The 2026-27 Budget: Office of Emergency Services Next Generation 911 System

analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET The 2026-27 Budget: Office of Emergency Services Next Generation 911 System GABRIEL PETEK | LEGISLATIVE ANALYST | FEBRUARY 2026 Summary State in Process of Transitioning From Legacy 911 to Next Generation 911. Next Generation 911 is intended to replace the copper landline-based legacy 911 system with an Internet Protocol (IP)-based system capable of transmitting voice, text, photos, video, and enhanced location data. In 2015, the Legislature directed the Office of Emergency Services (OES) to develop a plan for transitioning to Next Generation 911. Initially, OES adopted a regional approach for the project consisting of four regional networks and a single statewide back-up provider, intended to enhance resiliency of the system. Challenges Surfaced During Voice Transition. Between 2021 and 2024, 23 dispatch centers began transitioning voice calls to the regional Next Generation 911 system. Some reported routing problems, outages, and dropped calls. In early 2025, OES paused additional transitions and identified concerns related to network complexity, vendor interdependencies, and operational burdens on dispatch staff. OES Made Major Changes to Transition Plan in 2025. In November 2025, OES released a revised transition plan shifting from the regional model to a statewide approach with one primary and one back-up provider. OES now projects decommissioning the legacy system in 2030—eight years later than previously planned under the regional model. OES has not provided a cost estimate for the statewide approach. Available Information Leaves Key Questions Unanswered. While OES has provided high-level descriptions of its plans, it has not presented critical details to the Legislature, leaving key questions unanswered, including the following: • What Is the Nature and Scope of the Problem? For example, have the regional networks experienced systematic technical failures or are the problems a reflection of management and coordination challenges? • Will New Plan Solve the Problem? What evidence is there showing that the transition to a statewide approach will solve the problems identified by OES? • What Other Options Were Considered? Does the state need to transition to a statewide approach to solve these problems, or can they be solved within the regional approach as it currently exists? What other options have been explored? • How Do the Options Compare? How do different options compare on parameters such as cost, effectiveness of addressing the problems encountered to date, and length of time to decommissioning of the legacy 911 system? Recommendations. We recommend that the Legislature direct OES to pause implementation of the statewide approach until it can provide answers to the key questions. If this is not possible by May Revision, the Legislature could consider halting the project to allow an independent third-party to evaluate the state’s options. We also recommend requiring ongoing monthly project updates and quarterly fiscal reports. Finally, we recommend the Legislature consider implementing a new governance structure to provide greater ongoing oversight of the 911 system. www.lao.ca.gov 1 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET Background • Geographic Information Systems—These systems provide location data used to direct OES Administers State’s 911 System, Which emergency communications to appropriate Is Funded by a Monthly Surcharge on Telephone dispatch centers and help first responders Customers. The state’s 911 system consists of locate those in need of assistance. about 450 local dispatch centers (also known as Public Safety Answering Points, or PSAPs) • Call Handling Equipment—This equipment that receive emergency calls from the public and enables a dispatch center to receive, dispatch first responders to assist. Since 2013, OES process, and dispatch IP-based emergency has been responsible for administering this system. communications. The State 911 Advisory Board, which consists of California Effort to Develop and Deploy 11 members (most with expertise in public safety), Next Generation 911 Dates to at Least 2010. is responsible for advising OES on matters related The transition from legacy 911 to Next Generation to the state’s 911 system. Funding for the state’s 911 is a nationwide effort. Congress has urged the 911 system comes from a monthly surcharge adoption of IP-based technologies in 911 systems on telephone customers deposited in the State since at least 2008. In more recent years, the Emergency Telephone Number Account (SETNA). National 911 Program (within the U.S. Department The 911 surcharge is established each fall by OES, of Transportation) began working with stakeholders though current law caps the surcharge at 80 cents. towards a nationwide, interoperable “system of The 911 surcharge rate for calendar year 2026 is Next Generation 911 systems” with the goal of 41 cents. SETNA is expected to receive $215 million connecting 911 systems across state lines. While in surcharge revenue in 2026-27. most states have begun the transition to Next OES in Process of Transitioning From Generation 911, some (such as North Carolina and Legacy 911 to Next Generation 911. OES is in the Massachusetts) are further along the adoption process of transitioning the state from “legacy 911” curve. California’s effort to develop and deploy (designed to operate