february 2007

City of Houston Phase II Radio Communications Project Meeting – February 8, 2007


City of HoustonRadio Communications Project

Project began in 2003

• Today’s Agenda - Overview of the project

What has been done thus far

Where we are now

Where we are heading

When we anticipate getting there


Purpose of the Project

To replace aging City two-way radio communication systems that currently support the delivery of City services

Improve system performance & reliability

Reduce City’s risk & help better protect the lives & property of the citizens of Houston

Improve City employee safety

Improve the City’s ability to respond to emergency, disaster and normal day to day situations

To replace aging City two-way radio communication systems that currently support the delivery of City services

Improve system performance & reliability

Reduce City’s risk & help better protect the lives & property of the citizens of Houston

Improve City employee safety

Improve the City’s ability to respond to emergency, disaster and normal day to day situations


Phased Project Plan

Phase 1 Needs assessment, Conceptual System Designs & Budgetary Cost Estimate

Requirements Definition through Interviews Development of Alternatives Conceptual Solutions & Budgetary Costs

Phase 2 Development of RFP & Vendor Selection Detailed Specifications & RFP Preparation Proposal Solicitation & Proposal Evaluation Contract Negotiations

Phase 3 Management of Implementation Project Implementation Mgt. System Acceptance Testing Cut-over Plan & User Training

Phase 1 Needs assessment, Conceptual System Designs & Budgetary Cost Estimate

Requirements Definition through Interviews Development of Alternatives Conceptual Solutions & Budgetary Costs

Phase 2 Development of RFP & Vendor Selection Detailed Specifications & RFP Preparation Proposal Solicitation & Proposal Evaluation Contract Negotiations

Phase 3 Management of Implementation Project Implementation Mgt. System Acceptance Testing Cut-over Plan & User Training

..Completed


History - The 2003 SWISS Project

The City’s first step toward developing a new system

Examined the costs and feasibility of developing a new 700 MHz trunked radio system for the City

RCC worked with the City team to develop a radio system alternatives report at that time.

Four alternatives, substantial system costs

The City’s first step toward developing a new system

Examined the costs and feasibility of developing a new 700 MHz trunked radio system for the City

RCC worked with the City team to develop a radio system alternatives report at that time.

Four alternatives, substantial system costs

Strategic Wireless Systems StudyStrategic Wireless Systems Study


Last Year - The 2006 SWISS II Project

RCC conducted a review of two additional system alternatives

Potential use of the Regional 800 MHz Radio System

Development of a City owned UHF 460 MHz trunked system

Recommended a 700/800MHz solution either with Regional Radio System, or a City-only system. Competitive RFP process will allow the City to examine both thoroughly

RCC conducted a review of two additional system alternatives

Potential use of the Regional 800 MHz Radio System

Development of a City owned UHF 460 MHz trunked system

Recommended a 700/800MHz solution either with Regional Radio System, or a City-only system. Competitive RFP process will allow the City to examine both thoroughly


Phase IIRadio Communications Project

(Next Six Months)

• The City teams and RCC are developing the system’s Request for Proposals, “the system specs”.

RFP must contain a sufficient level of detail to accurately articulate City’s requirements and expectations

This will be a large and expensive procurement, the RFP must also foster and leverage market competition

• Resulting vendor proposals will be carefully and objectively evaluated to determine the City’s course of action


Currently revisiting and update key requirements before RFP is published

Important System Issues for the RFP Radio coverage requirements Talkgroup (channel) capacity Operational requirements for dispatch systems Fire station alerting Radio features and functionality System redundancy Radio Interoperability System management

These issues impact both performance & cost

Currently revisiting and update key requirements before RFP is published

Important System Issues for the RFP Radio coverage requirements Talkgroup (channel) capacity Operational requirements for dispatch systems Fire station alerting Radio features and functionality System redundancy Radio Interoperability System management

These issues impact both performance & cost

Next six months- RFP Development


Reliable coverage is the foundation of any public safety radio system

There are several important factors involved in specifying coverage requirements

City team is conducting meetings to discuss the specifics of the radio coverage requirements for the RFP Coverage area (where we need coverage) Coverage reliability (how reliable coverage should be) Audio quality (level of clarity we need & expect) Type of portable coverage, on-street, in-buildings Use of radio, head level, belt level, speaker-mic, etc.

Reliable coverage is the foundation of any public safety radio system

There are several important factors involved in specifying coverage requirements

City team is conducting meetings to discuss the specifics of the radio coverage requirements for the RFP Coverage area (where we need coverage) Coverage reliability (how reliable coverage should be) Audio quality (level of clarity we need & expect) Type of portable coverage, on-street, in-buildings Use of radio, head level, belt level, speaker-mic, etc.

