When agencies negotiate CAD and RMS contracts, they tend to focus on headline features: dispatch workflows, response times, dashboards.

But where systems make or break the mission?

👉 The interfaces.

Interfaces are where your CAD/RMS connects with the real world—mobile apps, radios, analytics engines, AVL platforms, alerting systems, evidence repositories, and more.

Fail to define them properly, and vendors will promise you the moon during procurement… and bill you again for the rocket fuel during deployment.

Why Interfaces Matter So Much

Interfaces determine:

• Whether data flows automatically or requires manual re-entry
• Whether responders get real-time updates—or stale info
• Whether your analytics team can identify trends—or work blind

Modern public safety systems must be interoperable. But how that’s achieved varies dramatically by vendor. That’s why contracts need more than good intentions—they need specificity.

Enter: IRD and IFD

Two documents should be locked in before deployment begins:

🔹 IRD (Interface Requirements Document):
Defines what systems connect, what data is exchanged, how frequently, and in what format (NIEM XML, JSON, etc.).

🔹 IFD (Interface Functionality Description):
Explains what the interface does in practice. Is it read-only or bi-directional? Triggered by user action or system event? What happens on failure?

📌 Pro tip: Never approve a milestone payment until these documents are complete, signed, and validated in real-world scenarios.

Real-Time vs. RDW: The Difference Is Everything

Here’s a crucial distinction vendors often blur:

✅ Real-Time Interfaces
Data updates live—as incidents evolve. For example, AVL shows accurate unit locations, or field apps receive CAD notes instantly.

❌ RDW Feeds (Reporting Data Warehouse)
Batch-based, one-way data dumps. Useful for analytics, not live ops.
Some vendors update every 45 seconds, others only once per hour. That gap can impact situational awareness, response, and safety.

If a vendor says “yes, we integrate,” your follow-up should be:
🔎 Is it real-time or RDW?
If it’s RDW, it’s not an interface—it’s a delayed feed.

Your contract should define:

• Frequency of updates
• Trigger mechanisms (event-driven, polling, scheduled)
• Latency tolerances
• Expected performance under real-world load

Real-World Interface Examples That Require Clarity

These integrations are frequently oversold—or under-specified:

🔹 SmartLocate on APX NEXT Radios
Is it truly real-time? Are breadcrumb trails logged? Can supervisors review location history?

🔹 Tablet Command Bi-Directional Integration
Can responders update incidents, assign themselves, and close calls—or is it read-only with manual syncs?

🔹 eCitation or Court Interface
Are citations auto-linked to CAD/RMS records? Are court updates synced back in?

🔹 Crime Analysis Heatmaps
Do maps update in real time, or based on overnight data pulls?

🔹 Auto-Tagging with Body Cams & Dash-Cams
Are video clips automatically linked to call-for-service numbers? Can they be queried via CAD/RMS/RTCC without manual matching?

🔹 Third-Party Evidence Management Interfaces
Can tools like license plate readers, citizen-upload portals, or forensic platforms push data into RMS or CAD and maintain full audit trails? Or does it require CSV exports and manual matching?

Vendors will say “we support that.”
What they mean is often “we can provide a feed.”

The Classic Bait-and-Switch

Here’s how it plays out far too often:

1. Sales Pitch: “We integrate with that—no problem.”
2. Contract Language: “Includes interface to Platform X.”
3. Deployment Reality: The integration is limited, delayed, or nonexistent.
4. Vendor Response: “That’s out of scope—you’ll need a change order.”

You end up over budget, behind schedule, and underdelivered.

How to Avoid It

You need one of two things at the negotiation table:

✔️ A strong internal project lead who understands CAD/RMS inside and out
✔️ Or an experienced consultant who knows where vendors cut corners—and how to write defensible scope

This role should:

• Translate operational needs into enforceable specs
• Build functional IRDs and IFDs
• Tie deliverables to payment milestones
• Push back hard when “yes” really means “maybe”

Final Thought: If You Don’t Define It, Someone Else Will

Interfaces are not extras.
They’re core infrastructure.

They affect dispatch, mobile response, evidence management, analytics, and public trust.

Define them.
Test them.
Document them.
Before the contract is signed—not after deployment begins.

✉️ Ever been burned by a vendor’s vague interface language? Let’s hear your lessons in the comments.
🔗 Need help getting this right before your next contract? Castleberry PSG can guide your team through it.

#PublicSafety #CAD #RMS #Procurement #DispatchTech #Interoperability #PublicSafetyConsulting #GovTech #FirstResponderTools #CastleberryPSG

📄 Now available: Download the full white paper
This article is also available as a white paper to use during CAD/RMS procurement.

‍

‍

‍

‍