A Case for a Business Case on Notification Programs

An effective way to approach a managed notification project is through development of a business case. (Many organizations require one.) Done right, a business case is more than a justification. It forces consideration of factors that can make or break a project. Plus, it establishes a go-forward plan. Even if not required for approval of a project, a strong business case can set the stage for success.

The business case should be a collaborative document with input from various stakeholders. Then, it should be kept alive, with updates and modifications, even after approval. A strong business case doesn’t need to be long, but it should be thorough.

The business case will be the guide throughout the project. Plus, it’s an excellent way for obtaining buy-in from stakeholders (including those who hold the purse strings).

Elements for a good notification program Business Case are:

1. Vision/Mission
2. Description
3. Justification
4. Critical Success Factors
5. Financial Impact
6. Measurements
7. Action Plan

Galain Solutions, Inc. has published a white paper "Building a Good Business Case", which is available upon request to info@galainsolutions.com. Couple the Business Case document with Galain's white paper, "Notifications, Alerts, Warnings: The Next Generation" and you have a good primer on launching or enhancing a notification program that truly produces success. (The "Next Generation" white paper is also available upon request to info@galainsolutions.com.)

All the best,

Rick

The Numbers Behind New York Alert

Response to our original post about New York Alert, the state of New York's unique approach to automated alerts and warnings, has been strong. The original post told the story of the New York State Emergency Management Office (SEMO) developing close relationships with carriers so that high-volume notifications could be delivered to populated areas, without bringing down the infrastructure. We know of no other place where these tight relationships exist (although they need to, as infrastructure issues can shut down notification efforts).

Here are some of the numbers behind the story: There are now more than 5.8-million people in the New York Alert database. Over 1.7-million have gone to the trouble of registering through the New York Alert portal. Public Information Officer Dennis Michalski says most of the citizens who signed up for the notifications heard about it through word of mouth. Plus, he says many of the counties in the state have done a good job spreading the word about New York Alert. Even though there are significantly more than 5.8-million people in New York, Michalski says, "Through multi-member households and in the workplace, the message will reach the general population that has not yet subscribed".

Over 800 organizations can deliver messages through New York Alert. They include state agencies, and local authorities throughout New York. State-supported colleges and universities can use the system. The State Department of Transportation, Office of Homeland Security, and the Division of Military and Naval Affairs can use it.

Over 105 vendors are involved. This includes providers of the networks that carry cell calls, land line calls, SMS, internet, email, etc.

The state has invested about $5-million dollars in New York Alert since 2005. This is not much money, considering the fact that state says it looked first for private vendors to complete the project and the vendor estimates came in at well over $100-million with desired features still missing. (SEMO built the system itself under leadership of Assistant CIO Kevin Ross.)

And, here's one of the most fascinating numbers behind the story: The system has been activated over 175-thousand times in the last five months alone!

A lot of people are watching the numbers as the New York Alert story is told, and they should be.

All the best,

Rick

Assessing Your Notification Program

One of the key elements of a successful notification program is getting off to the right start. That means developing a good understanding. Good understanding begins with an Assessment – a specific process that creates a solid detailed understanding of “what” is to be accomplished and likely to be encountered. (This is not the “how” to accomplish; that comes later.)

The Assessment Plan should be tied to a Vision and Mission. The Vision is, in effect, a statement of what the program will look like when it is fully in place. Then, a Mission is established. The Mission states how the Vision will be accomplished.

Then, Requirements and Constraints should be identified. It’s a good idea to classify and prioritize Requirements and Constraints based on importance and significance, and to make sure various elements are included (Technology, Management, Governance, Promotion). Next, an inventory of Communities of Interest must be conducted. From what groups will ‘buy-in’ and participation be needed in order to ensure the program’s success?

With these pieces in place (Vision, Mission, Requirements/Constraints, Communities of Interest) the investigation can begin. It is often a good idea to conduct a Preliminary Investigation to get a surface-level overview. Armed with this preliminary report, one could then hone in on the specifics appearing to be most significant.

