ESSEX FIRE AUTHORITY Essex County Fire & Rescue Service

ESSEX FIRE AUTHORITY Essex County Fire & Rescue Service Agenda Item 8 Page 1 of 13 MEETING MEETING DATE SUBJECT REPORT BY Essex Fire Authority 7 September 2011 Relocation of Service Control The Chief Fire Officer, David Johnson AGENDA ITEM REPORT NUMBER 8 PRESENTED BY Assistant Chief Fire Officer, Stewart Thomson SUMMARY The purpose of this paper is to seek confirmation that Members of Essex Fire Authority remain committed to their previous decision to relocate the Service s Control facility from its current location in Hutton to the Kelvedon Park site. In addition the paper also examines the options available to provide the mobilising and command & control functionality within the new control suite, should confirmation of the desire to move to Kelvedon Park be agreed. RECOMMENDATIONS Members of the Essex Fire Authority are asked to: 1. Note the Contents of the Report. 2. Confirm their support for the previous agreement to relocate the Service Control facility from Hutton to Kelvedon Park 3. Should recommendation 2 be agreed, Members are asked to consider the possibilities for the replacement of the Mobilising and Command & Control System and decide on the preferred option. BACKGROUND Over the past 12 months Members have been regularly updated regarding the increased risk of failure and then subsequent closure of the National FiReControl Project. This reporting has also been combined with detail of the contingency planning that has been undertaken in order to provide mitigation against this risk.

of 13 In September 2010 Members agreed to commence planning work specifically aimed at developing a substantive contingency plan to maintain a mobilising facility within ECFRS should the provision of Regional Control Centres not come to fruition. (Papers EFA/085/10 and EFA/086/10 refer). Indeed as far back as September 2009 Members approved preliminary scoping work to plan for the option of providing a Control room at Kelvedon Park. (EFA/098/09) Detail of the current position of Kelvedon Park development was presented to Members at the last Fire Authority Meeting in June 2011. At which Members were informed that the contingency plan agreed in September 2010 to include provision for the relocation of the ECFRS Control facility has become an additional requirement of the Service s planning work within the Kelvedon Park programme. (Paper EFA/050/11 refers) It was also stated that a separate paper reviewing the options for the Control facility, the staffing levels and mobilising system will be brought forward in September 2011 to ensure that these requirements are agreed by Members. OPTIONS TO PROCEED Members have already signalled their preference for the option to relocate the Control facility to Kelvedon Park, at the EFA meeting on 9 February 2011 as detailed in EFA/010/11. However for completeness, the option to contract the mobilisation of Essex Fire & Rescue Service resources out to another Fire Authority or as a third party supplier arrangement, has now been provided with some indicative costs and therefore can be presented to Members in greater detail than has been done in previous Fire Authority papers. Indicative costs and issues associated to contract-out the mobilising function The following assumptions are made in order to provide a legitimate estimate of the costs associated with outsourcing the mobilising function: The total system cost, maintenance & depreciation would be shared equally. This cost would be included within any agreement made to utilise the system belonging to another FRS or should a third party supplier be used, then the cost of procuring a new system. To deal with Essex call volumes, a minimum of five staff positions would be required for call taking, plus a management overhead, 365 days per year, 24 hours per day. To deal with spate conditions an addition ½ post would be required. The current costs of one operator, including all employer contributions & on-costs equate to 33,000 per annum, one Control management position equates to 40,000 per annum. With a Seat Occupancy Factor of 5-1, (Five staff are required to be employed to provide one 24hr operational position) which allows for 24 hour working. The total staff cost would be 1,108,000 per annum. Reason Annual Cost 000 s (Revenue) System maintenance & depreciation. 200 Staffing cost 1,108 Total 1,308 Reason One off Capital Cost Migrating of all data requirements 200

