Emergency Management Response

According to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), there are many factors that will affect the direction of emergency management in the coming years. These can be classified as global challenges, global opportunities, national challenges, national opportunities, professional challenges, and professional opportunities. Global Challenges include some issues like global climate change, increasing population and population density, increasing resource scarcities, rising income inequality, and increasing risk aversion. Global Opportunities has to do with increased scientific understanding of the hazards and societal responses, as well as revolutionary technologies. National Challenges involves increasing urbanization and hazard exposure, interdependencies in infrastructure, continued emphasis on growth, rising costs of disaster recovery, increasing population diversity, terrorist threats, low priority of emergency management, legal liability, and intergovernmental tensions. Due to these factors that will affect the direction of emergency management in the coming years, there is need for us at emergency management division to adjust operational plans to meet these challenges and especially changes emanating from constant changes expected in technology and other threats we face.

The various local, state, and federal emergency management systems of the United States suffered a crude awakening in the decade of the 2000s. Systems expected to hold up were put to the test and failed to prepare for disaster, mitigate the damage, and, in some instances, actually hampered responses in life-or-death situations. Worse, all failings were highlighted in an age of global communication and mass media, on display first whether a man-made incident like September 11th attacks or natural disaster like Hurricane Katrina. The decade found the complacent government failing to maintain modern emergency management practices, stimulating began a series of doctrinal upgrades and training improvements. Yet, no matter the bureaucracy, writings, or money thrown at a problem, the first responder to the incident has and will continue to influence the outcome. While the individual responder stands as the most important part of

This chapter provides an overview that describes the basic types of hazards threatening the United States and provides definitions for some basic terms such as hazards, emergencies, and disasters. The chapter also provides a brief history of emergency management in the federal government and a general description of the current emergency management system—including the basic functions performed by local emergency managers. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the all-hazards approach and its implications for local emergency management.

In the article Law enforcement lessons from Hurricane Katrina it states how the local law enforcement should take a greater responsibility when planning for a disaster. Law enforcement at a local level can be considered the first line to a management team. They also know their city, or district, better than any other agency; therefore, by having a plan already, it could reduce the panic and confusion for civilians as well as, other agencies who provided assistance. By having a plan for a “worst case scenario” whether that be physically training, or learning through disaster which had occurred in the past, agencies could improve their efficiency during a crisis. One of the reasons it is crucial law enforcement personnel receive this type of training is also because of the public. If the public see that an agency they are supposed to rely on does not know what to do, it impacts the confidence they have on that agency for future disasters. In conclusion, a way to implement an effective response is to focus on local law enforcement agencies as they would be the first responders to a

The history of emergency management dates back in 1803 when a great fire struck Portsmouth city in New Hampshire. In response to this firebreak out, the Congress passed into law the Congress Act, 1803 to compensate the Portsmouth merchants. The Portsmouth city fire breakout and the congress response to the disaster set a precedent, which was applied in United States in management of emergencies like the 1835 terrific fire of New york city, fire break out at Chicago in 1871, the Galveston hurricane of 1900, and the 1906 San Francisco horrible earthquake up to mid-20th century (Rubin, 2012).

In the years after the 9/11 tragedy, the United States continues to face risks from all forms of major disasters, from potentially dangerous terrorist attacks to catastrophic acts of nature. Professionals in the fields of emergency management and homeland security have responsibilities for ensuring that all levels of government, urban areas and communities, nongovernmental organizations, businesses, and individual citizens are prepared to deal with such hazards though actions that reduce risks to lives and property. Regrettably, the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the nation's ability to deal with disasters is unnecessarily challenged by the absence of a common understanding on how these fields are related in the workforce and educational

This is a review of Emergency Management: The American Experience 1900-2010 by Claire B. Rubin and Butler (2012), chapters 1 and 2. Emergency management at the federal level was nonexistent before 1950 when the Federal Disaster relief Act was passed. Disaster relief was the responsibility of state and volunteer agencies like the Red Cross. Several disasters paved the way for emergency management. The Galveston Hurricane of 1900, the San Frisco Earthquake of 1906, and the Great Influenza Pandemic of 1918 were the disasters that laid the foundation for the 1950 Federal Disaster relief Act (Butler, 2012, pg. 17).

