Item 2. c5 Worltshop on Inter-facing Comp~_~ter systems of Courtho~_rse and .jail. (Comity Judge} This item was disc~_issed with Software Grro up and Telecom Seci_rr•ity Systems. Several Officials were in the audience to discuss their pr•obleins with the systems. Mr•. Thomas haci some suggestions on how these problems could be worked out. The Co~.xr•t would lilte to inttsr•face both systems with minimal cost to everyone involved. Software Group and Telecom Security have been working together bttt they are uns~_me who needs to pay the additional fees for systems. Both entities have spent a lot of time on this pr-oject and they need cooper•~ation from all department heads. Judge Denson stated he. wanted to move forward bttt we need to have a true integrated cost. Rt this time thie system is a view only system nothing can be input. Kerr County Sheriffs Department Possible Computer Solution Offices needing Telephone lines for direct modem hook-up to the Kerr County Sheriffs Department: 1. County Clerks Office ** 2. County Court @ Law (Office) ** 3. County Court @ Law (courtroom) *J 4. County Attorney's Office ** 5. District Clerks Office ** 6. District Judges Office ** 7. District Courtroom *J 8. Adult Probation Dept. ** * * =Telephone Line *J = Extra Telephone Jack install fee: $81.00 per/line $48.50 per/e~Rra telephone jack Work Stations: 1. County Clerks Office Desk Top w/ modem 2. County Court @ Law (Office) Modem only 3. County Court @ Law (courtroom) Desk Top w/ modem 4. County Attorney's Office Telephone line only 5. District Clerks Office Desk Top w/ modem 6. District Judges Office Modem only 7. District Courtroom Desk Top w/ modem 8. Adult Probation Dept. Desk Top w/ modem 1. Called Gateway their basic computer is 1499.99 modem 14/4 P 100 2. Called Best Buy their basic computer is 1199.99 modem 14/4 486 3. Called Dell their basic computer is 1569.00 modem 28/8 P100 4. Called Wal-Mart their basic computer is 997.00 modem 14/4 486 5. Called Radio Shack (Kerrville) their basic computer is 975.96 modem 28/8 486 6. Called BDI Distributors their basic computer is 974.00 modem 28/8 P60 5 Desk Top Computers @ $974 each = $4870.00 2 Modems @ 149.99 each = 299.98 Modem: 8 port "Stand Alone" $2500 Kerrville Telephone Co. Telephone lines: install fee is a one time charge. $583.00 Total: $8252.98 * * these work stations are for `~+iew only", not as a full working Personal Computer. Kerrville Telephone Co. 8x$31.00 per/mth. For telephone line - .SI86.00 p/mth. Security Telecom will give Technical support to this system. Computer Network Kerr Co. Sheriffs Dept. Network Jail Info. CountyAlty's D~trirtCourt District Clerks County Court at CouMyC~lrs AduKProbation Office Judge Offce Law Office Dept. Datdct Courtroom County Court at law Courtroom COMMISatONERS' COURT AGENDA R~OUEST PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND FIVE COPIES OF THIS REOUEST AND DOCUMENTS "' TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT. MADE BY: ROBERT A. DENSON OFFICE: COUNTY JUDGE MEETING DATE: June 10, 1996 TIME PREFERRED: SUBJECT: (PLEASE BE SPECIFIC} Workshop on Interfacing Computer systems of Courthouse and jail. EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: (PLEASE STATE REASON) ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION: IF PERSONNELMATTER -NAME OF EMPLOYEE: NAME OF PERSON ADDRESSING THE COURT: County Judge Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in accordance with Title 5, Chapter 551 and 552, Government Code, is as follows: Meeting scheduled for Mondays: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON: 5:00 P.M. previous Tuesday. AlI Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court Meetings. Your cooperation will be appreciated and contribute towards you request being addressed at the earliest opportunity. See Agenda Request Rules Adopted by Commissioners' Court. Item 2.25 Con~ltex Wor~hop onC ~~use and 7~l' ,stems of tpis~ssion only JutK'- 10 ~ 1996 Vol U ~ Yam 502 ,t c~~~c~~~~, ~,S Kerr County Intra-County Judicial Information Exchange Options 6/10/96 Section I Letter from Judge Denison that initiates the Interface Project. Includes •- department functional requirements. Section 2 Letter from TSG that establishes the framework for the Interface Project Section 3 Functional Specification for the STC/TSG Interface Project with STC and TSG cover letters Section 4 TSG's alternative to the Interface Project Section 5 John Thomas's review of the Interface Project and Project Plan Section 6 Options and estimated costs for Kerr County and Commissioner's Court to consider Prepared by ...rte"' ~.~~ "' The Software Group, Inc. for 6~~~'yy Kerr County Commissioner's Court ~r ~. Coua7Y ]unae Roasai A. Dewsw+ CowwsSlON6a5 CWar ' RAY LPJWAN, Pcr. 1 T. N. "Bu7ta1" lwcaeY. Pcr. 2 41~M K HoiBluMe, PR. 3 Baud O®n~a. Pcr. 4 Mr. Jeff Puckett The Software Group, Inc. Judicial Development Manager Jupiter North Technology Park 1120 Jupiter Road, Road 100 Plano, Texas 75074 Mr. Jeff Rothel Security Tele-com Corporation 2100 North Highway 360 Suite 2203 Grand Prairie, Texas 75050 THE COUNTY COURT OF KERB COUNTY. TEXAS 700 Mew e....,.,. 1Tx~s 78026 1t~: (210)237-6711 Pnx: (210) 237-6716 February 27, 1996 C1pxa PA7RICIA DYe ADMensten77ve Assn. 7YIeA SOVIL Re: Computer Interface Kerr County Law Enforcement Center Gentlemen: Mr. Rothel of Security Tele-com Corporation has indicated, on several occasions, that the new computer system installed for the new jail in Kerr County would be interfaced or integrated with the existing computer that Kerr County has at the Kerr. County Courthouse, on a permanent basis, so as to allow access to certain information by the Kerr County District Clerk, the Kerr ,,,_ County Clerk, the 216th Judicial District Community Supervision and Corrections Department, the County Attorney's office, as well as the Justice of the Peace Precinct No. 1, from the Kerr County Sheriff's records. Please find enclosed herewith five (5) pages, each representing the needs of each department of Kerr County to be included in the capabilities of the interfacing of the computer -- systems. A letter from the Kerr County Sheriffs office, the County Attorney's office, the County Clerk's office, the District Clerk's