HLSC 600 Discussion 4
The planning process
Disaster planning is a multifaceted effort that is more than just a document written and
put on a shelf to be opened in case of emergency. Planning is a continuous and active process
that is always in review seeking improvement. Once developed, a disaster plan becomes a living
document open to review and updating as new information becomes available. It isn’t possible to
foresee or anticipate the variety of disasters that may strike but having a flexible plan that can
adapt to suit a wide range of possible scenarios is ideal. It is important to have all the known
disaster variables pre-planned such as communication, coordination, and decision-making
authority (Phillips et al., 2016). Doing so allows the principal players to achieve maximum
effectiveness once a disaster strikes. There should always be strong collaboration amongst the
various stakeholders at the local, state, and national. Fortunately, the Federal government has a
variety of planning documents and guidance available for emergency planners to utilize.
Planning cannot be viewed as a spectator sport though. Those involved with the planning
process should be involved in all phases of the plan. A disaster plan once written must be studied
and practiced so that there is no lost time once the time for action arrives. By rehearsing and
running through drills, critical actions and responses become instinctual to those tasked with
responding.
Types of planning
While it is true that there is some mitigation and recovery planning that will have to take
place after a disaster has struck, most planning occurs in the preparedness and mitigation phases
(Phillips et al., 2016). The preparedness phase is a very important part of the planning process
that includes conducting exercises, drills, public education, and training. These steps are
sometimes viewed as the most important timeframes in the planning process, but they should be
viewed as part of the full life cycle of emergency management.
“Mitigation planning involves stakeholders such as the business, education, utility, and
health care sectors with the public in identifying and prioritizing areas for risk reduction”
(Phillips et al., 2016, p. 80). There are structural mitigation measures that can be done to
buildings and hard infrastructure to resist known natural disaster events. Examples include
increasing building codes for higher wind resistance, installation of strengthening rebar for
earthquake resistance or the construction of levees to prevent flooding. There are also
nonstructural efforts that do not involve built measures. Planners develop mitigation measures by
assessing the probable hazard and the likelihood of how and where they can affect citizens.
These assessments lead to the development of plans that reduce the potential impact the known
hazards and disasters represent to the community.
Response planning activities, also referred to as Emergency Operations Plans (EOPs),
influence how recovery unfolds (Phillips et al., 2016). EOPs involve a wide range of focus,
length and format and are centered around the coordination of activities. These can involve the
restoration of common utility services, search and rescue and warning the public. Ultimately the
bulk of planning is done in the response phase since lifesaving activities are the primary focus.
Recovery planning should incorporate mitigation measures to reduce future disaster
impacts. “Several factors are involved when deciding on a recovery strategy including cost,
security, allowable outage time and integration” (Fallara, 2004, p. 43). Post-event recovery
planning typically consists of the reconstruction of housing, road, bridges, utilities, and other
resources (Phillips, 2016)..
Business continuity planning is a specialized business-related process that occurs
throughout the phases. Leaders should understand the financial impact a major disaster event
might have on the business and the planned response (Phillips et al., 2016).
Individual and household level planning takes place on the personal level and involves
becoming familiar with the local hazards possible and the risks they pose. As recent disasters
have demonstrated, there must be individual responsibility for your personal safety (Phillips et
al., 2016).
Community based planning is an approach that uses authentic dialogue to determine the
best ways to organize and strengthen communities (Phillips, 2016). This approach, which has
been used by FEMA for over 25 years involves all the stakeholders from the government,
community, and business. By empowering these parties to identify its needs and the existing
resources that may be used to address them, the best results can occur.
Best Practices
The U.S. federal government created their Comprehensive Planning Guide-101 (CPG-
101) which is designed as a guidance document for local disaster planning. It is designed to
assist emergency managers and stakeholders in the planning process. This document has helped
local and community planners to implement best practices in creating planning documents that
are based on expertise. CPG-101 developers wanted to help local disaster planners get started
with the planning process—not tell local governments how they must plan for disasters.
Underlying the whole approach to CPG-101 is the idea of building social capital—particularly
through interacting and networking in the planning process. The Red Cross provides generic best
practices guidance in the United States, but the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA
have created robust planning information. FEMA has been working hard to develop best
practices through a project better known as a whole community approach. This has proven to be
effective and has a stated objective to “identify, promote, and learn from examples of existing
community efforts that exemplify a whole community approach to preparedness and emergency
response for the purpose of informing potential, recommended methods for other communities”
(Sobelson et al., 2015, p. 3). The best practices involve investing time to understand and meet the
actual needs of the community as a whole. All parts of the community are engaged and
empowered in this effort to help strengthen what works well. This requires an understanding of
the community complexities as well as their capabilities and needs. Partnerships with community
leaders are developed and maintained to help leverage and strengthen social infrastructure,
networks, and assets (Sobelson et al., 2015).
Often disasters harm those with the least capability to help themselves and whether they
are poor or elderly the Bible commands they be helped. “For the poor shall never cease out of the
land: therefore, I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy
poor, and to thy needy, in thy land” (King James Bible, 1769/2017, Deuteronomy 15:11).
Emergency planners can fulfill that role to their community by implementing the best practices
and always updating disaster plans.
References
Fallara, P. (2004). Disaster recovery planning. IEEE potentials, 23(5), 42-44.
King James Bible. (2017). King James Bible Online. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org
(Original work published 1769)
Phillips, B. D., Neal, D. M., & Webb, G. R. (2016). Introduction to Emergency Management
(2nd Edition). Taylor & Francis.
https://mbsdirect.vitalsource.com/books/9781315394688
Sobelson, R. K., Wigington, C. J., Harp, V., & Bronson, B. B. (2015). A whole community
approach to emergency management: Strategies and best practices of seven
community programs. Journal of emergency management (Weston, Mass.), 13(4),
349.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
