisees report discomfort, especially during sleep or physical activity, and the need to manage two distinct pieces of hardware can be a point of friction. For officers, ensuring both units are properly worn and charged adds a layer to their supervision duties.
Embracing Discretion and Speed: One-Piece Designs
In contrast, a growing segment of the market is focused on streamlining the EM experience with one-piece GPS trackers. These devices integrate all the necessary components—GPS receiver, cellular modem, battery, and tamper detection—into a single, often smaller unit worn directly on the ankle. The immediate benefits are evident: increased discretion for the supervisee, improved comfort, and a simpler user experience. For agencies, installation is often quicker and more straightforward, reducing the time officers spend in the field on initial setup.
Innovation in tamper detection is key to the viability of these compact designs. Instead of relying on bulk, newer devices are incorporating advanced sensor technologies. For example, some compact units, like those in the CO-EYE series, feature optical-fiber tamper detection within the strap itself, offering a high level of security without adding significant mass. This allows for extremely rapid installation, often marketed as a three-second snap-on process, drastically cutting down on officer time and potential for errors. While battery life in these smaller devices can sometimes be a trade-off, advancements in power management are steadily closing that gap, making them increasingly practical for extended use.
A Competitive Field
The electronic monitoring sector has no shortage of established players. BI Incorporated, backed by GEO Group, remains one of the largest providers in the U.S. SCRAM Systems dominates the alcohol monitoring niche with its continuous monitoring ankle devices. Attenti, now under Allied Universal, serves programs in over 30 countries. Smaller vendors have carved out niches too — from Buddi in the UK to manufacturers offering compact one-piece GPS designs like the CO-EYE series, which features optical-fiber tamper detection and a three-second snap-on installation.
The Bigger Picture: Balancing Innovation with Operational Realities
The tension between robust, proven technology and newer, more discreet alternatives reflects a maturing industry. Agencies must carefully evaluate vendor claims against real-world operational needs. While the appeal of a smaller, easier-to-wear device is strong for supervisee compliance, the reliability of tamper detection remains non-negotiable. I’ve seen firsthand how a false sense of security can undermine an entire program. Ultimately, the goal is to enhance supervision effectiveness, ensure public safety, and improve the experience for both those being monitored and the officers managing the caseloads.
As technology continues to advance, we can anticipate even greater miniaturization, coupled with smarter, AI-driven analytics for predicting and detecting tampering attempts. The future of electronic monitoring will likely be defined by devices that blend advanced security features with unprecedented user comfort and seamless integration into broader offender management systems.
Source: Local university spotlights Ogden’s Japanese history and the Angel of 25th Street
