Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
AtHoc Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices Whitepaper • December 2011 © 2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. AtHoc, the AtHoc logo and AtHoc IWSAlerts are trademarks of AtHoc, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective companies. Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices Table of Contents Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Defining a Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System ........................................................................ 4 Centralized Architecture ................................................................................................................................ 4 The Benefits of a Centralized Net-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System .................................................. 4 AtHoc’s Approach to Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification .................................................................... 6 Cisco Unified Communications Manager (CUCM) ......................................................................................... 7 Unified Communications – Microsoft Lync ..................................................................................................... 8 Fire and Life Safety ....................................................................................................................................... 8 Social Networks ............................................................................................................................................ 9 Deployment Options .......................................................................................................................................... 10 Site-by-Site Architecture ............................................................................................................................. 10 Cloud Architectures..................................................................................................................................... 10 AtHoc’s Deployment Experience ........................................................................................................................ 11 Military and Federal Government ................................................................................................................ 11 Healthcare Facilities.................................................................................................................................... 11 Industrial/Chemical Facilities and Commercial Enterprises .......................................................................... 11 Higher Education Campuses ....................................................................................................................... 12 A Comparison of Centralized and Site-by-Site Architectures............................................................................... 12 ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 2 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices Introduction In the event of an emergency, the rapid notification of those in harm’s way provides the best possibility of saving lives and protecting infrastructure. The methods for alerting people about emergencies have evolved significantly in the past 50 years as new technologies have emerged. For decades, rudimentary alerting systems such as sirens and public address systems provided the best option for quickly alerting people in an emergency situation, but they also presented significant drawbacks, including a limited geographical reach and the inability to customize messages. These solutions could gain the attention of those in the vicinity but achieve little else. This was the 1st generation of emergency mass notification. nd The 2 generation of notification emerged when telephony became an important component in reaching people during emergencies. Though it surpassed the geographical reach of sirens and PA systems and could reach people at their desks or even at home, telephony alerting systems took longer to trigger and could take hours to send out a single message to a large group. Reach was improved, yet speed was compromised. Many organizations used both broadcast and telephony alerting simultaneously with the hope of achieving both speed and reach simultaneously. The last five years have brought about a fundamental shift in emergency alerting, ushering in the 3rd generation of emergency mass notification. In the same way that the internet has revolutionized the delivery and speed of communications for personal and business use, it has dramatically improved emergency mass alerting. In most recent years, there has been a confluence of significant technological advances from massive high-speed internet build-out to smartphones e.g., iPhones and Androids. At the same time, the world has experienced a rise in natural and manmade adversity around the globe. It is therefore no coincidence that the response of technology build-up has come to the aid of physical security and public safety – taking 1st generation mass notification of PA systems and sirens through 2nd generation of telephony/texting to the latest, 3rd generation of net-centric mass notification. The introduction of the IP network into the equation made it possible to exploit all the benefits of the Web and apply them to emergency mass