The Assessment should identify priorities, issues likely to develop, and critical success factors. Among other things, the Assessment needs to carefully address contact data, whether for the general public or internal staff. Contact information will often come from multiple sources, and will change often. Methods, processes, and technology exist to mitigate the diversity and change of contact data, but mitigation cannot begin until an understanding is developed through the Assessment.

To develop the Assessment, stakeholder collaboration will be required and senior officials must participate. Without buy-in and involvement from the top, the program will not be successful.

Note: Excerpted from the Galain Solutions, Inc. white paper: "Notifications, Alerts, Warnings: The Next Generation". For a copy, email info@galainsolutions.com.

New Hampshire Working Toward Statewide Notification System

A bill is circulating through the New Hampshire legislature to create a statewide emergency notification system. With amendments this month by the House, the legislation is now ready for Senate action. If approved, the bill would direct the state bureau of emergency communications to to develop and maintain the statewide system. Spending would be limited to $600,000

Here are a couple of particularly interesting points about HB-0213, and its new amendments:

1. The notification system would be financed through the same surcharges as the state E911 system. This is normally a controversial topic, since 911 organizations generally don't like their funds used for anything other than 911.

2. As amended, the legislation requires the emergency communications bureau to work with technical personnel of wireline, wireless, voice over Internet Protocol, and cable industries "to ensure the delivery of emergency messages in the most efficient manner". Not many months ago, this would been a tough order to carry out. But, the State of New York through its New York Alert system has shown quite effectively how this can work, and work well. (See "State of New York Fix for Major Emergency Notification Challenge").

There seem to be missing elements of the legislation:

1. We don't see mandates for collaboration with local public safety. Where states have tried to implement statewide systems without collaboration, the results have been less than pretty.

2. What about requirements that investments in the statewide system take into consideration developing federal programs, such as the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS) and the related Commercial Mobile Alert System (CMAS)? At the very least, other efforts have included a requirement that technology used must at least be compliant with the Common Alerting Protocol (CAP). Now, certainly the state doesn't need legislation to make those things happen, but it could help.

3. And, the other thing that appears to be missing is enough money. $600,000 may technology a state the size of New Hampshire needs. But, what about funds for public outreach? What about training? What about special needs provisions? And, would $600,000 really be enough to facilitate relationships with the carriers. (New York has spent over $5,000,000 on its statewide system, which includes automatic throttling based on live info from the carriers.)

Despite any shortcomings, hats off to the New Hampshire legislature for trying. If the bill passes and is signed into law, New Hampshire would join only a handful of other states with statewide notification systems.

All the best,

Rick

EAS Summit Connects Feds and Broadcasters on Issues of Public Warning

The 6th Annual 2010 Emergency Alert System Summit, funded by the National Association of Broadcasters, was held March 1 in Washington, D.C. In attendance were more than 175 emergency managers, broadcasters, cable operators and state broadcasters association representatives from 44 states and territories, according to a comprehensive article on www.radiomagonline.com.

The yearly Summit is designed to connect broadcasters and the Federal government on issues surrounding public alerting in times of crisis. The Summit generated significant interest this year, as a great deal of new attention is being placed on the nation's alerting infrastructure and the broadcasters' associated role.

Some of the highlights include:

- Discussion on a recent bill passed in Nevada naming broadcasters as first responders with priority for food, water, and fuel during a disaster. Broadcasters support this concept. Though broadcasters provide assurances their motivation is strictly centered on the priority receipt of staple items, others feel it might open the door for broadcasters to apply for public safety money.

-FEMA's intended target date to adopt CAP (and start the clock rolling on a 180-day deadline for broadcasters' equipment to comply) is currently August/September 2010. However, FEMA stated that the delay in OASIS's adoption of CAP v1.2 as an international standard until the end of May 2010 will likely push FEMA's deadline until Q4 of 2010.

-FEMA's Geo-Targeted Alerting System (GTAS) application was introduced. See our previous post here.

