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

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.

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

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.

When considering options for mass notification, emergency managers are generally accustomed to sending alerts through telephones, mobile devices and email. Yet, an interesting (perhaps controversial) option growing in public reach is the digital sign or digital outdoor billboard.

Digital sign deployments on campuses, in facilities and within complexes continues to expand. And, these signs are not confined to closed networks within buildings. As advertisers vie for attention, and consumers require greater sophistication in visual content, municipalities are witnessing an increase in the number of digital billboards on highways and highly-trafficked areas according to the Outdoor Advertising Association of America.

Whether for or against this trend, the movement is noteworthy for emergency managers as these devices appear to have implications for public alerting. For example, last month outdoor advertiser Clear Channel Outdoor and the FBI unveiled a digital billboard in Times Square designed to "highlight wanted fugitives, missing persons and high-priority security messages."

The billboard is apparently part of a nationwide partnering initiative which enables the FBI to highlight: violent criminals, kidnap victims, missing children, bank robbers, and more. The FBI currently has access to more than 1,500 billboards in more than 40 states through this initiative.

It's no stretch to imagine mass notification systems linked to local billboards, perhaps targeting very specific geographic areas of a city. Further, one can imagine private networks within malls, hospitals, office buildings, etc. open to receiving authenticated emergency alerts through a standard messaging protocol such as CAP (Common Alerting Protocol).

Such devices may even be useful for collecting situational data from citizens at the scene of a crisis. According to Sanjay Manandhar, CEO of Aerva, a company that develops software to drive digital displays, signs can be programmed in real-time through a web-based interface to collect feedback using SMS polling (such systems are being used currently for events such as concerts and trade shows). Perhaps this feature can be used in creative ways to solicit incident-related information.

It will certainly be interesting to see how new methods of notification will emerge over the next decade. Digital signage technology may become a widely-accepted channel for delivering critical information as its penetration continues to deepen.

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

Legislation has been introduced in Tennessee that would create a pilot for a statewide notification program. In bills introduced by Senator Eric Stewart and Representative Charles Curtiss, the state emergency communications board will select local communications boards in regions throughout the state to conduct pilots.

The program would notify persons of severe weather warnings and emergency information via recorded voice messages. Text message delivery is a possibility.

There's obviously a price tag associated with the pilot. Funds would come from the E911 coffers. Considering the state of the economy, resistance to new programs with costs, and the fact that 911 officials are very protective of their funds, the legislation could easily not pass this year. But, at least it puts the issue on the table.

States with statewide notification systems include: New York, Montana, Connecticut, California, and Louisiana. (If you know of others, please let us know.)

All the best,

Rick

Today marked the end of an era of sorts in emergency notification. PlantCML® announced it will no longer be using the Dialogic Communications Corporation or DCC brands, but will instead consolidate the division into a newly created "PlantCML Notification Solutions and Services (NSS)" business unit. DCC was previously a wholly owned subsidiary, using the name since its original inception in the early '80s.

It appears as if the company will continue utilizing the various application brand names such as The Communicator!® NXT™, GeoCast® Web™, NetNotify™ and REVERSE 911®. Further, product development, technical support, field services and sales will continue to be managed from the Franklin, TN offices.

On a related note, long-time ENS veteran Bob Peter has moved on from DCC. Bob led the sales teams and was a part of the REVERSE 911® organization prior to its acquisition by PlantCML. Bob is a class act and we wish him great success in his new endeavors.

All the best,

Lorin

Yesterday, FEMA illustrated its G eo-Targeted Alerting System (GTAS) project, a prototype application of plume modeling and high resolution weather models that may eventually be used for alerting the public.

The application is essentially a map-based notification interface, however, it is connected to some very useful data. First, it receives high-resolution weather data and modeling feeds from the National Weather Service. These feeds allow emergency managers to visualize areas in the path of dangerous weather (currently or forecasted) and to select these areas for the issuance of highly targeted public emergency notifications. Further, the app provides built-in collaboration tools so emergency managers can can work with outside experts to clarify the information being presented.

Second, it offers toxic plume modeling capabilities that, when combined with atmospheric information, provides detailed information on the dispersion patterns of toxic substances. This information can also be used to guide the issuance of public alerts. The application can apparently model more than 500 toxic substances (based on the CAMEO chemicals database).

The application is designed to utilize the Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) for communicating with local emergency notification systems and National Weather Service transmitters. It will also interface with FEMA's upcoming Commercial Mobile Alert System (CMAS) through CAP.

The system was piloted in four FEMA regions last year, and several more pilots are scheduled for this year. FEMA says it expects the application to be generally available to emergency managers by 2013.

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

As we travel around the country, we keep hearing public safety officials talk about Nixle. It's a notification solution, similar to others. A public safety agency subscribes, then invites residents to sign up to receive notifications. Here's the difference: Nixle is free. It doesn't cost public safety anything and it doesn't cost the residents anything.

So, how can a company offer such a service with no obvious means of survival? A prominent theory about the mystery is that Nixle will generate revenue by selling space in their notifications to advertisers. Wrong, we learned. In fact, their agreements with their public safety customers specifically state they won't do so. So, what is it?

Being astute detectives, we decided to solve the mystery. (OK, perhaps we simply called Nixle's Chief Executive Officer/Founder.) Craig Mitnik is a former prosecutor, clearly with a passion for helping make sure citizens are notified when there's something of interest going on in their communities. He says he's surprised that his business model has become an issue, but says he's been asked about it many times in the last few months as he was building his customer list to over 3,600 agencies.

Here's the trick: Mitnik and company have developed related technology they intend to sell to the private sector. That, he believes, will be more lucrative than selling to public safety, and will help support his public safety efforts.

Mitnik stresses that his public safety system and his private sector systems "are not co-mingled". His partners will probably make sure that's the case. One of them is the National Law Enforcement Technology System (NLETS), which has strict standards for security.

We don't endorse vendors, but I must confess to being impressed with Nixle. I signed up to check it out. (Since my hometown doesn't use Nixle, I had to trick the system into thinking that I live in a bar in Virginia.) I was impressed with the notifications I received. Mitnik shares credit with the public safety agency in Virginia I tricked, saying Nixle gives complete control to the agency for content.

Is Nixle the answer to the challenge of solving notification problems? Probably not by itself, but it sure looks like an interesting piece of the puzzle. Let's just hope Mitnik and company are successful selling to the private sector so they can keep their public safety habit alive.

All the best,

Rick