CESSA Technology, Systems Integration & Data Management Subcommittee Meeting - Approved Minutes 06/02/2025

CESSA Technology, Systems Integration & Data Management Subcommittee Meeting - Approved Minutes 06/02/2025

Time: 2 - 3:30 pm

Via Zoom

Subcommittee members: Brent Reynolds, Cindy Barbera-Brelle, David Albert (Designee- Lucy Craycroft), Jim Kaitschuk, Robert Van Bebber (Designee- Irene Wadhams), Candace Coleman (Designee-Jessica Gimeno), Pete Dyer

The meeting was called to order by Brent Reynolds at 2:04 p.m.

Roll Call (Erin Condon)

  • Present: Brent Reynolds, Cindy Barbera-Brelle, Lucy Craycroft, Jim Kaitschuk, Irene Wadhams, Jessica Gimeno, Pete Dyer
  • Quorum is present

Approval of Minutes from the Previous Meetings (Erin Condon)

  • Cindy Barbera-Brelle motioned to approve April 7 meeting minutes; Pete Dyer seconded the motion
    • No discussion/changes
    • Voted to approve: Brent Reynolds, Cindy Barbera-Brelle, Lucy Craycroft, Jim Kaitschuk, Irene Wadhams, Jessica Gimeno, Pete Dyer
    • Quorum approved the minutes

State Updates (Allie Lichterman)

  • Legislative session has ended; final outcomes as follows:
    • SB 2500 passed both houses and is currently with the Governor's office
    • SB 2500 would 1) create protocols for MCRTs to interact with LE during transportation/involuntary transportation situations, and would 2) extend implementation deadline to July 1, 2027
    • 988 funding went through; surcharge will help fund 988 and mobile crisis response (so that we are less reliant on the general revenue fund and federal funds)
  • Jessica Gimeno: Could you talk more about the 988 surcharges?
    • Allie Lichterman: It was projected to be $30-50 million; it's a surcharge on phone bills similar to 911. Trying to be less reliant on general revenue fund and to account for costs. The language in the spending bill is from the 988 trust fund and can fund both 988 and mobile crisis response, so it's meant to fund both even though it's called the 988 surcharge. Thank you to all who have been working hard in Springfield.

Baseline Assessment Project Updates (Judie Bargeron)

  • Caveat about meeting content: In this meeting, Jodie Bargeron will provide an update about the current status of various projects and immediate next steps; Pete Eckart will share information about a general timeline through FY27 and long-term next steps.
  • Goal is to reach out to PSAPs, Centerstone, and MCRTs to understand aspects of their crisis response before any pilot work began and before any CESSA implementation. Calendar year 2024 data can be used as a comparison for studies in the future and can help us understand general progress/effectiveness.
    • Completed: Identifying outcomes, measures, and benchmarks for assessment; confirming timeframe for baseline period
    • In progress/Summer 2025: Collecting data from PSAPs, Centerstone, and MCRT
    • Fall 2025: Beginning to review data analysis/results from the assessment

Landscape Survey Project (Jodie Bargeron)

  • PSAP landscape survey formerly conducted in 2023 to assess availability of different crisis response tools
  • As more resources become available, looking to re-field/redistribute the landscape survey later this year and help people learn about what is locally available (internal planning in progress)
  • Data collection later this year

Provider Data Collection & Reporting Database Updates (Jodie Bargeron)

  • In development; agencies will use the database to report for 988 and 590 services
  • Currently meeting with DMH staff to review current data practices and preparing for alpha testing software this summer
  • Cindy Barbera-Brelle [regarding landscape survey data]: Is the plan to use that as a baseline, so we'll provide that back out to the PSAP and the system in general, so that they can see what they previously provided in a response, and then have a column that shows where we're at in 24-25? Something to that effect so we can have the comparison in one document?
    • Jodie Bargeron: We are looking at how to collect landscape survey data, in terms of using Qualtrics or another online survey tool. We will look at providing the 2023 comparison, what would be most useful for the PSAPs, and how we can provide that. In short, TBD.
    • Cindy Barbera-Brelle: I think it will be important because we did a lot of hand holding last time, and I think the survey would be helpful because it's a lot easier to maneuver through that than to look a spreadsheet. I think the most important thing is to have some sort of kickoff meeting where the PSAPs-or whoever is going to respond to the survey-are invited so they understand the survey instrument and what kind of responses are expected.
    • Pete Eckart: I'll add that, without committing to a specific piece of data, the general purpose is to do what you are asking, Cindy.