office, and the 216th Judicial District Community Supervision and Corrections Department are enclosed. There is nothing enclosed from the Justice of the Peace Precinct No. 1 because their needs will be the same as the County Clerk's needs. After studying the enclosed materials, if either of you need any additional information, then please immediately call or fax me in order that we can immediately respond. Security Tele-com has indicated that they will not chazge anything to Kerr County for doing whatever is necessazy to permanently interface or integrate the computer systems. The Softwaze Group, Inc., however has indicated that they will chazge Kerr County for their services. Mr. Thomas, the independent computer specialist, has estimated that Software Group would have to incur about 100 hours at $100 per hour, or approximately $10,000.00 to complete their portion of the task required. Before proceeding on this matter, and before any expense or charges aze incurred, we would request a letter from the Software Group, Inc. advising whether or not they can accomplish the required tasks for the $10,000.00 estimated by Mr. Thomas. We would also request an estimate from both Security Tele-com and The Softwaze Group of the time which will be required to accomplish the permanent interfacing or integration of the computers. We are nearing completion of the construction of the new jail. Please let us hear from both of you, promptly. Thank you. Very truly yours, ~.~~~~-- obert A. Denson Kerr County Judge enc. RAD/ts DATA REQUIRED FROM SHERIFF'S COMPUTER PROGRAM CRIMINAL 1> Jail information: a. for calculating jail credit for sentencing b. for completing.CJIS farms for DPS c. for determining case type when bonds are sent to us for keeping pending indictment or "no bill" d. for companion case information to alloy the Court to determine amount of band tii aryl alter Grand Jury returns indictments or e. whether or not a JP set a pre-indictment bond and amount of that bond. f. when request for counsel is made by defendant prier to _ indictment the Court requires arrest date, charge and bond amount if set by JP. 2) Warrant information: a. for warrant service information to determine whether or not the Court will order the issuance a bond forfeiture and an additional warrant. b. Probation Dept. may determine existence of a new warrant while defendant is in Probation office allowing _ arrest of defendant. c, also allows Probation Dept to determine whether or eat to file a motion to revoke probation based on any new arrests. 3) Prior Case information for sentencing. 4) Allows deputy sheriff courtroom access by computer to any sheriff's software package. 5) All identifying data including addrese information when creating a case on a defendant. Without this information we would not be able to create the case or process court hearing notices. 6) Arrest for new charges ea the County and District Attorney may determine type of charge to file considering prior cases. "' CIVIL Officer's return information on citations. civil caplae, writs of execution, orders of sale, Protective Orders, etc. ~- .2-14-1996 09r09RM FROM TO - J - ,p 2577079 P.02 Data/Access kequired fr^om Sheriff's Lomputor - Criminal 1) Jail information: '° a. for calculating jail credit on sentencing. b. for calculating Credit on time served for Tina/east. c. for determining case type when bonds are sent to us pending ~- the case being riled. d. for companion Data information to allow the Judge to detar•raine amount of bond. - v. when request for counsel is made by defendant prior to case being filed the Court needs information on arrest date, charge and amount of bond. f. Name of Pondir.p Carapany and amount of band. ~~" p. Date of ar•r•est, release to caleulato court cost. i. Arresting agency and officer/deputy for bill of cost and for reimbursement for wnrrarit service. "" j. access of TRS, TRN and agency case numbors for filing and reporting to CJIS forms to DFS. k. access to jail roster to determine who needs to be placed on -- the .jail docket fee a court hearing. :?) Warrant Information: a. existence of an outstanding warrant in case the defendant - comes to court on a dirferent charge the warrant officer or bailiff can be notified. b. service information to determine whether or not the Court will order the issuance of a bond forfeiture plus an "' additional warrant. c. "OPEN WARRANT" highlighted to be able to sae if a warrant exist and ba ahle to see what court case it goes - with in case the defendant has pled out prior to arrest, the warrant must bo recalled. Without the highlight it might easily be missed. - ) prior Csse information for sentencing. 4) Allow deputy/bailiff/county attorney accocs by computer to any sheriffs software package. 5) All identifying data including address, date of birth, drivers license, and social security numbors when creating a ease on a defendant and sending out notices for hearings. 6: History of arrest .f or new charges so the County Attorney and District can determine what typo of charge and dogma to file a ease considering prior cases. CIVIL Officer's return information on citations, and all civil papers served. .00 MAIN STREET F~;RRVILLE, TEXAS 78028 Date: February 15, 1996 o: Tom Pollard prom: Sheriff Frances A. kE: Computer ACCESS FRANCES gALSER SHERIFF xExx colrn-Tx ceuxTxol..SE MEMORANDUM Kaiser 210.896.1216 210.257.4242 210.896-1133 z1o-sa4-zssa FAX z10-898.7380 6a have experienced problems with the Clerk's Offices issuing warrants in the county computer and never producing "hard copy" (paper copy) for t ~ to be able to serve. Also, by the clerks recalling a warrant in the >mputer but never issuing a "Recall Form" which leaves us with the warrant in TCICJNCIC (the state and national computer, which the "teriff's Department has sole responsibility to keep accurate) and ` ~lding a "hard copy." t-feel that there can be a program written allowing ONLY the Sheriff's partment Warrant Officer to be able to change or pull warrants, ;hereby allowing us to update or remove the warrants from TCICiNCIC and :e,ep litigation to a minimum. ` ~Ir 216th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COMMUNITY SUPERVISION AND CORRECTIONS DEPARTMENT HOWARD R. HOWMON DIRECTOR 431 QUINLAN KERRVILLE, TEXAS 78D28 (270) 896-2233 February 14, 1996 Mr. Tan Pollard Attorney At Law The following data is used on a daily basis by the Probation Depart- ment and is generated fran the Sheriff's Office Canputer Programs. 