9-8-8 Technical Advisory Board Meeting 20260219 171041UTC Meeting Recording

001Good morning everybody. We'll go ahead and get started. Um, welcome to the first 988 technical advisory board meeting of 2026. Uh, my name is Steve Yarro. I'm the deputy director of public safety communications here at Callowas and I'll be the chair for the meeting today. Um, we're going to be hearing some updates from some of the program areas and some of the working groups. And we'll also have uh a video demonstration of a a module of the uh what is it? The relationship management software um to look at. And so I hope you'll have an enjoyable time with the meeting today. Uh, obviously as we start to go through this, I I lean heavily on the expertise of the uh all of the members of the board here and the years of service and and

002uh all the disciplines that you represent, I think um will help make this a good and valuable use of our time. So, I'll start right off the bat with our uh roll call, make sure we have a quorum and um start with the ones who RSVP to be remote attendees uh since they will count as part of the quorum. Um so, I'll start with Dr. Buouie >> present. >> Thank you. And the other RSVP for remote I had was Diana Gutierrez, >> present. >> Right. I think volume was a little low, but I think that was a a present that I heard. Yeah. Okay. >> Yes, I'm present. >> Thank you. Okay, we got that. Uh, now in the room, um, Sherry Suelski, >> present. >> Thank you. Uh, Amitrius Sydney, >> present. >> Thank

003you. Jeff Hebert, nope. Tracy Gonzalez. Nope. Aaron Riley. Nope. Serena Lewis. >> Thank you. Dr. Rafa Yuan, >> present. >> Thank you. >> Terry Galvin, >> present. >> And Jamila Fields. >> Jama. Thank you. Um so by my count then that leaves us with eight which is the number that we needed for a quorum. So we may then continue with uh the business of the board today. >> So so Steve I would like to also uh inform everyone that I'm participating remotely. This is Lan. >> Oh thank you Lon. Yes I see you there. Wonderful. Mr. Dwin, um please be advised that because you're not included on the remote participation notice that we'll have to um you can participate in the discussions, but we can't have you vote. >> Oh, >> so next time just

004let Sammy know if you're going to participate remotely and she'll put you on that notice. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um so yeah. Okay, we've established quorum. We'll now move on to the next item of our agenda which is the uh meeting minutes uh and the their approval from the last meeting that we had uh back in November. Uh the meeting minutes have you have been distributed to the board in advance and posted on the website. Uh do any of the board members have a comment on the meeting minutes from the November meeting? All right. Seeing and hearing none, um we'll offer an opportunity for public comment on the meeting minutes. Uh is there any members of the public in the room who would like to make a comment as to the meeting minutes

005from the November meeting? Right. Seeing no takers on that, how about online? Any members of the public online who would like to make comment for the November meeting minutes? Right. Seeing no hands there, we will then move to a roll call vote for the approval of the meeting minutes. >> Sorry, Steve. Could I just um mention something? Um I noticed that this is for November 20th and Paul was not there. >> Correct. >> There's just one minor >> correction. So Okay. Okay. So, you're saying that Paul is indicated as having been present on the meeting minutes? >> I'm just looking at the minutes right now. So, actually, if I may ask for just a couple minutes to refresh my memory. I did look at it when Sammy sent it out, but I it's it felt

006like a long time ago. So, I'm just refreshing my my memory for for a minute here. Yeah. >> But, but Paul's listed as present, but he was not. >> Okay. So, yeah, we can we can strike that from the the minutes. Uh do we then need to not cast the votes now or is that uh >> you can make the motion including that amendment. >> Okay, >> great. So then uh in terms of approving the meeting minutes um if I have a motion to approve them with the amendment that Mr. Troxel has stricken. Oh yes, >> I have a question. Sorry, I'm also just regarding the platform. >> I I believed it was in there. Sorry, I cannot hear what the comment was online. >> Sorry about that, Dr. Buoie. I forgot to turn on

007my microphone. It's Sherry. I was just looking for the motion that I had made last time regarding forming a workg group um for the platform for the unified platform. I don't see that anywhere unless I'm missing it. So I believe um under in the meeting notes under item seven, this is page four, the bottom two lines of the page are in reference to the issue that you're talking about. It does not however indicate that a motion was made. So I think that's the discrepancy that you've identified. >> Okay. Yeah. So there was a motion to create that working group, but it doesn't attribute that to you having raised the motion. >> I don't know how to turn this on. I don't know if that's critical. I just didn't see that there at the bottom of

008the page. >> Right. Although it does say that we would meet before the February 2026 meeting, but when we inquired about meeting, we were told that we've had to wait until this meeting to meet. >> Correct. Yes. So, while the notes do represent uh what transpired at that meeting, things that have transpired since then have changed the understanding of what we understood at that time. So I think with in terms of the notes being accur or the minutes being accurate they are um in and but there's additional information that will be added through the discussion today that we know of. So I don't know that we need to update that with the intervening information. So then option one uh I'm I'll entertain a motion to approve them as written uh with the note to strike

009Mr. Troxel uh from them as he was not in fact present or option two uh we can edit them and uh put this matter over to our next regular meeting to have it reflect the the changes that we just discussed. So I leave it to to the board members to either motion or not motion accordingly. All right, hearing none. I think that means we put the matter over to the next meeting where we'll make these amendments. Um, and so that agenda item uh will uh appear on our next agenda. So we'll address the meeting minutes from that the November meeting and this meeting in the next uh meeting that's scheduled in May. All right. Moving on then to agenda item number three. This is the Callowas legislative and governmental affairs update. Oh, okay. Well, moving

010back then, um I it looks like there is a public comment uh online for pertaining to the meeting minutes. So, we'll turn to that now. Is it Mr. Taylor? >> Yes, thank you very much, Steve. Um just a quick comment uh on the meeting minutes, they at least as of today are not posted on the Caloes Technical Advisory Board web page. Um, so I'm just curious how the public is supposed to be able to comment on that those meeting notes when they aren't actually on the uh web page related to this this advisory board group. >> Thank you for that comment. >> Uh, yeah. So, just to close out that issue, it turns out that I misspoke that they were not in fact posted. Uh, and the reason for that is that they cannot be

011posted until they are approved. And so therefore, uh, that's why you don't see them posted out there. >> Well, understood. Just for the, you know, obviously we're not able to provide comment on something we can't see. So that's all I'm the only point I'm trying to raise here. >> Okay. Thank you. Yes. And and that is a a well-made point and we are definitely taking note of that and we'll address that uh prior to the next goround. >> So I think yeah thank you for that. >> All right. Now we'll turn to the legislative update agenda item number three. >> All right. Thank you Steve. Um, good morning. Paul McInness, legislative coordinator with uh Callowas. I'll be giving a legislative update. I have uh six uh state bills and six federal bills to share with

012the board this morning. Um as always, I'll make this list available through Samantha um after the meeting so everyone can reference it. Um and I just have a couple um legislative dates to share um initially before I get started. So, the legislature reconvened uh this year on January 5th. Uh this Friday, the 20th is their last day to introduce bills um in their house. And then um coming up May 29th, will be the last day for um each house to pass bills um over to the opposite house. Um I'll get started um with the state bills here. So, first bill is AB540, Assembly Member Gonzalez. Uh, this bill requires Callowas to ensure uh 988 call transfer capability between call centers and LGBTQ youth suicide prevention providers, including a press three routing option by July 127

013and expanded text and chat interoperability by uh between 988 networks by December 27th, I'm sorry, December 1st, 2027. Uh, the bill also requires California HHS to administer a grant program to support qualified suicide prevention providers and help 988 call centers implement these capabilities. Next bill is AB. Um, and one one note as well, these these have all been introduced and have not been um set for committee hearing yet. So, I won't be sharing status on all of these. Um, AB1639, Assembly Member Davies. Uh, this bill clarifies that 911 CPR instructions uh for drowning incidents must include ventilation and chest compressions and direct statewide CPR education updates. The next bill is AB1832, Assembly Member Ransom. This bill would state intent uh to enact further legislation to increase uh centralized access to vital 211 response services as

014part of the statewide emergency resource uh response and recovery system. AB18 next bill is AB1863. Assembly member um Deio. This one would prohibit a fire protection district board from charging a fee to any member of the public for use of a 911 emergency telephone number. Next is AB 1872. Assembly member TA would allow repeat false emergency reporting or 911 harassment violations to be charged as a misdemeanor or felony for adult repeat offenders. And the last um state bill is SB985. Senator Strickland uh would require Callowas um to provide quarterly reports to the legislature on the development, implementation, and spending of the NG 911 system. I'll move now to um uh six federal bills uh briefly I'd like to share this morning. First is HR 912. Uh, Representative Opbernoli amends title five of the public health

015service act to secure the 988 suicide prevention lifeline from cyber security incidents. Next bill is HR um 1519, Public Safety Communications Act by Representative Kamik would establish a permanent office of public safety communications within NTIA to administer the NG 911 grant programs and oversee firstn net public safety communications infrastructure. This uh next bill is HR6505. Um, this bill would expand federal coordination, grants, cyber security support and governance structures to accelerate nationwide deployment of NG 911 systems. And that's representative Hudson. Next bill is HR 7031. Making National Park Safer Act uh would require Secretary of the Interior to upgrade existing emergency communication centers in units of National Park systems to NG 911. And just a couple more bills here. A um S725 U Senator uh Globachar among among other things would require the FCC to report

016on certain activations of the disaster information reporting system or DURS. And the last bill is um S2826. Uh, Senator Baldwin directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to dedicate sufficient resources for the support of LGBTQ plus youth seeking help from the 988 suicide prevention hotline and for other purposes. So, that concludes the um legislative update for this morning. I'm happy to take any questions from the board. Right. >> Any questions from the board? Yeah. There are a couple of additional federal 98 bills that I'm tracking and if it's okay I'll send them to you. >> Yeah, absolutely. Thank you. >> All right. Uh seeing no questions, I'll thank you Paul for that report. We'll move on to the next agenda item. This will be uh the working group report outs. Um, so we'll start

017with the 988 and 911 interface working group. And do we have a member of that working group uh here to per uh do a report out for us? I think so. Right. >> So I I would like to share that this is langu again. Yeah. I I'd like to share that since um the uh technical survey board last met I believe believe two months ago. Uh I don't believe that the working group has something to meet yet. Uh but I but I think the other issue on the agenda that's going to be next for the board to act on which is the which is the uh the recommended draft for the 911 198 uh transfer recommendations which we've been which have been draft since like April uh 2024 which is about 20 months now and

018and I strongly um encourage the board to take action on because this is not a final final document. It's a living documents as more community members opportunity to provide input. I believe the working group will will also have an opportunity to to integrate those uh additional recommendation but it is something that we need to that the board need to need to look at and the tech section because it's just um it doesn't make sense that that the document has been in the draft mode for 20 months and we still talking about it. But uh uh but as a member of the working group uh the group has have a chance to meet since the last technical a board meeting. >> All right. Thank you for that report. Um any any questions or comments from the

