Video Conferencing at WCB

Transcription

1 Video Conferencing at WCB Research Compiled by: Terry Taylor Heather Hamilton

2 Introductory Note This material was compiled through telephone interviews, website searches, consultation with vendors, and agency IT staff. The views expressed are the interpretation of the investigative researchers. We are in the early stage of investigating video conferencing for use at the Workers Compensation Board. A significant amount of further information will need to be gathered before consideration of implementation. What is Video Conferencing? Video Conferencing is real-time communication to one or more specific sites which allows a number of people to communicate with each other using sound, video and to share data such as text and graphics even though they are thousands of miles apart. There are three distinct categories of Video Conferencing: 1. Desktop 2. Small Group 3. Large Group/Boardroom The two most common kinds of Video Conferencing Systems are: 1. Dedicated 2. Desktop Video Conferencing can be done through the existing telephone network, a private IP network or the Internet. However, bandwidth must be capable of 300K to 400K bit/sec. History of Video Conferencing Video Conferencing (VC) was first introduced in 1964 and was thought futuristic and expensive for widespread use. It was not until the 1980s that VC hit the commercial market. Several corporations and even the US Military started using VC based on the software and technology that had become available. Finally, in the 1990s with advances in Internet Protocol (IP) the first PC-based video conferencing system was introduced by IBM. This introduced instant messengers which allowed consumers to communicate with webcams from their desktop around the world. By 2003 high-speed Internet access became more widely available. This allowed even more accessibility for the consumer market with higher education and hospital facilities 1

3 starting to embrace the benefits of video conferencing into their distance learning programs. The history of Video Conferencing shows how far technology has come since 1964 and how it will undergo further transformation in the future. Video Conferencing in Judicial Settings According to the Federal Judicial Center the way in which Video Conferencing is actually used in criminal proceedings varies from district to district. Defendants sometimes appear for first appearances or arraignments and for sentencing. Some courts also may allow non-inmate witnesses to appear remotely. Defense attorneys have raised the following issues with respect to the use of videoconferencing in criminal proceedings. When defendants appear via videoconference from a prison on arraignment, sentencing, or another matter, defense lawyers believe they need to be with the client to ensure effective attorney-client communication and thus adequate representation. Defense attorneys also think there is a need for them to be in the courtroom if the prosecutor is appearing in person; otherwise, their communication with the court is at a relative disadvantage. This, in turn, may interfere with the right to due process and adequate representation, and, on a more practical level, may result in a manpower drain if two lawyers are used instead of one. Defense attorneys are also concerned about the possible dehumanizing effect of having defendants appear by videoconference from the prison facility. Having witnesses other than those called by the defense appear via videoconference at trial may raise constitutional concerns (right to confront witnesses). Further research may help policymakers evaluate these concerns and determine what action, if any, may be required. Information could be obtained, for example, on the following issues: How, if at all, does testifying from a remote location affect a defendant's or witness's perception of the importance of the court proceeding and of testifying accurately and honestly? How, if at all, does testifying remotely affect the clarity of witness's or defendant's testimony? How does it affect jurors' and judges' comprehension of the testimony and judgments of the witness's and defendant's credibility? What are the mediating factors? Can any negative effects be minimized with enhanced technology? Does testifying remotely make it more difficult to control outside influences on the witness (e.g., the attorneys and the judge may not know who else is in the 2

4 room or what documents and notes are available and in use)? If so, can sufficient safeguards be put into place? How, if at all, does the use of remote witnesses affect jurors', attorneys', and parties' perceptions of the fairness and sanctity of the court process? Do these perceptions depend on the type of proceeding (e.g., pretrial versus trial, trial versus appellate, criminal versus civil) and the number and type of participants appearing remotely? After doing research we have found that there is Video Conferencing occurring in certain judicial settings within government agencies in the State of Oregon, including the Social Security Administration, Marion County Trial Court Administrator, and the Department of Corrections in connection with the Department of Administrative Services and the Department of Human Services. SSA The Social Security Administration (SSA) began video conferencing based on over 500,000 requests for hearing that are filed each year. Hearings are held either at a hearing office or a remote hearing site. Remote sites are located at least 75 miles from hearing offices in order to accommodate those individuals who do not live near hearing offices. Approximately 40% of hearings are held at remote hearing sites. Based on claimant satisfaction, ability to provide more timely hearings, savings in ALJ travel time, faster case processing, and higher ratio of hearings held to hearings scheduled the SSA decided conducting hearings by VC was an efficient service delivery alternative. It would improve hearing office efficiency and would permit them to provide faster access to a hearing for some individuals. The SSA wanted to address the following: The individual has the same access to the hearing record when appearing by VC as he or she would have if appearing in person before the ALJ. There is means of transmitting and receiving additional evidence between all locations and all participants. A technician is present at the VC site to operate the equipment and provide other help, as required. The audio/video transmission is secure and the individual s privacy is protected. The SSA does currently run a video conferencing system. A video hearing for the Social Security Department allows hearing participants to see and hear each other through large color television screens. The judge remains in his or her office, and the participants go to a site that can be more convenient to where they live. A technician is there to make sure the equipment works smoothly. The judge can see and speak with anyone who is part of the hearing, including representatives and witnesses. Transmission of the hearing is secure, and your privacy is protected. Hearings are not videotaped, but audio recordings are made for all hearings. 3

