An emergency communication system (ECS) is any system (typically computer-based) that is organized for the primary purpose of supporting one-way and two-way communication of emergency information between individuals and groups. These systems may convey information over multiple types of devices, from signal lights to text messaging to live, streaming video, forming a unified communication system to optimize communications during emergencies. These systems are often made up of both input devices, sensors, and output/communication devices. Therefore, the origination of information can occur from a variety of sources and locations, from which the system will disseminate that information to one or more target audiences.
Emergency communication vs. notification An emergency notification system refers to a collection of methods that facilitate the one-way dissemination or broadcast of messages to one or many groups of people with the details of an occurring or pending emergency situation. Mass automated dialing services such as Cell Broadcast, Reverse 911, as well as common siren systems that are used to alert for tornadoes, tsunamis, air-raid, and other such incidents, are examples of emergency notification systems.
Emergency mass communication systems often provide or integrate those same notification services from a central source, and also include two-way communication—to facilitate communications among emergency communications staff, affected people, and first responders. Another distinguishing attribute of the term "communication" may be that it implies the ability to provide detailed and meaningful information about an evolving emergency and actions that might be taken; whereas "notification" denotes a relatively more simplistic one-time conveyance of the existence and general nature of an emergency.
Emergency individual communication refers to reports from an individual site to a central site, and may be one-way or two-way. It includes medical alarms, security alarms, panic buttons. The central site can notify others.
Alternate and related terms Since there are a collection of related systems used in diverse settings in varying ways, there are numerous terms used by entities which have a need for emergency communications. For example, use of the terms "emergency communications" and "disaster communications" refer to the same concept.
Alarm management Alerting System Audiovisual Public Address System Civil defense siren Common Alerting Protocol Disaster Communication System Emergency Alert Emergency Alert System Emergency Communications Emergency control centre Emergency management information system Emergency management software Emergency Notification Emergency population warning Emergency Public Warning System Emergency Response Software Emergency service Emergency Warning System Fire alarm system IoT Security Devices Mass Notification Medical alarm Network-Centric Emergency Communication Network-centric emergency notification Physical security Public address system Public Mass Notification Public safety network Public Security System Security alarm Unified Communication System Unified Emergency Communications Voice-activated radio-dispatched alarm
Emergency notification system
An emergency notification system is a method of facilitating the one-way dissemination or broadcast of messages to one or many groups of people, alerting them to a pending or existing emergency. The Emergency Notification System (ENS) was created by Dialogic Communication Corporation (DCC) in the early 1980s. DCC, including its patent portfolio, was purchased by Motorola Solutions as part of their 2018 acquisition of Airbus DS Communications.
Many local governments and organizations that hold large, public events adopt emergency notification systems to be able to notify large groups of people in the event of an emergency. For example, in 2013 the Dallas YMCA Thanksgiving "turkey trot" race, with over 40,000 participants, implemented an alert system called RedFlag.
Most major telecommunications providers offer Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs) access to their subscriber data (in the areas serviced by the PSAP) in order to facilitate the effective use of one-way emergency notifications
One-click notification One click notification is a method of clicking one button within a mobile app or emergency notification platform to initiate the dissemination of a message. An emergency notification system is an example of one-click multimodal notification. Organizations use a one-click notification service to trigger the sending of messages via pre-saved configurations such as selected contact groups, chosen delivery methods etc.
Need and limitations Emergencies place demands on communication processes that are often significantly different from the demands of non-emergency circumstances. Emergencies often involve escalating and evolving events that demand high performance and flexibility from the systems that provide emergency communication services. Message prioritization, automation of communication, fast message delivery, communication audit trails, and other capabilities are often required by each unique emergency situation. Inadequate emergency communications capabilities can have consequences that are inconvenient at best and disastrous at worst.
