VALL Engineering 10/2014 ISA Survey Results Review

VALL Engineering10/2014

ISA Survey Results Review

VALL and Idaho BHS involved in early FirstNet discussions.

Having a high level baseline for all counties, helps pave the way towards future planning.

Because all counties differ, a generalized high-level survey was created to capture most of the vital data.

Goals: Open dialogue, look at ways to drive efficiency, and help provide different perspectives.

Survey Background/Context

Why VALL?

Wireless Engineering Professionals

Corporate Management

Vendor Management

RFP’s/Pricing

Designed, Built and Launched Major US

Markets

New Technology evaluation and business case development

Extensive experience with voice and data radio technologies

Technology Operational &

Capital Expense

Technical & Financial Risk

Product Lifecycle Vendor Type

Survey Objectives

Promote Knowledge Sharing Amongst All Counties

Working Together to Achieve Success

County A

County C

County B

County D

County A

County C

County B

County D

Lower Cost Per County

• Counties work together to standardize technology and negotiate cost

• End result is standardization, lower cost and newer technology

• Vendors love autonomy.

• Inconsistency creates a continued revenue stream.

• Working as a team can help lower cost and refresh technology.

• RFP, SLA’s, Contracts, etc..

or

Survey Overview

• PDF questionnaire sent to all counties (July 2014)

• Results were exported into a database

• Reviewed each questionnaire and followed up as needed

• Created data models

Participation Map

75% Participation40% Fully Completed Surveys

Spending By Category

• 911 Selective Routing• Standard voice/trunked circuit cost• IP connectivity

Telco• 911 Phone System• Recording System• CAD• Dispatch Console

PSAP

• VPN/FirewallIT• Lease/Rent• Generator• Grounds keeping• Fuel

Site Maintenance

• Microwave• Power System Maintenance• Repeater Maintenance• Software Maint/Upgrades

Radio

• Monthly Data Service Cost• Annual Maintenance• Avg Per Device Cost

MDT

Categories Analyzed

Category Cost Analysis

• Represents data from all participating counties

• Provides a high level overview of key spending areas

Telco38%

PSAP25%

IT1%Site Maintenance

13%

Radio12%

MDT11%

Backhaul/Telco Category

Backhaul/Telco Cost Breakdown

PSAP Category

PSAP Cost Breakdown

IT Category

IT Cost Breakdown

Site Maintenance Category

Site Maintenance Cost Breakdown

Site maintenance cost varies by category

Radio Category

Radio Cost Breakdown

Software maintenance a majority of the annual cost

MDT Category

MDT Cost Breakdown

Substantial cost for supporting carrier data cards

Radio and Data Device Distributions By County

Bubble size represents volume of radio and data devices by county

This helps understand voice and data device usage in the state

Emergency Communications Budget By County

Collected published 911 budgets for each county. Compare against survey results.

911 Budgeted Funds Per Person

Total 911 Budget Divided By 2014 Census Population Per County

Budget / Population

Vendor Section

Selective Routing Vendor Map

Century Link provides a majority of the voice and IP connectivity in the state.

Selective Routing Cost By Carrier

Mobile Device Vendor Map

Geographical distribution of mobile devices by vendor

This analysis shows how counties can work together to upgrade technology and leverage better vendor pricing.

Radio/Repeater Vendor Map

Motorola supplies a majority of the radio network infrastructure, with TAIT and ICOM dominating some regions in the state.

Carrier Wireless Analysis (Statewide)

Total Statewide Spend on Carrier Wireless Data

$668,246.88

* This is a key area to evaluate where FirstNet would bring the most value.

Counties with Phone System Running on Windows Server 2003

• Teton• Nez Perce• Owyhee• Ada• Camas

End of Life OS – Phone System

Counties with Viper Phone Systems

• Canyon• Gooding, Jerome, Lincoln, Twin Falls• Valley• Ada• Adams• Kootenai• Camas

Viper Phone System

Majority:• Panasonic Toughbook• Dell (6400, XFR)

Others:• Samsung• Apple• J3500 Motion Tablets• Surface Pro

MDT Device Vendor

Majority:• Cisco• SonicWALL

Others:• Mikrotik• Watchguard• Barracuda

Firewall Vendors

Cisco typically has higher OPEX rates to support software updates, etc…

Majority:• Cisco• HP• Dell

Others:• Netgear• Adtran

Ethernet Switch Vendors

HP switches are cost effective and offer an unconditional lifetime warranty

Counties that are not P25 compliant• Payette• Minidoka• Cassia

P25 Non-Compliance

Number of Radio Channels Used By County

Survey Feedback Section

Biggest Challenges

Several systems out of date and need funding

Remote mountainous areas pose a problem for broadband and wireless

Funding Feedback

Upcoming Upgrades

Upgrades needed throughout the state over the next 24 months

MDT Performance Feedback

Cost, Reliability and Speed of wireless data networks a problem for several counties

CAD/RMS/JMS

Summary

Key Takeaways

• Telco is the source for highest spending. Opportunity to negotiate cost at state level? RFP?

• Critical Updates– Windows Server 2003– Viper– Narrow Band – Federal Mandate– MDT Fleet– EOL Serial Modem– P25 Compliance

• Common Issues: Geography, Funding, Working with State.

• Vendor selection from county to county differs in most categories.

Ron Valdez: ron@valltechnologies.com

Robert Meurer: robert@valltechnologies.com

Contact Info

Appendix

Simplify Your Communications Network

LMR isn’t going away anytime soon• Robust and stable radio communication platform• A big part of spending is on wireless data from carrier networks

However…..

Everything is now dependent on some form of wireless data

Problem:Commercial wireless networks are expensive and very unreliable during emergency situations

Is FirstNet the solution?

How To Get There?

Public Safety Needs FirstNet

First Responders Deserve the Best Network

Reliability Must Be Built In

Timeline

Obstacles for FirstNet

• Funding– Not a lot of funds available for FirstNet ($7 Billion)– $5 Billion needed to be raised from FCC auction– Cash won’t last long

• Vendor support– With the lack of new commercial network build-out, their

only “easy” revenue stream is FirstNet– New band, new devices = lots of bugs

• Learning curve– Who maintains?– Lots of training will be required (LTE can be quite complex)– Significant OPEX to maintain network over time

Process = TimeTime = $

Wi-Fi: Perhaps the better option?

The Failure of Muni Wi-Fi

Why earlier deployments of Muni Wi-Fi failed

• Technology wasn’t ready (802.11 bg)• Devices weren’t ready• Massive improvements in silicone

paved the way

Wi-Fi has improved 1000%

• Very high performing radios• Client devices have great chipsets• Cost per Wi-Fi chip is very economical• Top notch security• Every device supports Wi-Fi

Wi-Fi is the most cost effective way to provide high throughput wireless data

Thank You!www.valltechnologies.com