019board on the the report out from the interface working group. >> I I have a comment. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um I I feel like it might have been that working group that previously we asked um if other board members could join because it seems as though that working group um does not regularly meet or has had some challenges. I feel like that's contributes to the the time that's gone on. And I know that we're limited by having two board members on the committees, but I wonder um the plan when it seems like maybe the committee members are struggling to hold meetings. >> I was wondering the same thing, Terry. Thank you for bringing that up. And I was just curious how does the a meeting of that group be is it is it called

020does it have to be called by the chair or can the members do that? >> No the the members can arrange to meet and conduct the the working groups tasks uh without direction uh on a case on an instance by instance basis. Um so but another question that arises is do the the occupants of the working group must they be members of the board or is it possible to have other skilled people uh be among the working group and therefore you know have more than just two people on that working group. I don't know uh the answer to that question, but it seems to me that you know though Bagley Keane constrains us from having more than two members on that working group, it could then also have other people involved who uh are skilled

021and and meet with the approval of the >> I believe there are other people on it that aren't part of this board. I don't know if they're official or not. I don't quite know, but I know that there's someone from DD Hersh that's tried to be on it and and often has a difficult time getting responses sometimes for what's happening. >> So I thank you Steve for clarifying that that if the chair is not available to um to um arrange for the meeting that board members uh who is part of the working group can uh suggest to have meeting takes place. uh that is something that uh I don't believe that we've been informed or or know about. Um so I I think that's it's important for the tubo members on that on the working

022group um yeah to be aware of. >> Yeah. So um yeah that my understanding is just that way and so and unless and until uh I'm dissuaded from that understanding then we'll operate under that construct. So the the working groups can conduct their uh meetings and investigations and task work um without having to have uh the you know direct involvement of the chair of the board or um or in fact even uh any direction to establish a date to meet. um it it's sort of uh treated as uh it performs the work of the working group on an independent basis and reports back to this body. So yes, thank you for for clarifying that point. >> I have um an addition. So I along with Dr. we co-chair the accessibility and equal access working group

023>> and on the working group memberships we actually have a a point to raise for that on our report out but my understanding is that all of the working groups have had nonboard members as part of that since the beginning of >> advice report. >> Yes. >> No. Yeah. And that uh I think the key with that is it frees us up then to you know not necessarily be limited to the availability of those two board members. It the show can go on with the other members who are involved. So that's great. >> Exactly. So that happened for us this kind of quarter. Dr. Buoie during when the same period as our working group meeting got scheduled got called in for jury duty. So then we still were able to run the meeting even though

024that happened. >> Wonderful. Thank you for that clarification. Um, okay. Uh, any other comments on the the interface working group from the board members? All right, we'll move on to the next working group then. Yeah, I guess I'm sorry. Maybe I do have one more comment which is just that, you know, since the working group has been stalled, um I'm wondering if there's something that we might want to do to communicate to all the members that, you know, they can continue to meet and make recommendations or maybe even that they should continue so that we're not waiting the next time we meet. >> Yeah. Um so I think you know having discussed it here uh is is helpful and then what we can do is I'll have the team put together uh an explanation of

025that point and distribute it to each of the working groups uh so that we have clarity around that >> and so we can take that as an action item to to do after the after >> that would be great I think and to the members as well >> to the extent we know who the members are Um, and so I I if they if if if we'll figure out the ones that we know, but I I would prevail upon the people who are on those working groups to if if uh there are members that didn't get the thing to let us know who they are, but also to share with them that information. So, it's kind of a collaborative effort. We can send it to who we know is on that. Um, but if there

026are others that it doesn't get to because they're not on a list that we have kept, um, then I would like to know who that is so we can update our records and then, um, of course we would have a better standing to push this information out in the future. So, yes, please let us know if that happens. It seems like maybe we should have a process of keeping track of everybody that's on every working group, especially if there's a rule that there can only be two more board members participating. It would be great if we have a record then in the future of everybody that's on these groups and how a person can join or should join and become an official member. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, we'll definitely uh pull up our records

027and make sure that they reflect what we know to be accurate and uh we'll, you know, sort of pull information from previous meeting minutes and crossch checkck that. So, we'll Yeah. And then, of course, to your point, uh having a process, I think there is a process to add them and and keep track, but uh you know, no process is is 100% perfect. So, it's always prudent, I think, to uh cross-ch checkck that with anybody else's understanding. That's I think where my point is going. >> Got it. >> All right. Uh >> on to online. >> Yeah. >> Um the accessibility and and um equal access working group does have a roster um that we have submitted um to OES. uh happy to share that out so that you're aware of who's on the working

028group. >> Yeah. Thank you. So when you say you submitted it to OES, um are you referring to the board liaison, >> Samantha Barton? >> Yes. Just wanted to make sure that's where it went. >> So yeah, >> because I don't I don't recall having gotten that, but I I I wouldn't expect it to come to me. So, um, yeah, I I guess what I'm saying is when when we do submit those things, submit them to the board liaison, uh, that's Samantha Barton atcallowas.ca.gov. Um, and, uh, that's the the the I guess ingress point for data coming to the to the attention of the the administrative portion of running the board. Thank you. All right. Any other comments on the interface working group? >> Yeah, I just Yeah, I'm sorry. One last comment. This is

029long when I went since I I joined the technical advisory board when the 98 911 interface working group was already formed. So I attend a meeting not as a member to represent the board to be on that in that working group but just a member of community um attending that meeting. But if there's opportunity to be to be on that working group as a member of the board, I would be happy to be able to do that. Okay. Thank you. All right. Uh the next working group is the accessibility and equal access working group and I believe uh there was a report out for that. So I'll start and then Dr. Buouie if you have anything to add. Um so we have three kind of workg group items we approved for reading out to the

030board today. Um one has to do a little bit with this murkiness around workg groupoup composition and we wanted to improve kind of transparency and equitable access to the working group itself. So, we're asking for the board to approve four additions to our work group uh or these categories and we are going to seek out entities or individuals organizations that could provide the representation. So, one for youth and young adults, one for tribal communities, one for veterans, and one for people with disabilities. We have identified these as groups that are important for how the line functions. Um for example, the veterans crisis line is embedded into 988. We want to make sure that veterans in California that are using 988 um and then select the option to go to the veterans crisis line are still

031incorporated into the systems we're building here in California. Um so the this is an example of our reasoning. Um the second one is to recommend that the board seeks clarification uh from Callies on what privacy protections are going to be in place for the data of 98 service users especially as the CRM gets rolled out. And this is in light of kind of increasing state and national concerns around data privacy and misuse at times by the federal government or other entities. and one I think you um alluded to already but recommending development of additional supporting documents or trainings to support the 911 988 transfer guidance once that document goes out. Do we have a process in place to monitor how its implementation is going, what its uptake is, how it's being used in different local.

032>> All right. Uh any any comments from the board members on that report out? >> Question. Name the four groups. I didn't catch all four of them again. >> Sure. Um youth and young adults, tribal communities, veterans, and people with disabilities. >> Um I'm curious, um not being part of that discussion that that uh LGBTQ wasn't, uh didn't rise to the top. I would guess that you probably talked about it >> based on uh representation that we didn't already have. >> I see. >> Yes. Sorry. >> Got it. >> So, concerning those four subgroups, I guess is what they would be. Um, so you were you were looking for approval from the board to establish those and populate them with Right. And so, and >> I think historically the workg group chairs have have um

033solicited workg groupoup members kind of independent from the board which has led us to this situation where there's a bit of confusion about who's on the workg group and so our kind of goal is just to increase transparency and bring this formally here for approval. >> Yeah. So, uh I guess to then move that forward, we would would like to establish a a roll call vote to make that happen. Now, are you expecting it to be an all or nothing proposition for the four or do you want to get approval on them independently? >> I think it's okay to move forward with all four unless there anyone that has concerns. >> Okay. Right. So, >> I would just wonder um if there's I don't know the composition of the work group at the moment. Um

034but I would be curious if you considered or if you already have individuals with lived experience But yeah, perfect. Great. Then I have no concerns. >> And perhaps it'll be helpful. We can maybe get on to distributed out to the the board the roster that was submitted of the members that are already there. >> Yes, that would be helpful. Um Okay. Yeah. So, it sounds like then we're at a point where we would uh be looking for a motion to be made to vote to approve that uh four subgroup composition. Um so, I'm happy to entertain a motion if one were made. >> Can I go ahead and make the motion? >> Yeah. Okay. I make the motion to uh have the board approve for additions to the workg group for these these um kind

035of high high importance categories. >> And does anybody second that motion? >> I can second the motion. >> All right. Um so then before we move to a vote on that, I'll open it up for an opportunity for the public comment. uh so we can consider the public's comment when uh casting our votes. Is there anybody in the room among the public who would like to make a comment on the proposition of having these four subworking groups established? >> Yeah. Sorry. And a clarification wouldn't be subworking groups. They they would be we would just seek out representatives from these groups to participate in the regular working group meetings. >> Okay. So it's membership among the accessibility and equal access working group. >> Correct. >> Specifically delegates from those populations. >> Right. >> Got it. So

036it's one working group still with membership from these four areas. >> Right. Additional membership beyond the members we already have. Yes. >> Oh, there we go. Nice. Thank you for that clarification. Uh so then I didn't see any hands wanted to make a comment on that in the room. Are there any online among the public who would like to comment on this proposition? All right, then I think we the next step is for us to move to a vote on that. We'll conduct a roll call vote. Uh we'll start with Dr. Buouie. How do you vote? >> Yes. >> All right. Sherry Sinwellski. >> Yes. >> Diana Gutierrez. Yes, >> Sydney. >> Yes, >> Serena Lewis. >> Yes, >> Dr. Rafa Yuan. >> Yes. >> Terry Galvin, >> yes. >> Jamila Fields, >> yes. >>

037The motion passes unanimously. Uh can I have a make a comment uh Steve on this on this voting issue? >> Sure. >> Yeah. I I think earlier someone mentioned that since my name was not listed on the agenda that went public that that are we participating remotely but I'm looking at agenda now. I don't believe any board members that participate remotely are being listed or being noted on the agenda. >> I'm sorry it's not referenced in the agenda. There's an additional link below that on the 988 um web page >> um that says remote participation notice >> that's that's a requirement under Bley Keen that if you're going to participate we need to include you on a 24-hour notice. >> Okay. Yeah. Be Yeah. I served on a school board before for 16 years and

