In 2018, law enforcement agencies gained access to a national, interoperable first responder broadband communications network that was supposed to result in simple solutions for interoperability. For various reasons, this has not happened. In this report, RAND researchers present practical knowledge to inform agencies about available broadband options and opportunities, governance issues, funding options, costs, and barriers to implementation.
Broadband Communications Prioritization and Interoperability Guidance for Law Enforcement
Critical Considerations in the Transition to the Public Safety Broadband Network
Download
Download eBook for Free
| Format | File Size | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| PDF file | 6.3 MB | Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience. |
Purchase
Purchase Print Copy
| Format | List Price | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Add to Cart | Paperback110 pages | $36.00 | $28.80 20% Web Discount |
Research Questions
- What is the current state of public safety broadband, and what broadband options and opportunities are available, or emerging, for law enforcement?
- What are the issues of governance, funding, costs, and barriers to implementation that come with maintaining, acquiring, and transitioning to the NPSBN or a competing broadband platform?
In 2018, law enforcement agencies gained access to a federally funded and managed, interoperable first responder broadband communications network, the Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network (NPSBN), known as FirstNet. FirstNet was supposed to result in simple solutions for agencies seeking interoperability. For various reasons, this has not happened. Every law enforcement and first responder agency has legacy systems and equipment for mobile broadband uses and is faced with a complex set of decisions about its broadband communications infrastructure. Several competitors to FirstNet have emerged and are competing for a share of the public safety broadband market, causing confusion for end users. In addition, to make decisions regarding broadband communications systems, many agencies need assistance to understand the technical differences between various options.
To address the dizzying array of providers, capabilities, and options for the future, RAND researchers developed practical knowledge to inform agencies about available broadband options and opportunities, governance issues, funding options, costs, and barriers to implementation. This report is intended to help law enforcement executives, their staff, and their city or county communications technology providers chart a course forward that optimizes the systems they have now while better integrating technologies for enhanced interoperability.
Key Findings
- There are many device options and service providers available and many systems that make up a public safety network.
- Governance is needed to establish clear lines of authority and priorities for investment.
- Agencies have multiple options for funding communications technologies, including information technology budgets, police or municipal annual or operating budgets, grants, and private donations.
- Budgeting for broadband communications covers many costs, including software apps, connections between apps and databases, mobile device management systems, mobile application management systems, bridging to land mobile radio networks, training, and personnel.
- One critical aspect of reliability is a system's ability to interoperate smoothly with other systems.
- FirstNet seeks to be "public safety grade" and should be able to survive various threats. However, there is no standardized definition of this term.
- Agencies might already know the most likely threats to their broadband infrastructure. Any system employed for public safety broadband communications should be oriented to survive both these and novel threats.
- Broadband technology has been evolving rapidly — and so have new devices, sensors, and applications that need ever more bandwidth.
- It is important that agencies acquire broadband communications systems in ways that allow for relatively easy and inexpensive upgrading.
- Although agencies traditionally manage broadband contracting, equipment, and deployment individually, a better option might be a joint-powers agreement, a consortium dedicated to communications capabilities.
- The outcomes of the coverage modeling strongly suggest that the idea that LTE (Long-Term Evolution)/5G will displace LMR in the near future is not supported by the evidence.
Table of Contents
Chapter One
Introduction
Chapter Two
Methodology
Chapter Three
Understanding Core Communications Technologies
Chapter Four
Governance and Operational Requirements
Chapter Five
Funding and Acquisition
Chapter Six
Broadband Communications Costs for Law Enforcement Agencies
Chapter Seven
Barriers and Issues
Chapter Eight
Conclusions and Key Takeaways
Appendix A
Current and Emerging Broadband Technologies
Appendix B
Full Results of Coverage Modeling
Appendix C
Glossary
Research conducted by
This research was supported by the National Institute of Justice and conducted in the Justice Policy Program within RAND Social and Economic Well-Being.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.