Part 1: Introduction
Part 2: Local and State Roles in Response to Disaster
Part 3: Managing the Response Function
Part 4: Acquiring and Coordinating Federal Assistance
Part 5: Recovery Function and Federal Assistance Programs
Part 6: Summary
Part 1: Introduction
Emergencies occur in our communities every day. The large majority of
these are easily managed by local first responders using the resources
available to them. However, when disaster strikes, these resources can
quickly become overwhelmed, requiring outside assistance. In this
module, we will discuss the emergency management functions of response
and recovery, and the ways in which local communities can plan and
prepare for all incidents, large and small. We will discuss the
processes a local or state emergency manager must initiate in order to
obtain resources beyond those locally available.
We will also review the steps a state governor must take in order to
get the federal government to issue a presidential disaster declaration.
This declaration ensures the protection of the sovereign rights of the
state while permitting the federal government to act in the interest of
public safety. Obtaining this declaration would seem a complicated
process, but it is actually quite straightforward, and is done numerous
times each year across the country.
From 1990 to 2006, the United States experienced 823 presidential
disaster declarations (an average of forty-eight per year), as
illustrated in figure 4.2. Knowing approximately how many declarations
the president will make each year, emergency managers can develop plans
and estimates to identify the resources they have, and those they would
need in the event of a large-scale disaster.
Figure 4.2
Presidential Disaster Declarations by Year, 1990–2006
Based on information from FEMA, 2007, FEMA Web site
The recovery phase of any disaster is almost always the longest in
duration, and the most costly. It may take years, or even decades, for a
community to restore its critical infrastructure, or for the economy to
bounce back to the point at which the community is self-sufficient. In
our final discussion in this module, we will review some federal
financial support programs that can help individuals and governments
during the recovery phase of a disaster.
Part 2: Local and State Roles in Response to Disaster
Despite our best efforts in performing the functions of mitigation
and preparedness, we cannot prevent most disasters. Our best hope is
that the groundwork we have laid will minimize the effects of a disaster
when it occurs. Additionally, we can hope that our planning efforts
have given us an accurate idea of the damage we can expect from various
types of disasters, and that we have obtained the resources required to
quickly respond to an incident and to restore the community to normal.
The response function begins the moment a threat is perceived
(whether natural or man-made). The emergency management organization may
receive indicators of a hazard or threat prior to the event. If the
organization receives a warning of an imminent emergency or disaster, it
can respond by positioning response assets, moving people and property
out of harm’s way, and notifying citizens of the situation. Without such
an alert, the organization must rely on pre-event planning and response
resource preparedness.
Local Response Capabilities
When an emergency occurs in a community, the first responders to the
incident are invariably neighbors and volunteers, followed immediately
by local police, fire department, and emergency medical services (EMS)
personnel, and other civil responders. Typically, emergencies are
managed using local resources, without assistance from the emergency
management organization. Local resources act according to previously
developed Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) or a community Emergency
Operations Plan (EOP).
For example, the response to a motor vehicle accident occurring on
the highway will begin with a call to the emergency 911 center. Once the
911 operator has determined the severity of the accident, he or she
will dispatch local resources from law enforcement, fire, and EMS
agencies. If the accident requires additional resources (e.g., the power
company needs to fix downed power lines from a struck pole), the
responding units on the scene will communicate back to the 911 center to
initiate a request.
Our communities manage such events every day through the actions of
first responders. If an incident becomes so large or complicated as to
overwhelm local response teams, however, the emergency management
organization may need to acquire additional resources. Any emergency
severe enough to be considered a disaster will quickly exhaust local
resources, and will necessitate the deployment of state and/or federal
resources for effective management.
However, citizens and local response agencies should plan on
practicing self-reliance during the first three days of a disaster.
Federal assistance is based on a response plan that aims to have
resources in the area within seventy-two hours of a large-scale
disaster.
Regional and State Response Capabilities
All fifty states, the six U.S. territories (American Samoa, Guam, the
Mariana Islands, the Marshall Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin
Islands), and the District of Columbia have some type of Emergency
Management Office (EMO). Although the names of the different offices and
their positions within state government vary from locale to locale,
each has the same responsibility: to develop and coordinate a statewide
EOP.