-Five new Primary Entry Point (PEP) stations (stations with dedicated power circuits connected to emergency command centers) will be added this year to the existing 41. FEMA is committed to having a total of 74 PEP stations with coverage of 90 percent of the U.S. population by the end of 2011.

-The National Weather Service (NWS) said its CAP alert website will be in full production within the next two months. Also, the Weather Radio Improvement Program (WRIP), slated to be completed in two years, will offer CAP message input into NOAA Weather Radio (NWR) systems.

In all, feedback suggests the Summit was helpful and well-received by all audiences. The broadcast community is certainly a critical player in warning the public, and its great to see effective communication among the key stakeholders.

All the best,

Lorin


To receive a comprehensive Galain Solutions white paper: "Notifications Alerts & Warnings, The Next Generation," email us your request at resources@galainsolutions.com.

Galain Solutions, Inc.
www.galainsolutions.com

Notification Systems--More than Just Public Warnings

In speaking with emergency managers across the country, we find much of the focus with regards to emergency notification is on warning the public. However, we believe it's important to consider the powerful ways notification technology can also be used to enhance operational effectiveness and efficiency.

There are few agencies in the country (or the world for that matter) better at this than the Los Angeles Fire Department. The department employs many talented people, but our long-time friend Ron Corona is a rock star--constantly pushing the envelope when it comes to creating new uses for notification technology. Ron and company are consistently creating new interfaces and applications built on the "guts" of their commercial vendor's application (PlantCML in this case).

Most vendors offer some sort of API (Application Programming Interface), a sort of gateway that allows software developers outside of the vendor's company to safely access the inner workings of the application. This gives people like Ron the ability to create new ways of doing things without waiting (and hoping) for the vendor to add new functionality.

For example, Ron's team has created a portal that tracks and mobilizes crisis response team volunteers. Citizens trained in urban search and rescue, first aid, utilities maintenance, etc. can be mobilized according to their particular capabilities and the unique demands of the event.

Another example: the department has created an asset tracking system for keeping up with assorted fire vehicles. Because stations are able to "borrow" vehicles from other stations depending on need, it is sometimes a challenge to know exactly where equipment resides at any given time. To solve this, the department's notification system is custom programmed to call every fire station on Tuesdays reminding them to check their inventory and update the asset database. If a piece of equipment is overdue, the system will call and remind a station to turn in the loaned asset. Eventually, if the asset is not returned and there is no response from the borrowing station, the system calls upper management to alert them of the situation. This process is entirely automated, and made possible by tapping into the existing notification system.

When thinking about notification systems, remember they may offer greater capabilities than just public-oriented alerts. These systems can be useful tools for managing and overcoming everyday obstacles.

All the best,

Lorin

Paying for a System of Systems Emergency Notification Program

On the surface, costs for a managed system-of-systems notification and alerting program will be greater than the traditional approach of buying a single solution from a vendor. A closer look would reveal significant money has often been spent on the traditional approach, with little return and success. Since a proper approach had not been followed, results are disappointing.

A managed system-of-system can start small, and grow. With the proper design in place up front, sub-systems can be added as more money becomes available. It can also leverage past investments.

The managed system-of-system approach also addresses two of the most important requirements of the federal grant programs typically used: (1) Interoperability, and (2) Collaboration.

Interoperability is encouraged by bringing together diverse and dynamic communications modes, ensuring communications is facilitated through a single system …despite communications preferences and communication mode availability.

Collaboration is facilitated by the process, which requires shared input at almost every step. This will resonate with grant reviewers, as it shows a systematic approach for overcoming well-known obstacles.

Meantime, funds from the massive economic stimulus law could be used for notification/alert/warnings system deployments. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provides states with over $8.8 billion dollars which can be used for “public safety and other government services”. A number of local governments have listed notification systems on their “wish lists” for spending the federal funds.

Additionally, the economic stimulus law gave new life to two law enforcement grant programs used in the past to purchase notification solutions. The grant beneficiaries are the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Grant Program (commonly referred to as “Byrne Grants” or “JAG” – Justice Assistance Grants Program) and the Community Oriented Policing Services Grant Program (commonly referred to as “COPS Grants”). Both grant programs are designed to fight crime, although there’s been a certain amount of flexibility in the way funds are spent. Technology spending is accepted.

