Improving The Collaboration Between Emergency Responders, Public Safety, And Municipal Security

The assistance provided for the purpose of helping the victims of a disaster rebuild their homes to the same living conditions they had lived in before the disaster, FEMA assisted 130,000 middle income and low income families rebuild after the Northridge earthquake (Eugene, 2010). FEMA also assisted with the coordinated the response of 27 federal agencies that were involved in the recovery process. The FEMA United States Fire Administration student manual “ICS-300: Intermediate ICS for Expanding Incidents” (2013) refers to this type of command structure within the Incident Command System is defined as a “Unified Command”. The Unified Command type of management system allows for multiple agencies to work together to plan and strategize but most importantly to be able to collect resources from each agency without having to go through extra steps. This coordination was said to have had a huge benefit by being able to get the funding for repairs and to be able to decrease the time frames set to repair and rebuild the infrastructure (highways and roadways) needed to the get the city moving again. (DeBlasio et al,.

The last subject I would like to mention is the interface between emergency management and homeland security. The interface between them is staying in their own lane especially when a disaster or crisis occurs. There are no grey areas when it comes to these two entities. According to David McIntyre, he considered the interface as a “sibling rivalry” because “one was older than the other” (Lucus-McEwen, 2012). Department of Homeland Security was created to focus on terrorism. While focusing on terrorism the emergency management piece was deprived resulting in emergency management taking a life on its own. No matter how you look these two entities they are family. But the funny thing is neither one can stand on its own without the help

As Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma successively lashed the gulf coast starting in late August 2005, nature’s fury exposed serious weaknesses in the United States’ emergency response capabilities. Not all emergencies pose this magnitude of challenge. In the United States, the initial—and usually major—responsibility for disaster response rests with local authorities. This “bottom-up” system of emergency management has a long history and continues to make sense in most circumstances. Core Challenges for Large-Scale Disaster

Tragic events that cause damage to property and life may destroy the social, cultural and economic life of a community. Communities must be engaged in the various phases from prevention to recovery to build disaster resilient communities. In order to do this, there must be a disaster preparedness plan in place that involves multiple people in various roles.

In the event of a disaster, the community relies upon the public health personnel to evaluate the needs of the community, assess the available resources, provide reliable information, and coordinate health activities. It is essential that local health workers are trained professionals who are reassuring and organized to address health, social, cultural and material concerns of the community. Local health personnel coordinate social services, transportation, available health services, volunteers, outside assistance, public utilities and rescue work (HELP, 1989).

The whole world observed as the administration responders appeared incapable to provide essential protection from the effects of nature. The deprived response results from a failure to accomplish a number of risk factors (Moynihan, 2009). The dangers of a major hurricane striking New Orleans had been measured, and there was sufficient warning of the threat of Katrina that announcements of emergency were made days in advance of landfall (Moynihan, 2009). Nonetheless, the responders were unsuccessful to change this information into a level of preparation suitable with the possibility of the approaching disaster. Federal responders failed to recognize the need to more actively engage (Moynihan, 2009). These improvements include improved ability to provide support to states and tribes ahead of a disaster; developed a national disaster recovery strategy to guide recovery efforts after major disasters and emergencies; and the Establishment of Incident Management Assistance Teams in which these full time, rapid response teams are able to deploy within two hours and arrive at an incident within 12 hours to support the local incident commander (FEMA,

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) would become the central point-of-contact within the national government in responding to incidents. Since formation in 1979, FEMA’s core missions were to enhance the government’s ability to survive a foreign attack, and to assist state and local authorities in disaster response (Carafano, 2005). And while the two core missions seem heterogenous in scope at times from an outside perspective, the biggest difference between the two tasks is duration. A man-made disaster may be over in a matter of minutes as compared to a hurricane lasting several days, but in both instances the road to recovery is long. In order to streamline response and recovery in either scenario, FEMA was reorganized with new directives to support comprehensive emergency management practices (CRS, 2006). Today, FEMA provides the standard approach and guidance that many local communities may not have due to funding, training, and