Some EMOs function as an independent agency within state government,
reporting directly to the governor. Others serve as a component of the
state’s military department or homeland security office. This latter
type of arrangement appears to be a trend in states transitioning toward
an all-hazard approach encompassing both natural disasters and
terrorist events.
As directed by the U.S. Constitution, each governor is responsible
for the public safety of the people within his or her state or
territory. As a condition for receiving federal financial assistance for
emergency management, governors must develop a state EOP and conduct
preparedness activities to ensure that state resources are ready to
respond to an incident occurring within their jurisdiction.
The federal government provides funding for a National Guard
component for each state to assist the governor in these
responsibilities. Although the National Guard remains a ready reserve
unit of the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force, it is also one of the
primary resources available to the state in a disaster response.
The assets of the National Guard include personnel, communications
equipment, air and road transport vehicles and tools, construction and
earth-moving equipment, and emergency supplies such as food, water,
beds, blankets, and medical supplies. State emergency managers should
regularly check the availability of these resources, however, as some
may be deployed overseas in response to military mission requirements.
Each state’s EMO also maintains an Emergency Operations Center (EOC),
a safe location for the management and coordination of disaster
response activities. The EOC is the central point at which responding
agencies coordinate their actions, and at which policy-making
individuals receive status updates concerning the response efforts.
The EOC handles two primary tasks:
1. resource status management (deciding what resources are required and tracking them from acquisition to demobilization)
2. situational status management (collecting information from local
response agencies and disseminating a common operating picture to all
players that describes the incident status and the actions being taken)
The EOC also plays a vital role in disseminating information to the
public through a Joint Information Center (JIC) that prepares releases
for the community and disperses them among responding agencies to ensure
the delivery of a consistent and accurate message.
The state EMO must assess local and state efforts to determine
whether the response is effective, or whether resources are
overstretched and need federal assistance. Based on damage assessment
reports, the director of the EMO will determine whether or not the
governor should make a state disaster declaration or request a
presidential disaster declaration.
The Role of the Private Sector
As an emergency manager, you should note the vital role that the
private sector plays in emergency response. Private companies own
equipment and supplies that the government might need in the event of a
disaster. Local and state emergency managers should make an inventory of
these potential assets and prearrange contracts or agreements to use
them as needed. Resources available from within the private sector
include heavy equipment for excavation and cleanup, and tools for power
generation, refrigeration, housing, etc.
The private sector also includes a large number of volunteer groups
that play an active role in emergency response and recovery. The
American Red Cross, the Salvation Army, and various religious
organizations provide emergency shelters, clothing, food, and water as
necessary. The Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES) supports
emergency managers by delivering backup communications capability via
ham radio networks.
Many volunteer groups are organized under a state Voluntary
Organizations Active in Disaster (VOAD) group. The national VOAD group
(NVOAD) serves as the coordination center for these organizations. VOAD
is a necessary component of disaster response, as it enables these
groups to receive regular communications, training, and tasking through a
central administrative contact.
Recognizing the role of private citizens in the first response to a
disaster, FEMA has encouraged many state and local governments to
establish Community Emergency Response Teams (CERTs). CERTs prepare
communities to help each other through the use of education,
publications, and equipment. They enable citizens take an active role in
the outcome of an event, increasing their awareness of hazards and the
actions required to ensure the safety of their families and neighbors.
CERT members become qualified through training and exercise programs
to assist in providing emergency medical care, handling evacuation and
sheltering, and performing light search and rescue activities. During an
event that stretches local assets to the breaking point, CERT members
serve as a vital reserve force to meet the community’s needs.
Part 3: Managing the Response Function
In order to avoid effort duplication and the unclear delineation of
authority, emergency management organizations must have a mechanism in
place to effectively manage resources. In this section, we will review
the development of the Incident Command System (ICS), a tool used
by emergency services for incident management, and the evolution of the
ICS into a National Incident Management System (NIMS).
Incident Command System (ICS)
Managing the vast and varying resources needed during an emergency
requires the means to command, control, and coordinate those resources.
This challenge came to light for America’s fire service in the 1970s,
after a series of conflagrations in Southern California resulted in a
large number of homes lost. An after-action analysis of these fires
pointed to a high level of effort duplication among the responding
agencies, a lack of coordination and communication, and the absence of a
single plan to guide all parties.