5 Social Security is often able to schedule a video hearing faster than an in-person appearance. This means less waiting time for the parties. Also, a video hearing may be closer travel than an in-person appearance allowing witnesses or other people ease in accompanying the parties. The SSA does not require any individual to appear at his or her hearing by VC if the individual objects to that procedure at the earliest possible opportunity before the time of the scheduled hearing. To make sure that a party fully understands their right to decline to appear by VC, a notice scheduling an individual to appear at his or hearing by VC will clearly state: What it means to appear by VC; That they have scheduled the individual s appearance to be by VC; That they will schedule a hearing at which the individual may appear in person if the individual tells us that he or she does not want to appear by VC; and How to tell them if they do not want to appear by VC. Some details SSA considered: A separate docket may need to be created for remote sites. New notices to inform parties of their hearing being a video conference and their rights regarding that decision. ALJs may need to travel to other office locations to assist other hearing offices. An expert witness may not be available to appear at a remote hearing site or a hearing office. This may require multiple-point video conferencing. Marion County Trial Court Administrator Marion County currently uses video conferencing equipment in all of their courtrooms. They are running Polycom VSX8000 in 7 of their courtrooms and VSX7000 in 1 courtroom. This is an integrated system that works with their court recording system. It is IP based and remotely accessible allowing no need for a technician to be available onsite to run the equipment. Since this is a fully integrated system using JAVS the install alone is $80, for 1 courtroom. There is also a yearly maintenance contract and network usage fees, however, we were unable to get a figure for that from the technician at the Marion County Trial Court Administrator. Maintenance fees for our current FTR system run about $1,000 per year, but it is a significantly smaller system without network usage. This fully integrated system allows exhibits to be shown on cameras if they are being passed around, as well as having dedicated document cameras, and allowing any video exhibits to be able to be displayed for all parties. Audio recordings are taken for all of their hearings and the system is capable of integrating this function as well. The system does run on 4 channels, comparable with our FTR system, which allows easier and more accurate transcription of the hearing. 4

6 Department of Corrections/DHS/DAS These agencies currently work together and have Video Conferencing capabilities available. They are running Polycom VSX7000 at the Portland state office building in 4 different conference rooms that are available for anyone to use in the building. It is an IP based system controlled by the parties in the room with a remote control. This system requires both sites of the video conference to have their equipment on and one end to dial the IP address of the other end. The equipment itself is owned through DHS. If you are trying to connect with a party who is not using the same equipment, then DAS has the ability to bridge the connections with their equipment. We were scheduled to run a test 12/2 between Portland and Salem, but there were technical difficulties. Apparently the phone lines at the Department of Corrections were not working. We tried calling a few times trying to work things out, but we were not able to have a successful test. Therefore, we do not know what the quality of the recording will be with the videoconferencing or the possibilities of an occurrence like this in the future. We are still in contact with the Oregon Department of Corrections and they will be furnishing us with the costs for their video conferencing setup and equipment issues that have caused a failure to hold a video conference. Cost to implement Video Conferencing Cost is variable depending on the type of equipment and necessary components for making Video Conferencing possible on WCB s current system. Acquisition costs include: Number of systems and the features our users need Installation of those systems Management software ISDN installation/t1 installation Recurring costs include: Monthly cost of network access Network usage costs (this can vary significantly) Salary for one or more technicians managing network provisioning Installations Room or conferencing system reservations Technical support User training 5

