Next Generation 9-1-1 (NG9-1-1) promises more flexible routing, richer information and better coordination across emergency response. Getting there does not automatically mean replacing an Emergency Communications Center’s (ECC’s) call handling equipment. Centers must first understand what they have, how well it is maintained and how it fits the NG9-1-1 services and provider model available to them. Diane (Harris) Dupar, ENP, explains how agencies can protect sound investments and prepare for a controlled transition.
When considering upgrades, how should ECCs assess existing 9-1-1 systems?
Start with a detailed inventory of the environment you have. For each solution, document the hardware, its age and support status, the software release, whether updates are current and the interfaces it depends on. Include call handling, CAD, GIS and location data, logging and recording, network connectivity, cybersecurity, continuity systems and other key integrations. Then compare that inventory with any applicable state, regional or local timeline and the NG9-1-1 provider’s network, configuration and testing requirements. Some centers participate in shared environments; others continue to operate locally managed solutions.
A center that has kept its hardware supported and its software relatively current may find that much of its existing environment is ready or needs only targeted updates. The assessment should identify what can remain, what needs an upgrade and what has reached the end of its useful life.
Map how information moves from call receipt through dispatch, and involve internal IT, GIS authorities, neighboring agencies and every affected vendor early. Use the findings to build a phased roadmap and coordinate lifecycle plans across solutions. That allows leaders to schedule investments through normal budget cycles instead of facing one large budget request at cutover. Zetron’s NG9-1-1 Readiness Assessment can provide a practical starting point.
What NG9-1-1 capabilities might best suit a smaller ECC or Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP)?
For a smaller center, the best solutions are not necessarily the ones with the longest feature lists. The best solutions are those the center can operate, secure, maintain and train on effectively. Look for a modular approach that preserves existing investments where practical and allows capabilities to be added as services, funding and workforce readiness evolve. Simplicity at the workstation is especially important: new data should help telecommunicators make decisions without creating unnecessary steps or distractions.
What about a county, ECC or PSAP that already has a sophisticated system?
NG9-1-1 is for every ECC and PSAP, regardless of its size or how sophisticated its current systems may be. A center with a more complex environment may have more integrations, data sources, redundancy and governance considerations, but it still needs the same basic readiness review as a smaller center.
Confirm that call handling, CAD, GIS, logging, networks and other connected systems can exchange the appropriate information within the agency’s actual operating model. Ask each vendor how a proposed network, configuration or data change could affect other systems, workflows and reporting.
This is also a good time to decide how the agency will manage new incident data. Standards such as the Emergency Incident Data Object support structured information sharing between authorized systems and agencies, raising questions about access, data rights, mutual aid and liability. Centers can begin with clearly defined use cases and expand as their operational needs and readiness evolve.
Are all NG9-1-1 solutions interoperable?
NG9-1-1 standards are designed to support interoperability, but compatibility still needs to be confirmed within each customer’s environment.
Vendors typically conduct validation testing before working with end users. Before deployment, operational readiness testing is then performed at the customer site to verify that the solution works with the PSAP’s configured systems, network, integrations and operational workflows. This helps identify and resolve issues before cutover.
How can an ECC or PSAP build a credible schedule for an NG9-1-1 transition?
There is no responsible universal estimate. A credible schedule begins with the full inventory and lifecycle review: GIS and location data; the ESInet and local network; routing, firewalls and certificates; call handling; CAD; logging and recording; reporting; text; transfer plans; cybersecurity and redundancy; hardware and software; facilities; workflows; training; testing; and cutover requirements. Current, supported systems may require little or no replacement, while aging components may need to be upgraded in phases. The technical cutover is only one milestone in that larger plan.
Strong project management is essential to building and maintaining a realistic schedule. The project manager may be someone within the center, the NG9-1-1 Core Services or ESInet provider, a lead vendor or a shared project team. What matters is that responsibility is clearly assigned and that one coordinated plan tracks dependencies, decisions, owners, schedules, risks, budgets, testing, training and cutover activities.
Bring the solution vendors, network and security teams, and other integration partners together early. Walk through the architecture and dependencies. Make sure the vendors are talking directly to one another. A change to routing, a firewall, a certificate, a data element or a transfer plan may affect several systems. Strong project management helps identify those impacts, coordinate testing responsibilities, align work with budget cycles and keep the transition moving without unnecessary surprises.
Next step: Explore Zetron’s NG9-1-1 Readiness Assessment and the 5 Steps to Migrate to Next Generation Core Services/ESInet infographic.