These findings led to the development of the Incident Command System
(ICS) as a structure for managing the resources and activities required
in the response phase of an incident or disaster. FEMA funded the
development of Firefighting Resources of California Organized for
Potential Emergencies (FIRESCOPE) in 1982 and adopted it as the model
ICS for these types of incidents.
The Incident Command System (ICS) is characterized by the following six principles:
1. Unified command A single Incident Commander (IC) manages most incidents. A Unified Command (UC) team manages the response when multiple agencies or multiple jurisdictions share responsibility for the outcome.
2. Standardized organizational structure A common
organizational structure is implemented in a modular manner for all
incidents, large and small. Because it is modular, the organizational
structure is also scalable and can be expanded if the complexity of the
incident increases.
3. Manageable span of control Supervisors can effectively
manage only a limited number of resources. The ICS recommends that no
supervisor oversee more than three to seven resources, citing five as
the optimal number.
4. Unity of command Similar to the above principle, this one
holds that a subordinate should report to only one supervisor. This
limits the potential for conflicting tasking during an operation.
5. Common terminology Resources from different disciplines or
jurisdictions often adopt a local jargon to describe the tasks they
perform or the resources they use to fulfill their mission. The ICS
requires agencies and jurisdictions to adopt a common terminology to
limit confusion at the incident location.
6. Management by objectives The IC or UC team develops a single Incident Action Plan (IAP) to
define measurable objectives for each operational period, the resources
required to complete these objectives, and the tasks assigned to each
resource.
The Phoenix Fire Department later
modified the FIRESCOPE model to manage structural firefighting
activities, creating the Fire Ground Command (FGC) system. During the
1980s, fire service leaders debated the various merits of these systems.
The National Fire Service Incident Management System Consortium
(NFSIMSC) led a grassroots effort to merge the two ICSs into a single
Incident Management System (IMS). These efforts and the disaster events
of September 11, 2001, led to the formation of the National Incident
Management System (NIMS) under the mandate of Homeland Security
Presidential Directive 5 (HSPD-5).
The National Incident Management System (NIMS)
Following the horrific events of September 11, 2001, it became clear
that the nation needed a single ICS model to manage large-scale disaster
events. Responding agencies found themselves challenged by many of the
issues that had plagued the fire service during the 1970s: duplication
of effort, lack of coordination and communication, the absence of a
single plan of action.
President George W. Bush signed HSPD-5 on February 28, 2003,
requiring the newly established Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to
develop a National Incident Management System (NIMS) to “provide
a consistent nationwide approach for Federal, state, and local
governments to work effectively and efficiently together to prepare for,
respond to, and recover from domestic incidents, regardless of cause,
size, or complexity” (White House, 2003, White House Web site).
The NIMS accounts for six vital components of incident management that must be fully integrated to ensure a successful response:
1. Command and management The NIMS provides for a standard
ICS, plus the added capabilities of a Multiagency Coordination System
(MACS) and the Public Information Systems (PIS). These three structures
facilitate the management of an incident at the local level (ICS), the
coordination of different agencies in the jurisdiction (MACS), and the
coordination of response actions with the public (PIS).
2. Preparedness The NIMS recognizes that effective incident
management begins with preparedness. Agencies and jurisdictions must
ready resources for disaster response through planning, training, and
exercises.
3. Resource management The NIMS provides for a standard method
of describing, inventorying, mobilizing, tracking, and demobilizing the
resources required during the lifecycle of an incident.
4. Communications and information management The NIMS
recognizes the importance of reliable, interoperable communications at
an incident scene. It also notes the need for responders to collect and
disseminate information to make a common operating picture available to
all responding elements.
5. Supporting technology The NIMS supports investment in
research and development to obtain the technology required for disaster
response and incident mana
gement.
6. Ongoing management and maintenance The NIMS Integration Center (NIC) provides
guidance to state and local jurisdictions during NIMS implementation
activities, continually refining NIMS policy and procedures according to
feedback during and after disaster events.
