Continuity of operations planning in college athletic programs: The case for incorporating Federal Emergency Management Guidelines

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 71
Author(s):  
Stacey A. Hall, PhD, MBA ◽  
Brandon L. Allen, PhD ◽  
Dennis Phillips, PhD

College athletic departments have a responsibility to provide a safe environment for student-athletes; however, most colleges do not have a crisis management plan that includes procedures for displaced student-athletes or alternate facilities to perform athletic events. Continuity of operations planning ensures athletic programs are equipped to maintain essential functions during, or shortly after, a disruption of operations due to possible hazards. Previous studies have identified a lack of emergency preparedness and continuity planning in college athletic departments. The purpose of this article is to illustrate in detail one approach to disaster planning for college athletic departments, namely the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) continuity of operations framework. By adhering to FEMA guidelines and promoting a best practices model, athletic programs can effectively plan to address potential hazards, as well as protect the organization's brand, image, and financial sustainability after a crisis event.

Author(s):  
Elisabeth Belmont ◽  
Bruce Merlin Fried ◽  
Julianna S. Gonen ◽  
Anne M. Murphy ◽  
Jeffrey M. Sconyers ◽  
...  

Hadmérnök ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 352-370
Author(s):  
Zsolt Zólyomi

The security professionals are always talking about Emergency Plan, Emergency Preparedness, Emergency Response, Crisis Management, Crisis Management Plan, Business Continuity Management, Business Continuity Plan. etc. That is a question whichcomes to my mind do we know exactly what these phrases meanings are? My experiences show, usually we have different interpretations on the above mentioned expressions. Briefly we need to have an Emergency Plan to provide our Emergency Preparedness and to be able to take our Emergency Responses in case of a real Emergency situation. If we were able to eliminate the Emergency situation the problemhas been solved. If we had no success the Emergency can be develop a crisis situation which we need to manage by the Crisis Management Plan. As we are over the crisis we need to adopt our Business Continuity Plan to be able to manage our continuous operationor production. The aim of this study to providea useful tool or set up for security leaders on Crisis Management which is a clear security task and not as like Emergency Preparedness which is related to safety organization as Business Continuity is connected to each business functions.


1996 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 716
Author(s):  
M. Sandman

In essence, a crisis is a Public Affairs event and it is important to distinguish between a crisis on the one hand and an emergency on the other. An emergency may not necessarily become a crisis because the focus of an emergency is internal whereas the focus of a crisis is external.At West Australian Petroleum Pty Limited (WAPET) we have a crisis management plan which has been developed to facilitate the rapid notification and response to emergency incidents involving WAPET personnel and facilities.The plan requires the organisation of an Emergency Management Team to deal with the immediate impacts of the emergency, initiate a response and address the problem as quickly as possible.In addition, a separate Crisis Management Team is mobilised to address the external crisis situation by identifying the impact of the problem on the business, initiate a media response, liaise with outside agencies and support the Emergency Management Team.The overall goal of the emergency management system is to move from a reactive to a proactive mode of operation as quickly as possible.Different levels of emergency have been identified and procedures initiated to respond by individuals at different levels within the organisation.The process is tested periodically through the use of practice drills, the objective being to ensure that if a crisis occurs, the Company has in place procedures to respond at all levels to minimise impact upon the operations of the Company both short-term and long-term and to react to media interest in any crisis event.


2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 492-513 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jimmy Sanderson

Via their social-media postings, student-athletes are increasingly creating public relations issues for college athletic programs. With social media’s emergence as a popular communication tool, exploring the messages student-athletes receive from their athletic departments about social-media use is warranted. This research examined social-media policies in student-athlete handbooks from 159 NCAA Division I schools. Using thematic and textual analytic procedures, analysis revealed that policies heavily emphasize content restrictions and external monitoring and frame social media as laden with risk. The results suggest that social-media policies should be more reflexive to identify both positive and negative outcomes for student-athletes. In addition, athletic departments must assertively monitor social-media trends to ensure that policies and training stay relevant.


2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (2) ◽  
pp. 903-908 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glenn F. Epler

ABSTRACT U.S. federal and state regulations require industry to develop and maintain detailed crisis and emergency response plans. These plans are, for the most part, well thought out and detailed. As a result, along with extensive training and exercise programs, industry preparedness is better than it has ever been to respond to and manage an emergency. But how well prepared is industry to handle the business or operational continuity aspects of a crisis or emergency? What plans are in place to deal with the requirement for continuing essential business functions in the face of a disaster? If a major incident occurs to a refinery, terminal, or offshore production platform that requires it to be taken off-line, or damages it beyond repair, are there plans in place to minimize the impacts on the rest of the organization and on the downstream customers? How will this be done simultaneously while managing the response? This paper addresses those needs and discusses the requirements that companies in the oil and chemical industry should consider in developing business and operational continuity plans. It explains a multi-step planning process that is being used by many companies around the world to maintain their business edge when a crisis or disaster strikes. This planning process includes such functions as conducting a risk analysis and business impact analysis, developing mitigation and recovery strategies, drafting a continuity plan, developing an awareness program, and building a training and exercising program. The paper also looks at the similarities between business and operational continuity plans and a company's emergency or crisis management plan and address ways in which the plans may be integrated.