alerting. The primary benefits include: Speed: Organizations can now reach their personnel in under two minutes Reach: Alerts can be sent to hundreds of thousands of people simultaneously through multiple and redundant alerting devices, including PCs via intrusive audio/visual popups, landlines, mobile phones, smart phones and tablets, PDAs, BlackBerry devices, SMS text messages, sirens, public address systems, digital displays, land-mobile radios, broadcast TV and radio channels, social media Personalization: Organizations can predefine the roles of their people so that different alerts can be sent to different groups depending on personnel criteria such as their location, position within the organization or job responsibility After the introduction of the network as the primary conduit for alerting organizations to emergency situations, network-centric emergency mass notification systems have continued to evolve to meet the ever-changing needs of organizations. This whitepaper serves to: Define a network-centric emergency mass notification system Highlight the benefits for implementing a centralized solution for use at multiple, dispersed facilities Detail the AtHoc emergency mass notification solution Outline the options for deploying an enterprise-wide solution Provide examples of organizations using enterprise-wide, network-centric solutions ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 3 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices Defining a Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System The implementation of a network-centric emergency mass notification system means enabling a comprehensive, bi-directional notification capability across an entire geographically-dispersed organization. In an enterprise-wide, network-centric notification system, a data center – along with a centralized network and telephone connectivity – allows an emergency operator to access the system via the Web. Through a single, unifying Web-based console, the AtHoc technology triggers, manages, tracks and controls the emergency notification process. AtHoc disseminates the notification via multiple and redundant communication channels to alert hundreds of thousands of people in minutes. Customized alerts can be sent out to one facility, to all facilities, to specific personnel or an entire population depending on the specific details of the situation. The system also asks for a response from recipients and informs the emergency operators of the status of alert recipients. This real-time, 2-way communication provides the decision makers with much needed situational awareness regarding the status of their organization. Centralized Architecture In this model, there is a single physical system, typically located in one or more major enterprise data centers. The central system becomes the functional hub for multiple sites; each site accessing the centralized system using the network. With the proper implementation, a centralized architecture allows multiple local instances of the application to run on the same (centralized) servers, giving each site exactly the same operational control and functionality it would have if they were running it on their own hardware locally. This capability is called a “multi-tenancy” system. A multi-tenancy model provides each unit/tenant with its own virtual system. A common misperception about centralized, multi-tenant architectures is that they limit the level of operational control available to each local site. Such a concern is unwarranted. In a modern networking environment with internet access, the physical location of the server has no practical impact on the operational capabilities of the application or experience of the operators. For organizations looking to standardize on a single system from the beginning and benefit from the economies of scale and decrease implementation complexity, a centralized deployment of emergency mass notification systems is becoming the method of choice. The Benefits of a Centralized Net-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System The centralized deployment of an emergency mass notification system has several significant benefits: Faster Response Time: An enterprise-wide system enables operators to mange threats that go across facilities and regions faster and more effectively due to shorter response times because one central system will be managing all user data and alerting. Higher Accuracy and Better Alert Consistency: A centralized, enterprise-wide system improves the accuracy of alerts and assures consistency through the use of a single source of user data and alert information. Personnel receiving alerts benefit from the consistency of one standard emergency mass notification. Consistency mitigates misunderstanding and increases responsiveness across affected areas. Rapid Personnel Accountability Reporting: Having a centralized system allows a much faster process of contacting personnel and reporting back with accountability information, thereby providing operators with improved visibility into the status of their personnel. User Privacy Protection: A centrally-managed system protects user privacy by restricting the exposure of personnel data onto the public network. Solid Network Security: A centrally-managed notification system also reduces the risk of compromising network security. Protecting one system is easier than protecting multiple separate systems. ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 4 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices Reduced Maintenance Requirements and Decreased Costs: A single installation of a centralized system decreases costs for an enterprise – both in the form of the upfront investment in the system and associated hardware, and second, in the form of ongoing maintenance. Because an organization only needs to maintain a single situation, this decreases the amount of time and effort necessary to keep the system running and updated. Faster Implementation: A single system can be deployed much more quickly than duplicate systems at each site. Failover: When deploying a centralized architecture, it is common to create one or more redundant systems for each centralized system. For example, each regional system can have a failover capability to at least one of the other regional systems. Centralized/Shared Communication and Directory Resources: A centralized architecture uses a shared pool of resources for all sites served by the centralized system. For example, it can tap into a large, centralized telephony alerting capacity (using DCC NxT) that all sites can use as needed. Such capacity would typically be much larger than what a single site would have, but also smaller than what all sites would have in aggregate in a site-by-site deployment. For example, instead of having 24 lines dialing capability at each site, a regional system supporting 15 sites may have 192 lines, all available for all sites. This would provide significant cost savings when compared with the 360 lines that would be required to support all sites independently. Centralized with Local Communication Resources: Even though the hardware, software and personnel contact database are located at a centralized site (or a few regional sites), the application can interface with local communications devices and channels. Enhanced Interoperability: A centrally-managed system effectively leverages the interoperability of an IP network as virtually any IP-connected device can be used for emergency management and personnel accountability. In addition, the system can activate other alerting systems such as Giant Voice and traditional telephone call alerting through a single interface. A customizable, consistent alert message is communicated across multiple IP-network-integrated channels and delivery devices, including: Networked Computers – Pop-up notifications to IP-connected desktops Networked IP Phone Displays – 2-way audio-visual (text, video, images) alerts to IP phone displays and speakers (Cisco IP phones) Telephony – Alerts to any land, VoIP, or mobile phone via on-site or hosted mass dialing services Text-messaging – Delivery of text-messages (SMS) to mobile phones, pagers, and BlackBerry devices Smartphones – Rapid and scalable delivery of notifications to smartphones native applications, response collection and location tracking Email – Secure, digitally PKI-signed email delivery with responses using the organizations’ email address (i.e., .mil, .gov) Social Networks – Send alerts through social networking channels, e.g., Facebook and Twitter Indoor and Outdoor Speakers – Sirens and PA systems Cable TV and Display Boards – Text, image, or video alerts to digital signage displays Radio Broadcasts – Audio broadcasts to local stations Land Mobile Radios – Transmit alerts to security forces handheld LMR Building Safety/Fire Protection – Integrates with existing fire alarm systems XML Feeds – Output standard XML feeds (RSS, Atom and others) National Emergency Alert System (EAS) ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 5 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices AtHoc’s Approach to Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification AtHoc has been a pioneer and the leader in creating sophisticated emergency mass notification systems. rd The company is responsible for ushering in the 3 generation of emergency mass notification and continues to lead the charge toward increasing the reach and speed of notifications while simplifying the administrative and triggering processes. AtHoc’s emergency mass notification systems use a highly secure, redundant, web-based architecture to manage the entire emergency alert process. With an open, standards-based architecture, AtHoc integrates with existing user directories, supports organizational hierarchy and groups, and allows criteria-based targeting of alerts including group, location or role. Organizations can create role-based users such as operators, administrators and recipients based on their access rights across multiple facilities, campuses and installations. Business rules determine operator permissions and actions such as creating and activating scenarios, as well as the reach of alerts and the delivery devices to be used. AtHoc’s centralized, IP-based emergency mass notification system provides numerous enterprise capabilities, including: High Availability: Manual and automatic failover: instant, transparent connection to provisioned end devices to multiple gateways in case of critical failure of primary site Security: Provisions for secure communication, authentication and encryption using industry-standard PKI technologies o Digitally PKI signed email (SMTP) delivery and sending directly using the organization’s email address domain o The Management System supports integration with CAC (Smart Card) login, or with an external Single-Sign-On (SSO) system