Cushing Systems Inc.

Name: Cushing Systems Inc.
Brand: Cushing Systems Inc.

Cushing Systems Inc. PSIMS is a public safety software suite that manages end-to-end workflows from 911 call-taking/dispatch (CAD) through records (RMS) and jail operations (JMS), and provides web and mobile access via PSIMS Anywhere.

Est 1999|7 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 81|Website|FTEs 6|HQ Winston Salem, North Carolina, US

MarketsBusiness Process Management (BPM)Workflow Automation

Published Sep 22, 2026

01Common complaints

- Company sizes or stages where this product is overkill or insufficient - Very large metropolitan agencies requiring detailed enterprise security documentation, complex regional integrations, and extensive nearby references may prefer larger incumbents. - Industries or use cases where competitors are clearly superior - Jurisdictions requiring a fully documented compliance program (SOC 2/ISO/CJIS attestations) and formal trust centers may find larger vendors better prepared for security questionnaires. - Technical requirements that this product cannot meet - If an RFP mandates SAML SSO/SCIM, encryption specifics, or published penetration-test artifacts, PSIMS may be difficult to qualify based on currently accessible public documentation. - Budget constraints that make alternatives more appropriate - If an organization requires transparent low-cost SaaS pricing and rapid self-serve deployment, public safety CAD/RMS/JMS offerings generally are not sold that way; PSIMS is also quote-based. - Specific workflows or integrations where the product falls short - If proven, state-specific integrations with published reference architectures are required, procuring organizations should verify PSIMS capabilities in the relevant state via references and a formal integration matrix. - Red flags in the buying process - Lack of written deliverables/SOW clarity around go-live criteria and training responsibilities - Not validating timeline feasibility with references in similar jurisdictions - Not including contractual remedies for missed milestones - Current limitations acknowledged by the vendor - No explicit “known issues” page was found in public sources. - Features on the roadmap (not yet available) - note estimated dates if available - No public roadmap was located. - Scale limitations (at what volume/size does it break down?) - No published benchmark or scale limits were found. - Security or compliance gaps - Lack of publicly documented SOC 2/ISO certifications and limited security transparency is a practical gap for many government procurement processes. - Technical debt or architectural limitations mentioned in reviews - No PSIMS-specific review corpus was found to assess technical debt. - API limitations or integration constraints - Interfaces are listed broadly in brochures, but there is no public API documentation or integration catalog discovered in accessible sources.

Deal disqualifiers: what makes a POOR fit

Agency requires publicly documented SOC 2/ISO certifications as a procurement prerequisite
Agency requires extensive third-party review validation or analyst coverage
Agency cannot tolerate timeline risk or has hard statutory go-live mandates without schedule buffer

Why some customers left for competitors (churn reasons)

No explicit statements of “we switched to X competitor” were found in accessible sources.
The Adams County/Quincy ETSB record documents a buyer that did not proceed with implementation after problems meeting deadlines and training/service expectations.

02Why they buy

- Competitive advantages validated by customer feedback (not just vendor claims) - Due to limited third-party reviews, unique selling points are mostly vendor-claimed and are not broadly validated by independent customer feedback. - Unique features and capabilities competitors lack - No clear evidence found that PSIMS has exclusive capabilities that competitors cannot match; most features described are common in modern CAD/RMS/JMS suites. - Differentiation from competitors based on reviews - Insufficient PSIMS review footprint to substantiate unique differentiation via independent reviews. - Value propositions with evidence from case studies - Evidence is mixed: - Vendor materials emphasize reduced duplicate data entry and integrated operations. - Public procurement record indicates at least one implementation struggled with service/training and schedule adherence. - Areas where competitors clearly have advantages (be balanced) - Tyler/CentralSquare generally offer: - Larger installed base and more peer references - More visible third-party review coverage - More published procurement artifacts and pricing schedules (at least in some government contract vehicles)

Why customers chose this product over alternatives

In the Quincy/Adams County case, procurement context indicates urgency because the incumbent vendor was going out of business; PSIMS appears to have been selected through a competitive process.
Vendor materials emphasize integrated CAD/RMS/JMS, state/NCIC interfaces, NG911 and EMD tool interoperability, and mobile/unit access via PSIMS Anywhere.

03Field reports

- Vendor-published case studies - No formal vendor case study pages with quantified ROI were located in accessible sources. - Public-sector project documentation (quasi-case studies) - Quincy/Adams County ETSB (Illinois) - Reported Year 1 project cost (including implementation): a six-figure amount reported by the agency. - Later minutes describe the implementation as **indefinitely paused** after missing the go-live date (November 13, 2024) and dissatisfaction with training/service. - Critical evaluation: - This is evidence that **project execution risk** exists for at least one deployment. - It does not conclusively indicate the software cannot function in production; it indicates that delivery, implementation management, and agency readiness can affect outcomes. - Unknowns: contract terms, scope creep, agency readiness, data migration complexity, and how responsibilities were divided during the project.