of 13 There are a number of risks associated with this course of action: The design of a robust command and control system will demand and provide a high level of resilience, which will give a significant degree of assurance to the mobilisation of ECFRS resources. With this function being contracted out, the reliance will be on a third party to constantly perform to a prescribed standard. Although failure to meet this standard will result in punitive measures, ultimately there is a potential that no, or incorrect resources are mobilised. This ultimately will be outside the control of ECFRS. Seamless linkages into the Service s other ICT systems, such as community Fire Safety will be much more difficult to provide. This will reduce the efficiency of the system to enhance work processes, almost certainly providing the requirement to double key some data sets. The loss of opportunity to provide efficiency gains by utilising the resilient infrastructure that will be provided to support other ICT systems as well as the control mobilising processes. Control staff utilising a more modern command & control system will have capacity to be utilised for additional skilled work. Such as support for Community Fire Safety & other FRS activities. The in-house operational support for the command & control of incidents will be very difficult to replicate from a third party supplier due to many Standard Operating Procedures (SOP s) being specific to ECFRS. It is expected that there will be a very limited number of Fire and Rescue Services that would have the capacity to undertake the call handling, mobilising and command & control functions on Essex s behalf. Currently there are no third party suppliers providing this facility to any Fire & Rescue Service. The recommendation from the Strategic Management Board would be not to proceed with this course of action, due to the increased risk associated with the outsourcing of a Statuary Duty which is risk critical to the delivery of the service. Options to provide a mobilising solution at Kelvedon Park Fundamentally there are two options available to provide this function at Kelvedon Park. The current Kelvedon Park improvement programme provides within it, built space, which will accommodate both options. Option 1 To relocate the existing mobilising system from Hutton to Kelvedon Park The current system is unable to provide the level of connectivity into existing systems to enable the efficiency savings to be fully realised. This issue is fully detailed within the business benefits section of the Paper. The project team costs will be higher to move than re-procure due to the greater level of involvement required by ICT to integrate the systems together. It would also make sense to perform an in-life upgrade alongside the move as due to the age of the system a replacement would be required very shortly afterwards.

of 13 A number of parallel ICT projects such as mobile Community Fire Safety working could not be delivered as part of the main control project, therefore adding overall costs. Option 2 is to procure a replacement mobilising solution and associated equipment. The current Remsdaq NX system was provided in 2008 and would be due for in-life upgrade in 2013 in with replacement due in 2018. This in-life upgrade would not enable the system to provide full business integration with ICT systems or to function on the virtualised network as currently being provided through the ICT transformation programme in the same way a new system could. The design of a new system will fully integrate with existing systems which will allow full advantage of modern developments of ICT. This will enable more efficient use of the technology ultimately utilising less staff both to operate the systems and more efficient use of staff indirectly within various support functions. This will allow full integration with the ICT improvement programme currently underway in the Service, which will allow the resilience of the mobilising network to benefit the remainder of the organisation in a seamless manner. A prime example being extension to mobile working for community safety officers by their devices linking straight in to the newly provided mobile network that Mobile Data Terminal s require. The planning assumption for a replacement system would be to have 5 operator positions, 1 supervisor position and one further training position which could be used operationally if required under spate conditions. The number of staff required and the subsequent shift pattern adopted would be determined in conjunction with call patterns and volumes. This, combined with data-centric working practices, will provide efficiencies when compared with the current working practices and shift patterns. The existing solution based in Hutton can be utilised to the point when the new system is fully tested and operational, negating the need to have a significant period of operation out of secondary control.

of 13 Indicative project costs to provide a mobilising solution at Kelvedon Park Option 1 (Move current system from Hutton to Kelvedon Park) Equipment / Requirement Moving of Frequentis Radio Interface. Due for upgrade 2014 ICT Project Team for delivery. 1 ½ resource for 2years. Rerouting of 999 Telephones /Direct Lines Etc from Hutton to KP. Moving of HQ Meridian Telephone System Due for upgrade 2014 Moving Remsdaq Master Station Equipment and RAD Map Display. Next refresh required 2014. 35 150 78 Cost 000 s 20 for 999 lines. 60 for computer connectivity. 40 for dedicated resilient backup link as not capable of using that provided for ICT connectivity. 8 Moving Firelink (Airwave) Radio System 200 Electrical Power Systems. 11 Communications Specific Transportation to new site. 12 IT/Comms Systems and Cabling 6 Upgrade Mobile Data to Include Comms 15 Data Gateway Supplied by CLG as part of RCC. Mobile Network Connectivity for 20 Mobiles Total procurement cost 710 + 20% contingency 852 Yearly Running Cost (Revenue) Out Sourced Maintenance 125 This includes duplication of some Internal Resources Currently dedicated maintainers for Control Systems. ICT Staffing commitment Total 15 40 equipment. 75 One Engineer, one Technician, One ICT staff. 200 + 10% Contingency 220 Project Running Requirement Project Manager 2 years 174 Project Staff 2 years 85 (1 ½ Resources) ICT Staff 2 years (1/3 resource) 20 HR Resource 1 month 2 Total Cost to Move System (excluding maintenance costs) 1,133 Cost