for operator authentication Scalability: A load-balanced server farm to support tens of thousands of end users Interoperability and Integration: Uses standard and open protocols including CAP, XML and Web services ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 6 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices User Directory Integration: Active Directory, LDAP and other common enterprise directories accessible via API High Visibility: web-based visibility into system-wide logs and events for ease of troubleshooting Accounts and Resource Management: Network Delivery Server provides support for multiple configurable accounts, resource management and farm configuration Supportability: Desktop Notifier support for MacOS versions 10.4-10.7 and IE6-9 support for the Management System and self-service Superior User Experience: Easy, rapid configuration for devices, channels and gateways Deployment Flexibility: Multiple delivery options including: o On-premise: Entire system deployed behind the firewall leverages secure integration with user directory and internal resources including network, Cisco Unified Communications Manager (CUCM) Microsoft Lync, Public Address (PA) Systems, siren systems and physical security sensors o On-premise with Telephony Alerting via IP-Based Unified Communications Technology: Delivery of alerts as audio messages to any land, mobile or VoIP phone o Hosted/Software-as-a-Service (SaaS): Available as a service from a redundant and highly available remote hosting facilities, speeds deployment and eliminates the need for on-site hardware. AtHoc SaaS service is certified per NIST SP 800-53 Rev3 IA controls at FIPS-199 Moderate classification o On-premise with Hosted Managed Notification Delivery Service: Software installed locally with secure access to remote communication center for mass telephony dialing and text messaging without taxing local telephony resources o On-premise with Hosted Failover: Software installed locally with failover to host facility, assuring redundancy The net-centric approach introduces the ability to incorporate modern Unified Communication / voice-over-IP (VoIP) technology into the mass notification and emergency communication world. By turning any IP Phone to a desktop alerting device as well as using audio/video conferencing for first responder’s collaboration, the life safety and emergency management is becoming a driver for Unified Communication technology in this market space. Cisco Unified Communications Manager (CUCM) AtHoc IWSAlerts™ Unified Notification Server (UNS) manages the emergency mass notification process across the enterprise and when integrated with the Cisco Unified Communications Manager (CUCM), AtHoc IWSAlerts transforms the existing IP network and Cisco IP phones into a rapid, cost-effective, two-way emergency mass alert system. Using a Web-based console, authorized operators anywhere within the organization can use any computer on the network to send alerts to all supported Cisco IP phones and PSTN phone lines, as well as track responses and view accountability reports. By integrating the AtHoc technology with Cisco’s unified communications, AtHoc IWSAlerts transforms an organization’s VoIP/IP infrastructure into a modern multi-threat/multichannel life-safety mass notification system. CUCM integration with AtHoc IWSAlerts provides a number of rich features for Cisco IP Audio/Visual Phone Alerts including predefined alert tones image library to indicate various levels of emergencies, webcam remote viewing via alerts directly to the Cisco IP phone display, presenting, accepting, and tracking dynamic response options. “Panic buttons” are also available on Cisco IP phones, enabling end users to send silent real-time alerts to emergency operators. ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 7 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices Unified Communications – Microsoft Lync The integration of Microsoft Lync with AtHoc IWSAlerts provides a single, network-centric, unified web-based console to enable an emergency operator to effectively trigger, manage, track, and control notification processes via multiple and redundant communication channels and devices across the enterprise. The Microsoft Unified Communications platform delivers an intuitive user experience that is directly accessible from Microsoft Office applications. Microsoft Lync Server 2010 capabilities extend the reach of AtHoc IWSAlerts When integrated with Microsoft Unified Communications, AtHoc IWSAlerts sends information through computers, Microsoft Office Communications Server (Lync) 2007 R2, Instant Message (IM), Lync-connected VoIP (SIP) phones, cell phones, landline phones, PDAs, BlackBerry devices, digital display boards, TV, public address (PA) systems, land-mobile radios, and other channels. This integrated solution is ideal in allowing instantaneous conferencing and collaboration abilities using Lync IM and Lync-connected VoIP phones to key personnel in an emergency situation, providing physical security, fire and life safety protection, and personnel accountability. The centralized system simplifies activation and unifies all communications channels. Pre-defined scenarios allow ease of management in the emergency notification flow across the enterprise. Fire and Life Safety AtHoc’s innovation extends to the fire and life safety category: the IP network is also used to integrate more traditional mass