EOP is a process whereby a facility or an institution prepares to respond and recover from hazards. This paper is a review the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) EOP, i.e., the Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101- Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans and compares the guide with another plan for developing high-quality emergency operations for the houses of worship.
Part 1: The Review of the FEMA EOP Guide
Purpose and Scope
The plan is to provide FEMA with the guidance based on the planning and the development of EOP. It demonstrates that emergency plans are linked to promoting efforts regarding protection, prevention, response, recovery, and mitigation. The document also encourages the homeland security and emergency manages to include local communities when attending to the risks that might affect them. The guide also contains methods employed by the national policies and lessons that have been learned from past disasters. It provides the planners with ways of conducting the community-based planning that incorporates entire communities in the process, develops a scheme through the risk analysis, identifies techniques from all levels of government, and prioritizes efforts that smooth transitions from the development to the execution of hazards ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1).
The guide serves as the basis of an adequate response to any hazard that threatens a particular region. It facilitates the coordination with the federal government in times of emergencies that require the implementation of the national response framework. Concepts from the disaster research and the day-to-day experiences are incorporated into the document. The guide discusses the steps to be employed when producing an EOP, the possible EOP structure, and the contents of initial planning and annexes. It defines the doctrine of the national planning, revises the previous guide plans conveying an understanding of EOP, and provides a guide that includes all homeland security missions ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1).
Developing EOP Guide
The document was developed by the inputs of the state, territorial, tribal, and local officials from across the United States who determined the elements of the plan. The CPG initiative is an effort by FEMA that enhances, modernizes, and contributes to the structure of the national planning.
The Inclusion of “Whole Community” in the EOP Guide
The document requires that EOP should be community-based incorporating an entire population of a city. The planning efforts ensure that the composition of a community is well-understood by the emergency managers such as persons with disability and children to guarantee that everyone is included. The available resources and needs of a population will determine shelter operations, evacuations, and family reunifications; therefore, a community profile is essential for establishing a feasible course of actions. The composition of the businesses in the area, household pets, and services animals are also included in the planning ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-1).
All the stakeholders in the community are required to participate in the planning process as a way of representing and involving the whole community. The representation comprises of the departments and the agencies of the jurisdiction, businesses, civic leaders, and other organizations including faith-based and humanitarian entities ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-2).
Planning Considerations in the Guide
1. Prevention is vital since it comprises of actions that mitigate risks of incidents caused by humans, for instance, terrorism. Secondary and opportunistic events can also be reduced after a first event has taken place ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-8).
2. Protection eliminates threats that may be posed to people, the property, and the environment. Critical resources and infrastructure that are important to a community such as the public health and safety must also be considered for protection. Such planning involves measures taken to cover assets from the exposure and the distraction. The actions may take place before, during, and after an incident ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-8).
3. The response involves the activities that take place immediately after an incident has occurred to salvage and sustain lives, cater for basic needs of people, and reduce losses, damages, and effects of the hazard on the environment and the essential infrastructure. The response planning minimizes the impacts of a disaster psychologically, socially, physically, and economically ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-9).
Relationship between Federal, State and Local EOP’s
The planning of EOPs must be vertically integrated to ensure that there is a common operational focus at all levels of government. Departments and all supporting agencies at every stage must fit into a jurisdiction’s operational concepts via a horizontal integration. The national guidance and consensus standards require that all EOPs should be coordinated and integrated at all government levels with the critical infrastructural planning. Vertical integration involves planning up and down the various stages of government. The horizontal preparation includes the incorporation operations across a region and allows support agencies and departments to devise plans that meet the local needs of a community ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-6).
The plans are synchronized through phasing, branches, horizons, and forward and reverse planning. Phasing includes routine operations, incident response, heightening awareness, mobilizing, activating, and deploying personnel. Time, geographical locations, resources, and distances define the phase length. Branches are usually options that are built into the EOPs that are important because a hazard like a tsunami can change its course and affect the way response activities are conducted. Therefore, it is critical for every significant contingency to have options allowing the anticipation of different requirements and the course of action ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-7).
A planning horizon is a time focus that is employed in the planning effort since it is difficult to determine when incidents might occur, and therefore, the horizon is expressed in months and years at the time of planning. The plan must have broad concepts to allow for quick flexible operations because planners have no specific knowledge of how a future incident will take place. The forward planning begins with current conditions that are assumed to have taken place, establishing potential responses, and forwarding them in time. Reverse planning, on the other hand, commences with the end in mind working backward to identify the necessary objectives and related responses to achieving the end-result. However, in practice, the two methods are usually combined ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-7).
The federal plan elaborates what the federal government will do in providing the emergency assistance to a state and its local governments that have been affected by a disaster that is large-scale. It also highlights the organizational structure for assisting the areas affected. The plan, thus, guides federal agencies in responding and recovery actions. The national program assumes that a situation has exceeded or will surpass the state and local government’s capability of response and recovery ("SLG 101: Guide for All-Hazard Emergency Operations Planning” 7-3).
