Evaluation of an Early Intervention System at a Law Enforcement Agency. Robert Scott Russell, 2014: Applied Dissertation, Nova Southeastern University, Abraham S. Fischler School of Education. ERIC Descriptors: Computer Software Evaluation, Crime Prevention, Law Enforcement, Police Community Relationship, Program Evaluation. The problem addressed through this program evaluation was that no formal study had been conducted regarding the implementation and effectiveness of the BlueTeam Program (BTP) within the law enforcement agency (LEA) serving as the study site. The BTP is a program that utilizes a computer application to track officer behaviors and alert administrators to potential trends in officer misconduct and complaints against officers. The program evaluation was guided by the process and product segments of Stufflebeam's (2003) content, input, process, and product model. To conduct the evaluation, the researcher used a mixed methods approach for analyzing both qualitative and quantitative data. The perceptions of LEA stakeholders regarding the BTP, such as the sufficiency of staffing, budget, training, and ongoing support for effective implementation, were first collected. Quantitative data, consisting of archived, deidentified indicators of officer misconduct and complaints against officers acquired through the BTP, were then analyzed. Findings of the study were that the BTP was effective in reducing incidents of officer misconduct and complaints against officers and for use in identifying which alerts were valid indicators of misconduct and complaints against officers. The one concern of stakeholders involving the BTP was limited nighttime vision; the recommendation for program improvement is that this shortcoming be addressed to determine possible solutions. Recommendations for future research involve the need for initial determinations, as well as formative evaluations, pertaining to the following three areas: (a) ascertaining the way in which the early intervention system will be used, (b) identifying the indicators of misconduct that will be tracked, and (c) determining the threshold at which the system will issue an alert.