on copper landlines) to Next a Next Generation 911 system dates to at least Generation 911. Next Generation 911 systems use July 2010 when the former California State 9-1-1 Internet Protocol (IP)-based technology to send Office—within the California Technology Agency 911 data from one computer to another over the (CTA), now called the California Department of Internet. This technology allows 911 callers to share Technology (CDT)—identified the transition from multimedia emergency communications (voice, legacy 911 to Next Generation 911 as a key goal video, photos, and text) and improved location data for the state. Then, in the 15 subsequent years, with dispatch centers. It also allows dispatchers the state took a series of steps towards this to share this data directly with first responders. goal including, but not limited to, the following Additionally, Next Generation 911 systems can key milestones: be used to automatically re-route 911 calls to • 2010—First Roadmap Developed. In other dispatch centers, which can help with December 2010, the Schwarzenegger high call volumes during natural disasters, large administration released a proposed Next emergencies, or major events; or if one or more Generation 911 roadmap, which outlined key dispatch centers stop operating. Major components tasks, decision points, and work products of Next Generation 911 systems include: necessary to develop a statewide Next • Network—A Next Generation 911 network Generation 911 system. This roadmap delivers emergency communications over an projected that the system would be completed IP-based emergency services network. These around 2015. networks are specifically designated for use • 2013 to 2018—Project Moves to OES by public safety agencies. and Design Validated. Responsibility for • Core Services—Next Generation 911 core public safety communications (including the services include the software and databases 911 system) was subsequently transferred to needed to route emergency communications OES in 2013 through budget action during on the network. the Brown administration. The Legislature 2 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET then enacted Chapter 926 of 2014 As of February 2026, OES anticipates being able to (SB 1211, Padilla), which directed OES to decommission the legacy 911 system in 2030. develop a plan and time line for testing, Next Generation 911 Technology Deployed implementing, and operating a Next Across Four Main Regions Between 2019 Generation 911 system, including text-to-911. and 2024. As originally envisioned, California’s OES moved into the planning phase and approach for a Next Generation 911 system completed several Next Generation 911 pilot involved breaking the state up into four regions with programs used to validate system design. OES a single statewide vendor serving as a back-up. reports spending $334 million out of SETNA These four regions are each served by a regional between 2013-14 and 2016-17 for both legacy network service provider (or regional vendor) that and Next Generation 911. is responsible for providing services to connect • 2018-2019—Implementation Funding every dispatch center within the region of the Next Requested, Plans Outlined. The 2018-19 Generation 911 network they are responsible for. budget package provided $11.5 million in The prime network service provider (or statewide 2018-19 (increasing annually to $83.6 million vendor) is responsible for providing back-up in 2022-23) from SETNA and six positions services connecting all 447 dispatch centers for OES to build out and support the Next statewide. The central purpose of this design is to Generation 911 system and maintain the ensure the system can survive failure. It does so by legacy 911 system. It was expected that providing back-ups for network and core services the Next Generation 911 system would within each region and statewide, and by containing be fully implemented in 2022 and that the outages within a single area; but requires the five-year cost to develop the system would be regional and statewide networks to work together $132 million, with ongoing operational costs of seamlessly—that is, to interoperate—without $40 million annually beginning in 2022-23. sharing each other’s components or infrastructure. • 2019—Revenue Increased, Text-to-911 According to OES, Next Generation 911 network Required, and State Contracts Signed. infrastructure “has been installed across the In 2019, three key steps were taken. First, state and is now used to deliver both location Chapter 54 (SB 96, Committee on Budget services (911 caller location) and text-to-911” at and Fiscal Review) changed the structure all state dispatch centers. Between July 2019 of the fees that are deposited in SETNA, and August 2025, Next Generation 911 system thereby increasing revenue to enable OES development costs in accordance with the to pay for costs associated with planning, regional approach totaled $456 million. The total testing, implementing, and operating a Next cost to simultaneously operate legacy 911 during Generation 911 system. Second, Chapter 237 these same years was $148 million. Additionally, (AB 1168, Mullin) required all state dispatch the state provided support to dispatch centers centers to deploy a text-to-911 service. totaling $253 million. Third, OES awarded the five-year contracts COVID-19 Pandemic Delayed Project and that would begin the actual building and Operational Problems Surfaced When Dispatch deployment of a