038usually members of board who participate remotely would be their name and location of where they're participating usually listen their agendas and that's why when I don't see it here I'm just um making a note of that. >> Yeah. So um school boards are generally uh governed by what's called the Brown Act. State boards and bodies are governed by Bagley Keen. >> Um we're just following the law. >> Okay. Thank you. All right, thank you for that clarification. Um, all right. Now, back to uh back to the business at hand. Uh, there were remind me again, there were a couple of other points in your brief. >> Yeah, I know it was a little bit wordy. So, uh, the second point, so thank you for entertaining the first request. Um the second request is a concern

039that um was raised about when 988 users call in or text in. Um who holds that data? How is that information protected? They're sometimes disclosing very, you know, personal things that they don't necessarily want to be out in the public domain or they're not sure who's accessed by it. And the main point we're trying to raise is it's unclear to the public um how their information is protected when they call into 988. >> And do you have uh a recommended way that that be communicated so that it is clear to the public? So two two other things well one other yes so I'll answer that but one other this is in the context of other kind of large often state related data sets such as for for medical or for other things like this but

040then being used for example by the federal government for enforcement of immigration related issues. So there's also concern about well how safe is some of the state data if it's a state federal partner program like medical or like 988. Um so I actually don't have full clarity on how that data is protected or uh in the past what um the caloes had indicated to us was that they don't really hold the data that belongs to the call centers. Um, uh, as we move to the the CRM, there would be some entity of that's not the call center because it's actually in a technology platform. So, I wasn't sure if that was going to change things. Um, I can take this, we did not specifically discuss what we thought that Calos should do, but I can

041take this back. I think there would be a very robust discussion on that. Um I think request at this point is clarification on what data does the call center hold, what data does the caloes hold, if any. Um does the CRM change this? And yeah, so I think those are the main questions. >> No, it's uh I think it's an excellent point. Um I'm sure there are many uh sections of legal code that would come to bear on it as well. Um, and so I don't think it's necessarily something we just answer off the cuff, right? Um, so I would expect then that we could agendaize that as something to report out on in the next um in the next meeting and um as simultaneously you could uh work in the workg group to find

042out um what would be helpful in terms of the way you know what you would recommend. so that we find that sweet spot that overlaps what the law requires and what would be beneficial and helpful uh from the user experience. Um then we can you know sort of chart out how how that plays out in real life. So those are the two I think uh main ways of addressing it. So we'll put those as agenda items in the next okay meeting. >> That sounds good. And then um so I think there was Did you have a >> Yes, there was one more and I think we'll probably discuss this as we get to the the item of of of the voting on the recommendations >> but an acknowledgement that there will be continued requirements for

043kind of quality improvement and process oversight as the recommendation document goes live assuming it's voted to be approved. And does the board have a process of how we are going to revisit this um kind of in light of how long the initial piece went on? Is there a calendar that we want to set up or a process we want to put in place to to see the the document recommends thatus be put in place? Are we going to know if that's happening or not happening? Right. >> Um yeah, so continued monitoring of how the roll out goes and if we produce an updated document or supporting documents or trainings on the implementation of the document. >> Yeah. And and I agree with you there will probably be robust discussion about that in the in the

044agenda item for that. So um I think we'll probably uh address it there if if that's suitable. >> Can I make a comment on that? >> Yes, by all means. Um this is a very important concern obviously for the public to have trust in the system. Um I do believe that this is also an issue that's been raised many times by the centers um as we've been giving feedback on on a platform. Uh I don't know where that stands but I know it's a concern and I think that it was potentially uh something that was also addressed as part of theou that was happening or or maybe was discussed a bit with theou that was happening with vibrant um and callas. But I might have that wrong. Um, but it is something that you obviously

045is a big concern and I think that, you know, we we've been documenting that as something that we wanted to make sure of, too. So, I'm glad that y'all are bringing it up. >> Yeah. and and I would expect uh that it's probably on a lot of people's minds and that the requirements between in theou between SAMA and and uh the state platform would definitely have a lot of those terms and conditions applied there. So um so I if nothing else that definitely creates an opportunity to mine that information to come up with a set of requirements that stand independently uh from thatou. So >> y >> all right Dr. Buoie did you have anything to add um >> to the data privacy question? Um no I don't Okay. >> All right. Uh any questions

046from the board uh for the accessibility and equal access working group? All right. Seeing and hearing none, uh we'll thank you for that report, Alle, we'll move on to the 988 consortium working group for report. >> I can uh start and then Lon, if you want to jump in. Um, I do want to note that it is actually the implementation working group and so as such there may be some room for this working group to take on some of what we were just discussing when um implementing the 988 um protocol. We met several times. I have not submitted our roster but I will so that our roster is also provided um to Callowas of participants. We um submitted as a working group, we submitted comments to the interface working group for the um 988 911

047uh protocol. We also have um spent a lot of time on the reimbursement requests in the process and we have confirmed that to date there are several of the outstanding reimbursement requests have been completed and checks have been received by the centers. So um we've been tracking that. Um couple of the outstanding items that we've been working on. We were looking for a communication strategy between Callowes and the centers at some regular interval if it was going to be um we at back in time we used to have a series of meetings but they um were not necessarily so productive as other things had kind of stalled through the process. And so we understand that. But we talked about some other ways of just keeping the group informed of um all things related to the

048process. Um we had we have a center that's in a pilot process. So we thought maybe a newsletter or some type of ongoing communication that's just sharing lessons learned or some way to keep the communication flowing regularly through the centers as we're in any stages of implementation with any of the projects. And so that's still outstanding. So we would like to um take that up at our next meeting and make sure that we have some way to communicate other than just this board meeting quarterly. We have an outstanding question about the CRM system which we're may be covered today when when we present and whether or not the system is also a standalone system whether the system and the call system whether they must go together or whether they can be separated out. and it's

049really just a a we're just curious >> and so maybe that will be answered today. Um we have a question about the status of theou I believe probably under item seven you may cover that. >> Um so we we had that because a lot of the implementation points get held up when we come when it comes to whether the MOU has been signed or not. Now, as we spent a lot of time talking about the reimbursement process and how it works for the centers and and how it's working, we do have a recommendation that the equipment requests and reimbursements go through the state administrator for 988 to better align with the center needs. We the centers, as we've all discovered, are very different than big PAP organizations or or we don't have a one-time need

050for a lot of equipment. and then have it purchased and and put in place and then never again. We are now we've all gotten through this process now. We can see that we can see the end of the process, but now we have equipment that needs to be replaced. We have new equipment that's going to have to come for as our center um grows and we have to have a system that to date the Callaway S1 is quite cumbersome on nonprofit centers. So, our recommendation is that we move this process to the state administrator where we're able to purchase the equipment and get reimbursed in something that feels much like real time. >> I'd like to add something to what Terry just mentioned, too. I I think that the process that's in place right now

051can also be really challenging because of the preapproval um that's needed. I know that sometimes there are there's equipment that centers need quickly, especially if something breaks. Um, and you know, not being able to just purchase that and know whether or not it's going to be approved or when it's going to be approved can be really challenging. Um, so I think that was another reason that that recommendation was was brought u by some of the centers. >> So for my edification, who is the state administrator that you're referencing here? A apocates for human potential. >> Thank you. >> It's the organization that the centers submit our other invoices for for the rest of our services. So, I think the recommendation was it would be simpler and easier for us to be able to submit with

052our other invoicing through that process that's a little bit more um flexible, >> right? >> And we invoice monthly. >> The systems in place >> and then of course if needed AHP could still be reimbursed by Callowas, >> but we wouldn't have to put the money out and and be, you know, in the hole for that in the meantime. >> Yeah. No, it's uh yeah, it's a new AHP is a new term uh for me at least. And so I I thank you for your patience with explaining to you know that part of it to me. Um I'll definitely look into that and and see the opportunities are. I mean your point is is well taken that the the cumbersome nature of of bureaucratic processes don't necessarily align with the the world that you're operating

053in. Um and so in terms of serving that you know it well um there's improvements that can be made and if this is a way of doing that and uh you know obviously figuring out how to make all the all the money flow correctly is is important. So, um, yeah, I think that, you know, bears some investigation into how that could potentially work. Um, knowing if that if that's the recommendation, then, um, you know, I think as a candidate solution, it sounds reasonable. Um, so yeah, we'll look into that. >> This is Antubui online. If I may, um, help you with some background information. Um so AHP is a contractor to DHCS. Um so uh I I would say that it is something that would have to be decided by DHCS. >> Yes. Yeah. And

054then and that I think is part of the you know part of what needs to be investigated is how all that would work. um you know knowing that the money exists in one place and the and the capability um recommendation on the other side um you know figuring out is there a way to to mesh those two together or not is really the crux of the problem um that stops us from being able to say you know absolutely let's implement that now so yeah I think a lot of leg work still needs to happen behind the scenes in order to get to where that's uh you know we can greenlight that as the solution. But as a candidate, like I said, uh it sounds promising. >> Yeah. And but it has to do with interpretation

055of AB988, right? A lot of it is the decision of where the technology responsibility lies and that's where OES has um basically taken on the responsibility of the technology piece. So, I just want to clarify that there's been a lot of um roles and responsibilities that were established by AB98A and then by the 5-year implementation plan process. Um so, anything that reconsiders that and and the governance and the roles and responsibilities requires all the state entities to sit together and discuss that. Can we commit to starting that >> having at least an initial conversation between >> whoever should start those conversations? >> Yes, that's yeah, that's the looking into it that needs to happen is that conversation series that you're talking about and I think that's what Dr. Buoie is referencing as well. And so

056number one is is mapping out, you know, among whom must those conversations take place in order to get anywhere close to approving that as a solution. And um I think you know Dr. Buoie's comment is raising at least one stakeholder group that needs to be in that conversation. Um I'm not sure that's the totality of it. I feel like there's probably more and I and so I think those you know in investigations can be taken offline to advance that. Um but your point, you know, can we commit to starting that discussion and figuring it out? Yes. And so um we'll put that as an item to be reported back on at the next uh agenda or at the next uh scheduled meeting. >> Thank you. I >> I'd like to add also um Dr. Dr.