The regional response plans supplement the federal program and provide the specific details of an areas response and recovery activities that may be used by the federal departments and their agencies in supporting the efforts of a national response. The regional plan also ensures a connection between state and federal programs. It outlines the responsibilities of the federal departments in the mobilization and the deployment of resources in response and recovery efforts. The relationship between the federal and state agencies is also given. It contains information of response mechanisms, resources, and capabilities available for the states through the federal government ("SLG 101: Guide for All-Hazard Emergency Operations Planning” 7-3).
The state’s plan has a broader mission in emergency response as it covers matters and functions that focus on the direction, the control, and the warning member of the public about an impending emergency in addition to providing resources that satisfy needs that have not been met locally. The matters omitted in the federal response mission and are not included in the national response plan. The states do not have the additional responsibility to have federal assistance while some have chosen to mirror the federal response plans in their emergency response schemes. The states do not have to channel the federal aid because their EOP contents have a response action of a large-scale disaster and emergencies that can affect people and property ("SLG 101: Guide for All-Hazard Emergency Operations Planning” 7-5).
Formats for a Proposed EOP
The organization of the document requires that sections and subsections title should be understandable and help users to find what they need to use. The components should be revisable without the need to rewrite. Progression is imperative as each element should follow the previous ones so that readers can grasp the rationale of the information contained therein and its sequence ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 3-2).
The consistency of the elements contained in the document should be outstanding, and the information should be adaptable for the use in times of unanticipated incidents. The format should be compatible with other jurisdictions such as the state and federal government. The plan should be inclusive and address the needs of all members of a community including persons with disability, children, and those with a limited English proficiency ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 3-4).
There are three types of an EOP plan format, and the first is the traditional functional format, which has three major sections that include the basic plan, functional annexes, and hazard-specific annexes. The basic part contains introductory materials such as promulgation documents, the approval, the implementation, records of changes and distribution, and the table of content. The second part comprises of the purpose, the scope, the situation overview, and the assumption. The basic plan provides the general information about the region’s preparedness and response strategies, gives a description of the expected disasters, outlines the roles and the responsibilities of agencies, and highlights how the plan of a region remains relevant ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 3-4).
The second part is the functional annexes, which varies by a jurisdiction’s core functions. However, there are some commons elements, which include directions, control, and coordination. The continuity of operations, communication, transport, and warning together with the emergency public information, the public protection, and the public health are also included in this part. Logistics management, the resource support, and the long-term community recovery are among others. The annexes are chapters that focus on individual missions describing the actions, the roles, and the responsibilities of stakeholders. They explain how jurisdiction manages its functions before, during, and after the emergency and identify the various agencies that implement the former ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 3-4).
The third part is the hazard, threat, or incident specific annexes, which vary from one region to another depending on the calamities that occur there. Some of the elements contained in this format are hurricanes, tornado, earthquakes, floods, hazardous material incidents, radiological, and biological and terrorism incidents. The part describes the policies, the responsibilities, and the situations of different risks explaining the unique procedures of a particular hazard, threat, or incident ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 3-4).
The second format is the Emergency Support Format (ESF), which has four parts. The first is the essential one that gives an overview of a regions system of the emergency management. It explains capabilities, requirements, and threats of an emergency management structure. It reviews the normal execution of a mission for each phase of an emergency and agencies that control the operations contained therein. The significant components of this part are the introductory material, the purpose, the scope, the situation, the overview, the assumptions, concepts of activities, organizations, and the assignment of responsibility ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 3-6).
The second part is the annexes that identify the format coordinators and primary support agencies for various functions. The section highlights the missions that are expected to be executed for each phase and the task to be undertaken by the members involved. The ESF annexes include transport, communication, firefighting, emergency management, public works, and engineering among others ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 3-6).
The third part is the support annexes that describe the frameworks within which the identified stakeholders execute the common emergency strategies. Such examples include the warning, the population protection, the financial management, the private sector coordination, and the volunteer and donation management. The hazard-threat or the incident-specific annexes deal with policies, responsibilities, and situations of a particular threat ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 3-6).
The third format is the agency/department-focused one, which addresses the tasks of all organizations involved. It contains necessary plans that provide an overview of a region’s ability to prevent, respond, and recover from disasters. The separate lead agencies and support sections include the functions of emergencies completed by various departments, agencies, and organizations. The hazard specific procedures provide the unique strategies to be employed in particular disasters. The format is for the specific actions of different agencies ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 3-8).
