Timelines and Deliverables An overview of the timeline of the project with a lot of detail on FirstNet deliverables in the next two months August 3rd, 2015
Confidential Information
SiGNALS 1
Analytics, LLC
Today’s Agenda • Introductions (30 minutes) • Timelines and Deliverables (30 minutes) • Viewpoints (15 minutes) • Key Concepts (45 minutes) • Preview of RESULTS (60 minutes) • Public Policy / the RFP Process (30 minutes)
SiGNALS 2
Analytics, LLC
Program Timeline (Simplified)
SiGNALS 3
Analytics, LLC
Zoomed View: Preview Activities
SiGNALS 4
Analytics, LLC
Zoomed View: FirstNet Data Collection
SiGNALS 5
Analytics, LLC
Zoomed View: Future Activities
SiGNALS 6
Analytics, LLC
Coverage Models – Important Hypothetical Scenarios Study
Objective
Sites
Geographic Coverage
Notes
I
Coverage ONLY
Existing Assets
Specified Areas
• First Study
II
Coverage AND Capacity
Existing Assets
Specified Areas
• Adds Analysis of Capacity
III
Coverage AND Capacity
Existing Assets
100% of Geography
• Extends to 100% of Area
IV
Coverage AND Capacity
Unconstrained Site Locations
Specified Areas
• Assesses Unconstrained Locations
V
Coverage AND Capacity
Unconstrained Site Locations
100% of Geography
• Unconstrained and 100% Area
VI
Coverage AND Capacity
Existing and Commercial
Specified Areas
• Leverages Commercial
VII
Coverage AND Capacity
VIII
Coverage AND Capacity
Alternative Design Existing and Commercial
Specified Areas
• TBD • Verified Design Inputs
SiGNALS 7
Analytics, LLC
Existing Sites: 6,650, and Growing
SiGNALS 8
Analytics, LLC
FirstNet Deliverables
Confidential Information
SiGNALS 9
Analytics, LLC
Summary – Information to be Collected
Graphic provided by FirstNet
10
SiGNALS Analytics, LLC
Summary – Information to be Collected
A few very important questions that can be answered only after careful analysis and consideration of the implications
Graphic, without highlights, provided by FirstNet
11
SiGNALS Analytics, LLC
1a. Coverage Objectives
We need to decide what geographic areas need to be covered, at what quality of coverage, and why
Graphic provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 12
Analytics, LLC
1b. Phased Deployment
We also need to describe these requirements as a phased deployment
Graphic provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 13
Analytics, LLC
Formal Surveys
Confidential Information
SiGNALS 14
Analytics, LLC
FirstNet Colorado Data Collection Form Form
Short Form
https://sites.google.com/a/state.co.us/firstnetcolorado/home/consultation-process/datacollection/data-collection-form
Good News: Many of you have already provided much of the detailed factual information requested by FirstNet
SiGNALS 15
Analytics, LLC
Your Opinion Counts!
Please take the survey, if you haven’t already done so. You will find it on the home page of the FirstNet Colorado web site: https://sites.google.com/a/state.co.us/firstnetcolorado/home/consultation-process/datacollection/data-collection-form
SiGNALS 16
Analytics, LLC
2a. Demographics of each PSE
Graphic provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 17
Analytics, LLC
2b. Number of Devices
Graphic provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 18
Analytics, LLC
2c. Number of PSEs and Associated Personnel and Devices
Graphic provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 19
Analytics, LLC
2d-i. Operational Areas
Graphic provided by FirstNet
20
SiGNALS Analytics, LLC
2d-ii. Calls for Service
Graphic provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 21
Analytics, LLC
3a. Current Use of Data Services and Applications
Graphic provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 22
Analytics, LLC
3b. Data Usage
Graphic provided by FirstNet
23
SiGNALS Analytics, LLC
4a. Current Service Provider’s Plans and Pricing
Graphic provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 24
Analytics, LLC
4b. Barriers to Adoption
Graphic provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 25
Analytics, LLC
5a. State Decision Process
Graphic provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 26
Analytics, LLC
Spreadsheet Template #1: Demographics
Spreadsheet provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 27
Analytics, LLC
Spreadsheet Template #2: Devices
Spreadsheet provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 28
Analytics, LLC
Spreadsheet Template #3: Applications
Spreadsheet provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 29
Analytics, LLC
Experimental Systems
Confidential Information
SiGNALS 30
Analytics, LLC
ADCOM – Adams County Band 14 Trial, Site Locations
Site locations provided by ADCOM
The red dots above, superimposed on Google Earth, show the exact location of each trial site
SiGNALS 31
Analytics, LLC
ADCOM – Adams County Band 14 Trial, Radio Propagation
Graphic provided by ADCOM
Each site has a different coverage footprint. Hoyt (in the east), with an antenna at 550 feet, has a significantly larger footprint than lower sites in more populated areas.
