emse232

By Alan Petro

Preparedness is a fundamental component of emergency management, one that is based on the planning, training, and exercising involved in readying for an expected threat. Preparedness together with emergency management has been shaped by events throughout recent history. The latest event to alter how we approach preparedness was the September 11th terrorist attack. This event generated a shift in priorities within FEMA, reminiscent of the 1950's, and the days of civil defense.

Disaster response has its foundation in the civil defense program. Following World War II, the US feared that other countries, namely the Soviet Union, would develop their own nuclear weapons and ultimately mount an attack against the United States. As a result, Civil Defense was brought to the forefront of the political agenda. Preparedness at that time consisted of mass evacuation plans for populations in major cities as well as those living in close proximity to production facilities, power plants, and other key infrastructure points. This was the era of community air raid sirens and bomb shelters. School children were drilled in the basics of "duck and cover" and individuals were given tax credits for building bomb shelters in their homes.

The 1960's and 70's saw an increase in the number of emergencies and natural disasters affecting the United States. This prompted Governors to pressure the Federal government into allowing for dual-use of civil defense funds and equipment. For the first time, civil defense monies were used for natural disaster preparedness.

In the late 1970's, States were confronted not with traditional natural disasters, but with disasters and hazards associated with nuclear power plants and toxic materials. With these new hazards came the overwhelming task of dealing with dozens of different Federal agencies.   The Federal Disaster Relief effort was further complicated when States had to incorporate their own programs and policies with those of the Federal government. In a move to streamline the process, the National Governor's Association sought to decrease the number of agencies States were forced to work with and solicited President Jimmy Carter to consolidate the various agencies that handled emergency preparedness and civil defense. As a result, in 1979 the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was established.   While the various agencies were now under one roof, they still operated in a fragmented fashion. Those who joined FEMA with a civil defense and national security background continued to function by planning for a nuclear attack and mass evacuations. On the other hand, their counterparts worked with States and local governments in preparing for natural disasters.

Once FEMA and began to apply the "Comprehensive Emergency Management" (CEM) doctrine in the 1970's there was a further shift away from civil defense planning. CEM was developed by the National Governors Association and introduced the basic concepts of the division of emergency activity into four "phases": Mitigation, Preparedness, Response and Recovery. These phases could then be applied across any type of disaster, either man-made or natural.   The implementation of CEM also allowed for the management of responses to all types of disasters and emergencies through the coordination of multiple entities.
The development of the Integrated Emergency Management System (IEMS) was also key to the evolution of Preparedness. IEMS emphasized the application of "all hazard" planning for responding to disasters.   Eventually this approach led FEMA to allow States to focus on natural and technological disasters rather than just having to waste resources on preparing for a nuclear attack. Unfortunately, severe natural disasters such as Hurricane Hugo in 1989 and Hurricane Andrew in 1992 continued further exposing deficiencies in the agency’s handling of natural disasters.

It was after President Clinton's appointment of James Lee Witt as Director of FEMA in that the agency began to turn around. Under Director Witt, States were for the first time allowed to use agency funds to develop programs geared specifically for disasters to which they felt most vulnerable. It was also under Director Witt that the Federal Response Plan was implemented. The Federal Response Plan serves to coordinate federal assistance and resources in the event a State or local government is overwhelmed by a disaster.

During the 1990's FEMA launched numerous initiatives that fell within the scope of Preparedness. Programs such as the Community & Family Preparedness (CFP) and Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) were launched.   The CFP offered the public an opportunity to develop the basic skills necessary to protect themselves and families in the event of a disaster. CFP taught people how to develop and execute an individual family disaster plan.   CERT trained people in skills such as fire safety, first aid, and CPR. Participants were encouraged to form community-based teams with the purpose of aiding neighbors if an emergency occurred in which first responders such as the EMS or the police were overwhelmed.
OVERVIEW OF POST - SEPTEMBER 11TH
The discipline of emergency management and its public perception changed on September 11th. Like other Federal agencies, FEMA's focus shifted to homeland defense and preparing for future terrorist attacks.   FEMA's Office of National Preparedness, established in May 2001, was quickly given the responsibility of insuring that the nation's first responders would be trained and equipped to respond to future terrorist attacks.

President Bush's $3.5 billion budget also symbolized the increased significance of preparedness in the overall emergency management response effort.(1) This was the first time such a large amount of money was awarded to first responders. Portions of this fund are to go to the development of plans specifically addressing the threat of terrorism. Numerous training programs will also be developed focusing on various terrorism scenarios including the use of weapons of mass destruction. Funds have also been set aside to launch an exercise program specifically designed to improve response capabilities, to practice mutual aid, and to identify areas for improvement. According to a July 15, 2002 publication, (2) funds have even been allocated for FEMA to begin planning for large-scale temporary housing capable of holding millions of people who may be displaced after a nuclear, biological or chemical attack.

