November 2010

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101

Version 2.0

Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans

I am pleased to announce the release of Version 2.0 of Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101: Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans. Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 provides guidance for developing emergency operations plans. It promotes a common understanding of the fundamentals of risk-informed planning and decision making to help planners examine a hazard or threat and produce integrated, coordinated, and synchronized plans. The goal of CPG 101 is to assist in making the planning process routine across all phases of emergency management and for all homeland security mission areas. This Guide helps planners at all levels of government in their efforts to develop and maintain viable, all-hazards, all-threats emergency plans. Based on input from state, territorial, tribal, and local officials from across the United States, this update of CPG 101 expands on the fundamentals contained in the first version. With this edition, greater emphasis is placed on representing and engaging the whole community—to include those with access and functional needs, children, and those with household pets and service animals. Residents and all sectors of the community have a critical role and shared responsibility to take appropriate actions to protect themselves, their families and organizations, and their properties. Planning that engages and includes the whole community serves as the focal point for building a collaborative and resilient community. CPG 101 is the foundation for state, territorial, tribal, and local emergency planning in the United States. Planners in other disciplines, organizations, and the private sector, as well as other levels of government, may find this Guide useful in the development of their emergency operations plans. While CPG 101 maintains its link to previous guidance, it also reflects the reality of the current operational planning environment. This Guide integrates key concepts from national preparedness policies and doctrines, as well as lessons learned from disasters, major incidents, national assessments, and grant programs. W. Craig Fugate Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency

This page intentionally left blank.

Preface Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 provides Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guidance on the fundamentals of planning and developing emergency operations plans (EOP). CPG 101 shows that EOPs are connected to planning efforts in the areas of prevention, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation. Version 2.0 of this Guide expands on these fundamentals and encourages emergency and homeland security managers to engage the whole community in addressing all risks that might impact their jurisdictions. While CPG 101 maintains its link to previous guidance, it also reflects the reality of the current operational planning environment. This Guide integrates key concepts from national preparedness policies and doctrines, as well as lessons learned from disasters, major incidents, national assessments, and grant programs. CPG 101 provides methods for planners to:

• Conduct community-based planning that engages the whole community by using a planning process that represents the actual population in the community and involves community leaders and the private sector in the planning process

• Ensure plans are developed through an analysis of risk

• Identify operational assumptions and resource demands

• Prioritize plans and planning efforts to support their seamless transition from development to execution for any threat or hazard

• Integrate and synchronize efforts across all levels of government. CPG 101 incorporates the following concepts from operational planning research and day-to-day experience:

• The process of planning is just as important as the resulting document.

• Plans are not scripts followed to the letter, but are flexible and adaptable to the actual situation.

• Effective plans convey the goals and objectives of the intended operation and the actions needed to achieve them.

Successful operations occur when organizations know their roles, understand how they fit into the overall plan, and are able to execute the plan. This Guide is part of a series of CPGs published by FEMA. CPG 101 discusses the steps used to produce an EOP, possible plan structures, and components of a basic plan and its annexes. CPGs provide detailed information about planning considerations for specific functions, hazards, and threats. CPG 101 is the foundation for state, territorial, tribal, and local emergency planning in the United States. Planners in other disciplines, organizations, and the private sector, as well as other levels of government, may find this Guide useful in the development of their EOPs.

i

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

ii

This page intentionally left blank.

Contents INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW …………………………………………………………………………… INTRO-1

Purpose ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Intro-1  Applicability and Scope …………………………………………………………………………………………………. Intro-1  Supersession …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Intro-2  How to Use This Guide ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Intro-2  Suggested Training ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Intro-2  National Incident Management System Implementation …………………………………………………….. Intro-2  Administrative Information …………………………………………………………………………………………….. Intro-2  Revision Process ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Intro-3

1. THE BASICS OF PLANNING …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1-1  Overview …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1-1  Planning Fundamentals ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1-1

Planning Principles ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1-1  Strategic, Operational, and Tactical Planning ……………………………………………………………………. 1-4  Planning Approaches …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1-5  Plan Integration …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1-6  Plan Synchronization …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1-7  Common Planning Pitfalls ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 1-7

Planning Considerations ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1-8

2. UNDERSTANDING THE PLANNING ENVIRONMENT: FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL PLANS …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2-1

Overview …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2-1  Relationship Between Federal Plans and State Emergency Operations Plans ……………………………… 2-1

The National Incident Management System ……………………………………………………………………… 2-1  The National Response Framework …………………………………………………………………………………. 2-2  Federal Emergency Plans at the National and Regional Levels …………………………………………… 2-4  State, Territorial, and Tribal Emergency Operations Plans …………………………………………………. 2-5  Local Emergency Operations Plans …………………………………………………………………………………. 2-5

Linking Federal, State, and Local Emergency Plans ………………………………………………………………… 2-6

3. FORMAT AND FUNCTION: IDENTIFYING THE RIGHT PLAN FOR THE JOB …………….. 3-1  Overview …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 3-1  The Emergency Operations Plan …………………………………………………………………………………………… 3-1

State and Local Emergency Operations Plans …………………………………………………………………… 3-2  Structuring an Emergency Operations Plan…………………………………………………………………………….. 3-3

Traditional Functional Format ………………………………………………………………………………………… 3-4  Emergency Support Function Format ………………………………………………………………………………. 3-5  Agency-/Department-Focused Format ……………………………………………………………………………… 3-7

Using Planning Templates ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3-9  Additional Types of Plans ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3-9

Procedural Documents …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3-10  Emergency Operations Plan Content ……………………………………………………………………………………. 3-12

The Basic Plan ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3-12

iii

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

iv

Supporting Annexes …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 3-15  Hazard-, Threat-, or Incident-Specific Annexes ………………………………………………………………. 3-18

4. THE PLANNING PROCESS ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4-1  Overview …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 4-1  Steps in the Planning Process ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4-1

Step 1: Form a Collaborative Planning Team ……………………………………………………………………. 4-2  Step 2: Understand the Situation ……………………………………………………………………………………… 4-7  Step 3: Determine Goals and Objectives ………………………………………………………………………… 4-11  Step 4: Plan Development …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4-12  Step 5: Plan Preparation, Review, and Approval ……………………………………………………………… 4-16  Step 6: Plan Implementation and Maintenance ………………………………………………………………… 4-25

APPENDIX A: AUTHORITIES AND REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………. A-1

APPENDIX B: LIST OF ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY ……………………………………………………… B-1

APPENDIX C: EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN DEVELOPMENT GUIDE …………………… C-1

APPENDIX D: SUGGESTED TRAINING ……………………………………………………………………………… D-1

Introduction and Overview Purpose Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 provides guidelines on developing emergency operations plans (EOP). It promotes a common understanding of the fundamentals of risk-informed planning and decision making to help planners examine a hazard or threat and produce integrated, coordinated, and synchronized plans. The goal of CPG 101 is to make the planning process routine across all phases of emergency management and for all homeland security mission areas. This Guide helps planners at all levels of government in their efforts to develop and maintain viable all-hazards, all-threats EOPs. Accomplished properly, planning provides a methodical way to engage the whole community in thinking through the life cycle of a potential crisis, determining required capabilities, and establishing a framework for roles and responsibilities. It shapes how a community envisions and shares a desired outcome, selects effective ways to achieve it, and communicates expected results. Each jurisdiction’s plans must reflect what that community will do to address its specific risks with the unique resources it has or can obtain. Planners achieve unity of purpose through coordination and integration of plans across all levels of government, nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, and individuals and families. This supports the fundamental principle that, in many situations, emergency management and homeland security operations start at the local level and expand to include Federal, state, territorial, tribal, regional, and private sector assets as the affected jurisdiction requires additional resources and capabilities. Plans must, therefore, integrate vertically to ensure a common operational focus. Similarly, horizontal integration ensures that individual department and agency EOPs fit into the jurisdiction’s plans, and that each department or agency understands, accepts, and is prepared to execute identified mission assignments. Incorporating vertical and horizontal integration into a shared planning community ensures that the sequence and scope of an operation are synchronized.

