9. Choice of a Lead Entity to Oversee the 211 Program
2-1-1 California believes there should be a "Lead Entity" for all 211 services because a single point of coordination and implementation is necessary to achieve statewide 211 coverage. In particular, 2-1-1 California believes it is qualified to serve as Lead Entity, and, in that capacity, it would work with the telecommunications carriers in switch programming and call routing, and would coordinate disaster response, especially during disasters that occur in multiple counties or in counties where there is no regular 211 service provider.
2-1-1 California asserts that several State agencies and civic associations, including the League of California Cities, California Association of Governments, California Department of Transportation, California Volunteers, CalEMA, and the California Association of Emergency Services, have already informally recognized it as the lead entity for purposes of 211 service planning, coordination and contracting purposes. 32 Officers of the following organizations that currently work with 2-1-1 California, have written in support of 2-1-1 California's request to be Lead Entity: 211 Los Angeles, United Way of California, United Way of Silicon Valley, 211 Alameda County, 211 Santa Barbara, 211 Riverside, 211 Bay Area, 211 Tulare County, 211 Stanislaus, and Inland Empire 211.33 DRA agrees that 2-1-1 California should be appointed Lead Entity, as long as it is subject to requirements imposed by this Commission. 34 No party to this proceeding opposed 2-1-1 California's appointment as Lead Entity.
Accordingly, we appoint 2-1-1 California as Lead Entity. In Section 8.2.1 above, we discussed the criteria for choosing a Lead Entity and what the duties of a Lead Entity are. Since 2-1-1 California has already requested, via its petition, that it be appointed as Lead Entity, it has complied with Final Rule 1, and does not need to reapply. Also, 2-1-1 California has proven that it fulfills the requirements of Final Rule 2.a., through its experience providing leadership services in the 211 community and knowledge of the 211 program, as discussed in Section 2 of this decision. 2-1-1 California has also shown that it has broad support from local and state government, 211 service providers in California, and DRA. No one involved in this proceeding opposes 2-1-1 California's appointment as Lead Entity.
Also, 2-1-1 California has agreed to, and our Final Rules include, the criterion that at least half of the members of a Lead Entity's board of directors are be made up of 211 providers, which adds to the existing knowledge base regarding both 211 service and the experience of these 211 service providers during day-to-day operations and emergencies.
As required by Final Rule 2.b, a prospective Lead Entity must certify that no person who was associated with an offending provider, in the same type of capacity that it holds with the Lead Entity, at the same time an offense occurred, is associated with or employed by the prospective Lead Entity.
Since 2-1-1 California has not had an opportunity to provide this information to us, as discussed below, we appoint 2-1-1 California as Lead Entity for provision of 211 service provided in California,35 but require that 2-1-1 California file its certification that it has complied with the Final Rule 2.b (Attachment A to this decision) within 30 days of the issuance of this decision. As Lead Entity, 2-1-1 California must comply with all of the Final Rules set out in Attachment A to this decision.
32 Petition (P.) 10-02-002 at 8.
33 Response of 2-1-1 California to Inquiries of the Administrative Law Judge,
in P.10-02-002, at Attachment E.
34 Comments of the Division of Ratepayer Advocates on 211 Workshop Report, dated December 22, 2010.
35 Such 211 services include both regular 211 service provided pursuant to D.03-02-029, and 211 emergency service pursuant to the order herein.