notification devices such as digital signs to fire alarms, sirens and PA systems. In a fire emergency, the AtHoc solution extends traditional – and limited – legacy life safety systems from inadequate alerts to a modern, third-generation, bi-directional system capable of reaching multiple alert channels and devices, enabling a faster, safer, and more effective response over traditional methods. By utilizing the IP network, alert dissemination is pervasive and significantly quicker, augmenting conventional fire alarm systems and providing an enhanced spectrum of capabilities that save lives and property. The AtHoc solution gives incident commanders (ICs) the ability to obtain and disseminate critical, detailed information by sending targeted alerts to specific groups based on location, role and organizational hierarchy. This action accelerates response time and gets the right personnel to the exact fire location and facilitates evacuation routes for building occupants. Another benefit of the AtHoc system for the ICs is the feedback and tracking capabilities that communicate the status of alert recipients and also determine their location and ability to act, providing a reliable picture of personnel accountability. The AtHoc IP Integration Module (IIM), integrates with non-IP fire notification solutions, i.e., fire panels, Public Address (PA) speakers, and sirens to trigger WAV or text-to-speech (TTS) audio alerts during an emergency, with alarm override capacity. By leveraging the existing network, installation and infrastructure integration can be completed within hours or just a few days. This solution also complies with federal and Department of Defense emergency mass notification guidelines; also compliance with regulatory requirements for life safety and emergency response (i.e. NFPA 72 2010, DoD UFC). AtHoc has also created strategic and technological partnerships with industry leaders to integrate the AtHoc solution with a myriad of systems so customers can leverage their existing infrastructure. The result is a unified mass notification solution offering seamless interoperability with disparate systems, including non IP-based architectures and those adopting industry standards such as Common Alerting Protocol (CAP). ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 8 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices AtHoc has partnered with SimplexGrinnell to integrate AtHoc IWSAlerts platform with SimplexGrinnell’s Emergency Communications and Fire Alarm Systems. The AtHoc solution complements SimplexGrinnell offering by serving as its UL2572-compliant Distributed Recipient Mass Notification System (DRMNS) component, a recent recommendation in the NFPA 72 2010 fire alarm and signaling code. AtHoc IWSAlerts, when integrated with SimplexGrinnell systems, can initiate targeted indoor voice alerts using fire system speakers. This solution has the capacity to override the fire alarm, complying with NFPA 72 regulations and UL2572 requirements. In addition, the AtHoc solution receives triggers from SimplexGrinnell fire panels or TrueSite Workstations and disseminates the alerts via its multiple communication channels. Social Networks A large portion of the population is already connected via social networks, such as Facebook and Twitter. Harnessing the power of Social Networks for net-centric Life Safety and mass notification will be impacting our space in the upcoming years. The AtHoc mass notification solution has the capability to monitor and send alerts through popular social networking channels. This innovative capability increases the AtHoc system’s effectiveness as a pervasive mass notification solution by leveraging the newest media channels. This capability allows recipients to receive emergency notifications over social networks from their trusted organizations. Upon publishing an alert, the operator is able to select the social network to which the alert would be delivered. ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 9 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices Deployment Options There are two primary models for enterprise-wide deployments: a “site-by-site” architecture” model and a “centralized architecture” model. Further description of the two approaches follows. Site-by-Site Architecture In this model, each site within an enterprise deploys a separate physical system – hardware, software and database – at the local facility and on the local network. Each site’s system will be completely autonomous and will not depend on any other site. This type of system can be maintained and configured locally. There are two primary variations in this architecture: Site-by-Site with Shared Communication/Directory Resources: Hardware and software applications are physically installed at each site, and then share specific resources. Such shared resources may be an Active Directory that is maintained centrally, or centralized telephony alerting capability (i.e., regional DCC NxT resource and/or a commercial telephony alerting service). Site-by-Site with Cascading Alert Capability: Similar to above, but with ability to connect the systems at the different sites in a way that will “cascade” an alert from one site to another. This capability allows a system based in Virginia to activate a system based in Maryland and vice versa. Cloud Architectures AtHoc system architecture is designed to support flexible cloud deployment configurations in response