057Buouie, thank you for reminding us about the other relationships. Um, and you know, you mentioned that the way the law is written and the way the plan is written is that Callowas is, you know, responsible for the technology. Um, I think though, however, at least I'll speak for myself. I I didn't believe that, not that I wrote the law, but I didn't believe that we would still be here, you know, all these years later waiting for a platform. And you know perhaps an interim solution could be that this could be the way that we get reimbursed if up until when we're on a new platform that's actually being supported by Callowas. U you know that might be an easier way maybe I'm not sure but for for Callowas to provide our our technical support but

058right now when we're still operating on our own um I think most of us I think that it it creates an even additional burden. So maybe there's an opportunity to have an interim solution in place if if the longer term solution is is something that people are going to get stuck on. >> Thank you for that. The having Yeah. something to something to carry on in the in the intervening period. Um, and I think you're you're referencing both the technology and the reimbursement process when you say that, right? Um, the the concept of not waiting for a perfect final solution to have something that's workable in the in the intervening period. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> That's the end of my report. >> All right. Uh, any questions from the board members? uh for

059the implementation working group. All right. Uh seeing and hearing no other no other comments on that, we thank you for that report out. Um and so the next working group on our list is the call handling solution analysis work group. Um that is the one referenced in the meeting minutes uh from last time uh that was established. This was a a working group to evaluate features and functionality um that is needed by the centers but also what options are available in the marketplace of solutions um to sort of align you know where where the features and functionalities exist so we can evaluate which of them is best suited. Um the idea being and I I think correct me if I'm wrong but this was tangentially related to the idea or question last time as to

060whether there was a mandate to use the state uh offered system and as the conversation went last time that there there was no mandate to use that system but it was a a solution that was offered um should it be deemed valuable and helpful to each of the centers they could adopt that solution or they of course are free to adopt any other solution that's on the marketplace um that they find valuable and helpful for their use. So um that's sort of the construct of where this this uh solution analysis working group was coming from. Um, and as a board, we voted last time to establish this group, but uh I was remiss in not uh asking the the board to populate it with uh people to work on that working group. And so we

061had a shell of a working group with no members. Um, so one of the things that I would uh be interested in entertaining is a motion uh to uh nominate and and uh select members for this working group. Um if if such a motion were to be made here, then I think we as a board can consider that and vote on it. Um so I I leave it to your comments at this point. um if you have ideas about uh how to populate this group and then uh the tasks that we could charge them with um once populated. Um does anybody have any idea as to who or a volunteer perhaps of who might like to be on the solution analysis work group? >> So this is Lanwin again. Um I'm I'm not able to

062nominate because I'm uh I think somebody explained earlier since I can't vote I probably can't nominate. However um attended the last meeting and and able to participate in this discussion I believe Sher was was want to initiate to have this this issue discussed and she's not only uh care about this but also she's also the the one of the native center is also going to be the user of of this of this platform. So, so Sherry unless you have you feel strongly about able to participate, I hope to someone in the room able to nominate Sher to be uh either the chair or a um a a workg group member. >> Thank you, L. I appreciate that. Um and I'm not sure how if someone in the room needs to nominate or if if if

063he can nominate. Um however, regardless of of that, I also want to add and we can come back to that. I don't know if there's other people that want to be the chair. Um, but I also think that it's it's really important that we clarify what are the tasks um associated with with chairing this. Um, I actually think that there could be a lot of leg work involved in this working group actually in all of the working groups. And so I think it's important that myself or whoever were to chair it understands that and also what support there may or may not be from Callowas staff member that are designated to 988 to help us um in in doing the work of the of the group. Um yeah so to the extent um of your

064second part of your question uh we routinely provide staff resources to uh compile and gather uh data into a usable format. Um certainly this is the kind of thing um you know that we do I think we do it on the like with the um transfer recommendation document already. So it's yeah we're happy to perform that task. I think the key element here though um that really make would make something like this work is the unique expertise and voice of the call centers themselves. And so, um, that that's the key for me is understanding what the community of call centers find valuable. And I mean, I I presume that they're already using several products already out there. Um and so understanding which of those are being used and uh how how the feature set of

065those compares to the the one that we um have available under contract at the state level and then understanding from each of the each of the call centers the relative value of the feature sets. So in other words, if there was a rudimentary offering that just did like three things very well, but there was a robust offering that had 40 features, but nobody really values those additional 37 features, then that wouldn't necessarily be a better solution. Just because it was more complex didn't make it a better solution. And so you know sort of clearing through the debris to understand what's at the core that is necessary and and valued by the centers and that's the magic of this is understanding that because then that can be compared against the offerings that are in the marketplace

066and you know alignment can be made at that point. So >> yeah that's a that's a great point um that you made there Steve and I'm I'm glad that you brought that up. I remember you mentioned that when we were here um in November as well. I actually went back um me and my team went back and took a look at some of that um just to help inform this discussion. Um so in the last three and a half years um since August of 2022 um this doesn't include all of the requirements or all of the feedback that was given, but there was at least 11 times um that we formally provided that information to Callowas. Um the first being with 178 functional needs that were included in the system that we were asking for.

067Um you know, you're right, the number of of items is not the most important thing, but the meeting of the needs of the counselors and what they need to do to be able to do their job is really important. you know, 988 up until this point has been really successful in meeting the needs of the individuals that are calling in and also of us trying really hard to keep our staff from not being overwhelmed and burnt out. So having a system that they can use with ease to help um individuals in crisis is really important. Um and and so I think that what the feedback that I've heard from centers over the past three and a half years is that despite at least 11 times or perhaps more of us giving this information um over

068we have not gotten feedback back to say yes this has been received yes that your information is been taken into consideration and and here's where these features are reflected in in a Um, so you you mentioned earlier that um the product may or may not be a requirement. I'm I'm still not clear if I understand the answer to that because I've heard separately in in other conversations that it that it is required. And then, you know, I'm also hearing that it would be a product that is, you know, something that could be uh an asset to us and we can choose to use it if we want to. you know, if we can choose to use it, if we want to, then the this working group, I think, may have a different focus or a

069different goal. Um, but if we're required to use it, then I think that the centers, at least my center, uh, would be very passionate in making sure that we have our voices heard and that we have a product that's not going to, uh, take the centers backwards in terms of their ability to provide um, help to callers who and chatters and textters who are reaching out for support. Um so I think that um it is really important that we could get official answer on that at some point as to whether or not it's a required product. Um but in the meantime um I think that the focus of this work group when I when I made this motion certainly my intent was that there was really a clear feedback mechanism where when we give the

070requirements or the the the desires of a system that we're able to see that indeed those are being incorporated into a new a new uh platform. So yeah, uh thank you for pulling up the material about the 178 business requirements that you have there. Um just for clarification purposes, are those strictly a set of features and requirements that pertain to DD hir or is it does it represent the all of the calls? >> Yeah, that that's a great question. Um, so this process began a while ago, so I can't say that it currently represents all of the centers because a lot of time has passed and those needs may have changed. >> Um, but initially Dee Hirsch was contracted to do this work. Um, and so we did go through a a formal process of

071seeking requirements from every single center that was part of the network at the time. Um, and we provided those over for the RFP um that was used to solicit the vendor. Um so at that time it did represent um what the centers felt like they needed three and a half years ago. >> Yeah. I mean that's good and obviously things change over time of course and and even the number of centers has probably changed since that time as well. It has but you know just understanding from that perspective if so if you know if that's what was ingested and then turned into uh technical requirements for you know whatever solution is developed um then that probably meets some of the some of the purposes that at least in my mind were attributed to this work

072group. Um but going further beyond that then is sort of getting to a place I I think where we can say not every center has the same you know demand if you will for feature sets right and so it might be that one center really needs you know feature set A and another center might not need that at all they might already have something already that handles that and don't want to change. And so I think one of the products that could come out of this workg group is, you know, a recommendation set where if if you're looking for these things, then here are three products that provide that and and you know, their relative, you know, um, you know, price point or utility within within the all the solutions that are possible. And so

073you can, you know, say, okay, if you're looking for a luxury automobile, then I recommend a Cadillac. But if you're looking for a car that's good gas mileage and just get you back and forth to school, then perhaps a Honda Civic is what you're looking for. And so having those, you know, tiered offerings called out because an analysis has been performed, I think, would be helpful. Um, uh, I could be wrong in that and I'm happy to be wrong if if, uh, the community wants to correct me on that point, but that's one of the things I was looking at because to your other point, um, as I read the the legislation that um, that mandates the role of Caloes in this, I don't see where developing competing products in the marketplace is really the

074thing that is called out. I what I see is interoperability between 988 and 911 as being the mandate for OES. >> Yeah, that that's a really great point and I I think I don't want to speak for Terry, but I think that's part of that question that we we were asking about about whether or not a CRM could be separated from a call handling system. Uh I I do think that there are advantages um that Callowas may be able to have for the centers in terms of transfers at least from 98 911 to 988. We don't really transfer to 911 very often but uh there's definitely some work that Kurt's done to help Dee Hirs on that and I think that could be really helpful but I'm wondering uh if the CRM is as crucial

075um given that's the part of our work that's a lot different maybe than than what happens with 911. Um, >> so I I think that's that's one of the questions that we have. >> Yeah. No, and it's a valid question and I and I really think uh getting to the bottom of that is should be one of the key things. So if for no other reason, we're all, you know, understanding and expecting the same outcome, right? Um just, you know, >> from an expectation setting standpoint, we should all be clear about what we're doing. Um and you know I mean I I think one of the things that keeps coming up too is the there's you know a need for resources in this space that is routinely you know brought up in different venues and

076I don't know how much value um we would actually be adding to to the operation of 988 centers by creating a a competing product with products that are already available in the marketplace. Is that a good use of resources that have been allocated to us? >> That's a good question. And so if if software development is not the core competency of of OES um in you know with respect to 988 or um 911 or any of our programs then maybe that's not the best way for us to spend our time and energy uh in other resources. So if there are products available that meet the need and are competitive in terms of a cost standpoint, then um it might be wise and economically prudent to not recreate something and instead choose something that presently exists

077the research and development for which has been uh handled by private companies and doesn't necessarily be need to be underwritten by taxpayers. So, you know, these are the some of the things I think that factor into that decision. Um, and you know, obviously getting to the bottom of, you know, what the mandate is and whether this is in scope or out of scope for that mandate would be helpful in that regard. So, um, >> yeah, I I agree. I think that's would be really important. And it's unfortunate that we're just now getting to have this conversation cuz I remember when I made the motion last month, I mean, I'm sorry, at the last meeting. Um, I had suggested that that we the workg group meet before this meeting. Um, my intention behind that was because

078I think we were trying to we were having a discussion about the contract for the current vendor and how a decision would be made as to whether or not that current vendor would still continue to be on contract. And um so I guess I'm I'm also curious you know as an update if that decision has been made and and how that decision was made or you know what is the transparent transparency in those decisions. >> So in the decision as to whether the the current contractor continues to develop a CRM >> um my understanding was that the current contractor the contract was ending at the end of the year. >> That's correct. Yes. >> Yeah. And and I think I had we were asking several of us were asking how how it would be decided

079whether or not that contract was going to be extended. Um and and I I I don't know what the outcome of that was. >> So I think at the time I said that the intention was to extend it so that we didn't end up in a situation where we had nothing. And and so just from a game theory standpoint, if our options are to extend so that we have a a a vendor under contract or to let the contract expire and not have a vendor under contract, meaning that we don't have an opportunity to provide a solution or develop a solution, then it seems prudent to me to make sure that we have one under contract. And so that's what we went and did is we extended that contract strictly for the reason that we