Beyond grants, the system-of-systems approach will appeal to others who control purse strings – namely elected officials. Thus, grants are not necessarily the only source of funds, even during tough economic times. Impressive success stories exist showing how well-done notification programs are strong assets to communities in day-to-day use (not to mention, a source of community good will, which can translate to votes.)

Plus, the dynamic and diverse nature of communications methods and preferences is easy to see; every one experiences it first-hand. It’s simply a matter of showing the purse string-holders that a plan exists for, not only mitigating the rapidly-changing communications environment, but embracing it.

NOTE: Excerpted from Galain Solutions, Inc white paper, "Notifications, Alerts, Warnings: The Next Generation" Copies are available upon request to info@galainsolutions.com.

NEMA Plugs IPAWS to Congress

In Congressional testimony this week, a representative of the National Emergency Managers Association (NEMA) re-stated NEMA's support for the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS). Arkansas Homeland Security Advisor David Maxwell was on Capitol Hill to testify about an amendment to the Robert Stafford Act that, among other things, directs FEMA to modernize and implement IPAWS. Funding would also be provided.

Maxwell said NEMA considers IPAWS, "a valuable tool for state and local government warning functions." He said NEMA is pleased with the fact that the Amendment specifically calls for creation of a Modernization Advisory Council Committee, which would include state and local emergency management officials.

IPAWS is intended to be a roll-up of a number of national initiatives that would strengthen capability to issue Presidential alerts, imminent threat warnings, and Amber Alerts. Although criticized by the General Accounting Office last year for a lack of movement, IPAWS has shown recent signs of progress. Most significant is approval of design standards for the Commercial Mobile Alert System. By 2012 local, state, and federal emergency management professionals should be able to issue alerts to targeted geographic areas via cellular. Also, under the IPAWS umbrella, the Emergency Alert System (EAS) has recently been getting a work-out. A statewide EAS test was recently conducted in Alaska, and the FCC issued rules to allow EAS to be tested nationally. IPAWS has also been recently showing off a plume modeling and high-resolultion weather modeling application that can be used for notifications.

All the best,

Rick

Social Considerations for Successful Notifications & Alerts

The following is another in our series of excerpts from the Galain Solutions, Inc. white paper, "Notification, Alerts, and Warnings: The Next Generation". (Copy available by sending request to info@galainsolutions.com)

It’s tempting to view notifications/alerts/warnings primarily from a technology perspective, thinking the technology chosen will be the most significant key to success. No doubt technology is important, but other considerations carry as much weight…perhaps even more. One that’s often overlooked is Social Considerations – most importantly, how will people react when they receive critical messages? Will the message encourage them to do what’s necessary, perhaps to protect their lives? (Suggested reading: Communication of Emergency Public Warnings: A Social Science Perspective and State-of-the –Art Assessment; Dennis S. Mileti, John H. Sorenson; August, 1990. Yes, it's a bit old, but still quite pertinent.)

Dr. Dennis Milleti has been studying and advising on social considerations of notifications/alerts/warnings for years. The Professor Emeritus at Colorado University told the group working on a statewide notification program for California that while technology is needed to service the end, social problems cannot be solved by technology. The problem, he says, is that the whole purpose of notifications/alerts/warnings is to get people to change behavior…and people do not do so easily. For one thing, an individual’s response to a warning is largely based on credibility of the source. Different people find different sources credible…and credibility ratings change from day-to-day, according to Dr. Milleti. He says another challenge is that a warning weaves people together who don’t normally communicate. Because of this, it’s easy to break a link in communications…thus, making the warning ineffective, he says.

Dr. Milleti’s vision for optimum public warnings includes, what he calls, “a virtual warning center”…in effect, one person executing a notification/alert/warning from a single point, but through many “warning partners”. This is necessary, he says, because of a wide array of communications methods people use and trust. For example, he says, social networks are increasingly becoming the first way people learn about something. Thus, social networks would be one of the “warning partners”.

