Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff The Community Warning System A partnership of industry, government and the media to warn and inform our community.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Integrating Digital Signage with Emergency Notification Systems To Help Save Lives. Presented by Mike White Multi-Media Solutions, Inc. Peter Quinn Visix.
Advertisements

Siren Watch Franklin County Emergency Management and Homeland Security FCEM&HS Siren Watch 1.
Secure portal communications
The current System Landline caller The emergency call process starts with a caller dialing (highly simplified) © 2011 Colorado Resource.
1 IPAWS: The Integrated Public Alert and Warning System.
1 SUNGARD AVAILABILITY SERVICES Messaging and Collaboration - Availability Service - Notification Service.
All Rights Reserved © Alcatel-Lucent 2006, ##### Campus Safety Preparing the Foundation for Student Safety Greg Kovich Senior Director, Education Business.
Industrial Safety Ordinance Revisions Response to the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board’s Recommendations.
Community Health Assessment San Joaquin County.
Evaluating a Mass Notification Service for Campus Wide Communication Lori Sundal Georgia Institute of Technology EDUCAUSE Southeast Regional Conference.
Existing Communication System Capacity for Tsunami Warning Disseminations S.H.M. Fakhruddin Technical Specialist, US IOTWS
1 Introducing Maryland VINE Protective Order Fall 2010 Tim Bingham Director of VINE Protective Order Services.
EDS Public Information Tabletop Exercise
Capability Cliff Notes Series PHEP Capability 4—Emergency Public Information and Warning What Is It And How Will We Measure It?
1 Shelter-In-Place Everyone needs to know how... The protective action recommended by the Fire Department and Health Services Department after a chemical.
Phone: Fax: Emergency Mgmt.: Fire Safety: 15 Edgewood Avenue Atlanta, Georgia website:
1 Solutions 1.OmniMMS Multi Media Server 2.OmniMessaging Mass alarm notification 3.Voice mail server 4.Enterprise and Telco IVR most reliable and scalable.
Stanford University Department Operations Center Evacuation Exercise Debrief October 22, 2010.
Interagency Refinery Task Force Safety Forum December 11, 2014.
WARNING! DANGER!! DANGER!! NOT – Legal Advice NOT – Exhaustive NOT – To replace your campuses due diligence NOT – A one size fits all solution.
UNDERSTANDING, PLANNING AND PREPARING FOR THE SCHOOL-WIDE EVALUATION TOOL (SET)
Community Warning System A partnership of industry, media and the public to warn and inform our community in the event of an emergency.
EPR-Public Communications L-05
Two Ways to Know if a Tsunami is Coming: Natural Warnings ground shaking, a loud ocean roar, or the water receding unusually far exposing the sea floor.
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION AND PLANNING March 25,
Phone: Fax: Emergency Management: Fire Safety: 15 Edgewood Avenue Atlanta, Georgia website:
Partners Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice National Sheriffs’ Association.
National Public Health Performance Standards Local Assessment Instrument Essential Service:3 Inform, Educate, and Empower People about Health Issues.
Requirements for Emergency Authority to citizen notifications Steve Norreys.
Kanawha County’s Emergency Preparedness Plan. Planning is bringing the future into the present so you can do something about it now. Alan Lakein Time.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Media Relationships EPR-Public Communications L-012.
Notifying the Public Emergency Alert System (EAS)
Leaving No One Behind Communicating with Special Populations During Public Health Emergencies Doris Y. Estremera, MPH, CHES San Mateo County Health Department.
What Happens to Your Severe Weather Report: A WFO Perspective Pat Vesper Warning Coordination Meteorologist WFO Midland, TX.
Communication Strategies. Communicating via Traditional Media (print, tv, radio and online) Securing placements in media outlets, including radio stations,
George Heinrichs CEO SM IntelliCast Target Notification.
Judging a Book by its Cover Positive Communications and Style Guide for CCCOE Employees.
Phone Tips Teresa Shibao & Paul Dial January 19, 2010.
Can You Say ‘Drought’ in Multiple Languages? A Water Conservation Campaign for a Diverse Southern California Urban Water Institute August 27, 2015.
Genesee County Health Department PREPARE for Pandemic Influenza Learning Session Two September 25-26, 2006.
An Equal Opportunity University CPE Workshop Case Study -- tools.
Siren Watch Franklin County Emergency Management & Homeland Security FCEM&HS Siren Watch 1.
Rave Alert Emergency Notification System at CSU Pat Burns Colorado State University CHECO September 18, 2007.
MORPC 05/12/11 May 12, 2011 Agency Brief to Mid Ohio Regional Planning Commission Policy Committee 1.
Session 151 Crisis Communication in a Changing Media World Session 15 Slide Deck Slide 15-
Building Media Partnerships for Education, Mitigation, and Response Nezette Rydell Warning Coordination Meteorologist National Weather Service Honolulu,
Social Networking as a Training Tool Cincinnati-Hamilton County Homeland Security.
What You Need to Do to Get The Job of Your Choice! presented by Angela L. Cline Assistant Director of Career Development J. B. Speed School of Engineering.
Campus Safety Update September Area’s of Focus – Fall 2008 Implementation of Multi-Modal Personal Mass Notification Recruitment of Emergency & Security.
Chad A. Johnson, P.E., Pierce County Bruce G. Stelzner, Chippewa County Greg Schnell, Sheboygan County What’s New with County Road Construction.
11 Mayview Regional Service Area Plan (MRSAP) Tracking: Supporting Individuals in the Community June 18, 2008.
Course # Unit 2 - OEP and PEMS. Unit 2 OEP and PEMS HQ OEP  OEP Mission  EP Website PEMS  Overview  Benefits  Current Functionality 
Emergency Communications Management Annual Meeting February 11, 2008 Richard Hach, Associate Director Network Administration.
Business Services Team TTIG Strategy Consultation: Feedback Torbay Together Involvement Group 16 th August 2011.
The Press Release Purpose
11 June 2009Week – OASIS: Integrated Emergency Management1 Integrated Emergency Management Session Two: Incident Preparedness and Response.
Easy-to-Use RedFlag System Delivers Notifications via Phone, , Text, Social Media, and More to Improve Effectiveness of Your Communications COMPANY.
SCHOOL MESSENGER EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION GENERAL NOTIFICATION SURVEY.
Chapter 5: Research. Research is the most important to PR because it is used to... Achieve credibility with management Define audiences and segment publics.
IPAWS (Integrated Public Alert & Warning System) Quick Brief.
1 Iowa Emergency Management Association Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management Department Emergency Management Program Development Course EMERGENCY.
Answer Me 13Text Ltd. Answer Me... Do you need to RELY on your critical calls being answered by your Support Team each and every time, be they internal.
Introducing text to & Signing up for Local Emergency Alerts.
Response to an Emergency Training for 211 Staff in Ontario Updated September
Priority Telecommunications Services: Public Safety Applications National Public Safety Telecommunications Council: Quarterly Meeting - Las Vegas, NV March.
UNIT 4: THE ELECTORAL PROCESS Study Guide Review.
Big Data Analytics System for City Emergency Alerting
13Text Ltd Phone Broadcast.
Caller ID for Managed Critical Communication
Presentation transcript:

Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff The Community Warning System A partnership of industry, government and the media to warn and inform our community in the event of an emergency Telephone Emergency Notification System Test 8/28/2013

Contra Costa County CWS Test Objective To assess the capability and scalability of the CWS system to reach county residents via phones, SMS and s System Test Details On August 28, 2013, four (4) county areas participated in a coordinated test of CWS capabilities Pittsburg area around Dow Martinez area around Shell Rodeo/ Crockett area around Phillips66 Richmond area around Chevron CWS test focused on the following methods of notification: Voice calls to landlines in predetermined areas Voice calls, SMS and notification to devices pre-registered with the CWS County residents received alerts via automated voice calls, SMS and County residents were advised of this test by news media and CWS website

Time of test Total Phones Successful Calls 94% Errors Success Rate Answered/Voicemai l No Answer 55%75%94% 5:30-7:00pm21,94115,80272%4,90422%1,2356%5 min37* min85** min CWS System Test – Pittsburg / Antioch DOW Area * Can be reduced by approx. 10 minutes **Can be reduced by approx. 20 minutes

CWS System Test – Pittsburg / Antioch DOW Area Test activated on 28 AUG 2013 at 5:30 PM PST 72% of residents received the call 22% didn’t answer 6% were not reachable

CWS System Test – Martinez – Shell Area Time of test Total Phones Successful Calls 89% Errors Success Rate Answered/Voic No Answer 55%75%89% 6:00-7:25pm12,0568,52171%2,17018%1,356 11% 5 min34* min57** min * Can be reduced by approx. 10 minutes **Can be reduced by approx. 20 minutes