080need to make sure we have that capability in the in the toolbox. >> And my understanding of that conversation was it it didn't mean that there wasn't the ability to make changes even within the period of time that it's been extended. What did we have that conversation? So I I I don't recall that we explicitly had that conversation. We may have um but I if we did the answer was probably having a vendor under contract allows us the opportunity to engage with a vendor for developing uh feature sets and so forth. And so I think that's a yes to what I believe the question is >> or to go in a different direction at a time of your choosing. Yeah, it doesn't it doesn't preclude us from selecting another path. Um certainly so um under

081this work group then uh in order to have the work group meet um then the work group occupants must be determined. Um, so until we have people on the working group, the working group's not going to be able to meet. And that's I I think in my email back to you was one of the things that I and I think I said it here, I was remiss in not populating that work group with people. And so I stand here uh I think Lawn, you had indicated a desire at least to nominate uh Sherry for that role. Um, and I do we is law eligible to to make a nomination even though he is not eligible to vote >> or put another way if there was another person who were to make that nomination then we

082wouldn't uh need to actually uh get legal opinion on that. >> I would like to nominate Sher Sinwellski. >> All right. >> As the the chair. >> I will second that. >> All right. So, we have a a first and a second on nominating Sherry. Are there any other uh members of the work group that uh any of the board members would like to nominate or um in fact volunteer for? All right. Hearing none, uh >> I think you have someone over there. >> Oh, do we? Oh, I'm sorry. I >> I was just going to ask a question for clarification. Is it that the working group has to be board members or it can be someone outside of the board members? I just needed clarity on that. >> No, it it can be somebody

083outside of the outside of the board members, but generally I think we start with two board members. Um it doesn't have to be. I don't think uh there's necessarily a reason for that. If we're just capped at two, and we usually run to the cap on this, but um I don't think we have to have two and other members can be added. Um, and I I would suggest for the board's consideration that perhaps one of the first tasks of the work group would be to identify other people who can engage on that work group um so that it doesn't just fall to one person's shoulders to do uh what I think you correctly identified might be extensive leg work. So, um, so yeah, I think to to your question, um, yeah, the board members who

084are in this working group should then immediately turn their attention to adding others to it. More voices is better. >> Got it. Um, Sherry, I'll be your partner in crime. >> I'll nominate myself. >> All right. Um, just uh for the sake of tidying that up, do I have a second that will that will support the that nomination? >> I support. >> All right. Thank you. Okay. So, we have two nominations. Um, and so we'll I guess as a as a board we should vote as to whether to accept those two nominations. Um, so but before we move to that point, um, I think we should open it up for public comment here in the room. Are there any, uh, comments on these two nominations proposed, um, that any of the public would like to

085weigh in on? Oh, yes. I think there's a microphone right over here at the at the Good morning everyone. Naris Dylan from California 988 Centers. Um I wanted to make a comment regarding the work group being established. Um there are a couple factors that I think the it's imperative for the work group to keep in mind. One is the current contractual obligation for the centers to use the callases identified platform. I know in this discussion we have talked about whether or not it's optional, whether or not um how it competes with other services, but I do think there is a practicality there that has to be addressed potentially with um other stakeholders since our current contract with the HCS does specifically indicate that all centers are mandated to use the callas s service. Um, additionally,

086I think when I think about the focus of the AB988 5-year implementation plan being on the 911 988 diversion, I hope there can be some collaboration between the 911 988 group and this task force regarding what it would take to actually set that up successfully because in my opinion as a someone who has been running a center for 13 years, that is the primary thing that this new service would give us and that is the primary way that we will move the AB988 vision forward is that interoperability. Um so ensuring that that's at the center of the work that's happening feels um really important and that um we kind of make a commitment I think to for this to be the last round we're doing this because the the number 11 that Sherry mentioned I

087think is an undercount of how many times um I have personally met with people and talked about what this service needs to include in order for it to work for the centers. Thank you. Thank you. Any other public comment in the room? Okay, seeing none in um could I ask online? This is Auntie Buouie. I didn't hear the name for the second nomination. I only heard Sherry's name. Sorry. >> Yes, it was Demetrius Sydney. >> Thank you. >> Uh okay. So, any any public comment online? It looks like we have one. >> Hi, this is Matt Taylor, uh, senior director crisis line operations at DD Hirs. There's a lot going on in this meeting today. I'm very thankful for that in the dialogue. I just want to circle back uh given this is one of

088the agenda four items and reiterate something that uh Terry noted Terry Gavin who's uh obviously on the tap um and that is that as the volume of 908 continues to grow often it's growing monthly both on calls chats and text centers have to be the 988 centers have to be very dynamic we are constantly hiring people we're backfilling people and this has a direct relation to the technology provision needs. So I'm providing comment to reinforce this notion that most of the 988 centers would much prefer to submit our technology approval um needs and get reimbursed through the current state administrator which is advocates for human potential um who's contracted by DHCS. And the single uh most compelling example or justification that I'll give for this is that um a number of centers are thankful that

089we did just get reimbursement for a lot of the uh computer technology we had to provide to our counselors um the counselor staffing pool that's been growing. Um but that in some cases that reimbursement came after waiting a year and a half to be reimbursed for the laptops, the headsets, all the things like that that we have to provide to our centers. Nonprofit 988 centers shouldn't have to be waiting so long to get our technology needs approved as well as our um expenditures reimbured. and we have good experience getting timely uh payments from AHP in relation to all of our other programming needs. And that's why I'm reiterating Terry's recommendation. Thank you. >> Thank you for that comment. Any other comments online? All right. Seeing none, uh we'll then proceed to a roll call vote

090to whether to approve the two um nominated members of this work group. >> Steve, >> yes. >> Sorry, I think you were sort of answering, but I don't know if I quite heard the answer as to how um Callowas might provide support to this. So there would be a staff staffer that would be able to help with the requirements and communicating back to the group. I just want to make sure that that we amus and I if we take this on can can handle it. >> Yes. So yeah, where I was going with that and I think I referenced uh the the transfer recommendations as the example um is that we have staff who are happy to compile and gather uh the data from the from the members and make it into a pres presentable

091document. Um and so I think when we talk about you know staff provided for this function um you know we're we're in the habit of providing uh support in this way and I don't see a reason to uh deviate from that at this point. Um, so I know but again it's you know the work group does the work and I think the staff can compile the data that the work group surfaces. Um, but it where I was going was the valuable part of what the work group will be doing is that it's informed by people who are on the front lines and have that perspective. And so I wouldn't want to essentially turn over the analytical responsibility to somebody who is not in the business. And so um the voices that matter here are the

092ones that are right on the front line doing the work. And so that's why I'm making the distinction that you know we're happy. >> I can imagine that you know we might need to take those original requirements that we talked about and send them back out to the centers. have the centers vet them, make sure that they're still accurate. So that that's the kind of work I'm talking about because I I think that there's a lot of leg work that goes along with that and the centers have reported out on this at least 11 times and so I just want to make sure that >> yeah, >> I mean I don't I don't have the time to survey every center and compile it and that kind of stuff. So that's sort of what I'm getting

093at. It's a little bit more than just maybe minutes or presentation of materials. There's there's work that needs to be done. >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, and that's why I I recommended that one of the first orders of business of the work group would be to recruit other people who are, you know, of would would be helpful and want to participate. Um, so that it doesn't just fall to people to do that. Um, but again, I stand by my point that that it's practitionerdriven recommendations that matter here, right? Um uh to be honest, if we were going to have if we were going to have staff here in the in the 988 program do the work um then we wouldn't need the work group. We would just crank out a report and and present it here.

094So there's some give and take between those two things I think that needs to happen. Usually when a when there's a a technical uh product that's being solicited of you know there's a process of gathering user information, usability, feedback that's not >> how was it handled the previous 11 times. >> That's a good question. I don't know the answer to that. I don't know that anybody knows what what the answer to that is. And I I I think one of the reasons we're here is because we might not have had all of the correct people focused on it the correct way. So I definitely support the idea that Callowases provides somebody who is uh along with the working group very consistently and assigned to it so that as we figure out all of the things

095that we need we have both the very tight partnership um through this process and um their technical expertise alongside what we need from the centers. So an assigned person is what I think is a good suggestion. So I I the recommendation or request is noted. Uh I will take it under consideration. And so as you begin the the process of of thinking through this and adding uh other helpers to the workg group, I will work with my team here internally to come up with an answer to this question. >> Wonderful. All right. So, I believe we were on the cusp of voting to approve or otherwise uh the nominations for uh the leaders of this work group. And uh so that's the step we're at. I think a roll call vote is what we'll we'll

096proceed through on this point. Um indicate your agreement, yes or or no, and uh or your descent with a no. And we'll just start uh online with Dr. Buouie. Uh do you how do you vote as to the approval of these members of the work group? >> Yes. >> All right. Sherry Suelski. >> Yes. Diana Gutierrez, >> yes. >> Demetrius Sydney, >> yes. >> Serena Lewis, >> yes. >> Dr. Rafley Juan, >> yes. >> Terry Galvin, >> yes. >> Jamila Fields, >> yes. >> All right, it is unanimous. We now have a couple of leaders on the workg group. Um, and uh, thank you to both of you for being willing uh, to serve in that capacity. Um, and we look forward to getting started with those evaluations and um, as I indicated, we'll uh,

097consum. >> Okay. All right. Um yeah so as uh as to the current status of things uh with a member leaving the room and not able to participate just now we will take a short break until we get the full quorum of members back in the room. Um so I think this is a good opportunity to take a a fivem minute break and uh we'll reconvene here at I believe 11:35. All right. Uh welcome back. Thank you everybody. Um, back to our program here. Uh, I think we're at point 4 on the agenda, which is to discuss working groups that are needed. Um, so we have uh established the ones that we've already got here. Are there are there some that uh board members have been thinking we're required or we ought to establish uh

098to perform some functions? um that we don't have right now and I don't personally have any in mind but if you do I'd love to hear it. >> The so I also do not have any in mind. My comment was going to be a recommendation that instead of additional work groups that we further support whatever staff resources we have to the existing ones because I think the existing work groups have been formed for very um important purposes and and overall maybe just have not been as effective as we would have hoped and things that we can do to support the existing work groups would be welcome. >> Yeah. Right. Any any other board members have a want to weigh in on the topic? All right, thank you for that point. Um, we'll definitely make a

099note of that. Um, item number F then is, uh, identify members and assign tasks. Um I think to a large extent uh we identified the members and and um covered the tasks needed during the previous portions there. Um are there additional memberships or tasks that we need to be thinking about at this time? >> Um I just wanted to clarify. So we identified the chairs um but I don't think we identified members. I just want to clarify we're free then to go and and staff this workg group and the only rule is is that we can't have other any other board members. There can't be more than two board members. >> That's correct. Yes. Yeah. And so yeah, I would suggest that there are probably many people um who have, you know, the standing and

