Re: [emergency-comment] NIMS STEP comment - TractorFax

[rexbroo <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Thanks Jerome,

This is important information for us to have, so I am copying the OASIS EM TC list with this reply.

While I can only speak for myself, I think that the gap analysis I assume you have conducted to fill "shortfalls"  in EDXL coverage of incident management systems could be perhaps one of the most important tools we can support. Since NIMS STEP has been absorbed by P-TAC Center, I will add this to an ongoing ticket I have open with P-TAC concerning a FEMA Grant-supported project that uses Incident Resource Inventory System (IRIS).

What I am working on is third-party translation ontology that can provide EDXL-compatible terms/datatypes for Resources in the FEMA Resource Typing system which the firestations we are supporting need to coordinate and align with their own industry-supplied inventories. It is no easy task getting interoperability at this level.

I understand the problem only too well. Here in California the company-product attempting to build a monopoly-based interoperability by giving away the beginners-level version of their software product is making substantial inroads that I consider a long-term recipe for disaster, but I won't go into details, in order to avoid arguments and entanglements that would only make the situation even less solvable.

However, please keep beating the drums. In the long term, the only way we can deliver interoperability to the Emergency Management field is through is to provide low-to-no cost software systems at a basic level that products such as you provide can build upon, and that is the approach I am taking while working to improve the overall situation with standards.

Speaking of Standards, we are looking for vendors who are not necessarily OASIS members who can vouch for using the EDXM-SitRep v1.0 specification so we can move forward to an OASIS-wide vote for Standard status. If you could help in that effort, we would be grateful. However, in the meantime, you have brought forward a set of issues that needs to be addressed and I thank you again for that.

I wish I could be more hopeful, but I do think that if we can provide those low-cost alternative for local jurisidctions, they will work with us to build more advanced systems which implement genuine interoperability for the long term.

Thanks,
Rex Brooks

On 10/16/2012 7:20 AM, Jerome Hamilton wrote:

Dear OASIS TC;

 

We, NIMS STEP evaluated TractorFax Technologies, were evaluated back in 2008 against NIMS standards and criteria which is apparently guided and driven by underlying OASIS standards for interoperability, scalability, flexibility, and affordability across the board, as I understand things. 

 

With that said, in the beginning (2008) the NIMS STEP evaluation process had a slight sense of urgency.  Now, 5 years later, this whole process has fizzled out due in part to the fact "NIMS evaluated TractorFax fulfills longstanding shortfalls and missing capabilities within real world incident management/emergency operations following OASIS standards and criteria. If in fact public/private/NGO collaboration remains key, then TractorFax is in fact the technical environment where all 3 can co-exist!   

 

The NIMS STEP process (utilizing OASIS standards and criteria) has created a catch 22 offering nothing in the form of funding and implementing recommended pilots, even after appointed subject matter experts asked this vendor to document local, state, and regional recommended pilots for bringing our IT product from "Tech Lab" to "End User reality"...  What's up with that? 

 

The situation has created a wonderful deployment ready "all-in-one" solution to local, state, and regional level incident management/emergency operations shortfalls, however, based on my first hand experience since day one, local officials rely on their state agency as the gatekeeper to fulfilling their shortfalls and understanding the real underlying brilliance of NIMS.  Yet, SAA and State Agency Directors are intimidated and confused, thus rejecting any federal  (NIMS/OASIS compliance) standards and criteria; no matter how brilliant the solution.  And sadly most of these state/governor appointees have their own underlying agenda... 

 

The bottom line here is; the InterAgency Board (IAB) has approved NIMS evaluated TractorFax for 3 Standardized Equipment List (SELs).  And according to our sources "TractorFax is perfectly aligned with DHS/FEMA 2011 - 2014 Strategic Plan Initiative #1- the whole community approach to emergency operations".  All the while (5 years now), TractorFax recommended pilots have yet to be funded and implemented at any level while property and lives are at stake...  Shame on all.

 

In conclusion, I simply wish to get TractorFax out of my in-box and off my desk.  Can you help?  Any and all suggestions are welcomed; but I think OASIS TC involvement (oversight) is called for...  Otherwise there's no need for TractorFax being evaluated against stringent standards and criteria... even when the market has finally presented itself...   

 

Always available,

Jerome D. Hamilton, CEO

NIMS evaluated TractorFax Technologies

Communities COLLABORATIVELY Sharing Resources Securely

501-259-5007

Responders Knowledge Base link:    https://www.rkb.us/contentdetail.cfm?content_id=227516 

 

 

-- 
Rex Brooks
Starbourne Communications Design
Email: rexb@starbourne.com
GeoAddress:
1361 Addison St. Apt. A
Berkeley, CA 94702
Phone: 510-898-0670