“Let our advance worrying become advanced thinking and planning.”

Winston Churchill

A shared planning community increases the likelihood of integration and synchronization, makes planning cycles more efficient and effective, and makes plan maintenance easier.

Applicability and Scope The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) recommends that teams responsible for developing EOPs use CPG 101 to guide their efforts. It provides a context for emergency planning in light of other existing plans and describes a universal planning process. This Guide recognizes that many jurisdictions across the country have already developed EOPs that address many emergency management operations. Therefore, CPG 101 establishes no immediate requirements, but suggests that the next iteration of all EOPs follow this guidance. Additionally, regulatory requirements may necessitate the use of additional guides for the development of certain EOP annexes (e.g., the requirements for the Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program). CPG 101 has been designed to complement the use of those guides where required by law or regulation.

Intro-1

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

Supersession CPG 101 replaces State and Local Guide 101, which is rescinded. In addition, CPG 101 Version 2.0 supersedes CPG 101 Version 1.0, which is rescinded. CPG 101 Version 2.0 also supersedes the Interim CPG 301, which is rescinded.

How to Use This Guide CPG 101 is designed to help both novice and experienced planners navigate the planning process. Used in its entirety, this Guide provides information and instruction on the fundamentals of planning and their application. Chapters 1 and 2 lay the foundation for planning efforts by providing information on the basics of planning (Chapter 1) and the environment within which planners function (Chapter 2). With an understanding of these fundamentals, the Guide then transitions from theory to practice by discussing the different plan formats and functions (Chapter 3) and moving into an explanation of the planning process (Chapter 4). A detailed checklist, building upon Chapters 3 and 4, is provided in Appendix C. Because Appendix C provides a set of detailed questions to consider throughout the planning process, users are encouraged to copy or remove this checklist and employ it as they work through the planning process in Chapter 4.

Suggested Training To use this Guide to its fullest, users will benefit from training in emergency management and emergency planning. Appendix D provides a suggested list of training courses to increase users’ understanding of emergency management and emergency planning concepts.

National Incident Management System Implementation In November 2005, FEMA’s National Integration Center published guides for integrating National Incident Management System (NIMS) concepts into EOPs.1 CPG 101 incorporates the concepts and suggestions found in those documents, which have been discontinued.

Administrative Information Terms and acronyms in the text come from the FEMA Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Terms; the National Response Framework (NRF); the NIMS; or the Homeland Security Act of 2002. Websites referenced in this Guide were active at the time of its publication. CPG 101 uses the following contextual definitions for incident, state, and local government throughout the document:

• Incident means an occurrence or event—natural, technological, or human-caused—that requires a response to protect life, property, or the environment (e.g., major disasters, emergencies, terrorist attacks, terrorist threats, civil unrest, wildland and urban fires, floods, hazardous materials [HAZMAT] spills, nuclear accidents, aircraft accidents, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, tropical

1 State NIMS Integration: Integrating the National Incident Management System into State Emergency Operations Plans and Standard Operating Procedures Local and Tribal NIMS Integration: Integrating the National Incident Management System into Local and Tribal Emergency Operations Plans and Standard Operating Procedures

Intro-2

Introduction and Overview

storms, tsunamis, war-related disasters, public health and medical emergencies, other occurrences requiring an emergency response).

• State means any state of the United States, and includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, a Native American Tribe or organization,2 an Alaska native village or Regional Native Corporation, and any possession of the United States.

• Local government means:

– A county, municipality, city, town, township, local public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council of governments (regardless of whether the council of governments is incorporated as a not-for-profit corporation under state law), regional or interstate government entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local government

– A rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other public entity.

Revision Process FEMA will revise CPG 101, as needed, and issue change pages through the publication distribution system and online through approved sources. FEMA welcomes recommendations on how to improve this Guide so it better serves the needs of the emergency management community. Provide recommendations for improving this Guide to: NPD-Planning@dhs.gov, ATTN: CPG Initiative – 101.

2 FEMA recognizes that a tribe’s right of self-government flows from the inherent sovereignty of tribes as nations and that the Federally-recognized tribes have a unique and direct relationship with the Federal Government.

Intro-3

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

Intro-4

This page intentionally left blank.

1. The Basics of Planning Overview The elected and appointed leaders in each jurisdiction are responsible for ensuring that necessary and appropriate actions are taken to protect people and property from any threat or hazard. When threatened by any hazard, citizens expect elected or appointed leaders to take immediate action to help them resolve the problem. Citizens expect the government to marshal its resources, channel the efforts of the whole community—including voluntary organizations and the private sector—and, if necessary, solicit assistance from outside the jurisdiction. Residents and all sectors of the community have a critical role and shared responsibility to take appropriate actions to protect themselves, their families and organizations, and their properties. Planning that includes the whole community builds a resilient community.3 This chapter serves as a foundation for the rest of the Guide by providing an overview of the basics of planning. It describes how risk-informed, community-based planning supports decision making. This chapter also discusses key planning concepts, effective planning, and planning pitfalls.

Planning Fundamentals Planning Principles A p

pplying the following principles to the planning process is key to developing an all-hazards plan for rotecting lives, property, and the environment:

Planning must be community-based, representing the whole population and its needs. Understanding the composition of the population—such as accounting for people with disabilities, others with access and functional needs, and for the needs of children—must occur from the outset of the planning effort. For example, the demographics of the population, including its resources and needs, have a profound effect on evacuation, shelter operations, and family reunification.4 Another key consideration is the integration of household pets and service animals into the planning process. Many individuals may make decisions on whether to comply with protective action measures based on the jurisdiction’s ability to address the concerns about their household pets and service animals. Establishing a profile of the community will also let planners know if courses of action are feasible. For example, if the majority of the actual resident population do not own cars, then planning efforts must account for greater transportation resource requirements than if the population was predominately composed of car-owning households. The businesses that comprise your jurisdiction must also be a part of your demographics—your jurisdiction

Community-based planning is the concept that planning must not only be representative of the actual population within the community, but also must involve the whole community in the planning process. The process for engaging the whole community in community-based planning is discussed in Chapter 4.

3 Per the Department of Homeland Security Risk Lexicon (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/dhs_risk_lexicon.pdf), resiliency is the ability for governments, infrastructures, systems, businesses, and citizenry to resist, absorb, recover from, or adapt to an adverse occurrence that may cause harm or destruction to our health, safety, economic well-being, essential services, or public confidence. 4 Planners should ensure compliance with the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Executive Order 13166, the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and other Federal, state, or local laws and anti-discrimination laws.