Pilot Updates and Data Collection Updates (Jodie Bargeron)

  • 82 calls transferred from 911 to 988 (through the first week of May via the PowerPhone pilot)
  • Majority of callers' concerns were addressed by 988 crisis counselors
    • Call time with 988 crisis counselors for calls in which the call was coded as crisis "de-escalated" averaged close to 15 minutes (calls not coded as "de-escalated" are not included)
    • The 82 calls include one or two callers known to 911 who call frequently
    • Of 82 calls, 4 were referred to MCRT for an on-site response
    • Of 82 calls, 3 were transferred back to 911
  • Brent Reynolds: Of the 3 calls transferred back to 911, do we know what the situation was or any backstory?
    • Jodie Bargeron: I don't have that at my fingertips right now; I know that for one of them, during the transfer between 911 and 988, the caller escalated, and it was decided to keep it with 911 and 988 did not accept the transfer.
    • Brent Reynolds: Okay, so it wasn't effectively transferred.
    • Jodie Bargeron: Without having all the info pulled up, I don't want to comment on the other two.
  • Jessica Gimeno: For timeframe, you said May-did you say the first week of May?
    • Jodie Bargeron: These are the same data that were presented during the May SAC meeting. So, this was through the first week of May.
    • Jessica Gimeno: From when? When did it begin?
    • Jodie Bargeron: Each of the pilot sites started on specific dates, so it varies.

FY 2026 Benchmarks (Pete Eckart)

  • Will provide high-level overview of tentative plans/timelines

Implementation Data Collection and Reporting: FY26 and FY27 Benchmarks (Pete Eckart)

  • Note: Approx. 170 PSAPs right now (~20 in the pilot process and ~150 need to be brought on)
  • FY26 Q1
    • Review pilot data (as currently available), analyze barriers and opportunities to more complete data collection, develop recommendations for possible additional data indicators and process improvements
    • Submit quarterly reports to ILGA and informal monthly reports to DMH
  • FY26 Q2 and Q3
    • Collect data from new implementation sites, set data analysis and reporting cadence
    • Submit quarterly reports to ILGA and informal monthly reports to DMH
  • FY26 Q4
    • Collect data from new implementation sites. Conduct data analysis and report as planned. Conduct and prepare annual evaluation report and recommendations.
    • Submit quarterly reports to ILGA and informal monthly reports to DMH
  • FY27 Q1
    • Collect data from new implementation sites, set data analysis and reporting cadence
    • Submit quarterly reports to ILGA and informal monthly reports to DMH
  • FY27 Q2 and Q3
    • Collect data from new implementation sites, report as planned
    • Submit quarterly reports to ILGA and informal monthly reports to DMH
  • FY27 Q4
    • Collect data from new implementation sites. Conduct data analysis and report as planned. Conduct and prepare annual evaluation report and recommendations.
    • Submit quarterly reports to ILGA and informal monthly reports to DMH

Landscape Survey: FY26 and FY27 Benchmarks

  • FY26 Q1
    • Review and revise landscape survey instrument, including scope of survey (e.g. "somewhere to go" and training needs)
  • FY26 Q2 and Q3
    • Issue landscape survey with new wave of PSAPs
  • FY26 Q4
    • Issue landscape survey with new wave of PSAPs, review and revise landscape instrument if necessary
  • FY27 Q1 through Q4
    • Issue landscape survey with new wave of PSAPs