1) Access to Warrant information on all probation cases fran the Justice of the Peace Courts, County Courts and District Courts ; 2) Prrnipt at top of cmiputer screen advising of Jail and/or Warrant status; 3) Weekly Jail lists generated fran the Sheriff's Office system; 4) Access to the TRN & TRS Tracking numbers in the Sheriff's office system for all probation cases. The Kerr County office is the only County in the four county juris- diction that needs access to this information. _ yyti _ Jj Glendon, Felony Supervisor JMC:ls 02-13-19% 05~48PM Kerr Co. Atty's Office 12108960504 P.01 OFFICE OF TFIE COUNTY ATTORNEY %ERR COUNTY, TEXAS twat: ozassam, seassm 7oG EesrNnIIt Saeer J~ra~.arar.~ ncrsssu 1$I.BtHONB (210j 696d33i FA7t (y10) i98-030~ Dwvm M Mon.BY. tl}aRiwiioY62' 7ua D. BAII.HY, A~fAllr CbVxKAtT?MR SeiOinJ.Dwnw~, w~oenw+o~+trws~war FACSIlVIILE TRANSMITTAL Date: + February I3, 1996 To: Tom Pollard From: Helena Hanna Total Pages: 1 Fax: 257-7079 The portions of the Sheriff's module which we require to interlace with are: warrant informalioJt/history ~. Jail informatioa/history 3. Bond information/history ~+. Person information/history/updates at tune of am;st hank you for giving ns this opportunity to voice our needs. CONPIDENTIALITY NOTICE The information cronratned in this farstmik trmctmivion is attornry privileSed mid cvnfideneial ir{/ormatlon inttnded only for use of the individual or entity named below if you have rrceivtd this transmission in error. please rmmedately notsfy us j ukphone, collect; mid return it w res at the abets address; yott are hereby rwt~red that any disseminmion, distribution, or copying of thls trmurnsssion it strictly prohibited iR10GSYN~IOUigrK laid-9q THE SOFTWARE GROUP, INC. Jupiter North Technology Park 1120 Jupiter Road, Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 (214) 424.1579 March 11, 1996 -- Honorable Judge Robert A. Denson Kerr County Judge Kerr County Courthouse Kerrville, TX 78028 Deaz Judge Denson; The purpose of this letter is to respond to your request for information regarding the integration of the Security Tele-com jail management system with the County's Judiciai Management System. I regret that seven months have elapsed since my visit to Commissioner's Court to discuss this matter and we aze still asking the same cost question. During our meeting, the Court was lead to believe that the "integration" project is running at other TSG judicial ,_ sites and that the integration of two computer systems is a trivial project. If either of these statements were true, this project would be complete and the project would not be a problem that requires the continued involvement of Commissioner's Court. The County did authorize anopen-ended purchase order for programming services with The Software Group to begin this project and I assigned the project to our technical staff. Our technical staffnever advanced beyond preliminary phone conversations with Security Tele-com and never received sufficient data to initiate the programming project. I have not wavered from my initial comments to Commissioner's Court about the feasibility and cost of this project. I believe that the seamless inte arg lion of the two systems is cost prohibitive. I believe that we could interface the two systems with a reasonable chance for success. The County's consultant, John Thomas, provided a document that is the basis for the interface of the two systems. We should define "integration" to mean that as data is entered/modified in either system it is immediately updated on both systems and any triggering events are automatically initiated. "Interface" W indicates that data will be periodically moved between the systems in a batch mode with a set of exception reports to insure data integrity. I would like to offer a reasonable road map for this project that will provide the Court with the cost information you desire. Our goal should be to produce a design ._ specification that defines communications, identifies data elements, data availability, procedures, etc. The specification will provide every office involved in the judicial process a concrete understanding of the end product and the changes in office procedwes that may •- be required. Everyone can sign-off on the end product before any programming begins and both companies will know what they are to build and when the project is complete. And, finally, the Court will know what they aze buying and at what cost. • Applying Technology to Meet the Needs of Local Government ' The Softwaze Group will offer 32 hours of analyst time to prepaze the specification at no cost to the County. We will tentatively schedule two days with Security Tele-com at our office, one day at the County to discuss the specification and the implications for each office, and one day back at TSG to address the County's concerns. Of course, this is a ..® best case scenario and we should acknowledge that the various offices may entirely reject the preliminary specification. Based on the County's acceptance of the design specification, we could provide a cost estimate to the County. ]n addition to preparing the interface design document, I recommend that the Court obtain from Security Tele-com a document that explains the cost and time schedule to implement two important aspects of linking the systems that will not involve The Software Group. First, the systems must be physically linked to provide for the transfer of data; and, second, the same physical link will be used to allow each office to run an application to view the sheriff database from the Wyse terminals in each office. The link and viewing of the sheriff application could happen immediately as these tasks are outside the scope of the integration project. I have attached our recommendation for the physical link as a prototype for your review. Jeff Puckett will return from vacation on Tuesday, March 12, if you would like to schedule the analysis phase of the integration project. As