1-1

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

may house the only business providing a critical resource to your area or the Nation. By fully understanding the composition and requirements of the actual population (including all segments of the community), community-based plans will lead to improved response and recovery activities and, ultimately, overall preparedness. Planning must include participation from all stakeholders in the community. Effective planning ensures that the whole community is represented and involved in the planning process. The most realistic and complete plans are prepared by a diverse planning team, including representatives from the jurisdiction’s departments and agencies, civic leaders, businesses, and organizations (e.g., civic, social, faith-based, humanitarian, educational, advocacy, professional) who are able to contribute critical perspectives and/or have a role in executing the plan. The demographics of the community will aid in determining who to involve as the planning team is constructed. Including community leaders representative of the entire community in planning reinforces the expectation that the community members have a shared responsibility and strengthens the public motivation to conduct planning for themselves, their families, and their organizations. For example, it is essential to incorporate individuals with disabilities or specific access and functional needs and individuals with limited English proficiency, as well as the groups and organizations that support these individuals, in all aspects of the planning process. When the plan considers and incorporates the views of the individuals and organizations assigned tasks within it, they are more likely to accept and use the plan. Planning uses a logical and analytical problem-solving process to help address the complexity and uncertainty inherent in potential hazards and threats. By following a set of logical steps that includes gathering and analyzing information, determining operational objectives, and developing alternative ways to achieve the objectives, planning allows a jurisdiction or regional response structure to work through complex situations. Planning helps a jurisdiction identify the resources at its disposal to perform critical tasks and achieve desired outcomes/target levels of performance. Rather than concentrating on every detail of how to achieve the objective, an effective plan structures thinking and supports insight, creativity, and initiative in the face of an uncertain and fluid environment. While using a prescribed planning process cannot guarantee success, inadequate plans and insufficient planning are proven contributors to failure. Planning considers all hazards and threats. While the causes of emergencies can vary greatly, many of the effects do not. Planners can address common operational functions in their basic plans instead of having unique plans for every type of hazard or threat. For example, floods, wildfires, HAZMAT releases, and radiological dispersal devices may lead a jurisdiction to issue an evacuation order and open shelters. Even though each hazard’s characteristics (e.g., speed of onset, size of the affected area) are different, the general tasks for conducting an evacuation and shelter operations are the same. Planning for all threats and hazards ensures that, when addressing emergency functions, planners identify common tasks and those responsible for accomplishing the tasks. Planning should be flexible enough to address both traditional and catastrophic incidents. Scalable planning solutions are the most likely to be understood and executed properly by the operational personnel who have practice in applying them. Planners can test whether critical plan elements are sufficiently flexible by exercising them against scenarios of varying type and magnitude. In some cases, planners may determine that exceptional policies and approaches are necessary for responding to and recovering from catastrophic incidents. These exceptional planning solutions should be documented within plans, along with clear descriptions of the triggers that indicate they are necessary. Plans must clearly identify the mission and supporting goals (with desired results). More than any other plan element, the clear definition of the mission and supporting goals (which specify desired results/end-states) enables unity of effort and consistency of purpose among the multiple groups and

1-2

1. The Basics of Planning

activities involved in executing the plan. Every other plan element should be designed and evaluated according to its contributions to accomplishing the mission and achieving the goals and desired results. Planning depicts the anticipated environment for action. This anticipation promotes early understanding and agreement on planning assumptions and risks, as well as the context for interaction. In situations where a specific hazard has not been experienced, planning provides the opportunity to anticipate conditions and systematically identify potential problems and workable solutions. Planners should review existing EOPs to ensure current assumptions are still necessary and valid. After-action reports (AAR) of recent emergency operations and exercises in the jurisdiction will help planners develop a list of lessons learned to address when updating plans. Planning does not need to start from scratch. Planners should take advantage of the experience of other planners, as well as plans generated by other jurisdictions. Further, many states publish their own standards and guidance for emergency planning, conduct workshops and training courses, and assign their planners to work with local planners. FEMA offers resident, locally presented, and independent study emergency planning courses. FEMA also publishes guidance related to planning for specific functions and risks. By participating in this training and reviewing existing emergency or contingency plans, planners can:

Key infrastructure sectors, often owned and operated by the private sector, are frequently well prepared to maintain their business continuity and protect their employees. Their planning often follows recognized industry standards or established regulatory requirements. Use key infrastructure planning to complement State and local planning.

• Identify applicable authorities and statutes

• Gain insight into community risk perceptions

• Identify organizational arrangements used in the past

• Identify mutual aid agreements (MAA) with other jurisdictions

• Identify private sector planning that can complement and focus public sector planning

• Learn how historical planning issues were resolved

• Identify preparedness gaps. Planning identifies tasks, allocates resources to accomplish those tasks, and establishes accountability. Decision makers must ensure that they provide planners with clearly established priorities and adequate resources; additionally, planners and plan participants should be held accountable for effective planning and execution. Planning includes senior officials throughout the process to ensure both understanding and approval. Potential planning team members have many day-to-day concerns but must be reminded that emergency planning is a high priority. Senior official buy-in helps the planning process meet requirements of time, planning horizons, simplicity, and level of detail. The more involved decision makers are in planning, the better the planning product will be. The emergency or homeland security planner, hereafter referred to simply as “planner,” must reaffirm the senior official’s understanding that planning is an iterative, dynamic process that ultimately facilitates his or her job in a crisis situation by:

• Identifying and sharing the hazard, risk, and threat analyses for the jurisdiction

• Discussing readiness and capability assessments, as well as exercise critiques

1-3

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

• Describing what the government body and the senior official will have to do prior to, during, and after an incident to either prevent or minimize the incident’s impact.

Senior officials play a critical role in determining when and which plans should be developed or revised. Additionally, they customarily have the authority to approve the final product in coordination with key stakeholders. By participating throughout the planning process, senior officials will better understand how to implement the plan during an incident. Time, uncertainty, risk, and experience influence planning. These factors define the starting point where planners apply appropriate concepts and methods to create solutions to particular problems. Planning is, therefore, often considered to be both an art and a science in that successful planners are able to draw from both operational experience and an understanding of emergency management principles, but also are intuitive, creative, and have the ability to anticipate the unexpected. While the science and fundamental principles of planning can be learned through training and experience, the art of planning requires an understanding of the dynamic relationships among stakeholders, of special political considerations, and of the complexity imposed by the situation. Because this activity involves judgment and the balancing of competing demands, plans should not be overly detailed—to be followed by the letter—or so general that they provide insufficient direction. Mastering the balance of art and science is the most challenging aspect of becoming a successful planner. Effective plans tell those with operational responsibilities what to do and why to do it, and they instruct those outside the jurisdiction in how to provide support and what to expect. Plans must clearly communicate to operational personnel and support providers what their roles and responsibilities are and how those complement the activities of others. There should be no ambiguity regarding who is responsible for major tasks. This enables personnel to operate as a productive team more effectively, reducing duplication of effort and enhancing the benefits of collaboration. Planning is fundamentally a process to manage risk. Risk management is a process by which context is defined, risks are identified and assessed, and courses of action for managing those risks are analyzed, decided upon, and implemented, monitored, and evaluated. As part of the process, planning is a tool that allows for systematic risk management to reduce or eliminate risks in the future. Planning is one of the key components of the preparedness cycle. The preparedness cycle (Figure 1.1) illustrates the way that plans are continuously evaluated and improved through a cycle of planning, organizing, training, equipping, exercising, evaluating, and taking corrective action.

Strategic, Operational, and Tactical Planning There are three tiers of planning: strategic planning, operational planning, and tactical (incident scene) planning. Strategic planning sets the context and expectations for operational planning, while operational planning provides the framework for tactical planning. All three tiers of planning occur at all levels of government.

Figure 1.1: The Preparedness Cycle

Strategic plans describe how a jurisdiction wants to meet its emergency management or homeland security responsibilities over the long-term. These plans are driven by policy from senior officials and establish planning priorities.

1-4

1. The Basics of Planning

Operational plans provide a description of roles and responsibilities, tasks, integration, and actions required of a jurisdiction or its departments and agencies during emergencies. Jurisdictions use plans to provide the goals, roles, and responsibilities that a jurisdiction’s departments and agencies are assigned, and to focus on coordinating and integrating the activities of the many response and support organizations within a jurisdiction. They also consider private sector planning efforts as an integral part of community- based planning, and to ensure efficient allocation of resources. Department and agency plans do the same thing for the internal elements of those organizations. Operational plans tend to focus more on the broader physical, spatial, and time-related dimensions of an operation; thus, they tend to be more complex and comprehensive, yet less defined, than tactical plans. Tactical plans focus on managing personnel, equipment, and resources that play a direct role in an incident response. Pre-incident tactical planning, based upon existing operational plans, provides the opportunity to pre-identify personnel, equipment, exercise, and training requirements. These gaps can then be filled through various means (e.g., mutual aid, technical assistance, updates to policy, procurement, contingency leasing).