Six Steps of the Planning Process
1. Forming a collaborative planning team. The efforts of a group aid in the definition of the roles that will be played during an emergency, and it will assist the participating groups to understand and accept their positions. A planning team builds and expands the relationships that produce innovation and creativity, and the approach establishes a planning routine ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 4-2).
2. Understanding the situation. In this stage, information about a hazard is collected through a risk assignment process. The analysis assigns a value to the risks to determine priorities and develop a course of actions and a decision making that is well-informed ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 4-7).
3. Determining goals and objectives of the plan. Establishing operational priorities identifies what is to be accomplished to realize the desired results. The scenarios ought to be realistic and should be tailored to a region’s threat and data risk ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 4-12).
4. Developing the plan. The step generates, compares, and selects the possible solutions to the objectives and the goals determined in the third step. A single plan provides for an inadequate response method. Therefore, a program should contain two or more strategies for responding to emergencies ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 4-12).
5. Preparing the plan; reviewing and approving the proposed EOP. Writing a plan turns the development of actions into an EOP. Reviewing the policy to determine its conformity to the applicable rules, requirements, and standards required for its practical usefulness is also a part of the step. The approval and dissemination stage is for the elected officials to promulgate the plan ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 4-13).
6. Implementing and maintaining the plan. Managers are required to disseminate the plan and train their personnel to have the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed for performing the tasks identified by the project ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 4-20).
Three Types of Hazards that Are Identified in the EOP Guide
1. Natural hazards are events caused by forces that are extraneous to a human in the natural environment. These types of disasters cannot be managed and are usually interrelated. The hazards can occur without causing the damage to humans and their natural habitat. However, when a hazard and its development intersect, there can be the significant damage to the environment that will trigger a natural disaster ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-8).
Examples include the drought, which is a period of the below average rainfall, which is more prolonged and severe. The second type of the disaster is the earthquake, which is the shaking of the ground caused by volcanic activities or movements around the geological faults. The third is the tornado, which is a violent windstorm that is characterized by twisting funnel-shaped clouds ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-8).
2. Technological hazards involve fabricated catastrophes that pose a threat to the public and the environment such as lethal chemical agents and munitions and radiological incidents. The events include materials created by humans that represent a unique hazard to people and the environment ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-8).
3. Adversarial human-caused hazards are additional ones that are created by men intentionally or by accident. The events are identified through a country’s hazard analysis, for example, mass casualties, the plane crash, the school violence, terrorism, and cyber-attacks ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 1-8).
Part 2: The Comparison of the EOP Guide for Developing High-Quality Emergency Operations Plans for the Houses of Worship and the FEMA EOP Planning Guide
The house of worship EOP is a FEMA emergency plan for churches, mosques, temples, and other distinctive settings where congregants form a common bond. The purpose of the guide is to provide the house of worship with the information concerning the emergency plan for any hazard or threat that they might face. It highlights the actions that can be taken before, during, and after an incident to reduce the effects of a risk on the property and fatalities and encourage the houses to form their EOP (Federal Emergency Management Agency 1).
The introduction suggests that many people feel that places of worship are safe from hazards, but violence in such settings has been witnessed in addition to natural disasters. Houses of worship can take steps to plan for emergencies in collaboration with other community partners. The team formulation of EOP plans for these institutions is advised to use the houses of the worship guide (Federal Emergency Management Agency 1).
The EOP follows the format recommended by the FEMA EOP guide because it is designed for a range of hazards. The principles require that leadership in the community should support planning; all types of risks must be considered together with all settings and times; there should be accessible and functional needs of all congregants; and a collaborative process should be followed (Federal Emergency Management Agency 2-3).
The panning principle requires that the strategizing should use the assessment for the customization of EOP according to a building’s level and structure and consider all settings at all times. The planning process should be flexible and adaptable to accommodate the unique features and characteristics of a house of worship. It should involve community partners, the jurisdiction’s staff of emergency management, nongovernmental organizations, the first responders, the local community, and the mental health mangers (Federal Emergency Management Agency 2-3).
The planning process of the house of worship EOP guide is similar to that of FEMA since it contains forming a collaborative planning team that identifies the core planning group, forms a common framework, defines and assigns roles and responsibilities, and determines a regular schedule of meetings (Federal Emergency Management Agency 4).
The second step is the understanding of the situation, which requires assessments of threats and hazards likely to be experienced, the analysis of risk, and prioritizing the threats identified. The third step is the determination of goals and objectives where the desired outcomes are implied (Federal Emergency Management Agency 4).
The fourth is the plan development where the courses of action to be taken are identified. The fifth is the plan preparation, review, and approval phase where the scheme is formatted, written, revised, and shared. The final step is the implementation and the maintenance where stakeholders are trained and the plan is exercised, reviewed, and maintained (Federal Emergency Management Agency 4).