of 13 The project team have undertaken significant research with indicative suppliers to provide an estimate of likely costs to provide a Commercially Available Off-The-Shelf (COTS) product. Option 2 (Procure a new system) Equipment / Requirement Cost Digital radio & Telephony solution 250 Rerouting of 999 Telephones /Direct 20 Lines Etc from Hutton to KP. Firelink (Airwave) Radio System link to 200 new system. (may be CLG) New Mobilising System 400 New Stn. End Solution 250 Mobile Data Software & 250 Communications Gateway. Mobile Network Connectivity for Mobiles 20 Total procurement cost 1,390 + 10% contingency. 1,530 Yearly Running Cost (Revenue) Outsourced Maintenance 200 (15% of procurement cost, not including Firelink) Project Running Requirement Project Manager 2 years 174 Project Staff 2 years 85 HR Resource 1 month 2 Total Cost of Procured System (excluding maintenance costs) 1,791 Cost There are currently discussions taking place with the other Fire & Rescue Services in the region to determine the appetite and scope for the joint provision of a functional output specification, which may provide the option of reducing the costs associated with the procurement of a mobilising solution.

of 13 RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS The risk associated with any major failure of the current control facility at Hutton has been fully assessed and has been determined to be suitable to function adequately for a number of years. The current relocation of control project has the required risk management structures in place. These are currently under review pending the Authority decision to proceed. Risk Impact Mitigation Risk relative to Option. Delay in rollout of 2 new Control Systems ICT Improvement Strategy fails to deliver new systems with required resilience in the timescales required for Control. Failure to conduct appropriate change management Failure to obtain buy-in from Representative Bodies No coordination with other projects influencing KP relocation in general Resilience of FRS current network & links to support & provide the control function Inability to marry up current/future Control communication systems with main KP VOIP etc systems (Siemens/BT) Staff unable to cope with new systems. Staffing Model inadequate Staff Morale Industrial Dispute Projects don t work with each other. Possible loss of ability to Take Emergency calls & mobilise Control System will not function correctly Scrutiny at ICT Transformation Board. Scrutiny at Kelvedon Park Programme Board. Project to include change management techniques. Cultural change management. Business change management. ICT change management. Training requirements identified Staggered Change process as opposed to big bang. Communication strategy Rep Body representation on project board Rep Body Involvement in Key Decisions. Consultation process Project Manager to liaise with Business Planning Officer & KP Programme Manager Ensure Existing Network single points of failure are identified & removed. Close liaison with current ICT improvement programme. Ensure Specification includes all existing FRS Infrastructure that any new systems have to work on. Assess impact & cost of provision of appropriate Infrastructure if existing system is lift & shifted. 1 and 2 1 and 2 1 and 2 1 and 2 2

of 13 Lift & shift would put old system onto new infrastructure. Inability to get Old System that has been moved working in steady state on new infrastructure. Requirement to have dedicated team working on FRS side to eliminate Demarcation. 1 Benefits realisation of procurement balanced against relocation of existing system Benefit Reduction in non essential voice traffic into the Control Room. This facilitates greater availability for operators to take calls. Nearest Resource Mobilising Data Mobilising to Computers on Fire Appliances, holding risk information. Can be integrated with an Off the Shelf product for Mobilising Officers to Incidents. Automatic Population of Control System databases reducing data handling & risk of dirty data Will Function on FRA existing ICT infrastructure & conforms to ICT Strategy. Will Facilitate Partner working. Detailed Real Time Management Information can be relayed from Incidents & Activities, directly into the Service Full Automation of Returns & Statistics & Self service for information. Option1 Relocate Option 2 Replace Quantify PARTLY YES Reduction of up to seven control room posts, 33K per post. 241,000 PA YES YES YES Non Cashable YES Non Cashable Faster Time to In Attendance at an incident, reduction in Fire Losses Enhanced Health & Safety Information on the Incident Ground. Safer Working Environment. NO YES Conforms to FRA ICT Strategy. PARTLY YES Removal of double handling of Data. Savings of up to two posts currently double handling data @ 23,000 per post. 46,000 PA NO Requires second standalone Infrastructure YES No Secondary Infrastructure to maintain & manage. Saving 100,000 one off cost. 10,000 running cost PA & ½ of three current maintainer posts. 34,000 PA YES YES Can facilitate interoperability with neighbouring FRS s PARTLY YES Improves the Ability for the Non Organisation to Manage using Cashable Accurate Real time Information. NO YES Removal of double handling of Data. Will free up small amount of communications staff time currently liaising with other organisations & formulating information.