Next Generation 911 system Centers Began Transitioning Voice Calls to in this same year. the Next Generation 911 System. As with many state operations, the COVID-19 pandemic proved Legacy 911 and Next Generation 911 were to disruptive to the deployment of Next Generation work in parallel until dispatch centers could be 911. In addition, starting in 2021, 23 of the state’s transitioned to the new system—at which point the dispatch centers began transitioning voice calls legacy system would be largely decommissioned. from legacy 911 to Next Generation 911 with some However, a combination of COVID-19-related experiencing difficulties. Specifically, some of these and operational concerns (described more fully early adopters, such as Tuolumne Couty, reported below) delayed the anticipated date at which the experiencing call routing problems, outages, and legacy 911 system could be decommissioned. www.lao.ca.gov 3 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET dropped calls. In early 2025, OES paused the 911 configuration. In other words, OES plans transition of additional dispatch centers in order to to use a technology that will “convert” legacy investigate. It found four main concerns: communications into data that can be transmitted on the Next Generation network. • Dispatch centers did not have a clear support process when it was necessary to report a Three-Phase Implementation Plan Includes trouble ticket. Interim and Long-Term Statewide Contracts. OES, in February 2026, indicated that it would • Complexities of the network and deploy statewide Next Generation 911 services in interdependencies between the service three phases. providers created failure points. • The regional approach created a situation • Phase One. In February 2026, OES reports where both the technical and operational it will execute an interim contract to move design were significantly adjusted from the dispatch centers that are currently using industry-standard practices, introducing regional Next Generation 911 networks for fragility and risk. In particular, OES asserts voice calls to a statewide provider within that the regional approach “requires a 90 days. After these dispatch centers large degree of coordination between Next have been migrated, OES will focus on Generation 911 providers and strict adherence deploying Next Generation 911 services to to a single set of interface rules which are the Los Angeles area, to help prepare for unique to California’s configuration and are the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic games. not addressed in the National Emergency In addition to these priorities, up to 20 other Numbers Association (NENA) standards.” dispatch centers (those in most urgent need) will also be moved onto the statewide • Call handling procedures in the hybrid network. As a final part of phase one, in legacy/Next Generation 911 configuration the fall of 2026, OES (in partnership with generated additional work for dispatch CDT) will establish long-term contracts with center staff. its statewide Next Generation 911 vendor. OES Made Major Changes to Next Generation As part of this procurement process, OES will 911 Transition Plan in 2025. In November 2025, “require the statewide provider to propose and OES released an updated 2025 Next Generation demonstrate the ability to reach an availability 9-1-1 Transition Plan. Under the updated transition level of 99.999% or better, and the ability plan, the state will switch from the regional to utilize multiple data centers, distribution approach to a statewide approach with two networks, and aggregation sites.” statewide network providers—one prime network • Phase Two. During phase two (late 2026), service provider and a back-up. OES states that OES will transition all dispatch centers to the the switch to the statewide approach will eliminate new, long-term, primary statewide network the problematic interfaces and complexity while vendor. Transitional elements will be used. preserving system resiliency. It further notes This will, among other things, allow dispatch that the statewide approach comports with Next centers to move to the Next Generation 911 Generation 911 system standards established by network individually. (OES notes that under NENA and that it aligns with the “proven network the previous approach, dispatch centers architecture” used by other states. The updated that transfer calls amongst each other had to transition plan also provides for the use of migrate together, in a group.) “transitional elements.” Transitional elements • Phase Three. The final phase of use technology to package calls, such that the implementation plan involves they are received and can be handled the same decommissioning the legacy 911 system with way by dispatchers—potentially addressing the a target date of 2030. challenges reported by some dispatch centers in handling calls in the hybrid legacy/Next Generation 4 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET Governor’s Proposal be more resilient.) On the other hand, the regional approach may have too much redundancy and Provides Baseline Funding to The Next may have become so complex that it suffers in Generation 911 Project. The Governor’s budget operability compared to the envisioned statewide request would provide OES with $181.4 million from system. It is unclear if OES’s choices are consistent SETNA to support the department’s administration with the Legislature’s preferences if faced with the of the 911 system, including the Next Generation same set of options and trade-offs—particularly 911 transition, in 2026-27. This amount is about the since OES has not provided information on same as the 2025-26 funding level. the trade-offs and costs of the alternatives it Assessment considered, nor sought formal legislative input Project Is Overdue, Budget Needs Are (such as proposing the change through trailer bill Unclear. The state’s time line to Next Generation language) as it moves forward with its plans. 