Part of successful emergency response is the need to effectively communicate and coordinate actions among the various response organizations.  During the disaster of September 11th, a multitude of organizations converged on the World Trade Center to help in the recovery efforts.  Some of the organizations that were present are part of the National Volunteer Organizations Active in Disasters (NVOAD)*. 

NVOAD is an organization that coordinates the efforts of the 34 member response organizations.  Some of the more notable members are the American Red Cross and the Salvation Army, but the spectrum of membership ranges from pragmatic volunteer groups to faith based organizations, such as the Mennonite Disaster Service. 

Ben Curran is a Program Specialist for FEMA’s Office of Readiness, Response and Recovery.  Mr. Curran is the Liaison responsible with coordinating disaster response efforts with NVOAD.  I recently interviewed Ben to find out how FEMA and NVOAD worked together to response to the attack on the World Trade Center on September 11th. 

KE: I noticed that there are many members of NVOAD; do you deal with these members individually, or through the Board of Directors?
BC: I work with individual members of NVOAD.  My contact with the organizations varies, with most of my time being spent with the larger members, such as the Red Cross and the Salvation Army.  The overall level of interaction between FEMA and the NVOADs is very high; things have still not slowed down after 09/11. 

KE: How did FEMA coordinate their response to the 09/11 attacks with NVOAD members?
BC: We had a conference call on 09/13 with all the NVOAD members.  Technically, our Region 2 liaison Ken Curtain would have set up the call, but he was working in the Caribbean, so I coordinated the call.  Once Ken got back, he became the “super liaison” between FEMA and the NVOAD members who responded.  Ken called all the organizations once he set up shop, and also coordinated responses with several of the large New York based human service organizations such as the New York Times’ neediest cases fund, who contributed significant resources to the disaster.   Ken also coordinated with other FEMA Regional Liaisons; several were brought in to help with the coordination, while some were diverted to the Capital to help with the Pentagon disaster. 

KE: How effective was the communication between FEMA and NVOAD?
BC: It was for the most part good, though there were variances depending on the size or response experience of the organization.  The sheer magnitude of the disaster combined with the large number of responders definitely made communication challenging.  One of the communication successes would have to be information sharing; the NVOADS did a good job getting information out about FEMA’s basic program services and how to apply for them. 

KE: What type of services did the NVOADs provide?
BC: Response services ranged from disaster cleanup, human services, such as food and clothing, to emotional or spiritual care.  One of the most notable events was the immediate need for the latter; there was a great demand for spiritual or pastoral support after the disaster. 

KE: Does FEMA provide funding to NVOAD? 
BC: No, the only funding FEMA provides to them is a contribution for their annual conference, which is being held this year in Oklahoma City, on March 17-20th. 

KE: I had noticed that their annual conference was planned in Oklahoma City this year, was the lessons learned during the Oklahoma City bombing valuable during the 09/11 attacks?
BC: One of the lessons learned at Oklahoma City that was used in New York was coordination of relief funds.  After a disaster many organizations create relief funds for victims, it’s important to try to have some coordination and information sharing between the players to make sure the funds are being properly utilized.  One of the individuals who coordinated funds at Oklahoma City was flown to New York City to provide “best practices” concerning this.  While the New York relief funds coordination is still not perfect, there was some improvement as a result of the input. 

KE: What lessons were learned during the 09/11 attacks, and how will NVOAD and FEMA respond to these experiences?
BC: We learned that too much of something is not always a good thing.  There were far too many unaffiliated volunteers at the site; this created a lot of confusion from an organization standpoint and compromised the response efficiency to a certain degree.  We are looking into providing identification badges for future disasters.  Another problem was too much material; truckloads of material were showing up, the responders were literally tripping over it.  We are looking to develop a process to categorize and store goods and materials at future disaster sites so we can have access to it when we need it. 

* For more information on NVOADs, go to http://www.nvoad.org/