Figure 1.2: Relationship Between Strategic, Operational, and Tactical Planning

Comprehensive and integrated planning can help other levels of government plan their response to an incident within a jurisdiction. By knowing the extent of the jurisdiction’s capability, supporting planners can pre-identify shortfalls and develop pre-scripted resource requests.

Planning Approaches Planners use a number of approaches, either singly or in combination, to develop plans:

• Scenario-based planning. This approach starts with building a scenario for a hazard or threat. Then, planners analyze the impact of the scenario to determine appropriate courses of action. Planners

1-5

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

typically use this planning concept to develop planning assumptions, primarily for hazard- or threat- specific annexes to a basic plan.

• Function-based planning (functional planning). This approach identifies the common functions that a jurisdiction must perform during emergencies. Function-based planning defines the function to be performed and some combination of government agencies and departments responsible for its performance as a course of action.

• Capabilities-based planning. This approach focuses on a jurisdiction’s capacity to take a course of action. Capabilities-based planning answers the question, “Do I have the right mix of training, organizations, plans, people, leadership and management, equipment, and facilities to perform a required emergency function?” Some planners view this approach as a combination of scenario- and function-based planning because of its “scenario-to-task-to-capability” focus.

In reality, planners commonly use a combination of the three previous approaches to operational planning. This hybrid planning approach provides the basis for the planning process discussed in Chapter 4. Using the hybrid approach converts requirements generated by a scenario into goals and objectives that drive the planning process. It leads to a basic plan that describes overarching roles, relationships, and responsibilities with functional, hazard, and threat annexes that reflect sequencing of actions. A hybrid planning approach helps identify the courses of action that a jurisdiction must be able to take and the required functions it must perform based upon a comprehensive risk analysis; thus, it helps identify the capabilities a jurisdiction must have. FEMA strongly advocates the hybrid approach.

Plan Integration National guidance and consensus standards expect that a jurisdiction’s plans will be coordinated and integrated among all levels of government and with critical infrastructure planning efforts. The NIMS and NRF support a concept of layered operations. They recognize that all incidents start at the local level, and, as needs exceed resources and capabilities, Federal, state, territorial, tribal, regional, and private sector assets are applied. This approach means that planning must be vertically integrated to ensure that all response levels have a common operational focus. Similarly, planners at each level must ensure that department and supporting agency plans fit into their jurisdiction’s concept of operations (CONOPS) through horizontal integration. Planners must also appropriately integrate the community’s nongovernmental and private sector plans and resources. Vertical integration is the meshing of planning both up and down the various levels of government. It follows the concept that the foundation for operations is at the local level and that support from Federal, state, territorial, tribal, regional, and private sector entities is layered onto the local activities. This means that as a planning team identifies a support requirement from a “higher level” during the planning process, the two levels work together to resolve the situation. Chapter 2 presents a concept for vertical integration. Horizontal integration serves two purposes. First, it integrates operations across a jurisdiction. For example, an agency, department, or sector would write its plan or standard operating procedures/standard operating guidelines (SOPs/SOGs) for its role in an evacuation to fit the controlling jurisdiction’s plan for such an evacuation. Horizontal integration allows departments and support agencies to produce plans that meet their internal needs or regulatory requirements and still integrate into the EOP. Second, horizontal integration ensures that a jurisdiction’s set of plans supports its neighboring or partner jurisdictions’ similar sets of plans. A jurisdiction’s plan should include information about mission assignments that it executes in conjunction with, in support of, or with support from its neighbors or partners.

1-6

1. The Basics of Planning

Plan Synchronization The concept of sequencing creates effective EOPs that are synchronized in time, space, and purpose. Four planning concepts help sequence operations: phasing, branches, planning horizons, and forward and reverse planning. Phasing. A phase is a specific part of an operation that is distinctly different from the ones that precede or follow. For example, a set of phases might include routine operations, heightened awareness, mobilization-activation-deployment, incident response, and transition to recovery. Planners often use the factors of time, distance, geography, resources, and critical events to define phase lengths. Branches. A branch is an option built into an EOP. For example, a hurricane may affect a certain state by moving up its coast, by moving inland and traveling up a large bay, or by taking a more middle track that affects both areas. While many elements of the plan would be the same for all three scenarios, the change in track could affect response activities. Under the concept of branching, the hurricane annex of an EOP would provide options for each major contingency, therefore allowing the planner to anticipate different requirements and courses of action. Planners use branches only for major, critical options and not for every possible variation in the response. Planning horizon. A planning horizon is a point in time that planners use to focus the planning effort. Because no one can predict when most incidents will occur, planners typically use planning horizons expressed in months to years when developing EOPs. For example, the base components of an EOP may be updated on a two- to three-year cycle, while key annexes may be on a shorter cycle. Since planners develop these plans with little or no specific knowledge of how a future incident will evolve, the plan must describe broad concepts that allow for quick and flexible operations. They must allow for several courses of action and project potential uses of organizations and resources during those operations. Planners should view plans as living contingency plans because they provide the starting point for response operations if and when an emergency occurs. Forward and reverse planning. Forward planning starts with (assumed) present conditions and lays out potential decisions and actions forward in time, building an operation step-by-step toward the desired goal or objective. Conversely, reverse planning starts with the end in mind and works backward, identifying the objectives necessary and the related actions to achieve the desired end-state. When using reverse planning, it is essential to have a well-defined goal or objective. In practice, planners usually use a combination of the two methods: they use forward planning to look at what is feasible in the time allotted and use reverse planning to establish the desired goal (or end-state) and related objectives.

Common Planning Pitfalls The most common planning pitfall is the development of lengthy, overly detailed plans that those responsible for their execution do not read. A plan that tries to cover every conceivable condition or that attempts to address every detail will only frustrate, constrain, and confuse those charged with its implementation. Successful plans are simple and flexible. Another major pitfall faced by planners is failing to account for the community’s needs, concerns, capabilities, and desire to help. Often, plans are written based on the “average citizen” or mirror image of the planners. However, communities are diverse and comprise a wide variety of people, including those with access and functional needs, those requiring the support of service animals, and those who cannot independently care for themselves, such as children. This also includes diverse racial and ethnic populations and immigrant communities. Failing to base planning on the demographics and requirements of the particular community may lead to false planning assumptions, ineffective courses of action, and inaccurate resource calculations. Related to this pitfall is the notion that responders are the only people

1-7

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

who can take action. The public often does their work before responders arrive. The community must be engaged in the planning process and included as an integral part of the plan. Planning is only as good as the information on which it is based. Too often, planners rely on untested assumptions or uncoordinated resources. Planners should ensure that they have adequately validated assumptions and properly coordinated with those agencies/entities that they include in their plan. Planning needs may be coordinated directly with a required agency/entity via a memorandum of agreement (MOA)/memorandum of understanding (MOU) or by signatory of a designated representative. Planning is not a theoretical process that occurs without an understanding of the community, nor is it a scripting process that tries to prescribe hazard actions and response actions with unjustified precision. Community-based plans provide a starting point for operations, adjusting as the situation dictates and as facts replace planning assumptions.

Planning Considerations Emergency planning includes the key areas involved in addressing any threat or hazard: prevention, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation. Integrating the key areas as part of the overall planning effort allows jurisdictions to produce an effective EOP and advance overall preparedness. Prevention consists of actions that reduce risk from human-caused incidents, primarily terrorism (see Figure 1.3). Prevention planning can also help mitigate secondary or opportunistic incidents that may occur after the primary incident. Incorporating prevention methods into the comprehensive planning process also helps a jurisdiction identify information or intelligence requirements that support the overall planning process.