2011 ◽  
pp. 414-421
Author(s):  
R. Eric Petersen ◽  
Jeffrey W. Seifert

Continuity of operations (COOP) planning, sometimes referred to as disaster recovery planning, business continuity planning, or business resumption planning, is a segment of contingency planning that refers to the internal effort of an organization, such as a branch of government, department, agency, or office, to assure that the capability exists to continue essential operations in response to a comprehensive array of potential operational interruptions. In government, COOP planning is critical because much of the response to an incident might include the maintenance of civil authority and infrastructure repair, among other potential recovery activities. All such efforts presume the existence of an ongoing, functional government to mobilize, fund, support, and oversee recovery efforts. In an emergency, government is likely to need to ensure the ability to communicate with internal and external constituencies. This function is becoming associated with electronic government. For example, many people in the United States and elsewhere, when searching for information and guidance following the September 11, 2001 attacks, turned to government agency Web sites. Beyond such extraordinary examples, the growing public expectations of e-government has put additional pressure on the need to reconstitute systems quickly after an interruption to minimize any disruptions and financial costs associated with a major infrastructure failure. Government COOP planning may be regarded as a “good business practice,” and part of the fundamental mission of agencies as responsible and reliable public institutions. Comprehensive contingency plans, perhaps once viewed, at the least, as optional and, at the most, as a prudent measure, are now seen as an integral part of developing and maintaining an agency’s capacity to carry out its essential functions. Continuity planning professionals assert that the perception of a changing threat environment and the potential for no-notice emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, technological emergencies, and military or terrorist attack-related incidents, have increased the need for COOP capabilities and plans that enable agencies to continue their essential functions across a broad range of potential emergencies. COOP planning can be viewed as a continuation of basic emergency preparedness planning, including evacuation planning, and serves as a bridge between that planning and efforts to maintain continuity of government in the event of a significant disruption to government activity or institutions. In the aftermath of an incident, initial efforts typically focus on safeguarding personnel and securing the incident scene. Subsequently, attention focuses on reestablishing critical agency operations according to a COOP plan. Because the number and types of potential interruptions are essentially infinite, effective COOP planning must provide, in advance of an incident, a variety of means to assure contingent operations. In the context of e-government, the heavy reliance upon information technology to carry out mission critical tasks and provide other citizen services highlights the need to ensure these assets are robust, protected, backed up, and resilient to interruption. COOP is not a new idea. While contingency planning has gained considerable attention in recent years due to heightened security concerns and increased dependence on information technology, modern government continuity planning has been practiced, in one form or another, for several decades. What may now be emerging is a recognition that all organizational assets, in the case of government, this would include leaders, civil servants, and information infrastructures, must be incorporated into organization-wide contingency planning.


Author(s):  
R. E. Petersen

Continuity of operations (COOP) planning, sometimes referred to as disaster recovery planning, business continuity planning, or business resumption planning, is a segment of contingency planning that refers to the internal effort of an organization, such as a branch of government, department, agency, or office, to assure that the capability exists to continue essential operations in response to a comprehensive array of potential operational interruptions. In government, COOP planning is critical because much of the response to an incident might include the maintenance of civil authority and infrastructure repair, among other potential recovery activities. All such efforts presume the existence of an ongoing, functional government to mobilize, fund, support, and oversee recovery efforts. In an emergency, government is likely to need to ensure the ability to communicate with internal and external constituencies. This function is becoming associated with electronic government. For example, many people in the United States and elsewhere, when searching for information and guidance following the September 11, 2001 attacks, turned to government agency Web sites. Beyond such extraordinary examples, the growing public expectations of e-government has put additional pressure on the need to reconstitute systems quickly after an interruption to minimize any disruptions and financial costs associated with a major infrastructure failure. Government COOP planning may be regarded as a “good business practice,” and part of the fundamental mission of agencies as responsible and reliable public institutions. Comprehensive contingency plans, perhaps once viewed, at the least, as optional and, at the most, as a prudent measure, are now seen as an integral part of developing and maintaining an agency’s capacity to carry out its essential functions. Continuity planning professionals assert that the perception of a changing threat environment and the potential for no-notice emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, technological emergencies, and military or terrorist attack-related incidents, have increased the need for COOP capabilities and plans that enable agencies to continue their essential functions across a broad range of potential emergencies. COOP planning can be viewed as a continuation of basic emergency preparedness planning, including evacuation planning, and serves as a bridge between that planning and efforts to maintain continuity of government in the event of a significant disruption to government activity or institutions. In the aftermath of an incident, initial efforts typically focus on safeguarding personnel and securing the incident scene. Subsequently, attention focuses on reestablishing critical agency operations according to a COOP plan. Because the number and types of potential interruptions are essentially infinite, effective COOP planning must provide, in advance of an incident, a variety of means to assure contingent operations. In the context of e-government, the heavy reliance upon information technology to carry out mission critical tasks and provide other citizen services highlights the need to ensure these assets are robust, protected, backed up, and resilient to interruption. COOP is not a new idea. While contingency planning has gained considerable attention in recent years due to heightened security concerns and increased dependence on information technology, modern government continuity planning has been practiced, in one form or another, for several decades. What may now be emerging is a recognition that all organizational assets, in the case of government, this would include leaders, civil servants, and information infrastructures, must be incorporated into organization-wide contingency planning.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document