911 deployment—which we measure against the Changes of This Magnitude to a Critical date at which most or all of the legacy 911 system Public Safety System Are Best Accomplished can be decommissioned—has been pushed out Under Close Oversight, Which Is Currently from 2015-16 (estimated by CTA in 2010) to 2022 Lacking. In the decades since the 911 system was (estimated by OES in 2018-19 under the regional first established, it has developed into a critical part approach) to 2030 (under the updated transition of California’s public safety system. As such, major plan). Additionally, while some amount of cost changes to it are best made with close oversight. overruns are not uncommon for a technology However, there currently is relatively little oversight project of this scale and complexity, OES has of the state Next Generation 911 system. For spent much more than originally anticipated on example, OES is planning to make a fundamental the development of the Next Generation 911 change to the system with major implications for system. As discussed above, OES projected the its effectiveness and cost without formal legislative development of the system would cost $132 million input. Although the state has a 911 Advisory Board, in its 2018-19 request, but to date has spent its role with respect to OES and the 911 system is $456 million. Moreover, it is unclear how much only advisory. Similarly, as a telecommunications additional funding will be needed for the state’s project and not an information technology project, Next Generation 911 system. The additional amount Next Generation 911 is not subject to the typical that would be needed depends on many different CDT Project Approval Lifecycle (or PAL) process. variables, including: (1) the extent to which the state Available Information Leaves Key Questions is able to incorporate the existing Next Generation Unanswered. While OES has provided high-level 911 components deployed under the regional descriptions of its plans, it has not presented approach, (2) how quickly it can decommission critical details to the Legislature, leaving key the legacy 911 system, (3) the cost of the interim questions unanswered. Based on the publicly contract and solutions, and (4) the time (and available information, some of the key unanswered cost) of building out and deploying the new questions are: statewide system. • What Is the Nature and Scope of the Changes to the State’s Next Generation Problem? Have the regional Next Generation 911 System May Prove Entirely Appropriate, 911 networks experienced systematic but Changes Always Come With Trade-Offs. technical failures or are the problems OES The regional and statewide approaches each come identified during its investigation a reflection with advantages and disadvantages. For example, of management and coordination challenges? unless the statewide system envisioned by the What caused the call-handling impacts updated transition plan is designed carefully, the on dispatchers—network, call-handling regional approach may offer greater redundancy equipment, a combination, or something else? and may be more able to withstand failure as a How many state dispatch centers might be result. (In other words, the regional approach may affected by these challenges? If OES enforces www.lao.ca.gov 5 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET compliance with technical standards more for a period, the advent and diffusion of IP-based rigorously across the system, would many of technologies invite a more dynamic view. In the identified problems resolve themselves? other words, at least theoretically, an IP-enabled Are the interface rules under the regional 911 system has the technological capacity approach unique to California and not to incorporate new and innovative features, addressed in the NENA standards? applications, data, software, and hardware. As a • Will New Plan Solve the Problem? What result, policymakers may find that questions evidence is there showing that the transition to related to the budget, policy, and oversight of the a statewide approach will solve the problems state’s 911 technology may begin to surface more identified above or problems that lead OES to frequently than has been the case historically. propose abandoning the regional approach? This suggests that, even after the transition to Next Generation 911 is complete, the legislature might • What Other Options Were Considered? want to ensure it maintains consistent oversight Does the state need to transition to a over the continued operation of the system. statewide approach to solve these problems, or can they be solved within the regional Recommendations approach as it currently exists? What other Pause the Transition to the Statewide options have been explored? Approach Until OES Provides Information... • How Do the Options Compare? How We recommend the Legislature direct OES to do different options compare on: cost, pause its transition to the statewide