to diverse customer needs and requirements: Private Cloud, Public Cloud, and Hybrid architecture, while supporting cloud multi-tenancy with complete isolation between customers. With the Private Cloud (on-premise) deployment, the entire system is behind the firewall, securely integrating with user directory databases and internal resources. The Hosted (SaaS) deployment is available as a service from a remote hosting facility. This configuration speeds deployment and eliminates the need for on-site hardware. The Hybrid cloud architecture is a combination of private and hosted configurations: The application software is installed locally with secure access to a remote communications center that handles mass telephony dialing and text messaging without taxing local telephony resources. In this innovative approach, the on-site, Private Cloud implementation acts as the primary emergency notification system while the Public Cloud-provisioned, hosted service becomes the backup or disaster recovery system if the primary site is disabled. Application software is installed locally with secure access to a remote communications center that handles mass telephony and text messaging without taxing local telephony resources. The Hybrid solution is for customers requiring optimization of security, protection of sensitive information, integration capability, and costs. Further, the hybrid architecture supports cloud-based implementation while securely connecting to on-premise delivery systems (i.e., indoor and outdoor speakers) for complete unified notification, leveraging benefits for onpremise delivery systems as well as for cloud based hosting. A hybrid solution allows for multiple, flexible deployment models without compromising data security, sensitivity, or privacy and also enables customers to lower capital investments with all the features and functionality necessary for effective mass notification. ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 10 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices AtHoc’s Deployment Experience AtHoc has extensive experience with deployments of network-centric emergency mass notification systems. This experience includes site-by-site architecture and centralized architecture that evolved into enterprise-wide deployment. Below is a summary of key enterprise-wide deployments AtHoc has accomplished: Military and Federal Government AtHoc is the #1 provider of network-centric emergency mass notification systems to the military, homeland security, and federal government organizations. AtHoc IWSAlerts is used extensively in the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army, U.S. Navy and Marines, U.S. Coast Guard, Joint Forces, the Dept. of Veterans Affairs and the Pentagon Force Protection Agency, among others for the protection of more than 2 million personnel worldwide. Military concept of operations requires the use of mass notification for: Force protection – Mass dissemination of alerts to personnel to accelerate threat response Personnel recall – Rapid activation of off-base personnel to report for duty Personnel accountability – Proactive assessment of force status and its ability to perform duties Response Tracking and Reporting – Alert recipients have multiple response options for acknowledgement on all personal communication channels Regulatory compliance with DoD/Federal Regulations and Guidelines – Physical and network security Healthcare Facilities The Department of Veterans Affairs, Raymond W. Bliss Army Health Center, and Baylor Health Care Systems are some of the large-scale healthcare facilities that use AtHoc’s proven network-centric emergency mass notification system, meeting unique emergency alerting and critical communication needs such as: Personnel recall – Rapid recall of off-campus staff in case of patient emergencies, influx of patients due to mass casualty or pandemics Operational notifications – Shift/schedule changes, drug recall notification, critical systems outage Emergency alert – Mass dissemination of alerts to personnel to accelerate threat response – biological/chemical contaminant, intruder/child abduction, staff emergency, Center for Disease Control (CDC) alerts Regulatory compliance with Healthcare Regulations and Guidelines – Joint Commission, HIPPA and more Personnel accountability – Proactive assessment of personnel status and ability to perform duties Response Tracking and Reporting – Alert recipients have multiple response options for acknowledgement on all personal communication channels Industrial/Chemical Facilities and Commercial Enterprises Boeing, Microsoft and Raytheon are among the established enterprises that utilize AtHoc IWSAlerts for protecting employees and property in the event of an emergency. Industrial and chemical facilities have a need to protect people inside the facilities and notify those in surrounding communities in case of emergencies. Large, geographically-distributed companies with multiple campuses require an enterprise-class, network-centric mass notification solution that can quickly alert its personnel in an emergency, regardless of location. Industrial/Chemical Facilities and Commercial Enterprise use cases involve: Emergency alert – Mass dissemination of alerts to personnel to accelerate threat response – industrial/chemical contaminant, weather alerts, intruder/gunman alert Operational notifications – Shift/schedule changes, critical systems outage Personnel