The Importance of Multiphase CAD/RMS Implementation Planning

Key Takeaway: Successful CAD and RMS implementations require continuous planning before and after procurement, with clear project charters, governance, contracts, and project management practices. Agencies that treat planning as an ongoing process are better positioned to manage integrations, mitigate risks, maintain control, and deliver systems that meet operational needs.

When implementing computer-aided dispatch (CAD) systems and records-management systems (RMS), public safety agencies often treat planning as a front-end exercise —something that happens before a contract is signed and then fades into the background once the vendor begins work.  That mindset is one of the most common reasons that CAD and RMS implementation projects struggle. . The reality is that successful implementations depend on multiple planning sessions prior to each implementation phase. A Project Management Institute (PMI) best practice is to develop a project charter that defines what is in and out of scope, as well as the intended outcomes of each phase.

Implementation planning generally falls into two categories: pre-procurement and post-procurement. The former happens before contract signing, when agencies define requirements, expectations, and structure. Post-procurement planning begins immediately after the contract is executed and continues throughout implementation. The challenge is that many organizations excel at one and neglect the other — or worse, assume that the vendor will handle everything after procurement. That assumption often leads to loss of control, lack of accountability, and ultimately, poor outcomes for public safety technology projects.

Pre-procurement planning is where the foundation is built. It’s where agencies must apply rigor to ensure that they are not just buying a system but rather are setting up a successful implementation. One of the most important aspects is identifying and accounting for interfaces early. CAD systems and RMS rarely operate in isolation. They must integrate with call-handling systems, downstream alerting systems, and a wide range of external databases. Failing to map these integrations in advance can create significant complications later, as interfaces are often the “long pole” in implementation.

Another critical best practice is the use of structured tools and assessments during this phase. Tools like interface workbooks and planning artifacts ensure that key elements are not overlooked. This is also the time to think through project structure at a high level, including governance and execution expectations, even if they will be formalized later. Effective public safety project planning starts with this level of preparation.

Perhaps most importantly, pre-procurement planning must translate into a strong, well-defined contract. Without that rigor upfront, agencies often find themselves trying to implement against a contract that lacks clarity or enforceability. A poorly constructed contract makes implementation significantly more difficult. A well-constructed contract should reflect not only what is being procured but also how the implementation will be managed and tested, and how staff members and vendors will be held accountable. This is especially important for CAD and RMS procurement projects, where implementation success depends on clearly defined expectations.

However, even the best pre-procurement planning cannot guarantee success on its own. This is where post-procurement planning becomes essential. Once the contract is signed, there is often pressure to “start immediately,” but jumping in without structure quickly can lead to confusion. The most successful projects are those that treat day one of implementation as a continuation of planning, not the end of it.

The highest priority in post-procurement planning is leveraging well-conceived governance, which ideally is established at project onset but becomes even more critical during implementation. This means clearly identifying decision-makers, defining the project team, and setting up committees including an executive committee and a steering committee with authority to make critical decisions. Without this structure, projects tend to drift. Decisions may be delayed indefinitely, or worse, made by the wrong people. In some cases, too many voices create chaos; in others, a lack of decision-makers causes issues to “swirl” without resolution.

Alongside effective governance, agencies must implement a disciplined project management framework, again from the beginning. This includes developing a detailed project schedule, establishing regular status meetings, and using structured tools like RAID logs to track risks, actions, issues, and decisions. These tools are not optional — they are essential for maintaining visibility and accountability. Without them, critical items get lost, and the project begins to rely on informal communication, which is rarely sufficient for complex implementations.

Another best practice is ensuring that planning continues throughout the implementation lifecycle. Planning should be ongoing. For example, successful teams hold regular internal meetings to gain alignment on priorities before engaging with vendors, ensuring that every interaction is purposeful and focused. This continuous planning helps anticipate challenges, address risks proactively, and maintain momentum throughout the CAD and RMS implementation process.

Equally important is the use of transparent, centralized tools to manage the project. Whether through a shared portal or another platform, all project information — schedules, status reports, documents, and action items — should be accessible in one place. This transparency ensures that everyone involved has visibility into the project and can be held accountable for their responsibilities. It also reduces confusion and eliminates the inefficiencies of scattered communication.

Ultimately, the importance of ongoing planning comes down to control and continuity. Pre-procurement planning ensures that the agency embarks on the project with clarity, structure, and a strong contractual foundation. Post-procurement planning ensures that this foundation is executed with discipline, accountability, and adaptability.

Projects that fail often do so not because of technology, but because of planning gaps between multiple project phases. For example, agencies may invest heavily in defining requirements, only to step back after procurement and allow the vendor to dictate the process. Or they may rush procurement without sufficient planning, creating challenges that no amount of post-procurement effort can resolve fully.

The most successful CAD system and RMS implementation projects recognize that planning is not confined to a single phase. It is a continuous process that begins before system procurement and persists through project closeout. When agencies apply rigor across all project phases, they position themselves not just to deploy a system, but also to deliver one that meets their operational needs and supports their mission effectively.

We can help your agency develop and apply that rigor — let’s chat.

 Jack Dougherty is MCP’s manager of public safety applications.