Following 9/11, Federal government collaboration has increased. This led to the Department of Justice (DOJ) and FEMA combining their first responder grants to States. Prior to 9/11, FEMA's grants focused on planning while the DOJ's funds applied solely to equipment. This move by the DOJ and FEMA has streamlined the process, giving States easier access to grants and at the same time, improving the States’ preparedness capabilities.

In an effort to capitalize on the "get involved" grass roots enthusiasm present among the American public, the Bush Administration has established the Citizen’s Corps program.   The program is coordinated through FEMA and builds upon existing programs already in place that deal with crime prevention, natural disaster preparedness and public health response. Citizen’s Corps takes participants from groups such as FEMA's Community Emergency Response Teams, Health & Human Services' Medical Reserve Corps, DOJ's TIPS and Neighborhood Watch Programs and works with local government, law enforcement, educational institutions, the private sector, and volunteers.   In addition, funds have been allocated for the expansion of FEMA's CERTs across the country. (3)
ANALYSIS
When looking at how preparedness functions today one sees the similarities dating back to the 1950's and the days of civil defense. Today, like in the 50's, we are focusing vital resources on preparing for possible disasters which may cause mass casualty, but which have low probability in occurring. The Bush Administration has dedicated millions of dollars to planning, training, and exercising for potential terrorist attacks similar to fifty years ago when the threat was the Soviets. Few question the need to better prepare for possible terrorist attacks. The concern is that terrorism will overwhelm the agency and it will come at the expense of more probable disasters such as hurricanes and floods.   FEMA's Director Joe Allbaugh has reassured lawmakers on Capitol Hill that FEMA will maintain its all-hazards approach and not focus solely on terrorism.

Our overall preparedness capability has improved since 9/11.   Much of this is due to a substantial increase in existing programs as well as the creation of new programs that are not necessarily exclusively focused on terrorism. Budgets in all areas of preparedness, including planning, training, and exercising have been increased.   In addition, the 3.5 billion dollar grant the Bush Administration allocated to first responders has made this purchase new equipment possible. (4)

Cooperation between States has improved since 9/11. FEMA has taken an active role in facilitating the establishment of mutual aid arrangement among the States, creating a nationwide response network able to respond to an array of threats. There has also been an increased effort to provide the public with skills that will improve their own preparedness capability by way of the creation of Citizen’s Corp and with the expansion of others such as CERT and CAR.

According to the Bush Administration, FEMA's role in the new Department of Homeland Security will be as the primary grant giving agency to first responders as well as the lead agency preparing the country for future terrorist attacks. Director Allbraugh has reassured members on the Hill that FEMA will maintain its strong ties with the States and local governments. (5)

RECOMMENDATIONS
It is vital that any future initiatives that fall within the scope of preparedness not only apply to the threat of terrorism, but also serve to prepare for man-made or natural hazards.   One possible initiative could be to establish national protocols for the sharing of GIS data to serve as a strategic planning tool for disasters. GIS data would allow emergency managers to begin to formulate training and exercises specific to their areas of responsibility. For example, in the event of an attack on a commercial building, first responders would have access data identifying the location of hazardous materials or the floor plan for the building while en route to the emergency.   This data would come from city, county, State, Federal agencies, telecommunication companies, utilities, businesses, and other organizations.   Presently the Federal government itself has deployed GIS in most agencies and departments.

Taking an example from the 1950's, the Federal government could establish an emergency management program that is taught in school. Here children would be given the opportunity to learn basic preparedness skills appropriate to their age range as well as the types of hazards faced in their home State.

The Federal government should launch a campaign to promote the establishment of mutual aid agreements between private and public sector organizations. This would enable both sectors to come together to identify common threats as well as fund preventative measures to reduce potential damage from these threats.

Another area that should be improved is the sharing of sensitive information. Governors, fire and police chiefs have indicated that lack of sensitive information prevents them from accurately being able to assess terrorist threats, which in turn hinders their preparedness capability. The National Governor’s Association has stated that the absence of threat information has the potential to affect their ability to effectively deploy the National Guard, as well as putting first responders at a disadvantage by not providing them with the proper education and training necessary to handle such threats.

CONCLUSION

Many people consider FEMA's response to 9/11 successful in spite of the fact that most of their previous experience had been with natural disasters. This demonstrates that its approach to preparedness, which has served the agency well in the past, can function in a post 9/11 world. Regardless of the types of future disasters, the people of the United States still require and expect a strong emergency management program.