7 Operation of Equipment The operation of equipment varies depending on what we decide to use. If we decide to rent conference rooms a technician would probably be provided in the costs of renting a conference room. Depending on the system the ALJs may need to be trained to operate the system if it were to be similar to what is available in the PSOB. They would also need to setup the FTR equipment. If a system like JAVS were to be used, the whole system could be run remotely from a central location by an employee who has been hired/trained as a technician of the system. Recording of the Hearing We have not yet been able to complete a successful video conferencing test using our current FTR system to record the hearing. However, this would be a possible option if the ALJ is willing to setup the microphones around the video conferencing equipment taking into consideration it will more than likely sound like a telephonic hearing. Another option would be to upgrade our current FTR to the video conferencing option, which is available. It is also possible to switch to the system the Marion County Trial Court Administrator uses, which is JAVS. This integrated system would record the hearing itself in 4 channels and be similar to our current capabilities with FTR Gold. It would also allow transcribers to look at the video to determine who is speaking. Any system we look at will need to have open source code. This is necessary as open source allows us to access, make changes, understand, and modify software for our use without having to gain permission from the company who owns the product. The State of Oregon will not purchase proprietary code, as proprietary software that is owned by an individual or company has major restrictions on its use. Other Options There is the option of renting rooms to hold Video Conferencing without leasing a location and setting up our own equipment. The Portland state office building does have 4 conference rooms available, which are free to use for a few conferences a year, but it may be possible to put a contract in place to hold hearings. 6

8 Oregon Institute of Technology in Klamath Falls does have facilities for Video Conferencing, but their facilities are limited on a first come first serve basis. There are penalties for cancellations depending upon when you cancel, but if it is within less than 30 days the entire fee must be paid. H.320 conference - $36/hr H.323 conference - $30/hr Bridged conferences (>4 sites) - $125/session There are companies out there who also contract and have conference rooms available for usage. Availability in remote locations is subject to facilities located in those regions. While searching for remote locations for video conferencing rooms only Ontario listed a result for video conferencing rooms available for rental; the rest were Salem or Portland locations. However, vendors/companies may be able to provide this service as well as some colleges across Oregon, which we do have a list compiled of possible video conferencing rooms available for use in those schools. Current Costs WCB spends on remote hearings Current costs include: ALJ Per Diem Expenses o Meals o Mileage o Hotels o Flights o Car rentals o Other expenses Rentals Leased Locations Refer to Handouts Considerations with WCB s current system Refer to Handout: Questions posed to IMD 7

9 Facility Costs for 2007 (Jan-Dec) Location Facility Cost Travel Cost Total **Astoria $ $1, $1, Bend $29, $18, $47, Coos Bay $12, $7, $19, Klamath Falls $3, $6, $10, **Newport $ $ Ontario $15, $5, $21, Pendleton $12, $8, $20, *Roseburg $1, $5, $7, Totals $75, $52, $128, *WCB is considering leasing a space that should be available in January and will be the same cost as Ontario **Costs are low in these locations due to fewer # of cases RED indicates a leased facility and gives the cost for 12 months 8

10 Rentals of Video Conferencing Equipment Since VuPorts has 100's of video conferencing systems on hand at any one time, we are possibly one of the only companies that can provide you with quantity and quality video conferencing system rentals for 2 days, one week, one month or longer (Minimum: 2 day rental). We have in fact outfitted conventions with 30 and more units at a time. Please call us at with your video conferencing needs and we will be happy to help. We limit rentals to Polycom Viewstations, VSX and HDX Systems. If you require Tandberg rentals, please give us a call. VuPorts' Matrix of Polycom Video Conferencing Rental Units Weekly Rental Unit Type Cost Daily Cost Polycom HDX YES Polycom HDX9004 with HD Eagle YES Eye Camera Polycom VSX YES Polycom VSX with MP Option 250 YES Polycom VSX 7000e YES Polycom VSX 7000e with MP Option YES Polycom VSX 7000s YES Polycom VSX 7000s with MP Option YES Polycom VSX YES Polycom VSX 7000 with MP Option YES Polycom VS YES Polycom Viewstation FX YES Polycom Viewstation H YES Polycom Viewstation SP YES Sony D-30L Camera YES Rental Agreement and Deposit Required Polycom Powercam YES Voice Tracking Camera YES All video conferencing equipment comes with necessary cables. Microphones are included as needed. Cameras for the rack mount video conferencing systems are separate rentals. 9