100un and understanding to be very useful in a lot of these work groups that you all might know from uh your professional associations or so forth. That would be uh their input would be very valued uh in a lot of ways. So yes, I would encourage that. >> Thank you. Um, okay. Any last call for uh tasks that we might need to attribute to a workg group before we move on? All right. Uh, with that being said, then I think we'll move on to the next item on our agenda, uh, which is the transfer recommendations document. Um, I think you should all have uh the most recent version of that included here in your uh binder if you're in the room. Um, and if you're if you're among the audience in the room, there was

101a handout made available um over at the desk back there if you want to read the most recent version of the transfer recommendations document. And if you're joining us online, um in the chat for the online session, you'll find uh electronic version of that draft document of transfer recommendations. Um so this includes uh all of the submitted edits and uh grammatical changes that have been um added up to this point there. To my knowledge, there was not a meeting uh that took place in between the last one and this one to advance this um with any any new substantive material. So, it's just the same stuff uh as last time, but uh perhaps some edits made to that document. So, that's what you're looking at. Now, um I I note that uh board member um

102Lwen has uh indicated a couple of times now that uh this being a working document then and therefore subject to, you know, revision as time goes on. It doesn't have to be, you know, uh a final final, I believe, was the was the term that you used, Lon. Um and so but having it voted on and and taken as the document for now um was something you were very interested in and so uh I open it to the board here. Uh are there any comments on this document that you'd like to discuss? Um >> so thank yeah thank you for that Steve. I I I'd like to just to add that that the um the 98 number one interface working group was tasked with this important um um task to work on I mean basically

103the I mean to my knowledge the the work I mean the work group met at least five or six times >> to discuss the 911 call transfer criteria and protocols and so on and then after that they were able to develop what is called what was called the TRA uh number one number eight uh transfer recommendations document and it was post on the KS website since March 19 2024 so today is February 19 2026 so it's one month shy of two years but since that time there were many community members uh that had the opportunity to provide input um and then The board also had opportunities several opportunities to provide input into the document. So and and like like like I said before and you you correct correctly indicated Steve that this is a living

104document that opportunities to in the future to provide additional u input as we implement this uh will will be integrated will be considered. So um I hope that the board now is is is is almost two years now it's been like draft with many many in uh I mean integrative recommendations with input from almost everybody every major stakeholders and and and groups in in the state. Uh I I think we we ready to um to decide to vote on this and with the thinking that there might be opportunities to provide additional input in the future and this is something that I hope that the board will will consider acting uh today. >> Right. Any any other comments from the board members? >> Yes, this is Antibu online. Um, thank you for um, all the work

105that's gone into this and I appreciate that it's taken many years. Um, I just have a few um, uh, input regarding the process. So, I know um, I know there's been a lot of work. We've thought about it quite a bit, but the posted draft from November 18th, 2025 um, has received a number of feedback from several uh, stakeholders including um, some of the work groups in this board. I know the accessibility and equitable access working group provided written feedback. I heard another working group had provided feedback. Um there's been important feedback uh from the community including the Miles Hall Foundation and the ACLU. We don't have a clear process. At least it's not clear to me how we take into account these feedback. The document hasn't changed from November. Uh and I know there

106were a number of concerns that needed to change it. Um but I can just cite one example in terms of um um the concern of uh naming um that the individual is a threat to other people or property. That's a very key consideration that we haven't had a chance to weigh in on or provide any sort of um uh edits to the document. So I think we need a clearer process to say how we will account for both internal feedback uh from um you know uh community partners and public comments. Um in addition as a state document we do need a set of references. I know references will change but this is a very very hot area right now. We've looked at the NINA standard, but just so you know, SAMA has just published a

107toolkit on this very topic of 911 988 um um um interoperability or coordination. Um so we've as a state document we would want to have I think an accompanying sort of toolkit if we could um to provide additional information references uh best practices um good examples and models that have been successful in the community. I think it behooves us to to really work on this. Um, but as it stands, I would say that the current draft is is outdated and we need a more updated document in order to vote on this. >> I would I would agree with Dr. Buouie and I I do remember specific comments from community organizations um that they wanted to have some indication about um mobile units. Um I I remember there were several comments that were made that I

108I don't see reflected in this or um understand if it they were not included for a reason. So, so I'm I'm wondering Steve, I mean, so um can you explain about or maybe briefly mention about um is it the the the the role of the chair or or the members of the work group or the one that to make sure that every input from the community or whoever is been included in the in this document ment or or how does decide because there might be 10 to 15 you know recommendations to be added to the documents. How how who who and who I mean how and who has the role in making sure that all those 15 how many every input get get integrated or or or get included in in this document. >> Yeah.

109I I mean I think what you've done is put your finger on uh one of the issues and it it kind of ties back into something we discussed a few minutes ago which is you know the role of the working group is to ultimately end up producing a product here and you know taking ownership of of product delivery. Now I I note that in the past uh and and I've committed to it even as recently as this meeting that we're happy to help uh OES is happy to help you know compile the the uh input and recommendations that have come through the workg group from all of those stakeholders. Um, but it it isn't a a role of OES to produce the transfer recommendations. We're compiling them into a document, but I really don't think

110that it's appropriate for Caloes to be the owner of the document. Um, I think it's the work group that's the owner of the document. And in and to that point, I think it's it it ties back into my previous comment about, you know, actual practitioners um are the ones whose voices matter here. And so those are the voices that should make their way into the document. Um and I think our staff here will you know has been volunteered to compile that into the um you know just from a clerical function to put that onto the paper here. Um but it really is you know I think the the community of practitioners who need to influence what goes into this document and ultimately say when it's ready. Um, and so as a board, uh, I would

111suspect that, you know, the work group performs that role, reports out to the board, the board then makes a determination using their expertise that it's ready to go, and we vote to have that be the recommendations document until such time as the board decides that other recommendations need to be included in that document. So, that's how I view the process playing out here. Um, and so I I I think what I'm hearing is that a lot of those recommendations have not made their way into the document. And so, uh, with that being said, then it it feels to me like the board isn't inclined to approve it at this point. the I was going to ask a clarifying question to make sure we're all looking at the same draft because I um also recall the

112the public comment we got about threats to property and things like this. And in the draft that I'm looking at now, it looks like that was removed. And so, but I I also kind of echo on to Dr. everybody's point about it's not entirely clear because they don't really have the draft dates on them like what the different versions are and things like this so it's a little bit tricky to tell what actually has happened between different drafts at times. Um, and then my my last comment was it's I hear the um your point about the the the work group leads this and historically I think that was the process that was in place >> and then there was notice both from the public as well as the board that it wasn't happening in a

113timely fashion and so um when Paul Troxell um had taken over as the the board chair he had I think said that Callowes would take a larger role on this and so then it kind of got handed off a little bit and so I think that also has caused some of the delay and then of course today unfortunately the um work group chair is not here to like expand on the detail behind that. I would be more inclined to to move it forward if if it was accompanied by something that said these were the recommendations that we received and reviewed. Um, again, if the chair was here that we probably could have that answered. Um, but it's hard for me to know whether everything made its way or not. and and I am 100% interested

114in passing this as soon as or you know getting this moving as soon as possible. But I do think that there's been a lot of really good and critical feedback that was presented >> um just for my edification. Now this it reads like um it's a recommendation document and so and in fact it's titled as such. I wonder what force and effect a recommendation document has. And and the reason I asked that is to help understand and evaluate what the implic imp implications are of not having it be uh you know 100% fully formed and final final version. Like if it's going to be a living document um that presumably could be edited uh anytime between now and the next board meeting. Um then like what exactly is the nature of this document that stops

115it from being adequate in its current role? Um knowing that other things will be added to it upon recommendation from the working group. Um like I what what exactly would we be approving here? So let let me add to to this uh Steve because the reason that we have been saying this is a recommendations is it's not a guidance is not a policy but recommendation with the with the thinking and and and knowing that local 911 no center will use this as recommendation to develop their own local policies, procedures or protocol and so on. Knowing that each jurisdiction will function differently is not all the same. Even 98 centers each one have different capacity and and and the ability to to to to move things forward based on what's available in their local jurisdiction. That

116is why it's called recommendation. It's not called guidance. is not called policy and it's a set of recommendation that local jurisdiction can can use to develop their own that works for their local jurisdictions. So, so the the so um so because of that I mean we we cannot include uh everything and the uh and and and and and all things because no this is a number one is a set of recommendation number two is a it's a living documents it will never be finalized like final final because because locally we cannot take this and say okay this is a set of guidance a policy because of that we have to use you we have to develop what's required in this in this document because it's not it's just a recommendations so so it's I I

117think that that need to be you know um sort of separated out it's not a policy it's not a guidance it's a recommendation >> and so just to follow up on that. So, it performs that role right now, even being at a draft state, right? >> Right. Right. Yeah. >> Yeah. In my read of the document, it does appear to me that this has been changed from the November one. I can't say when that actually happened or that the date on the online PDF is February 13th, so maybe sometime recent. And it appears to me that if none of the work groups met to do this specifically that maybe that was staff, but I I don't can't verify that. Um, but I do specifically recall some of the public comment and request because we reviewed

118this in our work group at each of the the meetings as well. And it does look like the um point about property has been removed, a point that our work group had raised about about weapons. And it's uh in an earlier iteration of this document, there was a requirement that if there's a weapon present that that necessitates a transfer to 911 and we raised, well, that's not entirely clear to maybe local jurisdictions because if someone is calling from their house and in their house they have a kitchen, there's a knife in that kitchen and like how is that how is that being assessed? Um, uh, Miles Hall, who the the AB98 is named after, was holding some sort of gardening tool and was out in his backyard or was out in the yard. And so,

119we had wanted clarification on that. And it does look like the weapons piece has been removed from necessitates a transfer, but is included in any other relevant safety information section. So it does look like this feedback has been I can't say that all of the feedback has been incorporated but at least the the two things that our work group must review from the public comment has been >> there are a couple of other key points too and I appreciate you reviewing that area that's helpful um there are some key points and given that this is a technology advisory board there are things that um we haven't really included in clarifying so let's just say we don't accomplish this with any other materials. People are just reading this. Um there are uh places where people don't

120know that you can't just transfer to the three-digit 988, right? You would need anou with a 10-digit line. There are some technical things that really ought to be spelled out. Um because if a 911 PAP was to transfer to 98, it would just get to the national portal and that really doesn't work. Um, so I there's more work that needs to be done to spell out what this actually look like and and those are some of the more technical details that were provided as feedback and it's not clear what feedback again I think we need to be clear about the process of reviewing feedback and which feedback is taken and which feedback isn't. Um at Cal HHS we document all public comments um and and the discussion that goes along with it and we keep

