TUgis Conference 2019

GIS in support of public safety has evolved dramatically over the last decade. Public safety practitioners are excited about, buying into, asking for, and investing in GIS. The evolution of technology has facilitated cross-collaboration in the industry. GIS has also become more accessible, allowing operators in the field and command to leverage the power of GIS in real-time no matter if they are in the same room or miles apart. We are shifting rapidly into an era of geo-enabling decision-makers, field teams, the public, and even our plans. This shift is freeing up GIS analysts to perform the ‘So What?’ analysis—moving beyond “making maps” to providing decision-makers with actionable information to save lives and improve the outcomes of survivors.

Speaker: Tari Martin, GISP, is a program manager with the National Alliance for Public Safety GIS Foundation, where she is responsible for managing a team of technologists in the development of technology solutions used by emergency managers and first responders in the field, at the Incident Command Post, and in the Emergency Operations Center. She also serves as a lead subject matter expert in the design and curation of location-enabled tools and resources for risk analysis, preparedness planning, and exercise design and conduct. Tari holds a B.S. in environmental science and policy from the University of Maryland College Park.

In a fully operational Next Generation 9-1-1 system, GIS is the core component in determining how a 9-1-1 call is routed to the correct public safety answering point (PSAP). In order to route calls correctly, NG9-1-1 includes multiple standards around minimum data quality requirements for GIS data being provisioned into the Emergency Services IP Network (ESInet). For the purposes of current generations of 9-1-1 systems a 98 percent accuracy rate is far better than good, but for the NG911, 98 percent isn’t quite good enough. Public safety systems that do not synchronize their data beyond 98 percent accuracy will face boundary gaps and other issues that have potential to negatively affect call routing — perhaps even misdirecting a call. Additionally, the 98 percent figure does not address requirements for the other PSAP systems used. Therefore, exceeding the 98 percent accuracy levels that are adequate today will allow public safety organizations to support all PSAP systems moving forward. But, how do you determine if your GIS address data – centerlines and address points – is ready to support the critical path of emergency response?