always, I appreciate the opportunity to continue to provide Ken County with data processing products and services and stand ready to assist you with understanding and completing the interface project. ._ Sincere -~ G1 Smith Presi ent i i i t i i i i i i i i i i i f i i Kerr County .fudicia{ Management System Courthouse Wyse Terminals Wyse Terminals ^ *o ~* *~ IBM Concentrelor r~ ~. DeslRop computer Server Desldop computer Sheriff sOffice /Jail Management U IBM RSSI>DO 56kb Line ~`L'`~ CSU/DSU CSU/DSU I ~ o. Desidop computer BddgelRouter ^ o~ CSU/DSU T1 Line (Proposed Communications to New Jail Facility ) CSU/DSU ^ o Bddge/Router Probation Department (Remote) Wyse Terminals Wyse Terminals ^ CR^~TP IBM Concentrator THE SOFTWARE GROUP, INC. Jupirer North Technology Park 1120 Jupiter Road, Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 (214) 424.1579 April 18, 1996 Honorable Robert A Denson County Judge -- Ken County Courthouse 700 Main Street Kerrville, Texas 78028 Re: Computer Interface Specification Ken County Courthouse & Kerr County Law Enforcement Center Deaz Judge Denson: The following Interface Specification is the result of the combined effort of both Security Telecom and The Softwaze Group. Both companies have reviewed the specification and believe that the information contained within represents the most viable option for an interface of the two computer systems. Please contact either Dave McEvilly with Security Telecom or myself if you have any -~ technical questions regazding the interface described in this document. Sincerely, THE SOFTW GA~C. Puckett Judicial Development Manager • Applying Technology to Meet the Needs of Local Gooemment BECUF.ITY TELECOh4 ID:2149883774 HFF; 18'9e 13:18 No,J03 P,G2 SECURITY TELECOM CORPORATION 1209 West North Carrier, Suite 300 Grand Prairie, Texas 75050 214-988-3737 -- fax 214-988-3774 Mr. Thomas w. Pollard ~ Attorney at Law 951 Main Street Kerrville, Texas 78028 Re; TSG/STC Interface , Dear Mr. Pollard I would like to take this opportunity to apologize for the delay in getting this document to you. Needless to say, there are many considerations involved in a project of this importance. Jeff Puckett and his staff at The Software Group, have been very helpful in working with us °' here at Security Telewm. We feel that the attached "System Interface Specification° will provide a logical solution for the data flow problem between the county and the sheriffs office. I have read the attached document and agree with Mt. Puckett that these are the only plausible options for an interface between our two systems. Please call with any questions or comments. Sincerely, Security Product Engineering Manager KERB COUNTY, TEXAS SYSTEM INTERFACE SPECIFICATION TIDE SOFTWARE GROUPS INC. SECURITY TELECOh4 CORP. APRII., 1996 KERB COUNTY, TEXAS s SYSTEM INTERFACE SPECIFICATION TxE SOFTWARE GROUP, INC. SECURITY TELECOM CORP. APRII., 1996 CONTENTS BACKGROUND .....................................................................................................................................2 REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................................................................................3 INTEGRATION VS.INTERFACE ........................................................................................................3 INTEGRATION ......................................................................................................................................4 INTERFACE ...........................................................................................................................................4 _ FLOWCHART OF PROPOSED INTERFACE .....................................................................................5 DATA PROCESSED BY THE INTERFACE ........................................................................................6 °" DATA NOT PROCESSED BY THE INTERFACE ...............................................................................6 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................7 DIRECT ACCESS TO LEM FROM COURTHOIISE ..........................................................................8 PRELIMINARY COST ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................9 Page I Kerr Counrylnterface Specification Background The Kerr County Sheriff has discontinued use of The Softwaze Group's SheritT application, which is part of the Integrated Judicial Management System, and is installing Security Telecom's LEM application. This separation of county data into two databases on separate computer systems has created problems for several county offices who will no longer have access to Identification, Jail, and Warrant Service data collected by the Sheriff s Office. The County Judge of Kerr County, in a letter addressed to both vendors in February of 1996, provided documents outlining the needs of the various county offices that utilize the TSG Integrated Criminal Justice System. Judge Denson requested that both vendors provide an estimate of the time required to establish a permanent interface or integration of the two systems. On April 1, 1996, Dave McEvilly of Security Telecom met with Jeff Puckett, Brent Hinkle, and James Adams of The Software Group in an attempt to define the requirements and technical feasibility of this project. This document is a result of that meeting and subsequent discussion and research by both '~ companies. Its purpose is to describe the technical implications of interfacing the two systems Page 1 Kerr County Interface Specification Requirements Judge Denson provided detailed requirements provided by all of the affected county offices. In summary, these requirements fell into five areas: • Access to Defendant's Personal & Identification information collected by the Sheriff ® • Access to Jail Information & History (bookings, releases, charges, etc.) • Access to Bond Information collected by the County Jail • Access to Warrant Service information maintained by the Sheriff • Access to the full Security Telecom LEM application from the courthouse The Sheriff's Office enters and updates information and maintains records that are used by -- other county criminal justice offices including: • Kerr County Attorney • 216th Judicial District CSCD • Kerr County Clerk • Kerr Co. Justice of the Peace • Kerr Co. District Clerk These offices use the data provided by the Sheriffto build their case files, obtain current address information, determine time served, and for other purposes. Integration vs. Interface In order to provide county offices with the data that they require, it would be necessary to interconnect the two computer systems so that they can exchange data. There are two methods for interconnecting different software applications/databases: • Inte rg ation means that when data is entered or modified on either system, it is "~ automatically and immediately updated on both systems and any triggering events are automatically initiated. • Interface means that data will be periodically moved between the systems in batch mode with a set of exception reports to insure data integrity. Page 3 Kerr County Interface Specification Integration Both Security Telecom and The Software Group agree that a seamless integration of the two systems would be cost prohibitive. There is a high probability that an integration is - not technically feasible given the differences between the two applications and the two databases. Interface - An interface between the two systems is technically feasible. The interface would be one- way. Security Telecom's system would provide data to an intermediate file which TSG's _ system would merge into the integrated database. Security Telecom's system will not receive data from the county system. In summary, the interface would function as follows: - Security Telecom would modify their LEM application so that, whenever certain records aze added or updated by the Sheriff's Office, the LEM application updates both the LEM FoxPro database as well as a new intermediate ASCII file. This intermediate file would subsequently be transferred to the county system. • The two computer systems would be connected electronically by dial-up modem. - Security Telecom will provide a PC and modem to be located at the courthouse. This PC will have an ethernet connection to the IBM RS/6000. The county will be required to furnish a telephone line for the dial-up modem. - Note: Optionally, the two systems could be connected by a permanent T-I line so that the RS/6000 and Security Telecom Novell Network would be permanently - connected. See "General Communications Requirements "for additional information. 77tis type of connectivity would be more reliable than a dial up connection, a~:d provide for additional expansion of communications between the - Sher ff's Oice and Courthouse. Establishing this connection, however, would require additional equipment and more expensive telephone circuits that would not be provided by Security Telecom. - Security Telecom's LEM application at the Sheriffs Office would transfer data to the PC at the courthouse periodically. The county database could be updated hourly, - daily, weekly, or at any other interval determined by the county. • After the courthouse PC is updated, it will automatically transfer the data to the - RS/6000 using ftp (file transfer protocol). Note: If the county elects to establish a T-I line betweet: the Sheriff's Office and .~ Courthouse, the last two steps would not be necessary. The RS/6000 and Sherds Novell Network would be directly connected and would trot require this intermediate PC. Page 4 Kerr County Interface Specification • When the data is received on the RS/6000, an interface program will automatically read and analyze the file. The interface program will then update the integrated °° database unless it finds errors or cannot resolve database conflicts. In this event, the program will generate an "Exception Report" which will have to be reviewed and resolved by county personnel. Note: Due to the differences between the two systems, and the county's desire to avoid creating duplicate persons, we anticipate that at least 50% of the data transfers r will require some manual intervention by county personnel. Flowchart of Proposed Interface FoxPro ,1..,~,:: ~~ LEM ft6ti'" `~ .Database 1 Intermediate ASCII CSV Flle t'~ aaaaaaaaa~ ®~ TSG Integrated .• Database ~~ • ®. .' tlttarfdCO": . .,.; . »: -.. ~ Exception (J5 ..~ (Error) Reports 1) STC writes data simultaneously to their primary database and an intermediate ASCII comma separated file r 2) The file is periodically transferred by dial-up modem or T-I line 3) The file is received by the RS/6000 and processed by a TSG interface program 4) Rewrds that pass the interface edit~hecks will be automatically updated in the integrated judicial database 5) Records that do not pass the interface edit-checks will be held in an error file and listed on an "Exception Report" 6. Courthouse users will view the transferred data through their existing applications Page 5 Kerr County Interface Specification Data Processed by the Interface As previously discussed, this interface will be a one-way interface. Data will be received from Security Telecom's LEM application but LEM will not receive data from the county system. Security Telecom's LEM application cannot be modified to update the new intermediate file to reflect every data modification that occurs. As a compromise, Security Telecom proposes to update the intermediate file only when specific "events" occur: The following events at the Sheriff's Office will result in an "update" record being written to the intermediate file by Security Telecom's LEM application for transfer to the county computer: m 1) Inmate is booked into the county jail -- Security Telecom will provide: • Identification information (Name, Race, Sex, DOB, DL, address, etc.) •- Date & Time of Booking • Information on all Charges (Cause/Warrant #, Charge, Bond Amount, etc.) 2) Anew charge is added to an existing inmates record -- Security Telecom will: • Re-send the entire jail record which will replace the jail record previously sent after booking 3) Inmate is released from the county -jail -- Security Telecom will: • Re-send the entire jail record which will replace the record previously sent • It will also include release information ._ 4) Warrant is served -- Security Telecom will provide: • Identification information (Name, Race, Sex, DOB, DL, address, etc.) • Cause Number, date issued, and date of service - TSG will attempt to match this against an outstanding warrant by cause number and date of issue. If TSG Ends a positive match, it will update the status of the warrant to ARREST using the served date provided. Data Not Processed by the Interface Any person, jail, or warrant data that is modified will not be updated on the county system until one of the above four triggering "events" occurs at the Sherifr's Office. For example, if the jail updates an inmate's address on April I and releases the inmate on Apri130, the address change information will not be updated on the county system until -- the release occurs on Apri130. No other data from the Sheriff office will be provided. This interface will not be able to provide civil process updates or any data other than identification, basic warrant information, or basic jail information -- and then only as a result of one of the four special "events". „_ Page 6 Kerr County Interface Specification General Communications Requirements -- There are three options for connecting the courthouse RS/6000 to the Sheriff's Office Novell Network. -- OPTION "ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES - - DIAL-UP Inexpensive phone line • Relatively slow MODEM • No expansion potential - • Very limited network access • Requires a "bridge" PC at the courthouse to connect to RS/6000 T-1 LINE • Dces not require a "bridge" PC at • T-1 recurring phone co. chazges the courthouse • Communiptions equipment for • Enables pemranent network each end of the connection is more ._ connection between the courthouse expensive and sheriffs office • Faster than adial-up line • Significant expansion potential ~~ FIBER OPTIC Same as T-1 Line Fiber between the Sheriff's Office CABLE and Courthouse does not exist and • No recurring monttily line charges would be costly to run. W • Highest expansion potential • Security Telecom would provide the equipment necessary for the dial-up modem option. This would include a modem and a "bridge" PC that had a network connection to the RS/6000. This modem and PC would be located at the courthouse. An existing PC and modem at the Sheriff's office would be used to transfer files. • )f the county elects either the T-1 or Fiber Optic cable, Security Telecom would not be responsible for purchasing or installing the equipment. Either Security Telecom or TSG can provide pricing for the equipment. • Under all three options, the county would be responsible for all telephone installation charges and all monthly recumng telephone line chazges. rag. ~ Kerr County Interface Specifrcation Direct Access to LEM from Courthouse Both TSG and Security Telecom agree that it is not technically possible for courthouse users to access the Security Telecom LEM application from Wyse 50 terminals in the courthouse. In order to access the LEM application, a courthouse user would need a PC that was capable of establishing a connection to Security Telecom's Novell Network. Purchasing PC's for users who need this functionality would be the county's responsibility. If more than one PC at the courthouse needs to access the Security Telecom's LEM application at the Sheriff's Off ce, the county would need to purchase another PC and .... Shiva Netmodem to be located at the Sheriff's Office. This equipment would provide ports for up to 8 simultaneous dial-up connections and is available through Security Telecom. Page 8 Kerr County Interface Specification Preliminary Cost Analysis -RESPONSIBLE - '. DESCRIPTION COST TO COUD"I'Y-^. Security Modify Security Telecom's LEM application to update an intermediate file Included in phone Telecom with basic identification, jail, and warrant information after a booking, system proposal charge addition, release, or warrant service. Security PC with Network Connection to RS/6000 in courthouse and dial-up modem Included in phone Telecom ~ system proposal Security Additional PC and Shiva Netmodem at Sheriff's Office for access by 8,300.00 Telecom multiple courthouse PC's to Security Telecom's LEM application TSG Design and Coding of Interface Programs and exception reports to merge 13,600.00 data from intermediate file into integrated database (20 programming days (160 hours) at 585.00 per hour] TSG On-Site Installation and Testing, and troubleshooting of Interface Software 2,465.00 [3 days - 5425.00 Site Visit Charge + 3 days at $85.00/hourJ TSG On-Site Training for system administrator and affected users on the new 520.00 interface [I day - 5275 Site Visit Charge + 1 day at 565.00/hour) Kerr County Telephone Line in Courthouse Computer room for PC modem Standard Phone Co. Rate Kerr County Any upgrade of communiptions (T-1 line and equipment or fiber optic See Note' cable and equipment) to provide permanent network connection between the two systems rather than adial-up connection. Kerr County PC's for courthouse users to provide remote access to Security Telecom's See Note Z LEM application in the Sheriff's Office. Each PC would need a modem and access to an outgoing telephone line. NOTES: `- 'The specific cost of this communications upgrade would require consultation with your local telephone comparty. The county would be responsible for purchasing the necessary phone line and equipment. Z The total cost for installing PC's is dependent upon the number of users who require [his level of access to the LEM application. The county would be responsible for purchasing this equipment. -. Page 9 THE SOFTWARE GROUP, INC. Jupiter North Technology Park 1120 Jupiter Road, Sui[e 100 Plano, TX 75074 (214) 424-1579 April 17, 1996 Honorable Judge Robert A. Denson Kerr County Judge Kerr County Courthouse Kerrville, TX 78028 Dear Judge Denson; I have reviewed the specification for interfacing the Security Tele-com jail management system to the County's Judicial Management System and I am concerned that the elected officials will express dissatisfaction due to the loss of functionality. I would like to offer you an alternate solution that maybe agreeable to all parties involved. As an alternative to interfacing the Security Tele-com system to the County's Judicial Management System, I suggest that