Our world is complex there has always been and always will be disasters that can happen anywhere anytime. There can be natural disasters, for example floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, wild fires and drought. There are also man-made and technology types of disasters from hazardous material spills, biological weapons, cyber-attacks to even civil unrest. According to PEMA, the history of emergency management can date all the way back the first civil defense program which was started during World War I and later during World War II the office of civil defense (OCD) was created by Pres. Roosevelt. In the past emergency management, has always been event driven. With each new crisis that our nation has gone through, the reason for and the avenue in which to accomplish emergency management has changed. No more so than when the terrorist attacked on 9/11. The 9/11 commission report states that the Incident Command System is a “proven framework for emergency response” (911 CR). The incident command system is a proven framework for emergency response by providing clear leadership and organizational structure, improving the effectiveness of resource efforts, and maintaining safety for responders.

Over the years, the National Response Framework (NRF) has evolved to meet the growing need of a more comprehensive and logical approach to a nationwide emergency management strategy. Stemming from the National Response Plan in 2008, it is one of the five frameworks designed to aid in organizing national preparedness activities, the others being Prevention, Protection, Mitigation and Disaster Recovery. The NRF’s main function is to guide how the agencies and communities respond to all types of disasters and emergencies. The framework was designed to be scalable, flexible and adaptable to account for the differing scopes, particulars and complications that arise from these events. Its application can range from grave but local incidents, such

Emergency planning has changed very much since the 9/11 attacks. Law enforcement agencies focus more on prevention, preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation. With planning and efforts made by law enforcement agencies, the law enforcement community can provide a comprehensive emergency management and security program (EMHSD/MSP, 2009).

the current multi-agency/multi-discipline approach to national disasters and emergencies. This summary briefly reviews the history of federal planning documents over the past twenty years as context for the present day, National Response Framework; and then highlights the response doctrine and its five principles, as it seems to encapsulate the National Response Framework overall. “Response doctrine

My city, West Lafayette Indiana is all hazard arrange that builds up a solitary, thorough system for the administration of city occurrences. It gives the structure and instruments to the coordination of state backing to the affected nearby governments and influenced people and organizations around it. This disaster preparedness plan clarifies the regular train and structures that have been practiced and developed at the neighborhood, tribal, state, and national levels after some time. In particular, it expands upon the National Incident Management System, which gives a reliable format to overseeing occurrences.

Furthermore, planning processes prepare responders including counselors for the emotional and psychological toll that the crisis may have on survivor and responders equally. Planning enables emergency response systems to make comprehensive assessments that avail information on potential crisis and the intervention protocols in the event of their occurrence. The interview highlighted this by elucidating various phases that a crisis may undergo and possible intervention strategies that are applicable at each phase. “The involvement of, and collaboration with, a wide variety of both public and private agencies and organizations is strongly encouraged” (USDHH, 2003). This perspective has also been reiterated during the interview. The interviewee observed the cooperation of various agencies, institutions, state and local governments and aid

The burden of emergency management has grown great deal in the last few decades. We have seen an increase in natural disasters, a new threat of terrorism on our front door and an increase in manmade disasters. All of these have tested emergency management in a number of cities and towns across the nation. It is not always disasters that present problems for emergency managers. We have to look beyond our traditional view of emergency management of helping us during times of disasters and view what issues they consider may affect their emergency response. Issues that emergency management see that are moving into the critical area are issues of urbanization and hazard exposure, the rising costs of disaster recovery, and low priority of emergency management.

In Chapter 13, “Community Process: Coordination” written by Thomas E. Drabek, the idea of coordination within emergency management preparation is examined. Drabek commences by discussing how preparation and organization have benefitted communities during previous disasters and defines coordination as a process. He gives examples of how coordination should work and describes the role of an emergency manager during the process. This is shadowed by the author using structural theory, disaster response valuations, and research on local disaster preparedness directors to show how coordination has evolved into a vital task of emergency managers. Following this is an explanation of how coordination is and has been studied, at different system levels,