Introduction to Emergency Management:

Emergencies have been in the news for the past couple years. Most people started
thinking of them on September 11, 2001. They gained more currency in peoples’ heads
as wildfires in California and hurricanes on the Gulf Coast broke into the news and the
responses of government were often found wanting.

Emergencies are not new, and neither are they a uniquely American concern. People
have been dealing with them, to various degrees of success, since the dawn of time.

Emergencies, or disasters, generate a lot of emotion. That emotion is often negative, and
we all feel it as fear, uncertainty and doubt. Emotion can be good, if it generates positive
action. There is a lot to learn about effectively dealing with specific types of emergencies
as an individual or a family, but a lot can be done that will help one to deal with whatever
happens.

Knowledge drives out fear, and certain actions can overcome confusion. The purpose of
this series is to help you understand what you can do, but more importantly why you
should do it. Preparing for emergencies is not first and foremost an exercise in buying
things. Knowing what risks you face, their specific hazards, and how your efforts can
help yourself and integrate with any assistance from others are what you want to know
before you go off on a buying binge. You will find that you will not need to spend a lot
of money to be effectively prepared.

There is a basic discipline that emergency managers follow to prepare for emergencies. It
is a four phase approach.
1. Mitigation – Figuring out what hazards you may face, and doing what you can to
avoid them or lessen their effects.
2. Preparation – Understand what you have to do, make a plan, and exercise that
plan to ensure everyone knows what to do.
3. Respond – When an emergency happens, do what you need to do to keep you and
others safe.
4. Recovery – Getting your family back to normal, and incorporating the lessons
you learned dealing with a hazard.

The government has a role in emergency management. That role is not to make certain
you are not inconvenienced by a disaster. Politicians may desire us to think they can help
us in every eventuality, but the reality is we must know what we can expect the
government to do and when. Then, we know how our individual efforts can be
complemented by government work. People who think the government will handle any
and all emergencies will be disappointed.

The next piece will deal with what the role of the government is, and how it came to be.
With that understanding of the context, this series will teach how to use the four phases to
prepare for emergencies. Specific hazards will then be addressed to understand their risk
and how to mitigate them, prepare for them, and if necessary respond. Using this series,
Peter Van Loon
January 25, 2009
a family will be able to develop an emergency plan and the knowledge and resources to
take care of themselves in case of a variety of emergencies.

Peter Van Loon

January 25, 2009
Government Role in Emergency Management

The federal government is not charged with taking responsibility for emergency response.
There is a hierarchy of who is responsible. It starts at the lowest level of government and
works it way up.

That means your local government is responsible for emergency management – of

whatever type. The next level, depending on how governments are set up, would be
either the county or region. Florida and California have strong county governments,
while other states, like Connecticut, have counties but no effective county government.
There may be regional groups coming together ad hoc to deal with emergencies.

All states have emergency management roles. The big challenge at the state level is
integrating the work of local and regional entities. States also band together in mutual
assistance pacts, in order to share equipment and expertise if needed.

States also strive to maintain the Federal government in a role that supports the state
efforts. No one government entity willingly delegates its responsibility up to the next
level, and if it does it will demand a continued role. We have seen instances where
governments have not worked to integrate efforts, and the results have not been good.

Hurricane Katrina is a case in point. A hurricane devastating New Orleans has been on
the top five list of potential disasters for a long time. The city, parish, and state
governments had never fully developed integrated plans, let alone practice them. The
issue was effectively ignored. The Federal government response, which no one could
excuse, was made worse because of the lack of coordination on the local, parish and state
level.

Looking at how local, county and regional governments perform in California to fight
wildfires is an example of better preparation and coordination. The result is that often the
only needed response from the federal government is an open checkbook to help pay for
the response.

The level of government ability is something anyone can quickly determine. If you are
wondering if your town has an emergency plan, than there is an opportunity for your
town to do a better job. Go on your town’s website, and see if there is any indication of
effective emergency planning.

During the height of the Cold War, there was a civil defense infrastructure. You can see
relics; “Fallout Shelter” signs still can be seen on some buildings but the infrastructure
has long since disappeared. After the World Trade Center attacks, there has been renewed
efforts to build effective emergency management plans.

Such plans are difficult to develop on any government level. There is a need for all
involved to work together and compromise. That may be done well in short term

Peter Van Loon

January 25, 2009
situations, like a fire or traffic accident. The real test is when the emergency is long-lived
and widespread; e.g. a hurricane, earthquake or attack.

Some local governments have full time emergency managers. Others may have a
member of the police, fire or public health department with the emergency manager role
as a secondary responsibility. Find out who they are and ask what the town’s plans are.

All State governments have emergency management staff. Many used to have that role
reside either in the National Guard or police. In the past few years, departments of
homeland security have been established and emergency management established under
them. In this, they have followed the Federal government.

