30
The Next Generation 9-1-1 Engine and the GIS Fuel that Feeds it. Bob Long, Bexar Metro 9-1-1 Network District Richard Kelly – 911 Datamaster
The Next Generation 9-1-1 Engine
and the GIS Fuel that Feeds it.
Bob Long, Bexar Metro 9-1-1 Network District
Richard Kelly – 911 Datamaster
Assumptions to Keep in Mind
PIDF-LO replaces ALI with more location information to match to GIS
Civic Address has more detailed location elements than today’s ALI.
Geodetic Location refers to coordinates for longitude and latitude (X / Y)
For Validation and Routing
LVF validates all civic locations in data prior to inclusion in a ECRF.
ECRF provides real time routing instructions for both location types.
• A server-to-server function that, when presented with a valid location, will
deliver the “next hop” in 9-1-1 call delivery.
• Requires data that facilitates the ‘next hop’, such as a URI.
Note that the same data should be used for both LVF and ECRF.
ESINet
Caller
Dials
9-1-1
PSAP
ESRP
LVF / ECRF
Location +
Service URN
PIDF-LO + Service URN:
urn:service:sos
Service URN
(Uniform Resource Name) Is the IP reference to the type of service.
Location & Service
NG9-1-1 Call Routing – Part 1
PSAP ‘B’
PSAP ‘A’
(X,Y)
(Civic)
Method 1 Example:
‘Geodetic’ location (X, Y coordinates)
are compared to the Polygon layer
representing PSAPs to route to.
Method 2 Example:
‘Civic’ location geocoded to RCL layer
then compared to the Polygon layer
representing PSAPs to route to.
Required GIS Data:
1. PSAP Boundaries
2. Emergency Service Boundaries
3. Road Centerlines
Strongly Recommended GIS Data:
1. Site/Structure Address Points
2. Street Name Alias Table
3. Counties
4. Incorporated Municipal
Boundaries
Under the Hood
ESINet
PSAP
ESRPPRF
LVF / ECRF
Location +
PSAP URI
PSAP URI
(Uniform Resource Identifier) Is the identifier of the PSAP to connect the call to.
PIDF-LO + PSAP URI:
Location & PSAP
NG9-1-1 Call Routing – Part 1
Most common problems (16 sample agencies):
• Attribute Mismatch with Polygons 13%-86%
• Required Attributes Missing 18%-45%
• Road Centerline in Wrong Direction 18%-24%
• Intersection Split 17%-24%
• Address Range Overlaps 11%-13%
• Not Split at Polygons One at 14%
• No USPS Recognized Abbreviation One at 21%
• Not in Polygons One at 75%
• Duplicate Unique IDs
What We See in Road Centerlines
Most common problems (16 sample agencies):
• Required Attributes Missing 16%-64%
• Attribute Mismatch with Road Centerlines 17%-54%
• Geometry Overlaps 15%-53%
• Address Point Out of Sequence 11%-37%
• Parity Mismatch 19%-20%
• Attribute Mismatch with Polygons One at 20%
• No USPS Recognized Abbreviation One at 23%
• Not in Polygons One at 41%
• Duplicate Unique IDs
What We See in Address Points
Looks good?
How are empty
attributes
represented?
PreDirectional Street Name Street Suffix
Walnut Blvd
Walnut Blvd
Walnut Blvd
Walnut Blvd
PreDirectional Street Name Street Suffix
<NULL> Walnut Blvd
‘ ‘ Walnut Blvd
‘ ‘ Walnut Blvd
‘’ Walnut Blvd
Under closer
Inspection
though, perhaps
not so good!
One Common GIS Attribution Issue
Common attribution mistakes with automated attribute processing
• Automated cleanup of attribute data can lead to problems if not closely
monitored and verified.
• Software settings can not replace local knowledge and decision making.
Automated ‘Cleanup’ Induced Attribution Issues
NENA Globally Unique ID’s (NGUID) must be included for all features.
Format recommended in the GIS Data Model:
• A NGUID can be generated by taking local Unique ID numbers and
concatenating to the end of each with the providers domain.
• Data provisioning entities maintain local Unique ID numbers for all features in
their GIS (ex… 9025719)
• Each data provisioning entity would provide a unique identifier for its domain
(ex…@MYCOUNTY.TX.US).
9025719 + @MYCOUNTY.TX.US = [email protected]
Esri Object IDs or Feature IDs are unique only to a table, whereas unique
IDs for NG9-1-1 use must be globally unique across ALL data, from
everywhere.
NG9-1-1 Requires ‘Globally’ Unique IDs
• QC ‘internally’ and ‘externally’.
• Fix these issues 1st before comparing
to ALI / MSAG
• Matching ALI / MSAG does not ensure
routability!
Polygons (Required)
1. Empty (Null) Geometry
2. Geometry Overlaps
- PSAP
- Responders
3. Geometry Gaps
- PSAP
- Responders
4. Missing Required Field Values
Road Centerlines (Required)
1. Empty (Null) Geometry
2. Address Range Overlaps
3. Address Ranges Zero
4. Not in a Polygon
• PSAP
• Responders
5. No USPS Standard Match
6. Required Field Values Missing
Address Points (Recommended)
1. Empty (Null) Geometry
2. Not in a Polygon
• PSAP
• Responders
3. In Multiple Polygons
4. No USPS Standard Match
5. Required Field Values Missing
NG9-1-1 ‘Routability’ Depends on Good Data
Geocoding
NG-9-1-1
ENS
ImageryTXT to 9-1-1
Spatial
Validation
Mapping
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
9-1-1 CALLS FROM 1999 - 2011
Total Calls Total Wireline Calls Total Wireless Calls Total VOIP
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
2,000,000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
WIRELINE vs WIRELESS 2004 - 2015
WIRELINE CALLS
WIRELESS CALLS
Caller
Police
Fire
EMS
MAGIC !
9-1-1 service to most people
iPhone
9-1-1 Apps
Available
in the
iPhone
App
Store
Android
9-1-1
Apps
Available
in the
Play
Store
Regional Emergency Alert Network (REAN)
Imagery from 2004 - 2016
Although at times ….You get some strange occurrences
What we should keep in mind about NG9-1-1 GIS data:
• Preparing and managing NG 9-1-1 GIS data is getting more
complicated and resource intensive.
• Understand that locally produced GIS data drives the entire system.
• NG9-1-1 routes calls off this GIS data via an unattended system.
• Once a NG9-1-1 system goes live, quickly identifying and correcting
GIS data related issues will be mandatory (24HR GIS Support?)
• NG911 Now Coalition (NENA, NASNA, iCERT) working to accelerate
Next Generation services nationwide implementation, including
retirement of legacy systems, by 2020.
Some Final Reminders
Questions?