Mutual Aid Assistance and Multiagency Coordination
The NIMS assumes that the resources of each jurisdiction are limited,
and that a large-scale event will require resources beyond local
capabilities. The NIMS encourages local jurisdictions to develop mutual aid agreements with
surrounding jurisdictions (including other states) to share resources,
facilities, and equipment in the event of a large-scale disaster.
Jurisdictions may also establish these agreements with private or
non-governmental organizations to define their role in disaster response
and recovery. Mutual aid agreements should detail the
· roles and responsibilities of each participating organization
· procedures for implementing the mutual aid resource request
· rules for the payment and reimbursement of costs incurred during aid provision
· relationship between the mutual aid agreement and other agreements (i.e., local or state EOPs)
· treatment of liability or immunity issues
· qualifications and certifications of involved parties
Part 4: Acquiring and Coordinating Federal Assistance
Once a jurisdiction decides that the response to a disaster has
exhausted local and state assets, it will ask the federal government to
provide additional resources to ensure public safety and to assist in
restoring vital services. The governor of the state will forward a
letter to the president requesting a presidential disaster declaration.
This is the first step in directing federal equipment, supplies, and
personnel to a disaster site—and a necessary one, because without it,
federal aid could not be activated. Upon the declaration of a disaster,
the DHS, through FEMA, will bring together the resources of the federal
government under the provisions of the National Response Plan (NRP).
It is important to note that some disasters can overwhelm the
capabilities of both state and federal response assets. A catastrophic
disaster, such as Hurricane Katrina, can cause such widespread
destruction that even a huge amount of resources will not be able to
immediately meet the needs of the citizens. Hurricane Katrina was the
largest physical disaster this country has ever experienced. The storm
affected more than 90,000 square miles of land, disrupted the lives of
millions, and destroyed and degraded much of the area’s infrastructure.
In “normal” disasters, communities quickly obtain the help they need
by looking to neighboring communities and states for assistance. In
catastrophic disasters, neighboring communities all suffer equally.
Emergency management depends on federal and Emergency Management
Assistance Compact (EMAC) resources (described below).
To improve its response to catastrophic incidents, the federal
government may have to find ways to shorten its seventy-two hour
reaction time for those communities requiring immediate assistance. As
we continue to evaluate lessons learned, we will work on refining our
national response capabilities to address catastrophic disasters.
The National Response Plan (NRP)
As we previously noted, HSPD-5
required the development of the NRP to align and coordinate the federal
resources called in to support response and recovery after a national
incident. The NRP is built upon the framework of the NIMS, and sets
forth guidelines for managing large-scale incidents that require federal
assistance. The Stafford Act outlines the provisions for activating the NRP (discussed below).
The NRP was approved and released on December 2004, replacing the
former Federal Response Plan (FRP), which primarily addressed the
federal response to disasters; the Concept of Operations Plan (CONPLAN),
which addressed the federal response to terrorism incidents; and
several other federal response plans governing specific incident types.
The new NRP provides a single all-hazard approach for defining the
federal role in response to incidents of national significance.
It is important to note that both the NIMS and the NRP are under
consideration for revision as a result of the lessons learned after
Hurricane Katrina in 2005. A new version of the NIMS and a National
Response Framework (to replace the NRP) are under internal review, with a
release scheduled for the end of calendar year 2007.
In developing the NRP, the DHS incorporated the best practices and
procedures from established plans from across many disciplines,
including emergency management, homeland security, firefighting, law
enforcement, public health, public works, EMS, and hazardous materials
response. The DHS recognized that these disciplines already had working
plans and procedures. What the United States needed was a single
all-hazard response plan that would enable all of these disciplines to
function together in an integrated coordinating structure.
To meet this need, the NRP promotes the organization of support
functions and the delegation of responsibility to various federal
agencies to facilitate the delivery of critical federal resources to an
incident location. The NRP coordinates federal responsibilities through
the assignment of Emergency Support Functions (ESFs).
Each ESF provides a coordination mechanism for the function assigned.
Under the NRP, each ESF is assigned to a group of primary and support
agencies based on legal authority, resources, and capabilities. The NRP
requires that ESFs support one another to form a cohesive response to
the emergency incident. ESFs may direct staff to the National Response
Coordination Center (NRCC), the Regional Response Coordination Center
(RRCC), a Joint Field Office (JFO), or an Incident Command Post (ICP) as
required to provide the necessary support (more information on these
below).
