Cuyahoga County: Public Safety Answering Point ... - Cleveland.com

Cuyahoga County: PSAP Assessment
7. Failover Site for Cleveland
Throughout the course of this study, five cities and/or groups consistently
emerged as logical options for a Disaster Recovery (DR) failover site for the City
of Cleveland Department of Public Safety. Each of the five entities (Parma,
SouthEast, SouthWest, Solon/Chagrin Valley and Westcom) has pros and cons
associated with it which is illustrated in the table below.
Entity Name Pros Cons
Parma Technology - Same
Intergraph CAD as City of
Cleveland, and Intergraph
RMS interface is in place
Capacity – Currently have
the staff (5 positions) to
possibly absorb 25 % of
disaster recovery calls
from Cleveland.
New Administration
beginning January 1, 2012
has communicated the
need for regionalism.
SouthEast Space for additional
workstations and
dispatchers
Executive-level support.
Council of Governments
(COG) is in place and has
the support of
participating mayors.
SouthWest Space for additional
workstations and
dispatchers
Solon/Chagrin
Valley
Space for additional
workstations and
dispatchers
Executive-level support.
Council of Governments
(COG) is in place and has
the support of
participating mayors.
Entity is open to working
with County to build and
facilitate a regional
dispatch center.
Facility space is limited
New Administration
beginning January 1, 2012
may decide to proceed
with regionalism in areas
other than PSAP
consolidation.
City released RFP for new
CAD system in December
2011. If implemented this
would negate the ‘Pro’ of
the same Intergraph CAD
technology as the City of
Cleveland.
Current CAD vendor (TAC)
is not an enterprise-class
system (I.e., limited
application support, one
point of failure for support,
and unknown ability to
support large call/incident
volume)
No formal Council of
Governments (COG)
agreement is in place.
Executive-level (Mayoral)
support is not in place at
facility location (Middleburg
Heights)
Current CAD vendor (TAC)
is not an enterprise-class
system (I.e., limited
application support, one
point of failure for support,
and unknown ability to
support large call/incident
volume)
Funding for proposed
regional dispatch center
referenced in ‘Pros’
remains undefined.
Page 33