Figure 1.3: Types of Hazards

Protection reduces or eliminates a threat to people, property, and the environment. Primarily focused on adversarial incidents, the protection of critical infrastructure and key resources (CIKR) is vital to local jurisdictions, national security, public health and safety, and economic vitality. Protection planning safeguards citizens and their freedoms, critical infrastructure, property, and the economy from acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies. It includes actions or measures taken to cover or shield

1-8

1. The Basics of Planning

assets from exposure, injury, or destruction. Protective actions may occur before, during, or after an incident and prevent, minimize, or contain the impact of an incident. Response embodies the actions taken in the immediate aftermath of an incident to save and sustain lives, meet basic human needs, and reduce the loss of property and the effect on critical infrastructure and the environment. Following an incident, response operations reduce the physical, psychological, social, and economic effects of an incident. Response planning provides rapid and disciplined incident assessment to ensure a quickly scalable, adaptable, and flexible response. It incorporates national response doctrine as presented in the NRF, which defines basic roles and responsibilities for incident response across all levels of government and the private sector. Recovery encompasses both short-term and long-term efforts for the rebuilding and revitalization of affected communities. Recovery planning builds stakeholder partnerships that lead to community restoration and future sustainability and resiliency.5 Recovery planning must provide for a near-seamless transition from response activities to short-term recovery operations—including restoration of interrupted utility services, reestablishment of transportation routes, and the provision of food and shelter to displaced persons. Planners should design long-term recovery plans to maximize results through the efficient use of resources and incorporate national recovery doctrine. A recovery plan should address:

Planning for Adaptive versus Non-Adaptive Risks

One of the fundamental challenges planners face is how to address, through their planning efforts, the differences in risk that a hazard or threat poses to a jurisdiction. One way to focus those efforts is to determine whether the hazard’s or threat’s risk is adaptive or non-adaptive. A hazard or threat shows adaptive risk if it has the ability to change its behavior or characteristics in reaction to protection, prevention, response, or recovery measures taken by a jurisdiction. Only human-caused hazards or adversarial threats, such as civil disturbances or terrorism, have adaptive risk characteristics. When facing a hazard or threat characterized by adaptive risk, planners must continually evaluate and evolve their plans as the adversary learns and adapts to existing plans. Natural and technological hazards fall into the category of non-adaptive risks. Their physical characteristics and disaster dimensions do not change when a jurisdiction takes preventive, protective, or mitigation measures. Plans for such hazards tend to be more stable, requiring change only as the characteristics of the jurisdiction change. Traditional mitigation activities are most appropriate to deal with these risks. It is important to remember that this is not a “black and white” differentiation—extremist groups may take the opportunity presented by a hurricane (non-adaptive risk) to launch a terrorist attack (adaptive risk).

• Recovery-related MAAs and regional compacts

• Prewritten emergency ordinances that facilitate recovery operations, such as those dealing with road closures, debris removal, and expedited permitting

• Continuity of government (COG) operations (may also be addressed in a separate continuity of operations [COOP] plan)

• Strategies for including civic leaders and the public in the recovery decision-making process

• Community efforts that affect mitigation processes with the potential to reduce the effects of a threat or incident.

Mitigation, with its focus on the impact of a hazard, encompasses the structural and non-structural approaches taken to eliminate or limit a hazard’s presence; peoples’ exposure; or interactions with people, property, and the environment. The emphasis on sustained actions to reduce long-term risk differentiates

5 Sustainability refers to decision making that does not reduce the options of future generations, but passes on to them a natural, economic, and social environment that provides a high quality of life. Resiliency refers to the ability to resist, absorb, recover from, or successfully adapt to adversity or a change in conditions.

1-9

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

1-10

mitigation from those tasks that are required to survive an emergency safely. Examples of mitigation activities include:

• Complying with or exceeding National Flood Insurance Program floodplain management regulations

• Enforcing stringent building codes, flood-proofing requirements, seismic design standards, and wind- bracing requirements for new construction or repairing existing buildings

• Adopting zoning ordinances that steer development away from areas subject to flooding, storm surge, or coastal erosion

• Retrofitting public buildings to withstand ground shaking or hurricane-strength winds

• Acquiring damaged homes or businesses in flood-prone areas, relocating the structures, and returning the property to open space, wetlands, or recreational uses

• Building community shelters and tornado safe rooms to help protect people in their homes, public buildings, and schools in hurricane- and tornado-prone areas.

2. Understanding the Planning Environment: Federal, State, and Local Plans Overview Understanding the basics of planning is critical to the planner’s role. Building on that understanding, this chapter explains the environment within which this planning occurs, outlines the links between different levels of government, and summarizes how planning considerations shape the content of the NRF, Federal plans, and state/local EOPs.

Relationship Between Federal Plans and State Emergency Operations Plans Federal plans and state EOPs describe each respective government-level approach to emergency operations. Because these levels of government all provide support to emergency operations conducted at the local level, there are similar and overlapping functions in their plans. As indicated in Chapter 1, all levels of government must coordinate plans vertically to ensure a singular operational focus. The goal is to ensure the effectiveness of combined Federal and state operations through integration and synchronization. Key concepts for a national planning structure—integration and synchronization—serve different but equally important purposes in linking Federal plans and state EOPs. From the Federal perspective, integrated planning helps answer the question of how Federal agencies and departments add the right resources at the right time to support state and local operations. From the states’ perspectives, integrated planning provides answers to questions about which other organizations to work with and where to obtain resources.

The National Incident Management System NIMS provides a consistent framework for incident management, regardless of the cause, size, or complexity of the incident. NIMS provides the Nation’s first responders and authorities with the same foundation for incident management for all hazards. The Incident Command System (ICS) is a critical component of NIMS and is used to manage all domestic incidents.

2-1

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

As part of the development of EOPs, institutionalizing NIMS means that government officials:

• Adopt NIMS through executive order, proclamation, or legislation as the jurisdiction’s official incident response system

• Direct all incident managers and response organizations in their jurisdictions to train, exercise, and use NIMS in their response operations

• Integrate NIMS into functional, system-wide emergency operations policies, plans, and procedures

• Provide ICS training for responders, supervisors, and command-level officers

• Conduct exercises for responders at all levels, including responders from all disciplines and jurisdictions.

Depending on the jurisdiction, institutionalization means that an EOP should:

• Use ICS and the multiagency coordination system to manage and support all incidents, including recurring and/or planned special events

• Integrate all response agencies and entities into a single, seamless system, from the incident command post, to the department emergency operations centers (EOC) and local EOCs, to the state EOC, and to regional- and national-level entities

• Develop and implement a public information plan

• Identify and characterize all resources according to established standards and types

• Ensure that all personnel are trained properly for the jobs they perform and the training is validated

• Ensure interoperability, accessibility, and redundancy of communications. Planners should consider each of these requirements as they develop or revise their jurisdiction’s EOP.

The National Response Framework The NRF is a guide to how the Nation conducts all-hazards incident response. The NRF states that each Federal department or agency must also plan for its role in incident response. Virtually every Federal department and agency possesses resources that a jurisdiction may need when responding to an incident. Some Federal departments and agencies have primary responsibility for specific aspects of incident response, such as HAZMAT remediation. Others may have supporting roles in providing different types of resources, such as communications personnel and equipment. Regardless of their roles, all Federal departments and agencies must develop policies, plans, and procedures governing how they will effectively locate resources and provide them as part of a coordinated Federal response. The planning considerations described for response can also guide prevention and protection planning.

Planning Considerations The NRF identifies government responsibility to develop detailed all-hazards/all-threats EOPs. It states these plans should:

• Define leadership roles and responsibilities and clearly articulate the decisions that need to be made, who will make them, and when

• Include an all-hazards basic plan, as well as hazard- and threat-specific annexes

• Integrate and incorporate key private sector and nongovernmental elements

2-2

2. Understanding the Planning Environment: Federal, State, and Local Plans

• Include strategies for both no-notice and forewarned evacuations, with particular consideration given to assisting children, as well as individuals with disabilities, access and functional needs, or limited English proficiency.