Availability note (important)

- Major review platforms do not appear to have accessible listings/reviews for PSIMS/Cushing Systems in the sources successfully reached during this research. - Gartner Peer Insights: the general site is accessible, but no clear PSIMS/Cushing Systems product listing with reviews was found in the accessible search results; Gartner content often requires login and may limit automated access. - TrustRadius and Capterra searches did not yield a PSIMS/Cushing Systems product review page in accessible results. - G2 searches did not yield a PSIMS/Cushing Systems page; however, G2 does provide reviews for competitor suites (for example, CentralSquare Public Safety & Justice).

Direct quotes from Gartner Peer Insights, Reddit, TrustRadius, G2, HackerNews

- Gartner Peer Insights / TrustRadius: no PSIMS/Cushing Systems review quotes were retrievable. - HackerNews: no relevant discussions located in the accessible search results for “Cushing Systems” or “PSIMS.” - G2 competitor quote (CentralSquare Public Safety & Justice): - Positive: “I like the ability to add, create and customize many of the commands and dashboard parts… The support has been very good as well.” - Negative: “I do not like the inability to create a workflow based on a geo fenced area… I also do not care for how slow the system runs the majority of the time.” - Public‑sector meeting record quote (implementation delivery context; not a review platform but an end‑user procurement record): - Adams County/Quincy ETSB minutes state the implementation was “indefinitely paused… due to the vendor’s (Cushing Systems) inability to meet satisfactory standards of service… failing to provide a satisfactory solution meeting the original go‑live deadline… [and] the training… was also unsatisfactory.”

Common criticisms and complaints (support issues, bugs, missing features)

Because public review coverage is sparse, the clearest criticisms come from procurement meeting records rather than typical SaaS review sites:
- Missed go‑live deadline and dissatisfaction with service and training (Adams County/Quincy ETSB).
- Concern about support quality and availability due to perceived vendor footprint (noted in a municipal council packet).

Specific outcomes customers achieved (with metrics when available)

Vendor materials claim improved workflow efficiency and reduced duplicate entry, but independently verified performance metrics are limited in the accessible record.

Deal-breakers and reasons customers didn't purchase

Procurement records suggest potential deal‑breakers included:
- Inability to meet go‑live timelines
- Training quality concerns
- Support responsiveness and availability expectations

04Best fit

Company sizes

Public agencies are better sized by sworn staff, dispatch positions, and jail capacity than by revenue.
PSIMS appears most suitable for:
- Small to mid-sized agencies and counties (e.g., agencies with relatively modest sworn staff levels)
- Multi-agency dispatch centers needing CAD + RMS integration

Industries and verticals where adoption is strongest (with customer examples)

Law enforcement, county sheriff/jail operations, public safety communications
Public record mentions of PSIMS usage appear in municipal and county contexts

Roles and personas: decision makers AND end users

Decision makers
- 911/ETSB directors, police chiefs, sheriffs
- County IT leadership
- Procurement officers
End users
- Dispatchers
- Patrol officers (mobile/CFS)
- Records clerks/supervisors
- Jail officers

Pain points and challenges the product addresses

Duplicate data entry across CAD/RMS/Jail
Need for state/NCIC query workflows embedded in operations
Need for integrated property/evidence and reporting
Need for mobile access and multi-device usability

Qualification criteria: what makes a GREAT fit

Agency wants an integrated suite with consistent workflows
Ability to deploy on local servers (if required) and support device-flexible access
Clear project governance with adequate agency staffing for implementation

Real customer examples with organization names when available

Quincy/Adams County ETSB (Illinois) considered/implemented PSIMS CAD/RMS/Mobile to some degree (installed on local servers for training), then paused
Mulvane, Kansas evaluated Cushing Systems among alternatives

05The pitch

What the product does (core value proposition in objective terms)

- Cushing Systems Inc. develops a public safety software suite called PSIMS (Public Safety Information Management System), covering end-to-end workflows from 911 call-taking/dispatch (CAD) through records (RMS) and jail operations (JMS), with additional modules such as civil process and “PSIMS Anywhere” for access across devices. - Vendor materials describe an integrated workflow approach (single suite) intended to reduce duplicate data entry and provide web-style views, dashboards, and mobile/unit access. - Core modules and positioning are described in vendor brochures for CAD, RMS, Jail, and PSIMS Anywhere.

Target market and market positioning

Primary buyers appear to be U.S. law enforcement agencies, dispatch/PSAPs, sheriff’s offices, and multi-agency public safety organizations (police/fire/EMS).
Market positioning is “integrated suite” rather than single-function point solutions, competing with larger public safety vendors (Tyler, CentralSquare, Motorola/Spillman, Hexagon) and smaller regional vendors.

Get a comprehensive analysis of Cushing Systems Inc. including market position, competitive landscape, adoption trends, and peer benchmarks.

Download full report →