IT Governance Business Case
Compliance - Data Collection To Enable Auto Vehicle Solutions For Routing - Automatic Vehicle Locator (AVL)
Durham Emergency Communications Center (DECC)
Background
The DECC dispatches Durham Fire Department and Durham County Volunteer Fire Departments based on response plans using geoproximity. Currently, this setup works well as long as every fire vehicle is docked at its respective station at the time of an emergency call. However, this current structure does not ensure that the emergency service vehicle in the nearest proximity to the emergency call is dispatched.
Current Pain Points from DECC / 911
• Slow response times for both fire and medical emergencies due to lack of routing capabilities.
• Current center data line does not support automatic vehicle locator (AVL) because of lack of data
• Currently the emergency service vehicles are dispatched based on predetermined coverage areas as opposed to the proximity of the of the nearest emergency vehicles
Goal: Innovative & High Performing Organization
Initiative: Develop and implement a continuous improvement model that includes evaluation and process improvement to analyze and improve City services
Desired Business Value
Implement a solution that:
• Generates potential savings by increasing effectiveness, efficiencies, that directly generate a higher value
• Ability to enhance the transparency of a program’s operations which can yield favorable outcomes for all stakeholders
• Post implementation allows for better tracking, reporting, that is results based and directly contributes to improve operational capabilities
Goal: Creating a Safer Community Together
Initiative: Transition to contemporary dispatch methods that allow emergency communications to better process 911 calls and deploy first responders.
Desired Business Value
Implement a solution that:
• Improved operational efficiencies & effectiveness
• Increased quality assurance standards
• Provides additional visibility into handoff of emergency responses between both the City’s and County’s fire departments
Future State Benefits
Benefits of implementing an enhanced dispatching process using AVL technologies should include the following:
• AVL technologies integrated into Computer Aided Dispatching (CAD) system
• Beneficial to incident command by allowing them a visual location of all resources responding to the call
• Map data will be cleaned up & more accurate for routing
• Improves the efficiency of Fire and EMS response by accurately identifying the most effective route to the incident
• Improved overall experience by providing a better response time and insurance services offices (ISO) scores
• Data will provide streamline routes, speed limits, and traffic counts
• Collect and enter data to enable AVL routing integrations into dispatch
Recommended Solutions and Analysis
Solution #1: Public Works
Lead Data Collection for AVL
Enabled Routing
Description
Internally developed enhancement that automates the dispatch of all fire (city & county) agencies based on proximity.
Pros
• Improved response times for Fire and EMS
• DECC dispatching will be improved using this enhanced technology
• Collect data required for dispatching using AVL
Cons
• High level of internal effort is needed to implement and maintain center line mapping
Solution #1 DECC AVL: Public Works Lead Data Collection for AVL Integration
Project Financial Estimate
COST ESTIMATES FUNDING
Description Year 1 Costs (Hours) Annual Run Costs (Hours)/ KTLO Departmental Funding Amount: $0 Labor $ (Hours) Internal TS: 50 hours 0 hours Funding Requested (Y/N): Y Business Analysis 10 hours 0 hours TS Services 20 hours 0 hours Project One Time Costs $350,000 TS PMO 20 hours 0 hours Project Run Cost (External) $0 Internal Department: DECC/911 160 hours 75 hours *Total Project Funding Requested for Year 1 $350,000 Internal Department: Public Works 6,750 hours 3,000 hours External: $0 $ 0 *Recurring Costs $0 Non-Labor $ Hardware: $0 $0 Software: $0 $0 Other: $350,000 $0 *Total Project Funding Requested (External), includes External Year 1 Run Costs and Non-Labor
Solution #2: Third Party Data Collection for AVL Integration
Description
Subscription based model that enhances the automation routes of all fire (city & county) agencies based on proximity.
Pros
• Improved response times for Fire and EMS
• DECC routing will be improved using this enhanced technology
• Improved automation; Requires less resources to maintain
• Collect data required for routing using AVL
• Collaboration between local & state governments to provide the City with enterprise-wide accessible mapping data
• Increased cost due to a Subscription
Cons
• DECC maps are updated quarterly
• Potential configuration issues would need to be addressed
Solution #2 Third Party Data Collection for AVL Integration : Project Financial
Estimate
*Total Project Funding Requested (External), includes External Year 1 Run Costs and Non-Labor
Description Year 1 Costs (Hours) Annual Run Costs (Hours)/ KTLO Departmental Funding Amount: $0 Labor $ (Hours) Internal TS: 50 hours 0 hours Funding Requested (Y/N): Y Business Analysis 10 hours 0 hours TS Services 20 hours 0 hours Project One Time Costs $0 TS PMO 40 hours 0 hours Project Run Cost (External) $0 Internal Department: DECC/911 160 hours 75 hours *Total Project Funding Requested for Year 1 $0 Internal Department: Public Works 80 hours 40 hours External: $0 $ 0 *Recurring Costs $0 Non-Labor $ Hardware: $0 $0 Software: $0 $0 Other: $0 $0
COST ESTIMATES FUNDING
Recommended Solution: Third Party Data Collection for AVL Integration
Description
Subscription based model that enhances the automation routes of all fire (city & county) agencies based on proximity.
Pros
• Improved response times for Fire and EMS
• DECC routing will be improved using this enhanced technology
• Improved automation; Requires less resources to maintain
• Collect data required for routing using AVL
• Collaboration between local & state governments to provide the City with enterprise-wide accessible mapping data
• Increased cost due to a Subscription
Cons
• DECC maps are updated quarterly
• Potential configuration issues would need to be addressed
Risk Identification - 3rd Party Solution
Description of Risk Risk Impact Mitigated (Y/N) Contingency(Y/N) Poor execution High N Y Project team turnover High Y N Vendor performance Low Y N Cyber Security Low Y N
Mitigation Risk (Costs)
• TS will assist when applicable to support with the conversion/migration of data
Contingency Risk (Costs)
• N/A
Our Ask
We are asking to approve the compliance business case recommendation from TS Solution development committee for the DECC to acquire data from NCDOT at no cost to enable AVL routing rather than Public Works creating the data.