Dr. John Sorenson of Oak Ridge National Laboratories (ORNL) says, “From a social perspective, it makes a lot of sense that you want to use multiple channels.” However, he cautions against relying heavily on Internet Protocol (IP) notifications. He says during the San Diego wildfires of 2007, fewer than five-percent of residents used the web to obtain information on the wildfires.
Dr. Sorenson is the principle in charge of a FEMA-sponsored study on the impact of telephone notifications during the wildfires. He says his team has surveyed 1,200 households in the evacuation zones to determine how they reacted to the telephone calls. (For a copy of Dr. Sorenson's report, visit http://galainsolutions.com/resources.html)

The Next Generation notification/alerts/warnings programs will need to do a better job regarding social considerations.

State of New York Fix for Major Emergency Notification Challenge

I must confess to being skeptical. When I heard the State of New York claim the emergency notification system it built had real throttling to adjust to delivery infrastructure issues, I doubted it.

When you're trying to notify large quantities of people, you're bound to run into infrastructure issues. If you're making phone calls in an emergency (or on Mother's Day), the telco central offices can be clogged. If you're trying to send SMS messages, they can get cued behind other messages. If you're trying to send email, you can get delays from any of the large number of paths your messages must follow. Not to mention the fact that all of these delivery infrastructures can become even more clogged when a serious, widespread emergency is occurring...just when they're needed the most.

These types of problems are pretty much unavoidable, despite best efforts. The calling, SMSing, and emailing infrastructures simply won't accommodate the bursts of activity that a serious emergency in a heavily-populated area will create.

So, how could the State of New York claim that its system truly works around the logjams? Well, Kevin Ross is how. He's the energetic Assistant Director of Technology for the New York State Emergency Management Office (SEMO). Ross and team have created solid technology, but what they've done that's so blasted impressive is create real relationships, technology and otherwise, with many of the providers of infrastructure throughout New York.

These relationships allow the SEMO system to, first, know when logjams are occurring real-time, then, work around them. This is no small accomplishment. Infrastructure providers are very protective about how their networks function, and closely guard information about true capabilities.

Ross told us infrastructure vendors can't be dictated to. "They need to know that you respect their networks and that you know what you're talking about", he said. Then, it's a matter of forging relationships. It's not easy. Ross said, "It's extremely difficult to bring these people together". But, now that he has, infrastructure providers are bringing him creative new ideas for using their pipelines for emergency notification.

There's much more to be said about Ross and the SEMO system, and we will post more. For now, though, know there's at least one person who has figured out how to solve this chronic problem. His system may not be perfect, but holy moly, it's impressive!

All the best,


Rick

Managing a System-of-Systems emergency notification approach

Every day, more people are realizing that the best approach to a solid notification and alerting plan is the "system-of-systems" route. Not one single system, but a number of them working in concert. A system-of-system concept requires a different thought process from the get-go. The answer is not simply buying a notification solution from a vendor, going through training, and expecting success to occur. Instead, the mission must be approached as a managed program.

Success of a managed program is largely dependent upon understanding, design, control, and promotion of the system-of-systems. It must be properly built and managed - accomplished only after a good understanding is developed. Then, once in place, it must be “sold” both internally and externally. This means a specific process with five definitive steps. Once the process and steps are known, it’s a matter of implementing the process and following the steps.

First, an Assessment must be conducted. It is followed by development of a Business Case, a document and exercise that serves as a guide for going forward and a means for winning buy-in. Design, management, and promotion are next.

The level of effort will depend on the organization (or organizations) involved. Large, complex organizations will naturally require more effort. Smaller organizations would be well-served to follow the process, even if the level of effort is low.

With these five things properly done, a notification/alert/warning program will be successful.

NOTE: Excerpted from Galain Solutions, Inc. white paper, "Notifications, Alerts, Warnings: The Next Generation". Complete copy available by emailing info@galainsolutions.com.