CWS System Test – Martinez – Shell Area Test activated on 28 AUG 2013 at 6:00 PM PST 71% of residents received the call 18% didn’t answer 11% were not reachable 6

CWS System Test – Crockett/Rodeo – Phillips 66 Area Time of test Total Phones Successful Calls 83% Errors Success Rate Answered/Voicema il No Answer 50%75%83% 6:31-7:27pm6,4784,39068%96315%1,12517%5 min35* min53** min * Can be reduced by approx. 10 minutes **Can be reduced by approx. 20 minutes

CWS System Test – Crockett/Rodeo – Phillips 66 Area Test activated on 28 AUG 2013 at 6:30 PM PST 68% of residents received the call 15% didn’t answer 17% were not reachable

CWS System Test – Richmond – Chevron Area Time of test Total Phones Successful Calls 86% Errors Success Rate Answered/Voicemai l No Answer 53%75%86% 7:00-7:54pm13,6648,53763%3,20023%1,92714%5 min32* min54** min * Can be reduced by approx. 10 minutes **Can be reduced by approx. 20 minutes

CWS System Test – Richmond – Chevron Area Test activated on 28 AUG 2013 at 7:00 PM PST 63% of residents received the call 23% didn’t answer 14% were not reachable

CWS System Test – Results Summary How many residents were reached in the test? 54,139 phone lines were called 37,261 calls were answered or answering machine reached 108,181 total calls were attempted including retrials How quickly did phone calls start? Calls started within 1 minute of activation Three attempts were made to reach phones (if unsuccessful on initial attempt) Number of Phones Successful Calls (Calls Answered / Answering Machines) No AnswerErrors Call Attempts Pittsburg / Antioch - Dow Area 21,941 15,80272% 4,90422% 1,2356% 47,724 Martinez / Pacheco - Shell Area 12,056 8,52171% 2,17018% 1,36511% 22,098 Crockett / Rodeo - Phillips 66 Area 6,478 4,39068% 96315% 1,12517% 10,766 Richmond / San Pablo - Chevron Area 13,664 8,54863% 3,20023% 1,91614% 27,593

Test Behavior & Observations The test was conducted with up to two retries after the initial call for phone numbers with either no answer or unsuccessful results Time interval between calls was 15 minutes, to relieve network load and to allow people to get to their homes/phones before another retry. After analyzing call process, retries could be reduced

CCC CWS System Test - Summary CCC CWS – Operated as expected: CWS system used to activate the alerts. Multiple devices contacted; SMS, Phone, s 911 Telephone database and self-signup information was used Community Warning System website ( was used prior, during and after the test. The mass alert devices (Sirens, Radio, TV, social media etc.) are critical as telephone delivery takes time.

CCC CWS System Test - Summary Rodeo Total Phones Successful Calls 83% Errors Success Rate Answered/Voic No Answer 50%75%83% 6:31-7:27pm6,4784,39068%96315%1,12517%5 min35* min53** min Richmond Total Phones Successful Calls 86% Errors Success Rate Answered/Voic No Answer 53%75%86% 7:00-7:54pm13,6648,53763%3,20023%1,92714%5 min32* min54** min Martinez Total Phones Successful Calls 89% Errors Success Rate Answered/Voic No Answer 55%75%89% 6:00-7:25pm12,0568,52171%2,17018%1,35611%5 min34* min57** min Pittsburg / Antioch Total Phones Successful Calls 94% Errors Success Rate Answered/Voic No Answer 55%75%94% 5:30-7:00pm21,94115,80272%4,90422%1,2356%5 min37* min85** min * Can be reduced by approx. 10 minutes **Can be reduced by approx. 20 minutes ALL Total Phones Successful Calls 90% Errors Success Rate Answered/Voicemai l No Answer 54%75%- 5:30-7:54pm54,13937,26169%11,23720%5,64110%5 min36* min-

Public Survey Results Method Immediately following the test call, a short live public survey was conducted to 1,200 test call recipients: Dow – 350 interviews Shell – 300 interviews Phillips66 – 250 interviews Chevron – 300 interviews Interviews conducted in both English and Spanish Key Findings Few respondents reported problems with call quality, comprehension, or completeness of recording About 2/3 of respondents listened to the entire recording Trust in the CWS is high in all TENS Zones While many hear about incidents from calls and sirens, television is where most people turn to learn more about the alert