Homeland Security and the Private Sector in Emergency Management Prevention

2015 ◽  
pp. 240-259
Keyword(s):  
Private Sector ◽  
Emergency Management ◽  
Homeland Security

Implementation and modeling of a Regional Hub Reception Center during mass evacuation operations

2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 197
Author(s):  
Cliff Wojtalewicz, MS, CEM®, LTC (R) ◽  
Adam Kirby, MS ◽  
J. Eric Dietz, PhD, PE, LTC (R)
Keyword(s):  
Private Sector ◽  
Emergency Management ◽  
Homeland Security ◽  
Simulation Modeling ◽  
Situational Awareness ◽  
Research Effort ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Simulation Software ◽  
Mass Evacuation ◽  
The City

When developing response plans in the aftermath of a catastrophic incident, jurisdictions often fail to conduct the necessary interdisciplinary planning needed to fully address the needs across jurisdictional borders. The Purdue Homeland Security Institute (PHSI) was selected by the City of Chicago Office of Emergency Management and Communications (OEMC) in 2010 to lead an effort to address planning across jurisdictional borders during mass evacuations following a catastrophic incident. Specifically, PHSI was chosen to lead the effort in developing a planning and implementation guide for standing up a conceptual Regional Hub Reception Center (RHRC). A major component within the mass evacuation and sheltering continuum, the RHRC is designed to provide evacuees with quick-response mass care and emergency assistance while their other needs are assessed and appropriate shelter locations are identified. The RHRC also provides a central location to leverage governmental, nongovernmental, and private sector resources and is the first point in the evacuation, mass care, and sheltering concept of operations where more comprehensive support (food, shelter, medical, psychological, household pet sheltering, reunification, etc) can be expected. PHSI undertook this lead role working within the Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin (IL-IN-WI) Combined Statistical Area (CSA) as part of the US Department of Homeland Security Regional Catastrophic Planning Grant Program. Coordinating closely with the City of Chicago OEMC and IL-IN-WI CSA Regional Catastrophic Planning Team, PHSI lead the research effort using resource and capability data compiled from all 17 jurisdictions within the IL-IN-WI CSA and validated the RHRC concept using three tabletop exercises. Upon completion, the PHSI team published the RHRC planning guide complete with procedures and processes that define the roles and responsibilities of government, nongovernment organizations, and private sector for providing RHRC mass care functions and RHRC capability and capacity assessments. This article further examines the potential for using simulation modeling as a cost-effective means to rapidly evaluate any facility for potential use as a RHRC and to measure and maximize RHRC operational efficiency. Using AnyLogic simulation software, PHSI developed a first-ever model of a theoretical RHRC capable of simulating, measuring, and manipulating RHRC operations under specified conditions/ scenarios determined by the emergency management planner. Future simulation modeling research promises to promote the Whole Community Approach to response and recovery by reinforcing interdisciplinary planning, enhancing regional situational awareness, and improving overall jurisdictional coordination and synchronization.

Closing the Gaps in Public Private Partnerships in Emergency Management

2015 ◽  
pp. 64-97
Author(s):  
Marvine Hamner
Keyword(s):  
Private Sector ◽  
Emergency Management ◽  
Gap Analysis ◽  
Public Private Partnerships ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Roles And Responsibilities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Closing The Gaps ◽  
Public And Private Sector ◽  
Goals And Objectives

There are many differences between entities in the public and private sectors engaged in emergency management: vision, mission, goals, and objectives are only a few. To develop workable public private partnerships requires an understanding of these differences. This understanding will then provide a foundation for establishing unambiguous agreements within which each sector's roles and responsibilities are clear, and within which all entities can be successful. This chapter explores the differences between public and private sector entities, which can create gaps in understanding and communication, comparing and contrasting these differences; then, it evaluates ways the resulting gaps between entities and within public private partnerships can be closed. Comparison of the respective backgrounds and perspectives provides the material necessary to complete a gap analysis. Anecdotal information is provided that illustrates how the differences between public and private sector entities support, hinder, or manifest in public private partnerships.

Assessing the Interactions between Native American Tribes and the U.S. Government in Homeland Security and Emergency Management Policy

2017 ◽  
pp. 51-71
Author(s):  
Leigh R. Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Native American ◽  
Emergency Management ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Homeland Security ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Management Policy ◽  
Working Relationships ◽  
Native American Tribes ◽  
Intergovernmental Relationships ◽  
The U.S

The working relationships between Native American tribes, the states, and the federal government have been strained for centuries. These intergovernmental interactions have led to a fragmented system whose attempt to deliver public service is consistently met with opposition. One area where this has become increasingly evident is within homeland security and emergency management policy. This study used a cross sectional survey to gather information about the beliefs tribes held about the various aspects of their working relationships with states and the federal government within the context of homeland security and emergency management. Analysis of the data revealed that the majority of the intergovernmental relationships that existed between tribes and the U.S. government did not possess the characteristics of an effective working relationship. Evidence also suggests that the intergovernmental relationships were actually having a negative impact on the U.S. government's goal to achieve a unified system of homeland security and emergency management on American soil.

scholarly journals Disaster Risk Analysis Part 2: The Systemic Underestimation of Risk

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaida A. Mamuji ◽  
David Etkin
Keyword(s):  
Risk Analysis ◽  
Emergency Management ◽  
Homeland Security ◽  
Rare Events ◽  
Risk Estimation ◽  
Cumulative Risk ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Potential Contribution ◽  
Disaster Risk Analysis

Abstract How risk is defined, the nature of methodologies used to assess risk, and the degree to which rare events should be included in a disaster risk analysis, are important considerations when developing policies, programs and priorities to manage risk. Each of these factors can significantly affect risk estimation. In Part 1 of this paper [Etkin, D. A., A. A. Mamuji, and L. Clarke. 2018. “Disaster Risk Analysis Part 1: The Importance of Including Rare Events.” Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management.] we concluded that excluding rare events has the potential to seriously underestimate the cumulative risk from all possible events,For example, of the 100 most expensive weather disasters in the US, the single most expensive event accounts for 16% of total economic impacts. Similarly, the worst explosion disaster accounts for 17% of the fatalities of the total 100 worst events. though including them can be very challenging both from a methodological and data availability perspective. Underestimating risk can result in flawed disaster risk reduction policies, resulting in insufficient attention being devoted to mitigation and/or prevention. In Part 2, we survey various governmental emergency management policies and methodologies in order to evaluate varying equations used to define risk, and to assess potential biases within disaster risk analyses that do comparative risk ranking. We find (1) that the equations used to define risk used by emergency management organizations are frequently less robust than they should or are able to be, and (2) that methodologies used to assess risk are often inadequate to properly account for the potential contribution of rare events. We conclude that there is a systemic bias within many emergency management organizations that results in underestimation of risk.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document