Client: Stafford County, VA
In April of 2014, Stafford County upgraded its CAD system to the current Windows-based Infor EnRoute SQL CAD and Mobile system. Following the upgrade, significant issues arose during the implementation of the CAD and Mobile applications, including:
- Problems with functionality;
- A difficult transition for call takers and dispatchers;
- Serious performance problems;
- Quality issues in the deployment of software modifications; and
- Lockups and crashes of the software.
Seven months after implementation, the County sought to re-evaluate whether they should stay with the new EnRoute CAD system or replace it. If staying with the system, the County wanted to know the options available to improve the situation and resolve the outstanding issues.
IXP assessed the CAD system to make recommendations for moving forward. IXP found that some of the problems related to the following:
- Difficulties with functionality and configuration experienced during training;
- Dispatchers’ lack of familiarity with Microsoft Windows;
- Exploring and correcting configuration and data issues particularly related to the GIS; and
- Getting used to the new system.
IXP observed that the vendor EnRoute was reasonably responsive to these issues, as they had put personnel onsite at the Emergency Communications Center (ECC) to troubleshoot problems for extended periods. Because EnRoute had been responsive, IXP recommended that the County work with the vendor to address the remaining issues. IXP further recommended the development of a complete list of the major issues with the SQL and CAD system, establishing a timeframe within which EnRoute had to correct those issues, and monitor the progress until the agreed-upon timeframe had expired. If the County found the progress insufficient at that time, IXP recommended reviving the prior RFP process and searching for a CAD system that better fits the County’s needs and goals.
Stafford County accepted IXP’s assessment and requested further assistance in developing and implementing a corrective action plan. IXP worked with the customer to document all outstanding issues and prioritize them. Stafford and IXP then presented the vendor with a list of ‘critical’ and ‘important’ issues and gave a timeframe in which to complete corrections. The vendor agreed to the timeframe for corrections and the customer continued to work with them to a satisfactory resolution.