Ensuring Resilience to Disasters has more tasking’s than another mission and involves many different agencies to accomplish those tasks. The four tasks are to mitigate hazards, enhance preparedness, ensure effective emergency response, and rapidly recover. The main agency that is responsible for these tasking’s is FEMA. FEMA’s mission is to “reduce the loss of life and property and protect communities nationwide from all hazards, including natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters” (FEMA, 2017, p.2). FEMA works with federal and State services to assist them in accomplishing their goals. They also assist local services by assisting in setting up emergency management agencies (LEMA) and set guidance for Emergency Operations Planning (EOP). EOP’s are “plans that provide an overview of the jurisdiction’s preparedness and response strategies. It describes expected hazards, outlines agency roles and responsibilities, and explains how the jurisdiction keeps the plan current.” (FEMA, 2010,

Two specific areas of concern are noted in the majority of studies conducted. The first area of concern was that there was not a clear delineation of roles and responsibilities or organizational leaders (Haddow et al., 2014, p. 322). Since this event this has been an area that has shown considerable improvement. This has been accomplished through the use of NIMS and collaborative efforts of first responder leaders to craft an all hazards model of response. By doing both of these things, partner agencies are better able to fold into the rescue

A disaster which hit Arizona on September 2014 required the declaration of a major disaster by the American President Barack Obama (FEMA, 2014). This disaster killed many people in the Maricopa County, caused several damages to goods, homes, infrastructures, and so on. The recovery processes in the Maricopa County started simultaneously with the response and continued long time after the impact of the disaster. This paper addresses the strengths of the short- and the long-term recovery plans, the weaknesses and the challenges of the short- and long-term recovery plans, the remained long-term recovery work to be done, the political and legal issues that influenced the recovery, and recommendations that could promote effective recovery.

There have been times when government agencies have not been able to assist those in need during an event, and if the public is aware of the needs of the community they may be able to contribute and assist during disaster. Having the community involved in preparedness is essential in the “success in achieving resilience and national preparedness” (DHS 2013).

Collaboration involves various groups or groups of people working together to accomplish a desired outcome. It is a bit like teamwork. By strengthening connections during an emergency crisis, you have the ability to be more effective, faster, produce more, and have more personnel available. Collaboration offers more innovation and experience to a situation. This paper will discuss the roles of those that were involved in the collaborative efforts of FEMA. The basic reasoning for this paper is to provide knowledge and understanding the experience of emergency management and collaboration that took place during Hurricane Sandy.

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.

Nurses play a pivotal role in urban communities, when it comes to health care and disaster planning. Nurses need to comprehend their role in response to terrorist events, since they implement assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of the victims of terrorism, as well as disaster planning and response, at both the individual and community level. (Gebbie, K., Qureshi, K. 2006) The threat of terrorism has become a major issue for public health systems across the United States, and teaching urban and rural communities to plan ahead has become an important factor in disaster preparedness. Community awareness, education, and engagement can be provided not only through formal public health and public safety mechanisms and the local media, but also through a range of unique ways such as community groups, health organizations, and religious groups. These groups provide not only information, but also social support for participation in the planning and response effort that will help individuals stay engaged over time, even during times of perceived “low risk” when preparedness can become pervasive and forgotten about. Communities should carefully examine their own assets, and use them to build and plan a system to use if they were to ever have a disaster occur. When disaster hits, its inevitable, which is why planning ahead of time within communities is important to implement. A key asset is the relationships that already exist among potential planning partners in the community; these

Risk for disasters is a part of life; emergency situations occur more frequently than many people believe. A wise person plans for the worse, and hopes for the best. After a disaster, how well a community can recover will depend largely on how well they prepared in advance. Risk management includes identifying any potential risks to a community and proactively planning to minimize the threat. Proactive organization of resources and people to respond to emergencies can mean the difference between a community’s ability to regroup and recover, and the loss of life. To better