Baseline Assessment: FY26 and FY27 Benchmarks

  • FY25 Q4
    • Create data collection tool and dataset for baseline assessment
    • Pilot test data collection with sub-set of providers
    • Determine method and audience for distributing results of baseline assessment
    • Begin collecting data and populating dataset
  • FY26 Q1
    • Determine comparisons for next studies
  • FY26 Q2
    • Draft and deliver Baseline Assessment Results report
    • Review results and confirm outcomes/measures for comparison studies
    • Determine comparisons for next studies
    • Begin second comparison study
  • FY26 Q3
    • Draft and deliver Baseline Assessment Results report
  • FY26 Q4
    • Review and revise baseline assessment instrument, distribution, and reporting process.
  • FY27 Q1
    • Draft and distribute Baseline Assessment
    • Begin third comparison study
  • FY27 Q2 and Q3
    • Draft and deliver Baseline Assessment Results report
  • FY27 Q4
    • Review and revise baseline assessment instrument, distribution, and reporting process.

Provider Data Collection & Reporting Database: FY26 and FY27 Benchmarks

  • FY25 Q4
    • Provider Data Collection &Reporting Database (PDCRD) Alpha (internal) training/testing
    • PDCRD Beta (user) training and testing
    • Identify and align with existing or planned associated database development
  • FY26 Q1
    • PDCRD Pilot (provider) training and testing
    • PDCRD monitoring, reporting, and change management
  • FY26 Q2
    • PDCRD full training and implementation
    • PDCRD monitoring, reporting, and change management
    • Identify and align with existing or planned associated database development
  • FY26 Q3
    • PDCRD additional training and onboarding
    • PDCRD monitoring, reporting, and change management
  • FY26 Q4
    • PDCRD additional training and onboarding
    • Conduct full evaluation of the PDCRD, including monitoring, reporting, and change management
    • Identify, align and interconnect with existing or planned associated database development
  • FY27 Q1 and Q2
    • PDCRD additional training and onboarding
    • PDCRD monitoring, reporting, and change management
  • FY27 Q3
    • PDCRD additional training and onboarding
    • PDCRD monitoring, reporting, and change management
    • Identify, align and interconnect with existing or planned associated database development
  • FY27 Q4
    • PDCRD additional training and onboarding
    • Conduct full evaluation of the PDCRD, including monitoring, reporting, and change management
    • Identify, align and interconnect with existing or planned associated database development
  • Jessica Gimeno [following up about question from Pilot Updates and Data Collection Updates section]: Jodie said earlier that there were 82 calls transferred from 911 to 988. Do you know how many total calls?
    • Jodie Bargeron: I can look at the PowerPhone dataset to look at the total number of calls. I believe that information will be included in the overall pilot report.
    • Pete Eckart: Is it correct that that information was not originally in the design for the reports?
    • Jodie Bargeron: It hasn't been included in the information that's included in the SAC. When they send us their data, it does not include total calls to the PSAP.
    • Pete Eckart: The PSAP should be able to tell us the total number of calls, but we have to change our reporting process to correct that. It shouldn't be tough if we add the question.
    • Brent Reynolds: That's accurate. If you want to get into the mental health calls that resulted in a dispatch before being transferred out, that may be challenging. But total number of calls should be easy to report.
    • Pete Eckart: Since we started working on CESSA, we have tried to answer the question: How do we know that calls appropriate for 988 or MCR were correctly identified? The telecommunicators should be able to transfer more calls as they become more familiar with the system as a whole. We have been thrilled so far with 82 calls, which show it is possible to change the current system. Now, it's just about improving the quantity and quality of transfers over time.
    • Jodie Bargeron: Also, I want to remind us that the 82 calls were just for PowerPhone. This does not include the Priority Dispatch numbers. Those will be at the June SAC.