11 *OIT Video Conferencing We offer video conferencing at several locations here at the Oregon Institute of Technology. The system in Owens 130c is available for classes and some meetings. We need at least three days notice to setup a video conference. Since facilities are limited video conferencing is scheduled on a first come first serve basis. Academic/Administrative Use: H.320 $36/hr H.323 $30/hr Bridged Conferences ( > 4 sites ) $125/session Cancellations of Video Classes: If cancellation is made: 45 days before the start of term No penalty for cancellation Between 30 and 45 days 3/4's cost Less than 30 days entire fee *Info from OIT Website 10

12 College Colleges w/video Conference Capability Videoconferencing capability Seating Price if known Other Central Oregon Community College Net 2, H.320, H $30/hr Lewis & Clark College Linfield College 15,20,30 $25/day Oregon Institute of Technology 15 $36/hr Oregon State University PictureTel 20 Cost varies Southern Oregon University Polycom/Vtel 12, 25 Western Oregon University PictureTel High demand must be requested in advance Only works from their Portland to McMinnville campus High demand must be requested in advance High demand on Polycom system/other may be free during the day no charge 11

13 12

14 13

15 Questions Posed to IMD about Video Conferencing 1. What videoconferencing options are currently available for DCBS? There is currently video streaming at BCD. BCD is also expressing a desire to find our more information about video conferencing. There are no videoconferencing models currently in place for DCBS. There are no state purchasing contracts for video conferencing equipment. IMD is familiar with the Department of Justice (DOJ) using videoconferencing that interact with Oregon Counties to videoconference arraignments. More information on how DOJ uses VC is pending. 2. Will WCB's current system be able to handle videoconferencing? Our current system is not capable of handling videoconferencing. In our current environment video conferencing would bring down the ability to communicate within the agency as it would affect all Citrix applications. We currently run 1.5mg for bandwidth and videoconferencing would take up about 2/3rds of the line causing computer applications to be impacted. It is also of note that we share a server with OR-OSHA in Eugene which means they would also be impacted. Our current dial-up connections (phone lines) would not be able to deal with the load because it runs 56K max. 3. What would allow WCB to run videoconferencing? We would need to purchase and run T1 lines (DSL/Cable) and these would need to be installed in all offices, including remote locations. T1 lines are part of a network-based system. It wouldn't make sense to run separate lines just for videoconferencing, upgrading would be the most economical solution. If we were to install DSL in all offices it would require us to obtain an exception from DAS to purchase the lines from an outside vendor. Current policy requires the state to purchase lines from the State Data Center (SDC). We would need dedicated addresses for each location in order to be able to run a successful videoconference. We would also need to purchase an additional server(s). 4. What other possibilities are available? It may be possible to extend to a current network that is available. This means contacting other state agencies to see if they have the ability to extend their network to allow us to use their current system for videoconferencing. 14

16 5. How does the current economic climate affect a proposed change to videoconferencing? It is premature to give a sound answer to that question. With further research, WCB could determine what equipment would be appropriate for our business needs. The cost of that equipment, installation, and maintenance could then be compared to current cost. Rental of existing equipment in colleges or the use of VC vendors will also give a number for comparison with current costs. 6. Is it possible to purchase more bandwidth? It is possible to purchase more bandwidth. If we had dedicated T1 lines available, then we could ensure that only WCB would have access to the bandwidth. On our current system, however, anyone who shares our current resources would have access to the extra bandwidth we purchase. Because our remote offices are not currently connected to the DCBS network, we would basically need to start from scratch in terms of purchasing equipment, i.e. Desktop PC instead of laptops, running cable and installing servers. 7. What are the security concerns? If we are on the Internet - it is external and it poses security concerns for information access. If it is internal, there are not as many concerns. In an unstaffed office it poses some significant security concerns; theft and ability to assess and address technical issues. In a staffed office, those concerns are diminished by designating staff familiar with the operation of the equipment. 8. Are there videoconferencing services available to host us? Community colleges have videoconferencing hosting abilities. This may work or may not work depending on the type of equipment and if it is compatible with what we have. We are investigating the cost and feasibility of using this equipment. We have included some of that information in your report. It is important to note this equipment must have the ability to also record (preferably 4 channel) in order to work for us. If it does not have this capability, we will need to send a staff person to record the hearing. 15