121that internally. Uh but still it is available um should the public request it. And for a document like this we do need to have a clear process of how do we take into account public comment and what do we take and what do we um disregard and for what reason. >> I I agree with you Dr. Buouie. I think that is really important because it it does get confusing what's making its way into the document and how and I really appreciate you bringing up the concern about having anou because you can't transfer right to 988. Um there's a little bullet that seems to try to address that but it gets buried under how to initiate. Um it says following dep departmental policy an established informal agreement orou between the PAP and 988 lifeline center the

122911 dispatcher may initiate a transfer to the 988 lifeline center. So it says following an established informal agreement orou. But it's listed under how to initiate. And so I I think that there should be something kind of at the beginning that talks like you know before this even happens and that should stand out kind of more in bold. I think I recommended that last time. So, I think that underscores what you're saying, which is that some things seem to make their way into this and and others don't. And I'm not quite sure how that happens, but a process would be great. >> Okay. So, it sounds like then uh we're definitely not at a place to take any action on this document in this meeting today. Um I do note u that it's presently 12:00

123and this meeting is scheduled to go till 12:30. Uh and there are a few other agenda items that we want to get through here. Uh so I think what we'll do is we'll put this matter over for our next meeting. uh during which time uh perhaps the the working group uh can take an opportunity to review what's here and any recommendations that didn't make it into this edited version could then be re uh highlighted and submitted back um with the understanding that uh they be included with the what do we say version reference numbers uh so that we can uh keep track of what's been, you know, submitted in and what version we're on. Um, and I I see you have a comment, sir. >> Yeah. The the thing that I want I'm trying to

124help us puzzle through and get to a solution hopefully is it's been tricky for the board to keep an eye on or have an understanding, stay up to date with what's happening in the work group. For example, if the like today's the chair is not here, board members can't join that meeting because then we hit that quorum rule. So, we're really dependent on the communication between the the work group and and Callowas or the rest of the board. And so, because I don't want us to be here again at the next meeting and kind of have a similar situation where the work group didn't meet, board members can't attend the meeting, workg group chair's not here. Yeah. >> And then we're just kind of continue to be stalled. So, I want us to have a

125some way to prevent that so we can move forward with this important document that I think everyone is on page. we need to get approved as soon as it's it's it's ready for for public consumption. >> Yeah, I think your recommendation is well taken. Yes. >> So along with that, Steve, maybe um if you could put this on your radar and then maybe to provide support in ways that that for for for this to move uh continue moving uh whether through a workg groupoup capacity or some other capacity. um if you could. >> Yeah, thank you for that comment. Uh yeah, the so I think already uh have an action item to sort of define the degree and extent to which uh support can be offered, but also thinking about um ways alternatively that uh

126we can advance the work. um so that it doesn't end up, you know, taking multiple years and so forth. So, I I thank you for that input as well. All right. Um let's see. But moving on then to um agenda item number six. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Excuse me. >> Yes. I understand that there's a public comment that you would like to make. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. Um >> uh my name is Cassie Dibble. I'm giving my comments on behalf of the ACLU of Northern California and ACLU Nationals Disability Rights Program. Um I really appreciate Dr. Buoie's comments on this matter and the decision that was just made to put this item off to the next meeting. Um yeah, the discussion between board members really makes clear that it's not even clear

127to the full board what the operative version is and whether and how public comment has been incorporated, whether any additional modifications have been changed um or have been made. I'll also note that no document was put into the team's chat for virtual attendees. I I thought maybe that was someone had indicated that that would happen, but I don't see it um as a as a team's attendee. Um, so as as the board knows, we along with the disability rights California, the Baslon Center for Mental Health Law and the ACLUs of Southern California and San Diego and Imperial counties submitted written public comment to this advisory board in January with some suggested changes to the draft recommendations. That was as to the version published on the board's website in November 2025. Um it seems to me

128that anyone in this anyone in the state who is not actively attending this meeting in real time in person hasn't had access to that um operative document um that's being considered. Um, and while we understand that this is, you know, a quote a living document and it's called recommendations as opposed to a policy, the version that the board will approve will greatly impact how jurisdictions throughout the state formulate their local policies and will therefore have real impacts on Californians in crisis in the very near future. Um, you know, the board has acknowledged time and time again that jurisdictions will look to these recommendations to inform real policies. So, it's critical that the public is given meaningful opportunity to review and provide feedback on the guidelines that will actually be voted on. We request that the

129operative version be posted on the war board's web page along with the agenda. Well, >> I'm going to just interrupt you for one second. If you scroll to your chat feature for this meeting, you're going to see that there's a PDF for the 911988 transfer document in there. It was dropped in at 9:12 this morning. >> I I have my meeting chat open. It says chat is turned off for this meeting and there's no document. >> Uh >> I don't know if that's excuse me. >> On my version, it says the chat feature has been disabled for this meeting. Please raise your hand when open to public comment or email with any questions. And then right below that there's a PDF. >> I I I I don't know what to tell you. I don't see

130that on my version. Um Okay. I don't know if that's because I'm an external participant and not um part of the Caloes system. Sorry. Go ahead. >> Possibly, but it is also posted on our website. >> Just FYI. >> The operative version as in the one that was updated since November 2025. >> The one that was included for this meeting. Yes. Um, I looked about 10 minutes ago and I the only version I saw I'm looking again right now because there >> is let's see it looks like it's been updated within the past 15 minutes because I do now see a different version but um obviously that was not um added in time for folks to have a meaningful time to review. Um, I just like to close by saying that we request that whatever

131operative version that the board is going to be voting on will be posted on the web page well in advance of that next meeting to allow the public to review it. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you for that comment and uh yes, our commitment is to share these things in advance of any action being taken. So, uh, I think that underscores the the fact that we're not taking action this time. Uh, I think puts us in a good spot there. But, uh, thank you again for for the engagement on that point. I recognize that it is important, um, to a lot of stakeholder groups. So, thank you. Um, any other public comment online on that topic? Nope. Okay. How about in the room? Any public comment in the room on that topic? All right,

132seeing none. >> Sorry, um Steve, this is on online. Not a public comment, but um just so you're aware, um I don't have access to the team's chat either. It says chat is turned off for this meeting. That's how it appears to me. >> So, it looks like we can't share the external documents via teams or excuse me, we can't share documents via teams with external parties, but it is also available on our website. All right. Thank you for that clarification. All right. Uh yeah, no more uh open or public comment on that topic. Then I'm not seeing any hands in the room. So we'll move to the next agenda item. Agenda item six, which is the customer resource management walkth through. And I believe uh we have a video presentation which I think will

133be shared in your screens here. Um and then also perhaps a narrative. Good morning everybody or good afternoon. Uh thank you for your time here today. Yeah, we're going to show uh a video about a 15-inute video that's going to walk through show you some highlights of the CRM and what you know we've been working with Buckaloo with that pilot that was mentioned earlier. um and some of the progress we've made um on our CRM. And so I know we don't have much time for probably questions after that, but if I want to hang back, anybody want to ask me any questions or get some time with me at a later time, um I'd be more than happy to facilitate that into a beta version of the platform. Feedback gathered during this phase directly informed

134usability improvements, data structures, and workflow refinements. In the second quarter of 2025, all California 988 crisis centers were formally invited to participate in a CRM training and focus group initiative. This phase enabled remote access to the Nexus lifeline, Nexus Connect and Nexus message, a structured training session, and direct feedback on functionality, workflows, and reporting. The goal of this effort was to ensure centers had meaningful exposure to the platform prior to their own implementations while allowing NGA to incorporate statewide feedback into final readiness planning. Following the training and focus group phase, NGA and the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services jointly determined that the project should transition into a live pilot environment, focusing efforts on buckling programs as the pilot center. This transition was essential to the comprehensive evaluation of the Nexus Lifeline CRM, enabling real

135world input, meaningful feedback, and iterative refinement of the platform. The time, effort, and active participation of Buckaloo's leadership and counselors were critical to informing system enhancements, validating workflows, and ensuring the solution aligns with the operational realities of 988 crisis centers. NGA sincerely appreciates the commitment, collaboration, and partnership demonstrated throughout this phase of the project. Next, we will showcase the highlights of the Nexus Lifeline platform, which will integrate into the 988 call workflow. As soon as a call is answered, the system automatically creates a record capturing caller details, risk information, interventions, referrals, and importantly, the call recording itself. This ensures continuity of care across shifts and across different counselors. Supervisors have real-time visibility into active calls, counselor status, and open cases, and can observe calls for quality assurance and support. From a service delivery standpoint, staff

136can assign follow-ups, schedule outreach, and document safety plans directly in the same record, ensuring no caller falls through the cracks. The platform also centralizes resources, documents, and referral partners, enabling faster, and more accurate response paths. Ultimately, Nexus Lifeline provides a single compliant and operationally efficient environment that elevates crisis response, improves accountability, and strengthen service outcomes for the 988 network. The 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline offers compassionate support for anyone in emotional distress. Nexus Lifeline is the CRM powering this essential service, ensuring every contact is managed efficiently and empathetically. The customizable dashboard provides a real-time overview of critical operational metrics, including current contacts, recent contacts, center monitoring, internal communications, staff scheduling, follow-ups, and tasks. These can all be accessed by the intuitive sidebar menu located in the dashboard, as well as availability when utilizing the other

137menu. Right. >> Yeah. The dashboard offers customizable widget screens. This feature can be used as a template for the center or the individual user. The user also has the ability to choose between light and dark modes. Nexus Lifeline is structured around core modules. intake for new and existing contacts, center monitoring, scheduler for staffing, follow-up scheduler, task assignment, and easy access to federal or state required monthly and quarterly reports. Now, let's walk through the essential process of handling a new contact via the case intake module. Whether a contact comes via incoming or outgoing call, text or chat, once received by the counselor, Nexus lifeline immediately generates a new intake record, alerting the crisis counselor. This way, there is no duplicate data entry and no switching between systems. This automation can help ensure accurate documentation, standardized reporting,

138and most importantly, more counselor focus on the caller instead of administrative tasks. The intake form guides counselors through structured data entry for contact details, reason for contact, and an initial risk assessment, ensuring all necessary information is captured quickly. Conversation and contact bar offers features such as conversation timeline, which displays prior calls with timestamps, enabling quick historical context, and export to PDF with a one-click generation of case documentation for audits or reporting. Autopop populating initial call intake data. With the integration of the Nexus Connect call handling system, Nexus Lifeline can automatically populate key intake fields to support consistency, accuracy, and reliable reporting. Key intake includes channel, source, type, agent attribution, conversation start, end, and contact status. Draft status capability allows counselors to save a contact without completing all required fields upfront. This reduces disruption during active

139or high acuity calls. Contacts can then be finalized by updating the record from draft to published, ensuring all required data is completed before reporting or review. As contacts come into Nexus Lifeline, the system automatically presents a complete person- centered caller profile that includes demographics, risk indicators, notes, referrals, and prior interaction history. This allows counselors to immediately understand context and provide more informed, empathetic support. The system also attempts to identify returning callers using the incoming phone number. Counselors can quickly confirm identity to ensure accuracy or create a new profile if needed. This supports continuity of care, reduces repeated questioning, and helps improve long-term service outcomes. This section is designed to guide the counselor through a structured clinically informed risk assessment while remaining flexible and conversationdriven. The prompt questions at the top help capture critical safety indicators