accountability & Continuity of Operations – Proactive assessment of personnel status and ability to perform duties Response Tracking and Reporting – Alert recipients have multiple response options for acknowledgement on all personal communication channels ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 11 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices Higher Education Campuses Alerting students, faculty, administration, and visitors who are widely dispersed across a large campus quickly in an emergency is a tremendous undertaking. The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Texas A&M University, and the Naval Postgraduate School are among the higher education facilities that have deployed AtHoc IWSAlerts as part of their emergency management strategy to protect their campus populations of thousands. UCLA became one of the first major American universities to deploy 3rd generation mass notification technology, leveraging the IP network to create an effective and unified mass notification system that fully integrates all campus communications resources. The use cases in Higher Education setting involve: Emergency alert – Mass dissemination of alerts to students and staff to accelerate threat response – intruder/gunman alert, natural disaster (earthquake, tornado etc.) Operational notifications – Schedule changes, general announcements, critical systems outage Personnel accountability – Assessment of students and staff status during and post-emergency Regulatory compliance with Regulations and Guidelines – Higher Education Act (HEA), Clery act A Comparison of Centralized and Site-by-Site Architectures The table below presents a comparison of deployment and support requirements, features and benefits for a centralized and a site by site ENS architecture system: Category Centralized Architecture Site-by-Site Architecture Deployment Number of sites for server deployment One single, centralized server Multiple local sites Speed of deployment 20-25 days per regional site 4-5 days at each site (inc. intensive travel) Total: 80-100 days Total: 240-300 days TBD TBD Need to assure appropriate bandwidth, proxy load, firewall load and overall network reliability between regional data centers to each local site and local sites. Need to assure appropriate bandwidth, proxy load, firewall load and overall network reliability between each local sites Single integration One at each local site. Hardware requirement Microsoft licenses Networking requirement Integration with Active Directory Integration with Telephony Dialer Deployment management Program management and centralized IT Functional admin at each site local site System Administrators at each site Training ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 12 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices Ongoing IT Support IT Ownership One regional center Owned by each site’s local IT staff Software Maintenance and Update Single centralized location 60 sites Vendor IT support Working with a single IT point of contact – much more efficient; saves costs Supports multiple IT POC’s at each site. Network security assurance Managing security for a centralized deployment – more attention per each and more assured compliance with security requirements Subject to local-level network security assurance Redundancy and Availability Failover sites Failover site between Regions – inherit to architecture Separate local failover sites. If failover is on same site as primary system, failover’s effectiveness is low; if on different site – raises complexity significantly since now need to deal with multiple sites. Often site level deployments do not actually implement failover system Availability when local site is shut down (i.e. evacuation) System is available since it’s hosted in the regional center, and can be accessed via VPN or alternate location, and activated. If regional center is down – available through failover. System is not available at all, unless a failover has been deployed at an alternate site (as said – that raises overall complexity significantly) Availability when network connectivity is down If connectivity is down from local site to primary system, failover system should work. If connectivity is down for both – loss of direct access, though alert activation can be achieved by requesting primary site to access regional system and activate alerts. In that case system will reach any of the local units that are still on network and will reach all personnel via phone Continued functionality for local site, but no network alerts with subordinate units; phone alerts to subordinate units should still function. Servers Cost of a single centralize server Cost of multiple servers ENS Software licenses Enterprise Edition required – more costly per instance; yet significantly fewer licenses Express/Standard Edition required – less costly per instance; more instances required Volume discount available Volume discount available Costs ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 13 of 14 Network-Centric Emergency Mass Notification System Solutions, Implementation & Best Practices Maintenance costs Significantly lower – maintaining one site vs. multiple Significantly higher Internal NG costs Significantly lower – maintaining one site vs. multiple Significantly higher Bottom line Typically 40% less expensive than Site-bySite ©2011 AtHoc, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 14 of 14