Emergency management and public-service operations

Warn the people in an area, without a list of who they are

A river is rising. The agency has to warn the people in its path within the hour, and it has no list of who they are and no right to one.

Request a working session The product that runs it: Government & Public Sector

Read the journey; a working session shows it running.

Seen by the customer · Cell broadcast

From the record, not a run: what would reach them, on Cell broadcast, SMS.

The case

Annotated from the record

What happened

A river is rising and the agency has to warn the people in its path within the hour, without a list of who they are.

A river is rising. The agency has to warn the people in its path within the hour, and it has no list of who they are and no right to one.

What it reads

The approved area and time window
Aggregate device counts and the minimum group size
The legal basis and the emergency authority
Data freshness

Checks before anything is sent

Legal basis, emergency authority, re-identification risk, minimum group size and stale-data checks pass.

Every option considered, including doing nothing

An approved alert to the area, through the operator, on the agency's decisionConsidered
A narrower area or window, where the group size or the basis failsConsidered
Referral to an authorised officerConsidered
No alert, where no emergency authority existsConsidered

Doing nothing is one of the outcomes, and it is recorded with its reason. The options are the record's own; a run decides between them.

Evidence record

Preview

Reference: The reference of the saved run.
Decision: One of the options, including no action, with the reason.
Checks: Legal basis, emergency authority, re-identification risk, minimum group size and stale-data checks pass.
Evidence kept: Purpose approval
data agreement
aggregation test
agency decision
alert log
impact review
public report
The measures: People reached in the area within the window, against alerts sent outside it.
Connection: Written on every record: the systems the run read, and the sample it ran on.

The shape of the record, with no values. A reference appears only after a run is saved.

The improvement, and how it is measured

Hypothesis

An alert that reaches the people in the path within the hour is the service; one that reaches everyone, or no one, is not.

Modelled

The mechanism that could produce the result, stated; the figure is measured in the pilot.

Observed

Measured in a pilot’s validate stage, on your systems, against a comparison agreed first.

The result, the mechanism, the measurement, and the record’s five answers

Desired result

Faster, more accessible and better-targeted public service; improved resilience and resource allocation

Mechanism

Authorise purpose → prepare/aggregate → analyse → apply thresholds → agency review → act → log → publish impact and bias checks where appropriate

Measurement

Geographic/time phased rollout; process baseline; independent privacy and bias review; publish limitations; never infer causal impact without design

Measured on: Response time; queue reduction; service completion; coverage; false alert; excluded population; resource efficiency; public outcome metric

01
Desired result
The result wanted.
Faster, more accessible and better-targeted public service; improved resilience and resource allocation
02
Mechanism
The mechanism that could produce it.
Authorise purpose → prepare/aggregate → analyse → apply thresholds → agency review → act → log → publish impact and bias checks where appropriate
03
Evidence required
The records kept to show it.
Purpose approval; data agreement; aggregation test; model/logic version; agency decision; action log; impact/bias review; public reporting
04
Costs and risks
The cost, and the ways it can go wrong.
Costs: Fixed project + annual managed service; government framework contract; outcome milestone only where measurement and authority are agreed
If it fails: Withhold unsafe output; escalate to agency privacy/command authority; fall back to official data/process; never expose raw subscriber records
05
Measurement approach
The measure that shows it helped.
Geographic/time phased rollout; process baseline; independent privacy and bias review; publish limitations; never infer causal impact without design
Measured on: Response time; queue reduction; service completion; coverage; false alert; excluded population; resource efficiency; public outcome metric

Measured in the pilot's validate stage, on your systems, with the comparison agreed first. Every line above is the record's own design intent.

The business side

The change: People reached in the area within the window, against alerts sent outside it.
Running cost: Fixed project + annual managed service; government framework contract; outcome milestone only where measurement and authority are agreed
What evidence supports it: Purpose approval, data agreement, aggregation test, agency decision, alert log, impact review and public report.

The journey in detail

Step by step, from both sides

Step	What the customer experiences	What the operator does
The momentThe moment that started it.	A river is rising and the agency has to warn the people in its path within the hour, without a list of who they are.	Reads the approved area and time window, aggregate device counts and the minimum group size, the legal basis and the emergency authority, data freshness.
The decisionThe decision to be made.	The customer's screen is unchanged.	Prepares an aggregate of devices in the approved area and time window, checks the group size and the legal basis, and recommends the alert's reach.
The safeguardsThe conditions that stop it.	Still unchanged: the action waits until every check has passed.	Legal basis, emergency authority, re-identification risk, minimum group size and stale-data checks pass.
The actionThe action that reaches the customer.	The agency decides; the approved alert goes to the area through the operator, and nobody's identity leaves the network. Reaches them on Cell broadcast, SMS.	Recommends. The system that holds the right confirms, charges or provisions.
When it goes wrongThe failure, and the recovery.	The aggregate is built on counts from the previous evening, and the alert reaches an area the people have already left while missing the one they moved to.	The stale-data check refuses the aggregate, a fresh window is drawn, and the impact review records the gap so the freshness rule is tightened for alerts.
The resultThe change it made.	What changed for them is what is counted; nothing else is claimed.	People reached in the area within the window, against alerts sent outside it.
The proofThe proof anyone can check.	Can be answered for, later, from the record.	Purpose approval, data agreement, aggregation test, agency decision, alert log, impact review and public report.

Operator systems remain authoritative. HeuriTel reads these to propose an action; it does not decide on their behalf.

The failure, and the recovery

What goes wrong

The aggregate is built on counts from the previous evening, and the alert reaches an area the people have already left while missing the one they moved to.

What happens then

The stale-data check refuses the aggregate, a fresh window is drawn, and the impact review records the gap so the freshness rule is tightened for alerts.

The products in this journey

Runs the decision
Government & Public Sector
Citizen contact journeys, emergency alerts, population and mobility analytics and social-protection support run as lawful, purpose-limited workflows that aggregate where possible and act only with explicit agency authority.
Contributes
CAMARA & GSMA Open Gateway APIs
the population and location interfaces beneath the aggregate
Contributes
Network Operations & Autonomous Networks
the network the alert has to survive on
The definition it demonstratesHeuriTel Emergency Alert Targeting
Results it movesTurn network capabilities into enterprise services · Reduce fraud and identity risk

Available to see today

Read the journey; a working session shows it running.

Request a working session