of 13 Auto population of ICT Records, reducing Staff Admin Time. Ability to Automate & Audit Vehicle Mileage records. Full Asset Management & Usage Tracking capabilities, facilitating use based as opposed to time based servicing. Single Common Incident Command System. Ability to Extend Mobile Working to all Employees with Single user Interface & Infrastructure. Increased Resilience, Functionality & Flexibility in Back Up Systems. NO YES Non Cashable Removal of double handling of Data. Will free up to 50% of 1 post in efficiency savings. PARTLY YES Full Audit Trail of Official Mileage, reduction in unnecessary journeys reducing CO 2 footprint. NO YES Reduction in total servicing & maintenance schedules for kit & appliances. NO Can Facilitate Safer Working Environment, reduced training with single common system. NO YES Common Infrastructure for FRA wide working. Reduced Training impact of common user front end. Increase in productivity of up to 10% with no requirement to return to base. NO YES FRA Admin systems benefit from the resilience offered by the control system, leading to less down time. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 10 Year Whole Life Cost ( 000 s) Lift & Shift Replacement Relocation Cost 1,133 Procurement Cost 1,791 with Team with Team 10yr Maintenance 2,200 10yr Maintenance 2,000 Control Staff Saving over 10yrs (75% of 7 posts) Data & Admin Staff Saving -1,800 Control Staff Saving over 10yrs (100% of 7 posts) -350 Data & Admin Staff Saving -2,410-460 Total 1,183 Total 921

of 13 Accounting Treatment of Expenditure The costs of the two options are set out in the tables below. Lift & Shift Option Revenue Costs of Project '000s Capital Costs of Project '000s Total Project Cost '000s Moving of Frequentis Radio Interface. 35 35 Upgrade Radio Interface (Due 2014) 150 150 ICT Project Team for delivery. (1.5 FTE for 2 Years) 78 78 Telephones - Re-route 999 lines 20 20 Re-route Wide Area Network 60 60 Dedicated resilient back-up link 40 40 Moving of HQ Meridian Telephone System 8 8 Upgrade Telephone System (Due 2014) 15 15 Moving Remsdaq Master Station Equipment and RAD 40 40 Map Display. Next refresh required 2014. Moving Firelink (Airwave) Radio System 200 200 Electrical Power Systems. Communications Specific 11 11 Transportation to new site. 12 12 IT/Comms Systems and Cabling 6 6 Upgrade Mobile Data to Include Comms 15 15 Mobile Network Connectivity for Mobiles 20 20 Contingency (20%) 99 43 142 Project Management Project Manager 2 years (1 FTE) 174 174 Project Staff 2 years (1.5FTE) 85 85 ICT Staff 2 years (0.33 FTE) 20 20 HR Resource 1 month 2 2 Total Project cost 873 260 1,133 Annual Running Cost (Revenue) Saving - Maintenance of Existing System (100) Out Sourced Maintenance 125 Internal Resources (1 Engineer, 1 Tecnician, I ICT) 75 Contingency (10%) 20 Capital Financing & Borrowing Costs 40 Total 160 This option has a total project cost of 1,133k, most of which will be revenue expenditure as it involves the transfer of existing assets from one location to another.