SiGNALS 32
Analytics, LLC
Vail Demonstration Network (FIS World Ski Championships)
Presentation available to download from https://drive.google.com/a/state.co.us/file/d/0Bz1j7r1gtoiTdVc4VEtLLWxfNkE/view?usp=sharing A video briefing is also available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGNXml9zxj0
Kim Coleman gave an information-rich presentation at the IWCE conference in Las Vegas. This demonstration showed a Band 14 network under load
SiGNALS 33
Analytics, LLC
FirstNet’s Timeline
Confidential Information
SiGNALS 34
Analytics, LLC
FirstNet Timeline for 2015
Data Collection Due
Graphic (without annotations) provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 35
Analytics, LLC
FirstNet’s Timeline, Based on the Draft RFP
Graphic (without annotations) provided by FirstNet
The Draft RFP envisions a network that is build incrementally over a 5-year period, beginning as a national MVNO
SiGNALS 36
Analytics, LLC
National RAN vs. Regional or State-Assume RAN
Graphic provided by FirstNet
The Act allows for the possibility of a state-assumed RAN or a regional (multiple states) RAN
SiGNALS 37
Analytics, LLC
FirstNet Sustainability Model
Graphic provided by FirstNet
SiGNALS 38
Analytics, LLC
Video Resources • FirstNet Colorado has a YouTube video channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCt51PwPKUs3LvaS0DTZ2YWQ
• Another way to learn about FirstNet, including hearing the views of the elected representatives that established FirstNet, is to watch the recorded videos of the Senate and House oversight hearings. – The Senate Commerce Committee held a hearing on March 11th, 2015: http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Hearings&ContentRecord_id=25dedd7c-815b-4b3da420-4f4324d01041&ContentType_id=14f995b9-dfa5-407a-9d35-56cc7152a7ed&Group_id=b06c39afe033-4cba-9221-de668ca1978a&YearDisplay=2015
– The House Committee on Energy and Commerce held a hearing on June 16th, 2015: http://energycommerce.house.gov/hearing/progress-toward-nationwide-public-safety-broadband-network
• There are also a large number of videos available on YouTube (and elsewhere), from FirstNet and from States, including some produced by FirstNet on the data collection process, if you search for “FirstNet”
SiGNALS 39
Analytics, LLC
FirstNet’s Coverage Map
Confidential Information
SiGNALS 40
Analytics, LLC
Current FirstNet Map of Colorado
High Medium Low
GIS data with L, M, H pixels provided by FirstNet, mapping by Signals Analytics, LLC, using Google Earth
SiGNALS 41
Analytics, LLC
FirstNet Specification: Coverage Statistics 100% 90%
80% 70% 60%
Low
50%
Med High
40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Population
Area
The FirstNet specification covers 97.3% of the population of Colorado but only 23.7% of the area. The areas marked “high” in importance represent 0.9% of the area.