Depending on the location, time, and nature of the emergency, a large variety of limitations could present themselves when it comes to communicating details of an emergency and any resultant actions that may need to be taken to protect life and property. For example, an audio public address system might be rendered ineffective if the emergency happens to be an explosive event which renders most or all of those affected deaf. Another common example might be the limitation of a fire alarm's siren component in a deaf school. Yet another example of a limitation could be the overloading of public services (such as cellular phone networks), resulting in the delay of vital SMS messages until they are too late, such as occurred during the Boston Marathon bombing.
Attributes Timeliness and speed of delivery Emergency systems require timely and quick dissemination in order to mitigate damage or loss of life. During the Virginia Tech massacre, about two hours had passed before the first communication (an email) was sent to staff and students. By that time, the gunman had already entered and secured a building in which he was shortly to begin his attack. It wasn't until about 20 minutes after the shootings began that a loudspeaker announcement was made for people to take cover.
Ease of use During a crisis, the people who use an ECS need to launch their notifications and they need to be able to do so in a way that securely provides them with confidence and an intuitive interface that can be accessed from any location. An emergency communication system that's designed for non-technical users will ensure successful administration and usage; and during some life-threatening emergency situations, campus administrators must be able to trigger the alert system swiftly.
However, in order to support a robust and capable emergency communication ability, this ease of use should not preclude the use of a complex, technologically advanced system. A sufficiently advanced system is required to coordinate multiple components to act in concert, to initiate and propagate emergency communications in any manner of ways. A distinguishing factor is when such a system includes these advanced capabilities, while still being easy for the user to operate. This is important not only for effective emergency communication, but also for an organization to realize the most return on investment, as well as the user being familiar enough with its operation as to effectively operate it under stressful emergency situations, such as in an earthquake or tsunami.
Providing instructions A clearly needed attribute of any modern emergency communication system is the ability to not only provide notification of an emergency, but to also provide clear and actionable instructions for how to respond to an emergency. In a study by the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center for Wireless Technologies, it was revealed that regardless of the initial form of notification, a secondary form was necessary before action would be taken. This supports the important observation that providing clear and concise instructions may reduce dependency on such secondary verification; and thus, providing instructions may save lives in an urgent emergency situation.
Specific audiences or recipients Emergencies often require delivery of different versions of the same communication at the same time. For example, in an armed hostage-taking incident, occupants of a building may need to receive instructions to lock and barricade the door until further notice, while first responders to the incident need to be aware of the lockdown instructions and be provided more specific details of the hostage-taking event to inform their actions.
Using the hostage-taking example, some of the more modern emergency communication systems state the ability to deliver a single message that provides full details to first responders, while filtering that same message to provide more limited instructions to different groups. For example, a specific message could be sent to people in a certain area, in a specific building, or even in a specific department. By using a single message that segregates information between types of users, fewer messages have to be created and sent, which can also save time.
Multiple communication paths/redundancy There should be multiple means of delivering emergency information so that if one fails, others may get through. Also, according to the Partnership for Public Warning, research shows clearly that more than one channel of communication will be consulted by people at risk in order to confirm the need for action. The public expects to be contacted in a variety of ways. As evidenced by various historical and recent events, besides phone calls and emails, citizens also expect to be able to use and be reached via text messaging, and fax. In one exemplary incident, the 2012 Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting, barricaded victims relied on sending text messages for help, in addition to traditional phone calls. In addition, the public may look to social media as another vehicle to receive messages and check in on updates.
Additionally, the Partnership for Public Warning states, "A single warning is frequently insufficient to move people to action, especially if it cannot be confirmed by direct observation. For most people the first warning received captures their attention and triggers a search for corroboration, but cannot be relied on to elicit the desired behavior. Scientific research supports the common-sense observation that people are disinclined to risk being fooled by a single alarm that might prove false or accidental. Effective warning requires the coordinated use of multiple channels of communication."
Interoperability
To support these attributes, a "unified" emergency communication system should be able to connect to and communicate with other related systems, hence the term. According to the Partnership for Public Warning, a fundamental problem is the lack of technical and procedural interoperability among warning originators, system providers, delivery systems, and warning recipients. Originators of warnings must undertake expensive, redundant tasks using multiple, dissimilar tools and techniques to take full advantage of today's warning systems.