The second option is to replace the system. The costs of this are set out below: Replacement System Revenue Costs of Project '000s Capital Costs of Project '000s Agenda Item 8 Page 11 of 13 Total Project Cost '000s Digital radio & Telephony solution 250 250 Rerouting of 999 Telephones /Direct Lines Etc from 20 20 Hutton to KP. Firelink (Airwave) Radio System link to new system. 200 200 (may be CLG) New Mobilising System 400 400 New Stn. End Solution 250 250 Mobile Data Software & Communications Gateway. 250 250 Mobile Network Connectivity for Mobiles 20 20 Contingency 22 118 140 Project Management Project Manager 2 years 174 174 Project Staff 2 years 85 85 HR Resource 1 month 2 2 Total Project cost 503 1,288 1,791 Annual Running Cost (Revenue) Saving - Maintenance of Existing System (100) Outsourced Maintenance (15% of system costs) 200 Contingency 20 Capital Financing & Borrowing Costs 200 Total Annual Costs 320 This option has increased project costs, a higher capital element and higher annual running costs. The indicative costs associated with outsourcing the mobilising function, relocating the existing system from Hutton to Kelvedon Park or replacing the existing system and locating it at Kelvedon Park have all been detailed in the Paper. In July 2011 the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) provided details of a Resilience and Efficiency Grant to be made available to FRS s. The guidance from DCLG states that the purpose of this grant funding stream is to support local enhancements to control services which deliver efficiency and resilience improvements and lead to greater collaboration between Fire and Rescue Services in the delivery of their control and mobilisation service. The indicative level of funding available for each FRA is 1.8m. Funding is expected to be paid in 2011/12 and 2012/13 and will contain a mixture of capital and revenue grant. In advance of funding being provided FRA s have been requested to provide short business case detailing the funding requirements and justification for such requirements. ECFRS will of course be submitting a case, which will cover any procurement costs that might be agreed within this paper combined with building costs associated with the provision of a control facility at Kelvedon Park. Again pursuant with the decisions contained within this paper. When analysing the requirements prescribed within the DCLG guidance to Fire and Rescue Authorities who are seeking central support for improving the resilience and efficiency of their control service. The provision of a modern data centric mobilising

of 13 solution at Kelvedon Park as detailed in option 2 is certainly the most likely to align closest to those requirements. However it must be emphasised that there is no guarantee whatsoever that any submission of a business case to DCLG will be successful, which would result in any funding being allocated. Therefore the funding of the relocation of Service Control must be sought from 2012/13 and 2013/14 budgets respectively. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The Authority has a legal duty under section 7, (2) (c) of the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004 to make arrangements for dealing with calls for help and for summoning personnel in relation to emergencies to which they have a duty to respond. Section 16 of the Act allows FRAs to enter into arrangements with any other person for the discharge of a function under any of Sections 6 to 9 and 11 of the Act. However, this delegation must be judiciously and robustly managed to ensure that any other person can satisfactorily undertake the discharged function, as responsibility for the delivery of functions within the Act remains with the fire and rescue authority. Section 22 of the Act applies if the Secretary of State considers that a FRA is failing, or is likely to fail, to act on accordance with the Act. However, only if he considers that making the order would promote public safety, economy, efficiency and effectiveness Section 29 of the Act gives the Secretary of State power to provide and maintain or to contribute to the provision and maintenance of equipment, facilities, services and organisations appropriate for promoting the economy efficiency and effectiveness of FRAs. Under Section 29(4) the Secretary of State has power, by Order, to require FRAs to use and maintain specified equipment and facilities or use specified services. USE OF RESOURCES The provision of a modern data centric mobilising solution will provide an opportunity to rationalise working practices within Control. As industry standard model, the Erlang C Staffing Model, 1 has been used to establish the correct staffing levels. Dynamic system integration will provide efficiencies across many back office functions preventing the requirement to double key information. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS Potential environmental implications will be subsumed within the programme of works for the development of Kelvedon Park 1 The Erlang C staffing model is the industry standard tool in the telecommunications sector, used to assess staffing numbers required against incoming call volumes, it allows you to enter your own variables as required to deliver the performance required by any organisation. The Service has software that will calculate these figures & has been used for the Data in this exercise.

of 13 EQUALITY IMPLICATIONS There are no significant Equality Implications directly associated with this report. LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985 List of background documents Kelvedon Park Relocation Business Case Relocation of Service Control Business Case (2011) Future of fire & rescue control services in England consultation Summary of responses July 2011 Proper Officer: Contact Officer: Assistant Chief Fire Officer Stewart Thomson Assistant Chief Fire Officer Stewart Thomson Essex County Fire & Rescue Service, Kelvedon Park, London Road, Rivenhall, Witham CM8 3HB Tel: 01376 576000 E-mail: stewart.thomson@essex-fire.gov.uk