State, Territorial, and Tribal Government Planning State, territorial, and tribal governments have significant resources of their own, including emergency management and homeland security agencies, police departments, health agencies, transportation agencies, incident management teams, specialized teams, and the National Guard. The NRF states that the role of a state government during emergency response is to supplement local efforts before, during, and after a disaster or emergency situation. If a state anticipates that its needs may exceed its resources, the Governor can request assistance from other states through MAAs (e.g., Emergency Management Assistance Compact) and/or from the Federal Government.

Local Government Planning Resilient Communities and Planning Resilience, broadly defined, is the ability to resist, absorb, recover from, or adapt to an adverse occurrence. Engaging the community in the planning process will improve community resiliency by increasing the understanding of threats and hazards, participating in the planning process, and communicating the expected actions for the community to undertake during an emergency.

At the local and state level, this entails knowing the community and its demographics, as well as involving both the formal and informal community leadership structure in the planning process. This is true for all levels of government as each level works to engage the issues surrounding individuals with access and functional needs, individuals with limited English proficiency, children, and those with household pets and service animals.

Engaging the private sector is a critical element of the process. Much of the critical infrastructure necessary to our communities is owned and operated by the private sector. Connecting the government and the private sector is, therefore, a necessary part of the planning process.

The NRF emphasizes the concept of resilient communities. Resiliency begins with prepared individuals and depends on the leadership and engagement of local government, civic leaders, and private sector businesses and organizations. Local police, fire, emergency medical services (EMS), emergency management, public health and medical providers, public works, and other community agencies are often the first to be notified about a threat or hazard or to respond to an incident. These entities should work with individuals, families, and service providers for people with disabilities and others with access and functional needs to enhance their awareness of risk levels and specific threats, develop household emergency plans that include household pets and service animals, and prepare emergency supply kits.

Concept of Operations The NRF guides governments at all levels, the private sector, nongovernmental organizations, and individual citizens toward a shared and effective response. Upon receiving the warning that a disaster is likely to occur or has occurred, elements of the NRF may be implemented in a scalable and flexible way to improve response.

Functional Organization The NRF uses 15 Emergency Support Functions (ESF) to group and describe the kinds of resources and types of Federal assistance available to augment state and local response efforts:

2-3

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

• ESF #1 Transportation • ESF #8 Public Health and Medical Services • ESF #2 Communications • ESF #9 Search and Rescue • ESF #3 Public Works and Engineering • ESF #10 Oil and Hazardous Materials Response • ESF #4 Firefighting • ESF #11 Agriculture and Natural Resources • ESF #5 Emergency Management • ESF #12 Energy • ESF #6 Mass Care, Emergency

Assistance, Housing, and Human Services

• ESF #13 Public Safety and Security • ESF #14 Long-Term Community Recovery

• ESF #7 Logistics Management and Resource Support

• ESF #15 External Affairs.

Each ESF has a Federal department or agency identified as its coordinator. During response and recovery operations, the coordinating agency forms and activates a team that is responsible for working with the appropriate state and local officials to identify unmet resource needs. The team also coordinates the flow of resources and assistance provided by the Federal Government to meet these needs.

Federal Emergency Plans at the National and Regional Levels The NRF serves as the foundation for the development of national and regional response plans that implement Federal response activities. At the national level, the Federal planning structure supports the NRF. FEMA Regions are developing plans to address potential activities and actions taken by regional offices of Federal departments and agencies in support of state and local operations. They also provide the necessary link between the state EOP and the NRF. Within an identified scope, each Regional plan addresses one or more of the following:

• Specifies the responsibilities assigned to each of the tasked Federal departments and agencies for mobilizing and deploying resources to assist the state(s) in response/recovery efforts

• Describes the relationship between the responding Federal agencies/departments and their state counterparts

• Provides information to the states on the various response mechanisms, capabilities, and resources available to them through the Federal Government

• Describes notification procedures and protocols for communicating with state officials; procedures and systems for communication; frequency of contact; and message content

• Provides for Incident Management Assistance Team personnel to assist in conducting a rapid situation assessment immediately prior to or after a disaster has occurred

• Describes coordination responsibilities of the regional liaison officer(s) and the provisions established for deployment to the state EOC

• Provides for deployment of Incident Management Assistance Team members to the state EOC/Joint Field Office (JFO) and/or staging locations or directly into the area impacted by the disaster

• Provides for obtaining work space in the state EOC and other locations for the initial response cadre; arrangements to obtain work space for the JFO and other follow-on response teams; and a variety of other activities that require extensive coordination.

2-4

2. Understanding the Planning Environment: Federal, State, and Local Plans

State, Territorial, and Tribal Emergency Operations Plans The state/territorial/tribal EOP addresses several operational response functions and describes how to fulfill its mission of providing resources to satisfy unmet needs. These functions focus on actions, such as direction and control, warning, public notification, and evacuation, that the state/territorial/tribal government must take during the initial phase of response operations and that fall outside of the Federal response mission. Thus, they are not appropriate for inclusion in Federal response plans. Because state/territorial/tribal governments must channel Federal assistance provided under the NRF, some choose to mirror the NRF functions. There is no need to replicate the Federal ESFs exactly. Some have successfully used a hybrid approach, either by giving the counterparts of Federal ESFs extra responsibilities appropriate to the state/territorial/tribal level or by creating functions in addition to those used by the Federal Government to address state/territorial/tribal responsibilities and concerns. The important thing is for the choice of functions to fit the state/territorial/tribal government’s own concept of operations, policies, governmental structure, and resource base. That fit is critical, because the EOP describes what the state/territorial/tribal government will do when conducting emergency operations. The EOP:

• Identifies the departments and agencies designated to perform response and recovery activities and specifies tasks they must accomplish

• Outlines the assistance that is available to local jurisdictions during disasters that generate emergency response and recovery needs beyond what the local jurisdiction can satisfy

• Specifies the direction, control, and communications procedures and systems that will be relied upon to alert, notify, recall, and dispatch emergency response personnel; warn local jurisdictions; protect residents and property; and request aid/support from other jurisdictions and/or the Federal Government (including the role of the Governor’s Authorized Representative)

• Describes ways to obtain initial situation assessment information from the local jurisdiction(s) directly affected by the disaster or emergency

• Describes how work space and communication support will be provided to the Regional Liaison Officers and other Federal teams deployed to the EOC, staging areas, or the area directly impacted by the disaster

• Designates a State Coordinating Officer to work directly with the Federal Coordinating Officer

• Assists the Federal Coordinating Officer in identifying candidate locations for establishing the JFO

• Provides coordinating instructions and provisions for implementing interstate compacts, as applicable

• Describes the logistical support for planned operations.

Local Emergency Operations Plans Local EOPs should largely be consistent with state/territorial/tribal plans. The EOP addresses several operational response functions and describes how to fulfill its mission of providing resources to satisfy unmet needs. These functions focus on actions, such as direction and control, warning, public notification, and evacuation, that the local government must take during the initial phase of response operations and that fall outside of the state/territorial/tribal response mission. Thus, they are not appropriate for inclusion in those response plans. Local jurisdictions should work with their state, territorial, or tribal leadership to clearly delineate roles, responsibilities, and structures as required. At a minimum the EOP describes what the local government will do when conducting emergency operations. The EOP:

2-5

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

2-6

• Identifies the departments and agencies designated to perform response and recovery activities and specifies tasks they must accomplish

• Outlines the integration of assistance that is available to local jurisdictions during disaster situations that generate emergency response and recovery needs beyond what the local jurisdiction can satisfy

• Specifies the direction, control, and communications procedures and systems that will be relied upon to alert, notify, recall, and dispatch emergency response personnel; warn the public; protect residents and property; and request aid/support from other jurisdictions and/or the Federal Government (including the role of the Governor’s Authorized Representative)

• Provides coordinating instructions and provisions for implementing MAAs, as applicable

• Describes the logistical support for planned operations.