SiGNALS 42
Analytics, LLC
FirstNet Specification: Coverage Statistics County Adams Alamosa Arapahoe Archuleta* Baca Bent Boulder Broomfield Chaffee Cheyenne Clear Creek Conejos Costilla Crowley Custer Delta Denver Dolores Douglas Eagle El Paso Elbert Fremont Garfield Gilpin
Population
Area
99.4% 98.0% 99.7% 76.5% 77.3% 94.3% 99.7% 100.0% 86.7% 71.8% 86.5% 93.5% 60.8% 90.7% 49.2% 92.9% 100.0% 69.1% 98.6% 94.6% 97.9% 70.6% 93.5% 92.3% 91.4%
45.8% 64.8% 64.2% 20.7% 10.3% 13.1% 70.6% 100.0% 24.3% 10.5% 38.9% 39.1% 25.1% 19.4% 24.6% 36.4% 99.3% 8.8% 60.1% 19.3% 40.2% 16.3% 28.8% 21.0% 54.2%
County
Population
Area
89.2% 88.4% 73.8% 74.4% 68.4% 99.9% 70.7% 79.6% 88.7% 93.9% 97.3% 81.0% 68.0% 89.0% 97.8% 83.5% 89.7% 89.4% 96.9% 92.7% 97.5% 75.9% 60.4% 82.4% 90.5%
22.5% 18.0% 8.7% 19.0% 11.8% 97.5% 13.1% 8.3% 33.5% 26.0% 34.3% 6.4% 11.2% 23.5% 22.0% 15.3% 13.6% 25.5% 28.7% 31.8% 25.9% 21.3% 20.6% 14.4% 15.9%
Grand Gunnison Hinsdale Huerfano Jackson Jefferson Kiowa Kit Carson La Plata* Lake Larimer Las Animas Lincoln Logan Mesa Mineral Moffat Montezuma* Montrose Morgan Otero Ouray Park Phillips Pitkin
County
Population
Area
Prowers Pueblo Rio Blanco Rio Grande Routt Saguache San Juan San Miguel Sedgwick Summit Teller Washington Weld Yuma COMPOSITE
95.1% 97.8% 90.3% 93.6% 81.6% 77.9% 95.3% 84.7% 80.9% 96.8% 70.6% 59.7% 97.8% 77.3% 97.3%
25.9% 34.1% 22.0% 45.3% 15.8% 23.7% 23.3% 20.1% 24.2% 40.4% 29.1% 13.1% 38.2% 16.9% 23.7%
Reservation
Population
Area
80.9% 90.3% 81.9%
39.7% 14.7% 29.6%
Southern Ute Ute Mountain COMPOSITE
* Includes tribal and non-‐tribal areas
Population coverage is similar across counties. Area coverage varies, from 8.3% to 100.0%. These ratios reflect the total of low, medium, and high priority areas.
SiGNALS 43
Analytics, LLC
Computer Aided Dispatch – Incident Data
Confidential Information
SiGNALS 44
Analytics, LLC
Computer Aided Dispatch • What we need: – A year of data, in spreadsheet format – The data must include date, longitude, latitude, or civil address. – Ideally, incidents would be flagged by the type of response (police, fire, EMS), allowing for multiple classifications (e.g. fire + EMS, as an example) • How we hope to use the data: – It will be converted into a computer-generated map of “incident density”. – It will be used to optimize the coverage in your county to ensure that areas with a high number of incidents have good coverage
SiGNALS 45
Analytics, LLC
Jefferson County – Arial View
SiGNALS 46
Analytics, LLC
Jefferson County – Population (Census Tract View)
SiGNALS 47
Analytics, LLC
Jefferson County – Population with Clutter Weights View
SiGNALS 48
Analytics, LLC
Jefferson County – Clutter + Incident Data (2% Sample)
SiGNALS 49
Analytics, LLC
Jefferson County – Clutter + Incident Data (2% Sample)
SiGNALS 50
Analytics, LLC
Jefferson County – Dispatch Incident Data (2% Sample)
SiGNALS 51
Analytics, LLC
Aspen Park – Dispatch Incident Data (2% Sample)
SiGNALS 52
Analytics, LLC
Aspen Park – Dispatch Incident Data (100% of Data)
SiGNALS 53
Analytics, LLC
Buffalo Creek – Dispatch Incident Data (2% Sample)
SiGNALS 54
Analytics, LLC
Buffalo Creek – Dispatch Incident Data (100% of Data)
SiGNALS 55
Analytics, LLC
Conclusions • The western mountainous portion of Jefferson County would appear to be relatively uneventful, based upon demographics and clutter • Incident data tells a different story – There is a lot of activity in the western part of the county (e.g. Aspen Park) – The activity is high around major roads – There is also a lot of activity away from major roads – The entire area is mountainous – In the southern part of the county (Buffalo Creek) the volume of incidents is much lower. • The sample shows no activity • The full data set show some activity, but much less than regions to the north – Both of these areas look similar from a satellite / aerial view
SiGNALS 56
Analytics, LLC
Disclaimer
Disclaimer: This slide deck was prepared by the State of Colorado Governor’s Office of Information Technology using funds under award 08-10S13008 from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC). The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NTIA, DOC or FirstNet.
SiGNALS 57
Analytics, LLC