Radio Coverage Requirements


It is important to “manage expectations” throughout the project, as there is no such thing as 100% coverage

In-building coverage requires special attention and is currently being addressed in various meetings

It is important to “manage expectations” throughout the project, as there is no such thing as 100% coverage

In-building coverage requires special attention and is currently being addressed in various meetings

Radio Coverage Requirements


Team effort to develop the system RFP which will articulate requirements and expectations (currently underway)

IT, Fire, Police, PW&E, and HAS

Purchasing, Legal, Real Estate, RCC

RFP expected to be completed by end of the Summer

RFP to be released to the vendor community in Fall of 2007

Vendor proposals expected late 4th quarter

Team effort to develop the system RFP which will articulate requirements and expectations (currently underway)

IT, Fire, Police, PW&E, and HAS

Purchasing, Legal, Real Estate, RCC

RFP expected to be completed by end of the Summer

RFP to be released to the vendor community in Fall of 2007

Vendor proposals expected late 4th quarter

Developing System RFP


Project Team Members

Chester Gilson–HPDWayne Newman–HFDMatt McChesney-PWETerry Moore-OEMDavid Folkers-HECDoug Frankhouser-HAS

Mike Macha-Homeland SecurityGreg Muchrath-RCCBobby Jones-RCC

Chester Gilson–HPDWayne Newman–HFDMatt McChesney-PWETerry Moore-OEMDavid Folkers-HECDoug Frankhouser-HAS

Mike Macha-Homeland SecurityGreg Muchrath-RCCBobby Jones-RCC

Terry Stone-HFD (Fire)David Almagar-HFD(EMS)Danny Moore-HFD (Dispatch)Steve Casko-HPDEd Cuccia-HPDBrenda Kirkland-PWECarl Holmes-HASDavid Cutler-HECDoug Moore-SPDMary McKerall-Legal

Terry Stone-HFD (Fire)David Almagar-HFD(EMS)Danny Moore-HFD (Dispatch)Steve Casko-HPDEd Cuccia-HPDBrenda Kirkland-PWECarl Holmes-HASDavid Cutler-HECDoug Moore-SPDMary McKerall-Legal


Conduct initial proposal reviews Examine administrative and system issues

Pricing to remain sealed until technical evaluations are completed

Conduct vendor oral presentations (1 per vendor)

Consider best & final offer process if needed Finalize / complete evaluations Make vendor recommendation

Conduct initial proposal reviews Examine administrative and system issues

Pricing to remain sealed until technical evaluations are completed

Conduct vendor oral presentations (1 per vendor)

Consider best & final offer process if needed Finalize / complete evaluations Make vendor recommendation

Proposal Evaluations


Large complex project, many issues to address

Approximately 19,000 City radios involved

Additional radio tower sites will be needed throughout the City, requiring site acquisition (which can be problematic)

Existing PD, FD, and PW&E systems are old and will need care & feeding along the way

A suitable system cutover plan must be developed for the transition to the new system

Proposed vendor costs are substantial, likely to receive two vendors’ system proposals

When a recommendation is made, neither vendor is likely to go away quietly

Large complex project, many issues to address

Approximately 19,000 City radios involved

Additional radio tower sites will be needed throughout the City, requiring site acquisition (which can be problematic)

Existing PD, FD, and PW&E systems are old and will need care & feeding along the way

A suitable system cutover plan must be developed for the transition to the new system

Proposed vendor costs are substantial, likely to receive two vendors’ system proposals

When a recommendation is made, neither vendor is likely to go away quietly

Sounds Easy(What’s the Catch)


Initial Estimated Timeline(Next 6 months)

Formulate Baseline System Requirements and develop RFP

Jan 1 July-Aug

RFP firs

t

draft

complete

d

Mar May-June

Updated

require

ments

input d

ue

Publish R

FP

Team approach to gathering needed information

Potential impediments: Site acquisition problems, needs early attention


Next Steps

Allow staff to attend project meetings as needed:

RFP Development and review

Development of proposal evaluation criteria

Site acquisition process

Vendor proposal evaluation process

Keep proposed vendor information completely confidential, information leakage will disadvantage the City and cost the City time and money ($Millions)

Allow staff to attend project meetings as needed:

RFP Development and review

Development of proposal evaluation criteria

Site acquisition process

Vendor proposal evaluation process

Keep proposed vendor information completely confidential, information leakage will disadvantage the City and cost the City time and money ($Millions)


Next Steps

Help manage expectations, keep system expectations realistic, if you have questions call Tom Sorley (832) 393-9611

City is at a crossroads, a new system, a fresh start, a new era. You can help develop the City’s next-generation system. Your participation is important.

Help manage expectations, keep system expectations realistic, if you have questions call Tom Sorley (832) 393-9611

City is at a crossroads, a new system, a fresh start, a new era. You can help develop the City’s next-generation system. Your participation is important.


Thank you for your participation.

QuestionsThank you for your participation.

Questions


Expected Results

Option A – Two Separate Systems (different vendors) with Limited Interoperability

Option B – Two Systems (same vendor) that are Integrated with Strong Interoperability

Option C – City a Partner with Harris County for a Regional System with Manager Terminals and Pooling of Frequencies

Option A – Two Separate Systems (different vendors) with Limited Interoperability

Option B – Two Systems (same vendor) that are Integrated with Strong Interoperability

Option C – City a Partner with Harris County for a Regional System with Manager Terminals and Pooling of Frequencies


Option A

Allows maximum level of control for City.

Least desirable for interoperability

Budgetary Estimate of $150 million

Allows maximum level of control for City.

Least desirable for interoperability



Option B

Slightly less independence than Option A

Second best option for interoperability

Must coordinate system decision that impact interoperability with Harris County


Slightly less independence than Option A

Second best option for interoperability

Must coordinate system decision that impact interoperability with Harris County



Option C

Least amount of control for City

Best choice for interoperability

Must coordinate all system decisions with Harris County

Might realize significant cost savings over other two options

Least amount of control for City

Best choice for interoperability

Must coordinate all system decisions with Harris County

Might realize significant cost savings over other two options

february 2007

Business

system rfp

radio system development

regional radio system

trunked radio system

conceptual system

trunked system

system specs

public safety radio