Dashboard Development: FY26 and FY27 Benchmarks (Jodie Bargeron)

  • Discussion
    • Jodie Bargeron: We've discussed internally the different types of audiences we could share dashboards with. Obviously, there would be different options for public facing dashboards versus dashboards that might be more targeted to smaller groups and different sets of interests. We wanted to get your thoughts on what type of audience.
    • Brent Reynolds: I think all of public safety would be interested in seeing a dashboard from across the state, not just locally. Both regional breakdown as well as statewide.
    • Jessica Gimeno: It would be helpful if we could look at information by county as well.
    • Allie Lichterman: I can see legislators wanting to see it by district, so they can see what's going on in their district. I also imagine community groups, organizers, and especially service providers would want to show that the services they are recommending to their clients actually work.
    • Brent Reynolds: I think the idea for the legislators is good. My first reaction after thinking that was a good idea, is how do we break down where we have multi-jurisdictional 911 PSAPs?
    • Allie Lichterman: Illinois has more units of government than any other state by the hundreds, so breaking down data-no matter how well collected and categorized-is just very difficult to make useful. I am trying to think about what breakdowns every PSAP would have; I feel like most legislators know police districts, or EMS regions.
    • Jodie Bargeron: I suspect so. For each PSAP, we have the information on the geographic areas that they serve. These are variables that I could create, such as Senate Districts, for example. We could identify variables differently to be able to see overlap.
    • Brent Reynolds: I understand that out legislators are representing their district, but they all represent the state of Illinois, so I don't know how finite detail needs to be. Just because it's a smaller or bigger number somewhere, that doesn't change the importance or need for this statewide.
    • Allie Lichterman: Definitely. That goes to the question-what's the goal of the dashboard? And what pieces of data help us get there?
    • Jodie Bargeron: We are working to make sure the data is clear, not repetitive, and easy to access.
    • Brent Reynolds: Maybe we start by PSAPs and regions, and if it doesn't meet the needs of legislators, then we could work on it. I'd hate to see someone spend a lot of time trying to break that information down only to have the legislators care about the big picture.
    • Jodie Bargeron: We'll be starting broader and simpler, and each iteration can be narrower. Early on, we have to make sure they have meaningful, informative numbers without disclosing individual situations in small communities. This is an ongoing discussion, and people are welcome to email me if they have other ideas. Eventually we will move toward something like the Durham dashboards, which are gold standard.
  • FY25 Q4
    • Create prototype dashboard mock-ups with dummy data
    • Identify, support, align, and interconnect with existing or planned associated dashboard development
  • FY26 Q1
    • Design and debut dashboard(s)
    • Identify, support, align, and interconnect with existing or planned associated dashboard development
    • Develop a data communications strategy with the dashboard(s)
  • FY26 Q2 and Q3
    • Continue to design and populate dashboards
    • Identify, support, align, and interconnect with existing or planned associated dashboard development
  • FY26 Q4
    • Conduct evaluation of existing dashboards, revise and improve.
    • Identify, support, align, and interconnect with existing or planned associated dashboard development
  • FY27 Q1
    • Maintain existing dashboards, conduct stakeholder outreach to identify additional dashboard needs.
    • Identify, support, align, and interconnect with existing or planned associated dashboard development
  • FY27 Q2
    • Create prototype dashboard mock-ups with sample data, continue to populate existing dashboards
    • Identify, support, align, and interconnect with existing or planned associated dashboard development
  • FY27 Q3
    • Continue to populate dashboards
    • Identify, support, align, and interconnect with existing or planned associated dashboard development
  • FY27 Q4
    • Conduct evaluation of existing dashboards, revise and improve.
    • Identify, support, align, and interconnect with existing or planned associated dashboard development

Next Meeting Dates

  • Consultation (not vote) on meeting cadence and schedule for first meeting in FY26
    • Proposed next meeting date: Monday, September 8, 2:00 - 3:30 pm
    • Note: To be held on the second Monday of the month because of Labor Day
  • Members who are tentatively available on September 8; official roll call can be conducted when CESSA legislation passes and Subcommittee officially has the authority to meet: Brent Reynolds, Cindy Barbera-Brelle, Lucy Craycroft, Jim Kaitschuk, Irene Wadhams, Jessica Gimeno, Pete Dyer
  • Meeting to be tentatively schedule for September 8

Public Comment

  • None

Adjournment:

  • Jessica Gimeno made a motion to adjourn; Cindy Barbera-Brelle seconded the motion
    • Voted to adjourn: Brent Reynolds, Cindy Barbera-Brelle, Irene Wadhams, Jessica Gimeno, Jim Kaitschuk, Pete Dyer
    • Meeting adjourned at 3:10 PM