December 1, 2003
PSAP Study Frequently ANSWERED Questions (FAQ)
The FAQ document will be upgraded as new information becomes available or additional questions are raised. We will date and identify each upgrade. Some earlier versions of this document have been made public that are not date identified. The changes made since these early versions have focused mainly on clarifying data rather than a major change in the response. If you have any questions about this document or the PSAP Study in general, please feel free to e-mail us at Charlie.Petersen@state.mn.us or Thomas.X.Miller@state.mn.us . Q: Is this an attempt by the state to take over control of 911 services from local government? A: No. The purpose of the study is to determine whether cost savings and public safety benefits can be obtained from PSAP consolidation, and if so, under what circumstances. One of several possible consolidation models being considered, however, is whether financial and public safety benefits could be obtained if some counties consolidated with the regional state patrol PSAPs. But that is only one model among many, and we are also looking at multi-county PSAP consolidations such as Rice-Steele and Clay-Cass (FargoMoorhead), multi-city PSAP consolidation, as well as the possibility of consolidating state patrol PSAPs. Q: Is the state going to mandate consolidation? A: Any such decision is in the hands of the legislature. While anything is possible, it should be noted that the language authorizing the study asks for recommendations about "incentives" for consolidation, not for recommendations about how to mandate consolidation. Q: Will state aid be reduced by the cost savings amount identified in the study? A: Any decision on state aid is in the hands of the legislature. Determining if cost savings is possible is one of the aims of the study. Management Analysis is expending great effort to get real data to substantiate any claims as to what is or is not possible. Q: Is the outcome of the study already pre-determined? A: Not in the least. Management Analysis entered this study with no opinion on PSAP consolidation, and we are keeping our eyes, ears, and minds open. We will be collecting a variety of quantitative and qualitative data in the study. The conclusions will go where the data takes us. Q: Is that data only going to be collected out of the metro area and applied to the entire state? A: No. Management Analysis is collecting data in greater Minnesota as well as the metro area. The issues in the two areas are very different. In the metro area, the major question 1
we are trying to answer is whether there are financial and public safety benefits from the consolidation of the large number of city-operated PSAPs. In greater Minnesota, the question is whether there would be benefits from consolidating the PSAPs in low-population counties. As such, we have broken the research into two pieces. We are currently focusing on the metro area, but we will be focusing on greater Minnesota by early December. Q: How will you be doing the research? A: We are relying on the following methods: 1) Existing data on PSAP operations such as call data and budgets. 2) A detailed operations and service survey of PSAP managers (every PSAP in the state will be contacted). 3) Interviews with PSAP managers. 4) Site visits to a sample of PSAPs in both the metro area and in greater Minnesota (although more visits will be done in greater Minnesota simply because there are more PSAPs). 5) Interviews and focus groups with key stakeholders such as sheriffs, city council members, county commissioners, chiefs of police, fire chiefs, EMS providers, city and county administrators, professional associations, law enforcement officers, firefighters, and dispatchers. 6) Best Practice research into how PSAPs are organized in other parts of the country. 7) Technical advice from the advisory committee. Q: Who is on this advisory committee? A: The PSAP Advisory Committee is made up of representatives from a diverse group of stakeholders, including PSAP managers, local government officials, state government officials, and representatives from police chief, fire chief, and sheriff associations. There are 14 members on the committee. Q: What is the role of the PSAP Advisory Committee? A: The PSAP Advisory Committee is charged with three things: 1. Develop recommendations on minimum standards for PSAPs with Management Analysis’ assistance. 2. Develop recommendations for various incentives, including funding incentives, with Management Analysis’ assistance. 3. Respond to consolidation recommendations from Management Analysis research. Their response includes accepting the recommendation, commenting on the recommendation, or passing on the recommendation without acceptance or comment. During this process, the committee will provide input and feedback to Management Analysis on the consolidation. The committee will focus on standards and incentives while Management Analysis collects and analyzes data from various interested parties and stakeholders in Minnesota and across the country. Management Analysis will develop its recommendations based on this data, and the committee will respond as outlined. All of this provides information to the various policy makers. 2
The three areas: consolidation, standards, and incentives are very interrelated. Therefore, later discussions of the committee will focus on how these issues relate and impact each other and the PSAP system in Minnesota. You may follow the actions of the committee at http://www.apco-mn.org/apco/psap.asp or http://www.911.state.mn.us. Q: What is the link between this study and ARMER (800 MHz) radio project? A: The PSAP study and the Allied Radio Matrix for Emergency Response (ARMER) project are distinct and separate initiatives, each with their own operational, financial, and political characteristics. If they occur in conjunction, however, the projects can complement each other. And the two initiatives have some drivers and other factors in common. Traditionally merging the different radio systems of various agencies during a PSAP consolidation has been a technical obstacle, or even a barrier, to proceeding with this initiative. In areas where the ARMER project is underway or completed, this barrier is minimized. Despite this finding, PSAP consolidation should be considered based on its own operational and financial merits — as should the ARMER system. Some areas may need or benefit from PSAP consolidation regardless of the status of ARMER implementation. The ARMER project may also be underway in areas where the need or desire to consolidate PSAPs has not arisen. Cost-saving efficiencies are a government priority, and sharing and consolidation — key benefits of both ARMER and PSAP consolidation — support this objective. Technology migration and the high cost of providing public safety communications services are factors driving the ARMER project and that must also weigh into the PSAP study.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the PSAP Study, please feel free to e-mail us at Charlie.Petersen@state.mn.us or Thomas.X.Miller@state.mn.us .
3