the County consider the following • Continue to use the Security Tele-com provided personal computers, printers, and Novell network • Sheriffs Office continues to use The Software Group's Sheriff product on the Security Tele-com equipment • The Software Group modifies the Courts and Sheriffproducts to address the Sheriff's concerns about warrant processing • Kerr County /Security Tele-com purchases communications equipment to attach the Sheriff Office's network to the County's Judicial network. (est $ 10,000 ). This alternative to the interface project preserves the efficiencies of the County's integrated judicial management system, uses all of the equipment provided to the County as part of the Security Tele-com contract, and addresses the Sheriff s concerns about warrant processing. -- As always, I appreciate the opportunity to continue to provide Kerr County with data processing products and services and stand ready to assist you with either discussing our alternative to the interface project or completing the interface project. Sincerely, Glenn A. Smith President • Applying Technology to Meet the Needs of Local Government ' - , IN7ERNAT[ONAIy. DATA SYSTEMS, INC. ~- 13140 Colt 1~ matte 113: bAn2f. Texas 75240 Phone: 214680-1500 FAX: 214.680.2223 May21, t99b ~. Thomas Pollard Attorney at Law 951 Main St. Kerrville, TX 78028 Dear Tom: ~ -- -- Today. T mot with Davy T~4cEvilly and Ray >,2oote. Scctirity Telecom Corp. in our Dallas offices. 1 also had discussions with ]eff Puckert and Qlcnn Smith of The SoRware Group ('TSG) - ,~garding this matter. Vfthout delving into file icasons for th4 present state of this project. T hope to provide you a - status report and my opinions oa this matter. Status: Dave Mclr~tilly informed ma today that their LEMS system is opcrationaI, They wets able to °~ overcome a ft~v problems populating the L>/3~IS database from flit rapt prodded by TSQ. The LFMS system has 22 PCs 486/80 with S70 MB and 4 or 8 Iv,B memory, Their Novel! 3.12 server has 32 MB memory sad 4 GB d;sic. STC has also pravIded a, video/ima;_ing system• STC and TSG both agree that the next step is £or Kerr County to make a decision on their joint: - System YntRxfaco Speciftearioa developed ia•Apri1194b,. The iinpltmentatiori ofthe S'ySttitit interface a-iil take about 6 to eight weeks uYth additiosla~ tiara for stress tcsring. ARer rcyieating the material provided to me and conversatiotis with rSCisiid STC. I am offering tliese opinions: :.. _ 1. STC informed me today that their CE1viS system is presently Installed and opeistioael. In , revlewitig some of the eorcespoadcnce,• Ketr'County has fi~•eed to pay about SS;OpO for the one= - time tcansfcr of data from TSCs to STC.systcm,. ICcri• County has additiona]ly expended timo~atid other resources to get to this point of the LEIv1S installation. I 2. In review'lag the Interface Spe~catious,iointiy developed by TSG and STC: a) S'fC will provide a dial up modem, PC with network capabilities and all interface programming srndces at no cost to Kcrr Caumy. b) Kerr County has to pay $16,585 to'1'SC for their professional services to develop this interfaoe to the existing Court house system. c) Kerr County provides access to an existing phone linC Or pays a fee of about S25 per month far a neu; dedicated phone liar. The concerns I have about the,iointly (STC and TSG) developed Interface Specifications and the above costs are: 2) Tke interface is a "partial" interface, triggered only b}~ four specixle events °' (bookings, new charges, reloase and wpxraats). Also. the interface will not be able to provide civil process updates or any data other than identification or basic ~~~arranty/jail information. 2) Three options for connecting the courthouse with the sheriffs office (dial up modem versus TL versus fiber optic) aro presented. It is our opittiort that a dial up modem with a dedicated _ phone tine would be initially adequate to transfer the intermediate ASCI File W interfaco We two syStcrtts_ T7tis transfer cart be done at various times during the day to update the'fSG svsteat. ~" 3) My concern is the"'Exception Report" (errors) that will be generated when the TSG dais base is being updated. At this point we can only speculate an the size of this exception report and ease of olearirrg up these errorx. Tt might take several months aRcr the "interface°' has been implemented into production before w~ cart got realistic figures on the magnitude of this task. Karr County is being asked to spend atleast S 16,585 sad e?:pend other non-Dash resources to ittsplCmettt this partial interface, There: is no assurance that the interfaced systems will hav9 data that is timely. adequate and the exception report errors ar0 manageable wltlwut additional clerical resources, _ 4) Ire the event that the partial interface is not adequate in providing the courthouse with access to all the needed information from the Sheriff's system, Kerr County wiU need to spend an estimated $8,300 for additional PCllYet modmn to sacess STC LEMS system fronn the court ~- house. In my opinion, there.are st least two phases to be considered: Phase I: Kerr County tnakcs a decision to ititpleineni the jointly (STCITSG) Interface Specifications using a dial uP modem and a dcdicated'Iphone liac. t3lenn Smith/'!'SG in his letter dated April ] 7, 1996 has expressed conoetn to the success of proposed Interface Specification. On the contrary, STc`, has beat more optimistic about this interface project. My recommendation tivould be to have STC pay $16,485 up $ont towards TSG programming costs or alterrtatel}• warrant that if the interface approach, after a few months afimplementation is unsuccessful then STC w•ouid pay part or all of the 5i 6,58. Success`can be measured in the timeliness/adequacy ofupdatcs and ease Of Correcting errors in the exception reports. Tltis approach will insure that ICetr County is not out $16,585 for an inadequate iaGsrfaco program that may be expensive to maintain. Phase II: This addresses the timeliness and adequacy' of the data that updates the TSc3 system. If the courthouse users feel that they nerd access to the LF..MS system, Kerr County will need to pay an estim22ed 58.300 for~PGs and i`Jet Modems to access the