Security controls (i.e., control electronics) technology should be one of the last system selections, since it is the "glue" that integrates sub-systems together (e.g., locking controls with intercom and closed-circuit television/CCTV). Again, form should follow function.

Owners may not realize it, but they really need to be involved in the security controls selection. Since this equipment is less visible than the rest of the system (i.e., under the consoles or in the back room), selection is often made by the contractor in the contractor's best interest without the owner even being aware of it.

The long-term results of not questioning or being informed of this choice can include:

• a system that never fully functions as intended
  
• slow response time, limited flexibility, etc.
  
• being "locked into" (from a service and support standpoint) one vendor or even one dealer for the entire life of the system
  

Security control systems may be broadly divided into several categories:

• Hard-wired controls: includes systems without logic, relay-based logic, and "discrete" logic systems based on circuit boards and integrated circuits. This is 20- to 50-year-old technology. Secure-Tech is a good example of a hard-wired discrete logic system, although they also have programmable equipment.
  
• Programmable logic controllers (PLCs): custom-adapted to detention electronic applications by a systems integrator. This is extremely well supported, reliable 10- to 20- year-old "factory floor" technology and has been a de facto standard in corrections for about 10 years. Software often needs to be written that is specific to detention applications.
  
• True-non-proprietary industrial personal computers (IPCs): custom-adapted to detention electronics by a systems integrator. This is 5- to 10-year-old new technology now taking over the "factory floor" technology. It is more economical and much less proprietary than traditional PLCs. For any one component, there are many manufacturers. Standards are promulgated to achieve interoperability between manufacturers.
  
• Proprietary detention controllers: various proprietary systems custom-designed and manufactured specifically to be detention electronics control systems (e.g., Rauland Secureplex, Simplex ProLogic, etc.). While their software is fairly accessible for owners to revise, hardware support depends upon one manufacturer and standards aren't published (i.e., they control interoperability with other manufacturers). They readily interface with CCTV and other sub-systems having been designed specifically to do so.
  
• Distributed access control systems: various distributed control systems, many of them designed primarily as commercial access control (i.e., card reader) systems (e.g., CSI, Receptors, Andover Controls, etc.). In addition to being more commercially-oriented, these have the same drawbacks as the detention-specific controllers. However, they too integrate quite readily with CCTV and other sub-systems.