Are Cell Phones Making Emergency Call Stations Obsolete?

1.) I hope someone can define for me what the "return on investment" looks like for an emergency call station. Do they get extra money based upon the number of actual emergency calls they get?

2.) Based upon what I have seen (primarily in university environments), the bigger issue with these units and part of what is driving it is the often astronomical cost of maintenance and upkeep, usually due to poor installation practices from the beginning. If units were properly installed originally, they can be maintained and even replaced at a much more reasonable cost. Instead, universities are having to spend gobs of money to replace all of the infrastructure, stanchions, and everything, so they are choosing to just rip them out instead and look at other solutions.

3.) To directly answer the question, yes, there are some major disruptions about to happen in this market, primarily within higher education. There are products that have been out there for a little while that are starting to get major traction there.

Actually, this did come up in our discussion. They stated that even with high numbers of cell phone users there are still benefits for help points/emergency phones:

• Readily accessible emergency phones with single-button operation can be easier for people to use than pulling out their cellphone, unlocking it, and dialing
• Immediate response in the form of optional strobe lights can be effective at causing attackers to flee, more so than a cellphone.
• Not every use case is an emergency, help phones can be used to ask for directions, or summon non-emergency help (dead battery in a parking garage). Further, for these localized situations, where the person likely wants to speak directly with campus/university police the call station is easier/faster than looking up the right number to call.
• The organizations deploying these often have their own police/medical response, and can often respond to a call from an emergency station faster than if the call first went to 911 and then to the campus (most cellphone users would likely dial 911 before a local campus police number in an emergency.

I do think that cell phones are impacting the market for the emergency phone stations, but I have not heard of campuses removing them.  Do you have a link to a story on this?

Cell phones are not a crime determent and further people at risk versus a visible and high profile emergency call station with blue light, cameras and even a high power speaker for mass notification.

This is a very interesting topic. We have a project that is deciding very soon if it should have emergency call stations based on the cell phone advantages and sometimes disadvantages. I'm in the corner that we should have Emergency call stations if anything else as a deterrent and that the Police monitor that area. With cell phones there is no guarantee.

Here are a couple of articles related to the topic:

http://www.timescall.com/longmont-local-news/ci_29264057/cu-boulder-removing-outdated-campus-emergency-phones

 https://securitytoday.com/Articles/2014/01/28/Moving-Beyond-the-Blue-Light-Smartphones-Improve-Facility-Safety.aspx?Page=1

When I spoke to return on investment, if you put in a $10k emergency communications poles (figure rounded up to include installation) and no one uses it except for the pizza delivery guy, keys locked in car, for directions or other non-emergency issues is the blue light pole really worth the cost in not only install but maintenance, or are you getting a return on your investment?  

As End User#3 stated above maybe ROI can be calculated in other ways such as it is a strong desire of parents to see these poles on campus and they are more likely to send their children to the university if they see a ton of these poles. This ROI is a little trickier to measure but still it would be an ROI.  

To me if the emergency communications poles are not being utilized perhaps the money is better invested in other tech such a smart analytics (deep learning) they would show an abnormality and auto alert the operator. 

What about those 'see something, say something' apps like elerts?

Emergency call stations are stationary, while cell phones with direct connections to support and/or emergency services are not.  You have to get to a call station to sound an alarm - with a cell phone, not.

Playing a loud sound and flashing a blue light when something is already happening can't really be described as deterrents in the classic sense.  They are alerting tools - just like apps are. 

IMO, I think these kinds of apps are a stronger alerting solution than emergency call stations.

There are a number of smart phone apps that can replace Emergency Call stations.  We use Live Safe, which allows the user to call 911 (anywhere), Call or Text security directly.  Allows the user to report tips anonymously.  Allows the user to send photos, video or audio to security.  It also functions as a "safe walk" , or actual escort request.  It has a map for the posting of incidents.  You can "push" notifications to users.  Absolutely a free download for the users.

I have not seen any limitations or problems with resource limitations.  You need someone to monitor the blue lights and someone to monitor the Live Safe event.  The only problem is if your entire computer network went down.  The app still gives the users the ability to call security or 911 if that happens.  Please explain what other limitations or resources you are referring to.   But if your network goes down, the blue lights are useless.  The app also allows you to provide informational resources such as emergency procedures, or the location of vital services and phone number.

It has one distinct advantage over a blue light.  If you truly are being attacked, you have to find or run to a blue light.  

The cost to the organization is far less than a single blue light.

Did the removal of 99% of the payphones negatively impact crime reporting? Cell phones made them obsolete too.

They need to make a GSM version station and probably already do. It is such a pain to trench, rigid conduit, aquaseal cable all these locations.

I say make a GSM model with a wifi backup and power both with Solar already.

Also why does it have to be some huge $2500 stanchion tube? Just put a pole up and stop with the 100 pound aluminum wall mount enclosures in parking garages already.

Write a phone app that beacons everyone running that same app while on campus. Your face, phone and location is now available to anyone who can assist, with a corresponding beacon to the police. Think APP911.

Do you really want your risk mitigation plans based upon a cell phone or the reliability of the provider network?  When "Boom" happens everyone pulls out a phone and begins either a live Facebook stream, snapchat or some other social media transmission over the cell/data network.  Reliability is out the window, the cell/data network is now down. How can Emergency Operations depend on this as a means to communicate with their students, visitors, employees, constituents, etc?  What if the visitor or employee doesn't have the app?  A reliable communication device with the highest level of intelligibility on reliable campus network wins this argument.  You have to plan as though no one has a cell phone because you can plan on them not working after the "boom."    

What if the campus purchased "Blue Lights" that did not provide 24/7 full supervision? (And I don't mean someone walking around campus and testing them once or twice a year.) At the same time if you can't understand what the person in the SOC is saying and the person at the stanchion can clearly hear the instructions, now what?  What do you say to someone that pressed the help button and it isn't operational?  How will their lawyer use this against the institution; sign on the stanchion says: "Out of order, keep running!"  

Emergency Operations Planning using ICS All Hazards approach has two significant bullets that the security industry has seemed to forgotten or never learned:

• Communications
• Resources and Assets

Public Address, Intercoms, "Blue Lights," Help Points, Phone Systems, Radio Systems, Elevator Communications, Parking Control Systems and similar, should  all be considered resources for unified communications when an event occurs. All of these resources and assets should be considered in All-Hazards planning.  What's more the SOC should not have to touch multiple "master stations" to communicate to all of these resources.  Institutions are now drilling and testing how long it takes to get a critical message to everyone during an event.  How long is acceptable? 

Adding more cameras and analytics is not the answer either.  Coming out of the video space I always thought the more cameras you have the greater the situational awareness.  What I have since learned is you need to be able to "See Something" AND "Say Something" or it's worthless to have all the video.

The concept of “All Hazards” Emergency Management essentially means that providers must be prepared to address the ever-expanding scope of emergencies that could potentially impact a campus/community.  Incident Action Plans (IAP) also include "Resource Typing."  During a disaster (boom), an emergency manager knows what capability a resource needs to have to respond efficiently and effectively.  Locking or unlocking doors, eyes on the scene and clear reliable communications are a must.  A "blue light" stanchion could and should be part of the resources the SOC can depend on to Alert and Inform those in harm's way.  

Maybe it is time to start thinking out of the box on how to use all communications before during and after an All Hazards event.  Much more could be said . . .