STC2EMS system. Again, I feat that Kerr County can ask $TC to contribute this equipment and soma PCs since STC has saved mottey on their origiua122 PC 486!81) proposal. As you are aware, tlte~4$6J80 PCs has been made aconomieally obsoft`te by the Pentium PC prices. It is my overall rerAtnutendation that Igetr County not unden~•ritc the IntenFabe Program, if the Interface Program provides data that is'tuncly, adequate and easily maintainable, Kerr Count<•; at its option. after some months of use, pay all or same part of these costs. You have already agreed t0 pa}• about 55,000 forthe orie-time ttut'isfer of data to STC/LEMS system. The &ddidonal casts ate est%matcd presently~to be $16,585 (software progratuuting), $8,3pt)`for PC/Net Modem and additional PCs at the courthouse. Please feel free to call meat: 214-680-8434 if you have any questions or need clarification. l ain _ faxing this to you today and the origittsl is in the mail. Please provide copies of this letter to Judge 17enson and ShkrifFKziser. . -- !regards. (,~W _ o Thomas ; President ~ C>~Q ~ 1 ~ ~ Kerr County Intra-County Judicial Information Exchange Options 6/10/96 Option 1 Decide Sheriff s office and Courthouse offices will not communicate electronically. Kerr County will not have an integrated Judicial System. Pros Cons • A decision • Efficiencies of Integration lost • Departmental re-keying of Data • Phone calls to resolve warranUjail requests for information Estimated Cost One Time Recurrin $0 Unknown Page 1 The Software Group, Inc Kerr County Intra-County Judicial Information Exchange Options 6/10/96 Option 2 Cancel STC/TSG interface, purchase departmental personal computers for departmental access to the jail system. Pros Cons • Department PC will allow jail record • Efficiencies of integration lost lookup • Departmental re-keying of all data • Saves recurring expense to resolve data interface issues Estimated Cost One Time Recurrin Communications E ui ment and PC Sheriff's Office $8,300 De artment cs -estimate 5 offices C,CC,CCL CA, P $10,000 10 Standard Phone lines - ial-u Access $3,600 Estimated Ex enses $18,300 $3,600 Alternate Communications Leased Line :Probation <-> Jail $1,200 Leased Line :Courthouse <-> Jail $1,200 8 Channel Modetn/Mux -Courthouse <-> Jail $5,800 Leased Line Modem -Probation <-> Jail $1,700 Estimated Ex enses with Alternate Communications $25,800 $2,400 Page 2 The Software Group, Inc Kerr County Intra-County Judicial Information Exchange Options 6/10/96 Option 3 Proceed with the STC/TSG interface, purchase departmental personal computers for departmental access to the jail system. Pros Cons • Saves some departmental re-keying of • Ongoing dissatisfaction from data departments • Department PC will allow jail record • Expensive startup lookup . High recurring costs -exception resolution • Departmental re-keying of some data Estimated Cost One Time Recurrin Interface - TSG Pro ammin $16,585 Clerk to Mana a Interface & resolve exce tions 50% $12,500 Communications E ui ment and PC Sheriff's Office $8,300 De artment cs -estimate 5 offices C,CC,CCL, CA, P $10,000 10 Standard Phone lines - ial-u Access $3,600 Estimated Ex enses $34,885 $16,100 Alternate Communications Leased Line :Probation <-> Jail $1,200 Leased Line :Courthouse <-> Jail $1,200 8 Channel Modem/Mux -Courthouse <-> Jail $5,800 Leased Line Modem -Probation <-> Jail $1,700 Estimated Ex enses with Alternate Communications $42,385 $14,900 Page 3 The Software Group, Inc. Kerr County Intra-County Judicial Information Exchange Options 6/10/96 Option 4 Drop standalone jail software provided by STC, purchase communications equipment to attach existing STC provided PC/Jail network to County's IBM RS6000, use STC supplied video mug-shots standalone. Pros • Efficiencies of sharing data between departments • Makes use of equipment purchased as part of the phone deal Estimated Cost Cons One Time ........................... ................ .......................... ........................... .................... .......................... ........................... . .............. .......................... ........................... .......................... Page 4 The SoJtrvare Group, Inc Kerr County Intra-County Judicial Information Exchange Options 6/10/96 Option 5 Drop standalone jail soflwaze provided by STC, purchase communications equipment to attach existing STC Provided PC/Jail network to County's IBM RS6000, purchase integrated mug-shots Pros • Efficiencies of sharing data between departments • Mug-shots available to print on warrants, available at all judicial offices. Cons Ethernet Brid e/Router $7,200 CSU/DSU's $4,800 IBM Terminal Server $2,650 Leased Line :Courthouse <-> Jaazl $1,200 Traiain "and Annual Su ' `ort A lication Software Refresher Trainin $2,500 Sheriff Annual Product Su ort and U date Fee _ $8,232 S stem /;PC Software _ __ _. Network PC Terminal Emulation Software - 20 Co ies $2,400 Additional Database Mana ement users - 10 Users $3,650 Video lYfu -shots:: Video Mu -Shot Ca tore Station $25,250 Mu -Shot Host Soffwaze License Fee $6,650 Moe-Shot View Station Software - 5 Seats $6,250 $67 Page 5 The Sof[inare Group, Ina Kerr County Intra-County Judicial Information Exchange Options 6/10/96 Option 6 Drop standalone jail softwaze provided by STC, drop STC provided computer equipment, purchase new peripheral equipment for the jail, communications equipment to connect jail to County's IBM RS6000, purchase integrated mug-shots Pros Cons , • Efficiencies of sharing data between departments • Mug-shots available to print on warrants, available at all judicial offices. Estimated Cost One Time ........................... ........................... l OBaseT Network Hub $950 IBM Terminal Server $2,650 Installation/'I'estin Setu $1,200 Leased Line :Courthouse <-> Jail $1 200 ^1'raigin `and Annual Su " ort A lication Software Refresher Trainin $2,500 Sheriff Annual Product Su ort and U date Fee $8,232 3 stem 1'PC Softtivare Network PC Terminal Emulation Software - 5 Co ies $1,200 Additional Database Mana ement users - 10 Users $3,650 -Video Mu -shots Video Mu -Shot Ca ture Station $25,250 Mu -Shot Host Software License Fee $6,650 Mu -Shot View Station Softwaee - 5 Seats $6,250