Linking Federal, State, and Local Emergency Plans A close analysis of the planning relationships described in the previous section shows that the FEMA Region is the interface between the Federal and jurisdictional planning processes. The FEMA Region is the place where jurisdictional needs during an incident are converted into Federal support missions until a JFO is established. It is through the FEMA Region that planning for Federal operations is integrated and synchronized with planning for operations shaped by the hazards and risks faced by state, territorial, tribal, and local communities. Course of action development determines jurisdictional needs during the planning process. Similarly, FEMA Regions determine capability gaps, resource shortfalls, and state expectations for Federal assistance through the process of gap analysis. FEMA Regions conduct these analyses by using a joint planning team with multiple state representatives, individually with each state, or through some other method. To ensure a common operational concept, each Region’s plan may include an annex that summarizes the CONOPS, priorities, concerns, and needs of each state within its jurisdiction. In short, the relationships established between the FEMA Region and all Federal, state, and local partners ensure effective collaboration before, during, and after emergency operations. The integrated plans resulting from these relationships clarify the roles and responsibilities at all levels and result in more effective operations.

3. Format and Function: Identifying the Right Plan for the Job Overview The first two chapters provided a foundation for planners by illustrating not only the basics of planning, but also the environment in which planning occurs. Chapter 3 shifts from theory to application by examining the different types of plans and how they are used to meet the requirements of a jurisdiction.

The Emergency Operations Plan Traditionally, the focus of a jurisdiction’s operational planning effort has been the EOP. EOPs are plans that define the scope of preparedness and emergency management activities necessary for that jurisdiction. The EOP structures and concepts that follow provide an example for jurisdictions to use when developing any plan. The EOP format works well for both conventional and complex emergency operations. Emergency management involves several kinds of plans, just as it involves several kinds of actions. While many jurisdictions consider the EOP the centerpiece of their planning effort, it is not the only plan that addresses emergency management functions. Other types of plans that support and supplement the EOP are discussed later in this chapter. A jurisdiction’s EOP is a document that:

• Assigns responsibility to organizations and individuals for carrying out specific actions that exceed routine responsibility at projected times and places during an emergency

• Sets forth lines of authority and organizational relationships and shows how all actions will be coordinated

• Describes how people (including unaccompanied minors, individuals with disabilities, others with access and functional needs, and individuals with limited English proficiency) and property are protected

• Identifies personnel, equipment, facilities, supplies, and other resources available within the jurisdiction or by agreement with other jurisdictions

• Reconciles requirements with other jurisdictions. An EOP is flexible enough for use in all emergencies. A complete EOP describes: the purpose of the plan; the situation; assumptions; CONOPS; organization and assignment of responsibilities; administration and logistics; plan development and maintenance; and authorities and references.

3-1

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

The EOP contains annexes appropriate to the jurisdiction’s organization and operations. EOPs pre- designate a jurisdictional lead agency and/or functional area representatives to the incident command, unified command, or multiagency coordination entity whenever possible to facilitate responsive and collaborative incident management. The EOP facilitates prevention, protection, response, and short-term recovery, which sets the stage for successful long-term recovery. Response actions and some post-disaster recovery issues, such as the rebuilding and placement of temporary housing facilities, are time-sensitive. Advance planning makes performing these tasks easier, especially in a changing environment. Jurisdictions, especially those with known severe hazards and vulnerabilities, should integrate complex housing and overall recovery planning with that of the EOP. Typically, an EOP does not detail long-term recovery actions. However, the EOP should provide for a transition to a long-term recovery plan, if any exists, and for a stand-down of response forces. As mentioned previously, the EOP may cover some short-term recovery actions that are natural extensions of response. For example, meeting human needs requires maintaining logistical support for mass care actions initiated in the response phase. It could also involve the restoration of infrastructure “lifelines” and the removal of debris to facilitate the response. At the state’s discretion, its disaster assistance plans for distribution of Federal and state relief funds might be included as an annex to the EOP. Disaster assistance plans indicate how to identify, contact, match to aid, certify, and provide support to eligible aid recipients.

State and Local Emergency Operations Plans In the Nation’s system of emergency management, the local government must act first to address the public’s emergency needs. Depending on the nature and size of the emergency, Federal, state, territorial, tribal, and regional (e.g., the National Capital Region) assistance may be provided to the local jurisdiction. The focus of local and tribal EOPs is on the emergency measures that are essential for protecting the public. At the minimum, these measures include warning, emergency public information, evacuation, and shelter. States, territories, and regional organizations play three roles: assisting local jurisdictions whose capabilities must be augmented or are overwhelmed by an emergency; responding first to certain emergencies; and working with the Federal Government when Federal assistance is necessary. The state EOP is the framework within which local EOPs are created and through which the Federal Government becomes involved. As such, the state EOP ensures that all levels of government are able to mobilize in a unified way to safeguard the well-being of their citizens. The state and regional organization EOPs should synchronize and integrate with local, tribal, and regional plans. A planning team’s main concern is to include all essential information and instructions in the EOP. FEMA does not mandate a particular format for EOPs. In the final analysis, an EOP’s format is acceptable if users understand it, are comfortable with it, and can extract the information they need. In designing a format for an all-hazards EOP, the planning team should consider the following:

• Organization. Do the EOP section and subsection titles help users find what they need, or must users sift through information that is not relevant? Can single plan components be revised without forcing a substantial rewrite of the entire EOP?

• Progression. In any one section of the EOP, does each element seem to follow from the previous one, or are some items strikingly out of place? Can the reader grasp the rationale for the sequence and scan for the information he or she needs?

3-2

3. Format and Function: Identifying the Right Plan for the Job

• Consistency. Does each section of the EOP use the same logical progression of elements, or must the reader reorient himself or herself in each section?

• Adaptability. Does the EOP’s organization make its information easy to use during unanticipated situations?

• Compatibility. Does the EOP format promote or hinder coordination with other jurisdictions, including the state and/or Federal Government? Can reformatting the EOP or making a chart of the coordinating relationships (i.e., a “crosswalk”) solve problems in this area?

• Inclusivity. Does the EOP appropriately address the needs of those with disabilities or other access and functional needs, children, individuals with limited English proficiency, and household pets and service animals?

Structuring an Emergency Operations Plan While the causes of emergencies vary greatly, their potential effects do not. Jurisdictions can plan for effects common to several hazards rather than develop separate plans for each hazard. For example, earthquakes, floods, and hurricanes can all force people from their homes. The jurisdiction can develop a plan organized around the task of finding shelter and food for individuals who have been displaced. If desired, the EOP planners can make minor adjustments to reflect differences in the speed of onset, duration, and intensity of the hazards. This section outlines a variety of formats that a jurisdiction could use when developing an EOP, including a functional format, an ESF format, and an agency-/department-focused format. These format options come from EOPs used by jurisdictions across the Nation. They are suggestions for new planners on where to begin when developing an EOP. Seasoned planners can use these formats to validate the effectiveness of their EOP’s organization. The planning team must try to identify all critical common tasks or functions that participating organizations must perform, and assign responsibility for accomplishing each task or function. The planning team must work with the heads of tasked organizations to ensure that they prepare SOPs/SOGs detailing how they will carry out critical tasks associated with the jurisdiction’s strategy. Because the jurisdiction’s goal is a coordinated and integrated response, all EOP styles should flow from a basic plan that outlines the jurisdiction’s overall emergency organization and its policies. As the planning team begins to develop a new EOP, members must discuss which format is the most effective for and applicable to their jurisdiction. The jurisdiction’s style of government or the results of a risk assessment may help the team decide which format to use. For example, in a sprawling metropolitan county that contains several municipalities and has a complex government structure, county emergency operations may assume more of a coordination and support role. Thus, an ESF approach may be optimal for that county’s EOP. In contrast, a small rural community with a limited government structure and staff that performs multiple duties may benefit from a function-based EOP. In short, “form follows function” in the sense that operational needs should help determine the EOP format a jurisdiction uses. Generally, the functional or agency/department formats are used by local jurisdictions, while the ESF format tends to be used by larger jurisdictions and other levels of government. None of these formats are mandatory to achieve NIMS compliance. The planning team may modify any of these formats to make the EOP fit the jurisdiction’s emergency management strategy, policy, resources, and capabilities. Note, however, that some states prescribe an EOP format for their local governments.