Until 2002, emergency management was the province of one agency; the Federal
Emergency Management Agency. The Department of Homeland Security was
established and FEMA was subsumed. One reason for founding the DHA was to better
coordinate emergency management with other complementary efforts from marine
protection to immigration.

The basics have not changed. Local governments are responsible for emergency
management, of whatever type, and states are above them. The point to remember is that
leadership and resources for emergency management will come first from your town and
state. The Federal Government is not a passive player; it works to provide resources,
education, training and coordination. The National Response Framework, put out in
January 2008 is the latest manifestation of the thinking and planning of the Federal
Government. We will cover that in the next piece.

Peter Van Loon

January 25, 2009
Addressing Emergencies: The National Response Framework

The last two pieces introduced emergency management and the role of governments. The
point to remember is that emergency management responsibility starts at the local level
and works up through the state to the Federal level. Local and state governments
embrace their emergency management roles to different degrees. The Federal
government has been working to effect better local and state efforts, and that work can be
seen in the latest statement of their emergency management guidance; the National
Response Framework.

The NRF is the latest edition. Several years ago, there was the Federal Response Plan.
That was the plan for the Federal government to act. That was replaced shortly after the
World Trade Center attacks by the National Response Plan. The goal was to engage more
levels of government and other organizations. That went through a couple editions and
earlier this year, the NRF was published.

It should be noted that what used to be a “Plan” is now a “Framework”. I think the
Federal government is beginning to comprehend that it must get others involved and that
it can not be effective in dealing with any disaster by itself. Unfortunately, there is a
growing tendency to look to the Federal government as the first responder. The fact is
there is local knowledge, capability and resource that must be engaged. The NRF works
to do that.

The National Response Framework has five core principles;

1. Engaged Partnership
2. Tiered Response
3. Scalable, Flexible and Adaptable Operational Capabilities
4. Unity of Command
5. Readiness to Act

Engaged Partnership is the idea that leaders at all levels of government must develop
shared response goals and integrate capabilities to ensure effective crisis response. This
principle is meant as more than just governments. Local private and business resources
need to be engaged, and not just at the point of a disaster. An example is the effort to
engage local humane societies, veterinary clinics, veterinary schools and local volunteers
to set up pet shelters in the event of a disaster.

The goal is to keep any response to the lowest level possible. A Tiered Response is an
effort to avoid unnecessary escalation. A great example of proper tiered response is when
a large fire in one locality may begin to draw on help from surrounding localities in an
orderly fashion. The goal is to not just avoid wasting resources, but to keep the response
effective. More is not always better; people and resources can quickly get in each other’s
way.

Emergencies change. What may start out as a truck accident requiring fire and police
may involve into a hazardous material spill requiring environmental protection. An effort
Peter Van Loon
January 25, 2009
to evacuate a community in the face of a hazard requires a huge communication and
transportation effort, and then work to house and feed people. To deal with these things,
emergency response requires the ability to shift focus and to do it quickly.

Only one person can be in charge, and as responses change so may the ultimately
responsible party. At the Pentagon on 11 September 2001, it was the local fire
department in charge initially. As the fires went out, the responsibility shifted back to the
military. The Incident Command System, or ICS, was developed out of the need for
those fighting California wildfires to shift responsibility as the fires evolved and traveled.
Unity of command is never easy, but it must be the case for effective response.

Readiness to act is easy when the emergency is evident; a fire, hurricane or flood will
find no shortage of eagerness to act. The readiness to act must be utilized in planning and
integration efforts before any emergency or disaster. It can be difficult to get various
constituencies to plan and integrate. Action is not just response; it has to be channeled to
all phases of emergency management; mitigation, preparation, response and recovery.

The NRF is meant to give guidance to state, county and local governments – and also
families, businesses and individuals. The message is that all work together, and all must
be active in preparing for and responding to emergencies. The way to do that is to look at
each of the four phases of emergency management and how they should be implemented
at the family level.

Peter Van Loon

January 25, 2009
Next Pieces:

1. Mitigation Introduction
a. Hazard Identification
b. Vulnerability analysis
c. Mitigation Measaurs
2. Preparedness Introduction
a. Plan
i. General versus Specific
ii. Integration
b. Basic Preparation
i. Base on vulnerability
ii. Think before buy
c. Aspects
i. Food, Energy, Transport, Communication
It is possible to frame an individual family plan within a series of articles – it may
be more palatable to write to the basics and have the plan format online.

3. Response
a. Implement the plan
b. What to expect from government
4. Recovery
a. Identify Lessons Learned
b. Act on lessons learned
5. Hazard Specific Pieces(dispassionate synopsis of potential emergencies)
a. Natural
b. Technological
c. Man Made Disasters

My expectation is that as the articles roll out, there will be feedback as to what people
would like to see and where else the series could go.

Peter Van Loon

January 25, 2009