Many states have adopted the ESF model and have organized their EOCs
in line with it to better manage state resources and to allow for the
seamless integration of local and federal responders.
Table 4.1 lists the federal ESF structures and responsibilities as defined by the NRP (DHS, 2004, p. 12 and ESF annexes):
Table 4.1
Federal ESF Structure
ESF
Title
Primary Agency(ies)
Responsibilities
ESF #1
Transportation
Department of Transportation (DOT)
· federal and civil transportation support
· transportation safety
· restoration/recovery of transportation infrastructure
· movement restriction easement
· damage and impact assessment
ESF #2
Communications
DHS, Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection (IAIP) Directorate and National Communications System (NCS)
· coordination with telecommunications industry
· restoration/repair of telecommunications infrastructure
· protection, restoration, and maintenance of national cyber and information technology resources
ESF #3
Public Works and Engineering
Department of Defense (DoD)/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)/DHS, Emergency Preparedness and Response/FEMA
· infrastructure protection and emergency repair
· infrastructure restoration
· engineering services, construction management
· critical infrastructure liaison services
ESF #4
Firefighting
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service
· firefighting support on federal lands
· provision of resources to rural and urban firefighting operations
ESF #5
Emergency Management
DHS, Emergency Preparedness and Response/FEMA
· coordination of incident management efforts
· issuance of mission assignments
· resource and human capital management
· incident action planning
· financial management
ESF #6
Mass Care, Housing, and Human Services
DHS, Emergency Preparedness and Response/FEMA/American Red Cross
· mass care
· disaster housing
· human services
ESF #7
Resource Support
General Services Administration (GSA)
· resource support (for facility spaces, office equipment and supplies, contracting services, etc.)
ESF #8
Public Health and Medical Services
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
· public health
· medical services
· mental health services
· mortuary services
ESF #9
Urban Search and Rescue
DHS, Emergency Preparedness and Response/FEMA
· life-saving services
· urban search and rescue
ESF #10
Oil and Hazardous Materials Response
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/DHS/U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
· oil and hazardous materials (chemical, biological, radiological, etc.) response
· environmental safety and short- and long-term cleanup
ESF #11
Agriculture and Natural Resources
USDA/Department of the Interior (DOI)
· nutritional assistance
· animal and plant disease/pest response
· food safety and security
· natural and cultural resources and historic properties protection and restoration
ESF #12
Energy
Department of Energy (DOE)
· energy infrastructure assessment, repair, and restoration
· energy industry utilities coordination
· energy forecasts
ESF #13
Public Safety and Security
DHS/Department of Justice (DOJ)
· facility and resource security
· security planning and technical and resource assistance
· public safety/security
· traffic, access, and crowd control
ESF #14
Long-Term Community Recovery and Mitigation
DHS, Emergency Preparedness and Response/FEMA, with USDA/U.S.
Department of Commerce (DOC)/Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD)/Department of the Treasury (TREAS)/Small Business Administration
(SBA)
· social and economic community impact assessment
· long-term community recovery assistance to states, local governments, and private sector
· mitigation analysis and program implementation
ESF #15
External Affairs
DHS, Emergency Preparedness and Response/FEMA
· emergency public information and protective action guidance
· media and community relations
· congressional and international affairs
· tribal and insular affairs
Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC)
As part of disaster planning and preparedness, states are encouraged
to develop mutual aid agreements with surrounding states to share
resources and capabilities. However, a large-scale disaster will impact a
large region, and it may not be possible in such cases for
jurisdictions to share assets. To help resolve this challenge, Congress
passed legislation in 1996 providing for the creation of the EMAC. The Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) is an agreement that enables any state to provide resources to any other state in response to disaster needs.
The EMAC is administered through a private organization, NEMA. The
National Emergency Management Association (NEMA) is a professional
organization of emergency managers, established with the following
mission (NEMA, 2007, NEMA Web site):
· to provide national leadership and expertise in comprehensive emergency management
· to serve as a vital emergency management information and assistance resource
· to advance continuous improvement in emergency management through
strategic partnerships, innovative programs, and collaborative policy
positions
To request resources via EMAC, a state broadcasts its requirements
through the EMAC network to all other EMAC members (all other states).
Any state that can provide a needed resource submits a reply with
projected cost information. The requiring state reviews the proposals,
then accepts offers as needed for the provision of equipment, supplies,
or personnel. Costs are identified up front so that the requesting state
can record them for potential reimbursement from the federal government
if a disaster declaration is issued.
Since its establishment, the EMAC has been put to the test on several
major disasters (West Coast wildfires, hurricanes, earthquakes, etc.),
and has proved itself a cornerstone of the national mutual aid system.
Emergency management organizations should always consider the EMAC
during a disaster response and recovery operation.
Federal Response and Recovery Under the Stafford Act
Although mutual aid can supplement local resources in a disaster, the
needs of the response may continue to outweigh the available assets.
The assistance of the federal government is then required to help ensure
public safety. As discussed above, the governor initiates the process
of obtaining assistance with a request for a presidential disaster
declaration. The president’s approval permits the activation of federal
assets under the provisions of the NRP and the Stafford Act.
During module 2, we had the opportunity to review the Stafford Act
from the perspective of the mitigation function. The Stafford Act
authorizes federal agencies to provide technical assistance and grants
in support of state and local pre-disaster planning, mitigation
programs, and disaster response.
Figure 4.3 shows the flow of actions that occur before and during the activation of federal support under the Stafford Act:
Figure 4.3
Activation of Federal Disaster Support
Source: NRP, 2004, p. 93
The first step in requesting a presidential disaster declaration is the preparation of a preliminary damage assessment (PDA).
Based on the results of the PDA and other information provided, the
Homeland Security Operations Center (HSOC) will evaluate the governor’s
request and forward a recommendation to the secretary of the DHS. The
secretary will make a recommendation to the president and, if necessary,
initiate federal support as permitted by the NRP. The Stafford Act
authorizes two types of declarations: emergency and major disaster.
1. Emergency declarations The president will make an emergency
declaration if he or she determines that federal assistance is needed
(usually to supplement state and local resources). The funding for
emergency declarations is capped at $5 million per event.
2. Major disaster declaration The president will make a major
disaster declaration if he or she determines that the damage has
overwhelmed the combined capabilities of state and local authorities,
and that federal assistance is required. This type of declaration
enables the state to choose from a variety of federal assistance
programs to perform emergency work, restore critical services, and
rebuild the local infrastructure and economy.
After the president makes the declaration, the government will
coordinate its actions through a Joint Field Office (JFO) led by a
Principal Federal Official (PFO), with support from the Federal
Coordinating Officer (FCO), State Coordinating Officer (SCO), and other
officials who have statutory authority for the outcome of the response
and recovery efforts. The government may deploy an Emergency Response
Team (ERT) prior to the establishment of the JFO to address urgent
issues affecting public safety (more on these offices and personnel
below).
Part 5: Recovery Function and Federal Assistance Programs
The best-prepared communities are ready to begin recovery efforts
immediately after the initial response to a disaster. Often, a fine line
distinguishes the end of response from the beginning of recovery. For
the purposes of clarification, we will define response as the immediate actions taken to save lives, reduce property loss, and address basic citizen needs (food, shelter, etc.).
Recovery includes the actions taken to rebuild infrastructure
(power, roads, bridges, etc.), repair/rebuild homes, and reestablish
businesses and the local economy. Recovery is long-term in focus, and
aims to restore the community as closely as possible to its previous
state. The recovery phase may also include mitigation actions taken to
prevent or reduce losses from future occurrences of the event.
The recovery function is the longest of all the phases of the
emergency management cycle (except for those ongoing functions), and
also the most costly. Restoring homes, buildings, and infrastructure
would quickly empty the pockets of local homeowners, businesses, and
governments if they had to cover the costs themselves. Recognizing that
federal agencies must step in for a successful recovery, Congress has
included provisions in the Stafford Act to provide financial support to
individuals and governments. Once a presidential disaster declaration
has been issued, local groups can obtain federal financial and technical
assistance. Federal, state, and local governments; volunteer
organizations; and the private sector can also form partnerships in
enacting disaster recovery operations.