140early in the interaction, such as whether the caller has experienced suicidal thoughts in recent days or taken any suicidal actions today. Based on the counselor's selections, the platform dynamically adapts. Different drop- down menus, assessment tools, and documentation fields will automatically appear to support deeper evaluation. For example, if suicidal thoughts are indicated, the system will initiate the self-rated intent SRI assessment, allowing counselors to document the caller's perceived level of intent using a structured evidence-based scale. Similarly, the system supports workflow automation beyond risk assessment. If during the interaction, the counselor offers or schedules a follow-up, the platform will automatically engage the follow-up task menu. This allows the counselor to create and assign a follow-up call to another counselor if needed. Once scheduled, the follow-up becomes visible within the cent's shared follow-up, ensuring continuity of care and team

141visibility across the crisis center. Below the prompt questions, counselors can further document findings across key domains, including suicidal desire, intent, capability, and protective buffers or connections. These structured selections support consistent documentation, improved reporting, and enhanced clinical insight while still allowing counselors to capture narrative details relevant to the caller situation. Importantly, all drop-own menus and assessment fields within this section are fully customizable. Nexus Lifeline captures the overall outcome of the interaction while keeping documentation fast and consistent for counselors. Here, staff record how risk levels changed from the start to the end of the conversation, categorize the crisis type, and document any referrals or service connections made during the contact. Nexus Lifeline also includes an integrated speechtoext feature, allowing counselors to dictate summaries, outcomes, and feedback directly into the narrative fields. This reduces after call work and

142helps ensure notes are complete and accurate while counselors remain focused on the caller. The counselor then selects the final conversation result, adds tags for reporting and analytics, and supervisors can review interactions for quality and training purposes. Access to previous contacts is done by either clicking one the dashboard screen widget or by clicking on the contacts on the menu sidebar. Once in the menu, you can click on the contact and click edit if changes need to be made. This would often be used to go back and complete or revise a contact intake form if required. Other options are also accessible in the contact such as resource referrals, follow-ups, previous contacts, contact scripts, recordings, comments, attachments, and history. The details tab captures the core information about the caller, including demographics, risk indicators, and notes from the interaction.

143Counselors can quickly navigate to resource referrals to document services or resources offered. And the follow-up tab allows them to schedule and assign follow-up outreach, which becomes visible in the center shared. The previous contacts by phone view provides immediate access to caller history. The contact script section provides guided prompts that can dynamically launch assessments or tasks based on counselor selections. And all prompts are fully customizable to meet each cent's operational needs. Finally, tabs like recordings, comments, attachments, and history support quality assurance, collaboration, and full documentation tracking, ensuring a complete and person- centered contact record. Nexus Lifelines offers recordings built into the contact for easy access. Call recordings provide an important safety and quality tool for the center. They allow supervisors to support coaching and training, help counselors prepare for follow-ups by understanding previous interactions, and ensure

144compliance with 988 standards. This can be done by simply going into the contact, selecting the recordings, and loading the audio file. Integrated with the Nexus Connect call handling system, the center monitoring dashboard provides supervisors with a real-time operational snapshot of crisis center activity. At the top, leadership can filter by date and time to review live or historical performance. The call channel statistics panel immediately shows incoming volume, abandoned contacts, and total call activity, helping quickly identify demand and service levels. Below that, agent performance provides visibility into counselor workload, contact volume, and average engagement time, supporting staffing and coaching decisions. Finally, the ongoing draft call section allows supervisors to monitor active interactions in real time, providing situational awareness and ensuring support can be provided when needed. Together, this dashboard gives centers a centralized command view to help

145manage operations efficiently and support timely care for individuals reaching out through 988. The Nexus Lifelineer and follow-up provides counselors and supervisors with a centralized integrated tool to manage follow-ups, scheduling, and workforce coordination directly within the CRM platform. Rather than relying on separate calendars or manual tracking methods, theuler connects client care activities, staffing, and workflow management into a single streamlined interface, the Nexus Lifeline scheduler is designed to simplify workforce management while giving counselors greater flexibility and transparency. Staff can set their availability, book shifts, request substitutions, and manage schedule changes in real time. The scheduler also syncs directly with Google and Outlook calendars, helping prevent conflicts and keeping schedules aligned across platforms. Supervisors can quickly create new shifts, duplicate existing schedules, and even enable automatic shift assignments based on counselor availability and qualifications. Together, this helps ensure

146consistent staffing coverage, reduces administrative workload, and supports crisis centers in maintaining reliable, well-balanced operations. With the follow-up scheduler, counselors can create and manage follow-up tasks tied to specific individuals or interactions, ensuring continuity of care and accountability for outreach efforts. This action can be performed manually from the task menu or from the contact intake form. The system allows users to document progress, attach relevant materials, and collaborate across teams when follow-up activities need to be reassigned. Within Nexus Lifeline, centers can quickly generate required monthly and quarterly reports through a simple centralized reporting dashboard. Administrators select the reporting month, and the system automatically compiles the required operational data. Most importantly, the reporting structure is fully configurable, allowing centers to tailor reports to meet evolving federal or state reporting requirements, reducing manual workload while improving accuracy and consistency. This

147screen highlights the Nexus Lifeline resource directory, which provides counselors with a centralized, searchable database of community and national support resources. Users can quickly filter by category, county, or keyword to identify appropriate referrals during a live interaction with key details like contact information, coverage area, and services readily available. NGA can also upload a crisis cent's existing resource database directly into Nexus Lifeline or securely connected through an API integration. This ensures there is no loss of historical resource data. Today we shared several of the key highlights and feature enhancements within Nexus Lifeline that have been shaped directly by user feedback, operational experience, and continued platform development. While we focused on some of the most impactful capabilities, Nexus Lifeline includes many additional tools and integrations designed to support crisis centers, improve workflow efficiency, and strengthen continuity of care.

148NGA would be very happy to schedule additional more in-depth sessions with any California crisis center that would like to explore the platform further or discuss how it can be tailored to their specific operational needs. We sincerely appreciate everyone's time and engagement today and the opportunity to demonstrate what we believe will be an essential tool in supporting counselors, supervisors, and ultimately the individuals and communities served through 988. >> All right. Uh, thank you for that presentation. Does the board have any comments or discussion around that? >> I have a question. Um, as far as the um the Nexus program, is like the mapper integrated into that or how do you have a separate program in order to locate callers? So right now with 988, we're not allow you're not allowed to locate callers. So would N

149if it was a it was passed from 988 to 911, yes, it would pick up that that address and the 911 caller would be able to take that. But the other way, not the 988 caller is not allowed to get that. And I know that was something that the was proposed to the FCC, but for right now, the 988 caller can't get that location information. >> Okay. Thank you. And just to clarify, so if a 911 call was transferred to 988, it scrubs off the location data before the handoff takes place. >> Well, in the back end, it's it could still be there. >> Um, but we're not going to present it unless we're allowed to, >> but it does have the capability for it. >> Great. Thank you for that. >> And any other

150questions on that presentation? >> Sorry, I have another question. No, >> sorry. I know we're out of time, but um as far as like the call handling, is there are there separate um roles like uh separate is there a call taker and a call maker or is it um you get a caller and they are um you that's your technically that's now your caller for the extent of time that they need they need help. So you receive the call, they call 988, you help them and then now you make call backs. Um are you now assigned that person or is it handed off to somebody else? Well, I mean that depends on the center, but certainly if there was a follow-up, that could be for the person who took the call or it could be

151assigned to somebody else as well. And you can do that within the CRM if you wanted to assign somebody else or with that follow-up where it showed uh that would be accessible to anybody to pick that up if it wasn't assigned to, you know, if you put it in the calendar the next day or the following week to follow up with somebody. And is there an expiration as far as like when do you stop following up with a person like >> that? I wouldn't be able to answer. That would be answer for one of the centers. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I have a question. So it may have just been for purposes of the of the presentation, but it was very like call ccentric. Is there also um a mechanism or would it look

152different if this was handling texts that are incoming? >> Um actually it would pick up from the texts as well. um it would it would record the same way. So if you got if you received a text, you'd get the popup in the CRM that would feed some of that information. Yeah. I mean, so right now it's very voice ccentric, but it would pop up using the uh Nexus message as well, that integration with that. >> Thank you. I'm very interested to see what the call center folks have to say. >> Uh I have a question to follow up on that. Um are is Buffalo using the chat and text feature? >> No, not at this time. Has the text and chat feature been tested? Because I thought my understanding was is that that there

153were no text and chats coming through from national that they were keeping them all in the platform that they had. >> So we've done all our testing with Vibrant. Um we've we've done scenarios with them and we have passed their technical requirements for text and chat as well. >> Yep. For text and chat. we've done voice or so right now um the pilot we have in place um in lie of not having theou we've got permission to do voice with vibrant right now right but we don't have it with text and chat so unless that moves forward then we will and we could go ready with text and chat at any time >> so how did you test the chats and texts if you don't have the permission to get them from vibrant >> working

154with vibrant we were able to do our testing in a sandbox and in a live environment with, you know, working with them and we've got the uh the approval to move forward. >> Um, one of my earlier questions was whether or not the system could be separated out, the call part and the CRM part. Um, >> so that would be further discussion with with Callaways. Um, right now the contract that we have with Callaways is designed for a call handling system. Um, I'm not saying anything's possible, but for how the contract is designed right now, if there was amendment done, I'm sure that could be possible and building an API between some uh, whatever existing call handling system and the CRM. But as the contract is right now, it's really based on the call handling

155system. >> Yeah. So, just to add on to that, technologically, of course, uh it's it's possible to do that, but there's a lot of uh leg work and mapping that would have to be pinned down before it could just be turned on. All right. Any other any other questions on or comments on the uh presentation from the CRM? All right, I'm not seeing any. So, well, thank you for the presentation and the video. >> Thank you for your time. >> Yeah, >> and I do note that we are now past our uh aotted time here. And so with that in mind, the agenda items that we didn't get to will be put over uh to our next session which is scheduled in May and we'll have the updates at that time. Um and so I

156think that it's already been calendared uh and so the invitations are out there. Uh and with that I thank you all. And uh before we go I would like to just open it up for uh public comment about items that were not on the agenda. wanting to make sure that there's an opportunity for folks uh of among the public to have their uh chance to make a comment. So, in the room, any public comment takers? All right, seeing none in the room. How about online? Any public comment online for items not on the agenda? All right, not seeing any there. Um and so with that being said, uh we'll go ahead and adjourn this uh board meeting. Thank you.