The format comprises of the basic plan parts that review the houses of worship in terms of operations before, during, and after their occurrence. The fundamental component consists of introductory materials that enhance the accountability with various community stakeholders such as first responders, mental health officials, and local emergency managers making the plan easier to use (Federal Emergency Management Agency 16).
Functional annexes are the second section of the format, and they pay attention to operational functions, and the development of courses of action to be taken such as evacuation, shelter, and recovery. Key aspects that should be considered in developing the high-quality and comprehensive EOP is described in this section. The hazard-threat or incident-specific part pertains to particular disasters that have been identified in a community (Federal Emergency Management Agency 22).
Top Two Hazards Identified by the EOP Planners
1. Active shooter situations are incidences where individuals are actively engaged in taking lives or attempting to do so in an area that is confined and populated. Places of worships have also had their fair share of active shootings. In 2012, there were six casualties and four injuries in Oak Creek at a Sikh temple Wisconsin. In 2008, two people were murdered and seven others wounded in Knoxville, Tennessee at a Unitarian church (Federal Emergency Management Agency 23).
2. Severe storms. Disasters like hurricanes and thunderstorms are different events by nature. However, they both can result in damage from flooding and high winds. Weather events are preceded by forecasts that provide time for last minute preparations. In such an instance, the priority is saving the human lives and protecting the property through the effective use of the house of worship, state, and federal resources. Central points of communication are critical at such a time to facilitate the proper decision-making and response operations. Hurricane Harvey caused the Lakewood church to close its doors since it could not serve as a shelter due to the severity of the storm. If a religious institution can be a safe place, their EOP should contain evacuation procedures and emergency supplies (Sheepdog Church Security).
The Non-Emergency Stakeholders or Participants Mentioned in the EOP and Their Roles
The leadership of the house of worship implies the leaders in such places that are responsible for running and organizing the functioning of the buildings and their populations. They are responsible for safety, for instance, hiring security guards to search people at the entrance and the spiritual growth of the congregants and act as the link between the congregation to the local government officials and agencies through the representation.
Mentioning the “Whole Community”
The community spectrum has been mentioned regarding the whole house of worship. The planning is required to provide the access and the functional needs to the entire community including those who attend regularly, guests, staff, persons with disabilities, and representatives of different ethnic, racial, and other diverse backgrounds (Federal Emergency Management Agency 3).
The Emergency Responder and the Role in the EOP
The Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is a group that provides the equipment, the personnel, and the facilities for adequate health services to victims. The focus is on providing the timely medical care or emergency to minimize or eliminate needless mortalities or morbidity that is long-term. Their function involves the access to medical care and providing services in the community, en route to a hospital, and upon the arrival at a health facility. The world health organization regards the EMS as an essential part of any functional healthcare system. The unit is the first point of contact between any healthcare institution and a person in an emergency and with injuries that are life-threatening; besides, they have expanded their roles to deal with medical traumas. The American model of the EMS is based on the scoop and rum philosophy where a patient has to be quickly taken to a hospital with very few interventions before arriving (Al-Shaqs 321).
The Incident Commander
The incident command is a tool of control and coordination during emergencies that can be used by an individual who has been put in charge. In the setup, every person has one supervisor with each being overseeing up to seven people. The incident command provides a consistent framework for managing incidents regardless of the situation. It is used to control all domestic events ("Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans” 4-2).
The incident commander is at the top of the chain issuing orders, assigning duties, and appointing other commanders depending on the level and the degree of an emergency. A commander is responsible for setting a post and an action plan to be conducted during a crisis. The policy dictates the responsibilities of people involved in the chain of communication and the mitigation of more damage or harm. The incident command is not a rank structure; therefore, the appointment of a commander is incident driven. However, it requires an individual that suits the position being highly trained and skilled for the job and is chosen according to the needs of an organization ("Who’s in Charge Here? The Incident Command System").
References
Al-Shaqs, Sultan. "Models of International Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Systems." Oman Medical Journal, vol. 25, no. 4, 2010, pp. 320–323.
"Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans. Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101." Fema, 2010, https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1828-25045-0014/cpg_101_comprehensive_preparedness_guide_developing_and_maintaining_emergency_operations_plans_2010.pdf Accessed 26 Apr. 2018.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. "Guide for Developing HighQuality Emergency Operations Plans for Houses of Worship." Homeland Security, 2013, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Developing_EOPs_for_Houses_of_Worship_FINAL.PDF Accessed 26 Apr. 2018.
"SLG 101: Guide for All-Hazard Emergency Operations Planning. Linking Federal and State Emergency Response Operations." Fema, n.d., https://www.fema.gov/pdf/plan/7-ch.pdf Accessed 26 Apr. 2018
"Who’s in Charge Here? The Incident Command System." Disasterdoc, 2012, https://disasterdoc.net/2012/11/05/whos-in-charge-here-the-incident-command-system/ Accessed 26 Apr. 2018.
