Houston Emergency Center

Editor’s note: Bill Hobgood will be speaking on this topic on a panel, Critical Link: The Delivery of Alarm Transmissions Between Alarm Monitoring Companies and 911 PSAPs, at 1:15 p.m. on Aug. 7 during the 2011 APCO Conference.  

Notable things are taking place this year surrounding the use of an ANSI-approved APCO International American National Standard (ANS) that streamlines the delivery of alarm notifications between alarm monitoring companies, also-known-as central stations, and 9-1-1 PSAPs. The official title of this standard, approved by ANSI on Jan. 15, 2009, is the Alarm Monitoring Company to Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) Computer-aided Dispatch (CAD) External Alarm Interface Exchange — APCO/CSAA 2.101.1-2008, abbreviated the “External Alarm Interface Exchange.” The Central Station Alarm Association (CSAA) has branded the project the Automated Secure Alarm Protocol (ASAP) in what is a public/private partnership that offers a better, faster and cost-effective solution to deliver alarm information from alarm monitoring companies to PSAPs. 

Houston Launches WebARM
The city of Houston’s Emergency Center (HEC), the fourth largest 9-1-1 PSAP in the U.S., has become the latest public safety communications agency—and the first in Texas—to implement ASAP. HEC went live on April 28, 2011, with an interface solution named the Web Alarm Reporting Mechanism (WebARM), developed by Houston’s CAD provider, Northrop Grumman. WebARM conforms to the approved standard, which is reinforced with the use of NIEM and XML standards. 

The city of Houston’s Emergency Center, the fourth largest 9-1-1 PSAP in the U.S., has become the latest public safety communications agency—and the first in Texas—to implement ASAP.

David Cutler, HEC director, envisions an estimated savings of $1 million to $2 million annually based on the proven success of the data exchange in Virginia and the Houston experience since April. Houston officials expect a reduction in both alarm company and PSAP call-handling expenditures, while greatly improving the accuracy and timeliness of alarm call transactions and the corresponding public safety responses. 

Houston implemented WebARM with participation of Pittsburgh-based Vector Security and San Antonio-based United Central Control (UCC) alarm monitoring companies. Dallas-based Monitronics, another central station, became operational with the standard in July. Collectively, these three alarm companies monitor 43,000 alarm systems in Houston. Houston receives more than 2,000 “police-related” alarms weekly on average. Since the launch of WebARM, Houston has experienced a 10% drop in alarm calls created by PSAP calltakers and a drop of 8-13% in Houston’s seven-digit phone number call volumes. 

“As the first metropolitan city in the nation to utilize ASAP, this will serve as another tool in our efforts to provide the best possible public safety services available for the citizens of Houston,” said Cutler. 

CSAA Becomes an NLETS SPO
On May 5, 2011, Nlets (www.nlets.org) approved the CSAA as a strategic partner organization. This announcement followed a two-year effort of analyzing the CSAA’s business model and reworking that model into a design that will allow the eventual rollout of ASAP to many central stations and PSAPs. 

The CSAA/APCO Technical Committee designed and proposed the installation of a CSAA-managed “message broker.” The message broker, scheduled to be operational approximately the fourth quarter of CY 2011, will allow most alarm companies to participate in the ASAP program. The message broker is the “traffic cop” that will be handling incoming alarm notifications (Nlets MKE: ALQ) from the alarm companies, validating that each message meets minimum requirements, and sending the message to the Nlets message switch for forwarding to the correct PSAP via the appropriate state control point. PSAP responses (Nlets MKE: ALR) will be delivered to the message broker by Nlets and forwarded to the originating alarm company. For routing purposes, all transmissions use originating agency IDs (ORI). Each participating alarm company has been assigned an ORI by Nlets. The Virginia and Texas state control points have authorized the passing of ALQ/ALR traffic. Other state control point representatives have shown interest in participating. 

How the Standard Works
The standard was approved following a two-and-a-half-year pilot in the state of Virginia. Operationally, the standard eliminates the phone calls between alarm monitoring companies and PSAPs. The use of the standard applies to alarm monitoring companies and their automation providers, CAD providers and 9-1-1 PSAPs. Alarm notifications are electronically delivered using automation at the alarm company by sending the data directly to the PSAP’s CAD system via Nlets and the state control points. 

The county of York, Va., and the city of Richmond, Va., conducted the first pilot with Vector Security as the pilot central station. Performance measures tied to goals were incorporated in the standard based on expectations during the pilot. Goals include: 1) a reduction in the phone call volumes between alarm monitoring companies and PSAPs, 2) reduction in miscommunications and mistakes made during the verbal handoff of alarm notification information between an alarm company operator and a 9-1-1 calltaker, and 3) a reduction in PSAP processing time, resulting in an equivalent reduction in response times by first responders, resulting in the likelihood of increased law enforcement apprehensions made, fires being more quickly extinguished and more lives saved. 

The Results in Virginia
The Virginia PSAPs have logged the receipt of more than 13,000 alarm notifications from Vector Security, including police, fire and emergency medical alarms. This represents 15,000+ fewer phone calls for these PSAPs (alarm call centers make multiple calls associated with a single alarm; one call to report the alarm, one or more calls to provide updates regarding the alarm, and one or more calls to determine how the alarm was cleared). Not one single mistake has occurred through the use of ASAP. Miscommunications between the alarm company operator and the PSAP calltaker no longer exist because a verbal conversation is no longer necessary. ASAP provides a messaging feature that operators can use for active events, further reducing phone call volumes. Because the alarm data is delivered to the CAD system or a front end processor in the PSAP, the CAD will validate the address and translate the data into a call-for-service that appears in the radio operator’s dispatch queue along with other calls-for-service within seconds. The alarm company provides all available data associated with the alarm account and no piece of data is overlooked, unlike the traditional verbal question-and-answer calltaker session that often averages 1½–3 minutes. Some alarm companies have complained their telephone calls go answered for several minutes or they are put on hold sometimes 10 minutes or longer before the calltaker returns to the line to take the information. With the ASAP method, this scenario no longer occurs. 

The city of Richmond has at least four documented cases in which the police arrived so quickly upon the receipt of a burglar alarm received via the ASAP method that a burglary suspect was captured. Richmond also sends a broadcast copy of high-priority alarms to all MDCs in the police vehicles so that officers can head in the direction of the alarm location before the call is voice dispatched. 

The bottom line: Public safety communications agencies should consider the impact that a 2–3 minute or more reduction in processing and response times would mean to them. For most, it’s a no-brainer, and the proven benefits are many. As more CAD providers develop their solution to take advantage of ASAP, PSAPs should put the use of this standard on their radar screens for the future. For more information, write to 911services@apcointl.org or visit www.apcointl.org/standards. 

About the Author
Bill Hobgood is a project manager for the city of Richmond’s DIT Public Safety Team with 39 years of experience in public safety. He is also a project coordinator for APCO International’s Comm Center & 9-1-1 Services Department and a subject matter expert on the ASAP Project. 

Originally published in APCO International’s Public Safety Communications, Vol. 77(8):18-19, August 2011.