approach to effectiveness of addressing the problems allow for legislative hearings (preferably prior to encountered to date, redundancy and the release of May Revision). We recommend the resiliency, impact on dispatch centers, length Legislature conduct oversight hearings in order to of time to decommissioning of the legacy gather information on the key questions we raise 911 system, management and coordination above. In particular, we recommend directing needs, as well as significant technical and OES to provide an analysis of options, including operational trade-offs? the statewide approach, the regional approach, • How Will the State’s Next Generation 911 and a third approach (such as a hybrid). This System Comply With State Privacy and analysis should compare the options based on the Security Regulations and Laws? Have these key parameters described above (such as cost protections been integrated into the Next and effectiveness of addressing the problems Generation 911 system as it exists (now) and encountered to date) as well as any others deemed as planned under the statewide approach, relevant by OES. or will these protections be developed? Will …Or Seek an Independent, Third-Party the state be able to undertake periodic, Evaluation. If OES cannot provide this information, independent security audits of the system and then we recommend that the Legislature consider all of its components? If security and privacy prohibiting OES from implementing the statewide protections need to be upgraded or added on approach until an independent third party with later, who will pay for these improvements? appropriate technical expertise evaluates the state’s • Is There Sufficient Oversight of This options. This evaluation should include a clear Project? What policies and governance identification of the challenges with the system models are needed to ensure that as currently built and a discrete set of options the transition to Next Generation to address those challenges, as well as defined 911 is successful? cost and operational trade-offs for each option. 911 Will Continue to Evolve Technologically— These options should include fixing the system as Meaning Ongoing Oversight Is Likely Necessary. currently designed, transitioning to a statewide Although the underlying technologies that enabled approach, and any other option that is deemed the legacy 911 system stayed (relatively) constant worthy of legislative consideration. This could be 6 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET accomplished by directing the State Auditor to preferably on a monthly (project) and quarterly carry out such an assessment. We acknowledge (expenditures) basis in 2026-27 and ongoing that this recommendation will add additional costs until legacy 911 has been fully decommissioned. to SETNA in the short term—both from the direct We also recommend that the Legislature direct cost of the assessment, as well as from project OES to develop and update (on a quarterly basis) delays that will extend the need for maintaining the a five-year cost outlook for legacy 911, supporting legacy 911 system. Moreover, we recognize that dispatch centers, and Next Generation 911. this recommendation comes with some risk as it Consider Governance Options and Oversight would delay the decommissioning of the legacy for the Long Term. As an IP-enabled system, 911 system. This is a risk as the existing state Next Generation 911 will have the (theoretical) 911 system is in very poor condition and is subject capacity to integrate new and innovative features, to failure. However, if the statewide approach does services, software, hardware, and applications in not work as envisioned then failure could be the a manner that was not the norm for legacy 911. outcome anyway. Taking this step will allow the The Legislature may wish to consider whether Legislature to be confident that whatever approach ongoing oversight might be appropriate even after it ultimately chooses to adopt is cost-effective and the new system is operational, and if so, what can deliver this critical service to Californians. form that oversight should take. One option for Quarterly Fiscal Reports and Monthly determining what form the oversight could take Progress Reports to the Legislature. In the would be to request the Little Hoover Commission 2025-26 Budget Act, the Legislature directed to assess California’s governance model for OES to provide two reports on major challenges, Next Generation 911 and provide the Legislature solutions, expenditures, and a time line for the with recommendations. This assessment could Next Generation 911 system. We recommend that include a review of how other states manage these the Legislature continue to direct OES to provide systems and which stakeholders in state and local project and expenditure reports to the Legislature, government should be involved. www.lao.ca.gov 7 analysis full 2026-27 BUDGET LAO PUBLICATIONS This report was prepared by Heather Gonzalez, and reviewed by Drew Soderborg and Ross Brown. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) is a nonpartisan office that provides fiscal and policy information and advice to the Legislature. To request publications call (916) 445-4656. This report and others, as well as an e-mail subscription service, are available on the LAO’s website at www.lao.ca.gov. The LAO is located at 925 L Street, Suite 1000, Sacramento, California 95814. 8 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE