|
|
Institute for Crisis, Disaster, and Risk Management Crisis and Emergency Management Newsletter Website |
|
|
|
February
2004
Volume 6
- Number 1 |
|
|
Related Sites:
|
Report on State Homeland
Security
Structure Study by National Governor’s Association Bryan Koon As
a result of
the attacks of September 11, 2001 and the subsequent creation of the
United
States Department of Homeland Security, the governors of the 50 states
and 5
U.S. Territories created their own homeland security organizations. These organizations were designed to liaison
with their federal counterpart and to address homeland security issues
in their
own jurisdiction. This study provides a
summary of each state’s organizational structure. Each
state and
territory has created their organizations based on their own needs and
resources. As a result, there is no
standard and in some cases, little similarity across the spectrum of
programs. Some states have chosen to
create new
organizations to address the possibility of terrorism within their
borders;
others have chosen to integrate the responsibility into already
existing
agencies. In some states the programs
are designed as an information and intelligence clearinghouse; in
others, they
are designed to oversee and monitor all disasters, both natural and
man-made. There
is also a
split in the philosophy of how who should be in charge of Homeland
Security. In a large number of states,
the program is weighted heavily towards law enforcement supervision,
with
governors appointing either the Adjutant General of their National
Guard unit
(10 states) or a senior police official (7 states) as their Homeland
Security
Advisor. Other states, particularly
those with smaller populations, chose to incorporate the Homeland
Security
Advisor position into their emergency management program in order to
avoid
bureaucratic redundancies. Seven states
(IA, MS, MT, NH, UT, ND, and SD) all chose to utilize this structure,
and named
the director of their state’s Emergency Management Agency to the
position. The
remainder of
the states did not utilize an existing agency to supervise Homeland
Security;
instead they created a hybrid organization to administer the program. The roles of these organizations vary
greatly, from small councils designed to advise the governor or
Homeland
Security Advisor to large task forces made up of multiple agencies who
have
responsibility for the entire spectrum of planning, training, and
response. Although
the
dissimilarities among these plans makes it difficult to neatly package
states’
response to the Homeland Security challenge, there are numerous
benefits to the
creation of the programs in this manner. First,
it allows each state to create a system that
addresses their
states’ unique threats, geography, population, and resources. Secondly, regardless of the size or scope of
the organization, it has achieved the effect of unifying previously
fragmented
sections of the states’ emergency programs. The
benefits of preparing and training for terrorist
incidents within
their borders will also be apparent during the response to future
natural
disasters. References:
www.nga.org, State Homeland
Security Organizational
Structures |