Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety It topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Central Square pitches unified call-handling and CAD to Lake County 911 Authority
Summary
Central Square representatives outlined how a single shared data model for call handling and CAD could reduce rekeying, improve reporting and support multi-agency response in Lake County; the board asked for discovery sessions, demos and vendor references before any procurement step.
Central Square representatives gave Lake County 911 Authority members an overview of a unified call‑handling and computer‑aided dispatch (CAD) approach and asked the board to authorize follow‑up discovery and demonstrations.
The presentation, led by Devon and a Central Square colleague (Jackie), argued that operating from a single shared data model — ‘‘one system, one environment, one application’’ — would reduce manual re‑entry of incident data across dispatch, law enforcement, fire and EMS, improve the accuracy of state and federal reporting, and clarify case ownership across agencies. Central Square estimated a conservative 12‑month implementation timeline from delivery and described a standard five‑year subscription contract with project costs for implementation and training.
Why it matters: Lake County currently operates multiple systems that presenters and local staff described as creating reporting gaps, duplicate data entry and support challenges. Dispatchers and deputies said pulling the exact statistics required for state reporting is time‑consuming and that poor data handoffs have led to confusion about case ownership when multiple agencies respond.
Central Square described product and support features that address those gaps: integrated call‑handling that is i3 certified, caller location query tools, integrated text‑to‑911, a triage ticketing system with a self‑service support portal and train‑the‑trainer implementation. They stressed that Central Square ingests GIS data but does not create county GIS datasets; the vendor said the county must provide corrected GIS (address points and structure centroids) or contract a third party to produce it.
Board members asked for Colorado and small‑agency references; Central Square offered references in Colorado and Montana and said it could provide customer contacts. On pricing, the vendor described a subscription plus project‑cost model: an annual subscription fee plus a one‑time project cost that covers the implementation deliverables, training and business‑process review. The vendor also said cloud contracts typically include a 5% year‑over‑year increase in subscription terms after year one.
The vendor discussed UniFi, a separate hub product that translates CAD screens between different vendors so agencies on different CAD platforms can share call screens in real time; Central Square noted each connected agency must opt into that hub for interoperability.
Next steps: The board asked staff to schedule discovery sessions and discipline‑specific demos and to identify decision makers to participate. Central Square offered to return for a full‑day demonstration, provide references, and run discovery sessions and ride‑alongs to scope the project. Central Square also reiterated it can build CAD map layers from provided GIS data and assist with ongoing updates once the county supplies the GIS source data.
A central open question remains GIS production: Central Square said it will ingest and maintain GIS layers but will not create the underlying GIS dataset; staff earlier recommended the county pursue a contractor to bring boundary and address data to next‑generation standards.
