CDW-G Emergency Communications Report:
Awareness and Progress Toward the
National Emergency Communications Plan

When an emergency strikes, first responders must have access to real-time, situational information. Whether it is a major incident, such as a man-made or natural disaster, or a smaller-scale incident such as a traffic accident or building fire, cross-agency and cross-jurisdiction communication is not an option – it is a necessity. These communications need to happen seamlessly and immediately. Why then, does resilient, coordinated communication – a factor so paramount to the safety of citizens – remain the No. 1 challenge to providing timely and effective emergency services?

To view an in-depth analysis of the CDW-G Emergency Communications Report: Awareness and Progress Toward the National Emergency Communications Plan, please complete the information form at the link below.

To address the issue, the Department of Homeland Security developed the National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP), which aims to strengthen emergency communications capabilities nationwide through technology, coordination, governance, planning and training at all levels of government.

CDW-G surveyed more than 200 state and local public-safety communications professionals on the state of emergency communications and the NECP. The CDW-G Emergency Communications Report examines progress towards meeting the goals outlined by the NECP, key challenges facing state and local agencies and lessons learned.

Responding to emergency communication challenges, the Department of Homeland Security established specific emergency response communications goals in the July 2008 National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP):

By 2010, 90 percent of all high-risk urban areas designated within the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) are able to demonstrate response-level emergency communications within one hour for routine events involving multiple jurisdictions and agencies
By 2011, 75 percent of non-UASI jurisdictions are able to demonstrate response-level emergency communications within one hour for routine events involving multiple jurisdictions and agencies
By 2013, 75 percent of all jurisdictions are able to demonstrate response-level emergency communications within three hours, in the event of a significant incident as outlined in national planning scenarios

The Challenge: Resilient communication and coordination across jurisdictions and agencies is the No. 1 challenge to providing timely and effective emergency services.

61%

of public-safety communications professionals say communications interoperability is the top challenge facing the emergency response community

Improvement is
imperative

28%

of public-safety communications professionals experienced a communications challenge in the last year that hampered a response effort

Awareness of and Progress Toward the NECP

The public-safety community has not yet rallied around the NECP. Awareness is low; one-half of public-safety communications professionals have never heard of the NECP.

The Bottom Line: Of those aware of the plan, most believe it will or may solve their communications problems. But successful NECP implementation will require awareness across all agencies and jurisdictions.

Among those who are familiar:
Will the NECP solve inter-agency first responder communications problems?

For Homeland Security

Communicate: Launch an outreach initiative to ensure state and local agencies are aware of the NECP

State and Local Agencies

Build a Plan: Establish a written plan, including a timeline and budget to achieve NECP goals
Coordinate: Identify any overlapping requirements and, if possible, share expenses with other local jurisdictions. Identify and pursue grants and stimulus funds
Establish Accountability: Identify the leader responsible for achieving your jurisdictions plans
Focus on People, Processes and Tools: Success requires the right equipment coupled with trained personnel and effective management (command chain) processes
Test the Waters: Hold multi-agency, multi-jurisdiction drills to ensure both equipment and management processes are effective
Share Progress: Plan periodic state-wide meetings to discuss lessons learned and share success stories – in person or online

Title/Role:

•	2%	Communications/Telecomm director
•	7%	Communications/Telecomm manager/officer/supervisor
•	6%	Communications/Telecomm specialist/telecommunicator
•	4%	Communications/Telecomm engineer/technician
•	1%	Information technology chief/director
•	21%	Information technology manager/analyst/administrator
•	4%	Dispatch lead/supervisor
•	20%	Operations manager
•	35%	Other communications or telecommunications professional

Organization:

•	26%	Law enforcement agency
•	18%	Emergency management/call center
•	14%	Transportation agency/facility
•	7%	Fire department
•	5%	IT services
•	5%	Health services
•	3%	Environmental response
•	2%	Social/human services
•	2%	Emergency medical services agency
•	2%	Corrections department
•	1%	Forensic/crime lab
•	1%	Forestry service
•	14%	Other

Branch:

•	44%	State government
•	24%	County government
•	32%	Local government

Kelly Caraher
CDW-G Public Relations
847-968-0729
kellyc@cdw.com

CDW-G Emergency Communications Report:Awareness and Progress Toward theNational Emergency Communications Plan

CDW-G Emergency Communications Report:
Awareness and Progress Toward the
National Emergency Communications Plan