3-3

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

Traditional Functional Format The traditional functional structure is probably the most commonly used EOP format. This is the format that many jurisdictions have used to develop EOPs since the 1990s, following FEMA’s Civil Preparedness Guide 1-8 and State and Local Guide 101, which have been rescinded and replaced by this Guide. The traditional functional format has three major sections: the basic plan, functional annexes, and hazard-specific annexes (see Figure 3.1).6

Figure 3.1: Traditional Functional EOP Format

6 The term annex is used throughout this CPG to refer to functional, support, hazard/incident-specific, or other supplements to the basic plan, consistent with the NRF. Some jurisdictions’ plans may use the term appendix in the same fashion (e.g., hazard-specific appendix).

3-4

3. Format and Function: Identifying the Right Plan for the Job

The basic plan provides 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. The functional annexes are individual chapters that focus on missions (e.g., communications, damage assessment). These annexes describe the actions, roles, and responsibilities of participating organizations. Functional annexes discuss how the jurisdiction manages the function before, during, and after the emergency, and they identify the agencies that implement that function. However, each functional annex addresses only general strategies used for any emergency. The hazard-, threat-, or incident-specific annexes describe the policies, situation, CONOPS, and responsibilities for particular hazards, threats, or incidents. They explain the procedures that are unique to that annex for a hazard type. For example, the direction and control annex may discuss how a local law enforcement’s command post would coordinate its functions; this information would only be addressed in a hazard-, threat-, or incident-specific annex if it would be different for particular hazards, threats, or incidents. Strategies already outlined in a functional annex should not be repeated in a hazard-specific annex. The traditional format also uses a specific outline to define the elements of each annex. When the format is followed, EOP users can find information in the plan more easily because the same type of information is in the same location. The traditional EOP format is flexible enough to accommodate all jurisdictional strategies. The planning team can add annexes to include a new function or a newly identified hazard or threat. Similarly, the team can separate an operational issue (e.g., mass care) into two separate annexes (e.g., sheltering and feeding, distribution of emergency supplies).

Emergency Support Function Format The ESF format is the plan structure used in the NRF. Many state-level EOPs use this format. It begins with a basic plan, includes unique annexes that support the whole plan, addresses individual ESF annexes, and then attaches separate support or incident annexes (see Figure 3.2).

3-5

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

Figure 3.2: Emergency Support Function EOP Format

The basic plan provides an overview of the jurisdiction’s emergency management system. It briefly explains the hazards faced, capabilities, requirements, and the jurisdiction’s emergency management structure. It also reviews expected mission execution for each emergency phase and identifies the agencies that have the lead for a given ESF. The basic plan then outlines the ESFs activated during an emergency.

3-6

3. Format and Function: Identifying the Right Plan for the Job

The ESF annexes identify the ESF coordinator and the primary and support agencies for each function. ESFs with multiple primary agencies should designate an ESF coordinator to coordinate pre-incident planning. An ESF annex describes expected mission execution for each emergency phase and identifies tasks assigned to members of the ESF, including nongovernmental and private sector partners. The support annexes describe the framework through which a jurisdiction’s departments and agencies, the private sector, not-for-profit and voluntary organizations, and other nongovernmental organizations coordinate and execute the common emergency management strategies. The actions described in the support annexes apply to nearly every type of emergency. Each support annex identifies a coordinating agency, as well as assisting and cooperating agencies. In some instances, two departments or agencies share coordinating agency responsibilities. The hazard-, threat-, or incident-specific annexes describe the policies, situation, CONOPS, and responsibilities for particular hazards, threats, or incidents. Each annex should consider the following components:

• Policies. The policy section identifies the authorities unique to the incident type, the special actions or declarations that may result, and any special policies that may apply.

• Situation. The situation section describes the incident or hazard characteristics and the planning assumptions. It also outlines the management approach for those instances when key assumptions do not hold (e.g., how authorities will operate if they lose communication with senior decision makers).

• Concept of Operations. This section describes the flow of the emergency management strategy for accomplishing a mission or set of objectives in order to reach a desired end-state. It identifies special coordination structures, specialized response teams or resources needed, and other considerations unique to the type of incident or hazard.

• Responsibilities. Each incident annex identifies the coordinating and cooperating agencies involved in an incident-, hazard-, or threat-specific response.

Agency-/Department-Focused Format The agency-/department-focused format addresses each department’s or agency’s tasks in a separate section. In addition to the basic plan, this format includes lead and support agency sections and hazard- specific procedures for the individual agencies (see Figure 3.3). Very small communities may find this format more appropriate for their situation than the other formats previously presented.

3-7

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

Figure 3.3: Agency-/Department-Focused EOP Format

Like the other EOP formats, the basic plan provides an overview of a jurisdiction’s ability to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from emergencies. It summarizes the basic tasks taken to prepare for a disaster and defines how the plan is developed and maintained. Separate lead and support agency sections discuss the emergency functions completed by individual departments, agencies, and nongovernmental partners. Each individual agency section still needs to refer to other agency sections to ensure coordination with their respective emergency management strategies. The hazard-specific procedures section addresses the unique preparedness, response, and recovery strategies relevant to each department or agency for specific disaster types. The hazard-specific procedures can immediately follow each agency section or be attached as a separate chapter to the plan. This format allows EOP users to review only those procedures specific to their agency without having to review other agencies’ response tasks. The individual sections still reference the unique relationships that need to exist with other agencies during a disaster; however, they do not contain details on the other departments’ or agencies’ strategies. If needed, the plan users can go to the other departments’ or agencies’ sections and review their procedures to understand the bigger picture. The level of detail provided in each section varies according to the needs of the specific department or agency. Agencies or departments with detailed SOPs/SOGs may not need much information in their portion of the plan, while others may need to provide more details in the EOP.

3-8

3. Format and Function: Identifying the Right Plan for the Job

Using Planning Templates Managers and planners, particularly at the local level, recognize that the planning process demands a significant commitment of time, effort, and resources. To ease this burden, many planners and jurisdictions use templates to complete their plans. Some states provide templates to their local jurisdictions. Other templates are available through hazard-specific preparedness programs or commercially from private sector vendors. Planners must ensure that using those templates does not undermine the planning process. For example, “fill-in-the-blank” templates can defeat the socialization, mutual learning, and role acceptance that are so important to achieving effective planning and a successful response. The best templates are those that offer a plan format and describe the content that each section might contain, allowing for tailoring to the jurisdiction’s geographic, political, and social environment. With this in mind, planners should consider CPG 101 a template because it provides plan formats and content guidance. When using a planning template, planners should consider whether:

• The resulting plan represents the jurisdiction’s unique hazard and threat situation by ensuring that the underlying facts and assumptions match those applicable to the jurisdiction

• The hazard and risk assessments match the jurisdiction’s demographics, infrastructure inventory, probability of hazard occurrence, etc.

• The template broadly identifies the resources needed to address the problems generated by an emergency or disaster

• Using the template stifles creativity and flexibility, thereby constraining the development of strategies and tactics needed to solve disaster problems

• Using the templates encourages planning “in a vacuum,” by allowing a single individual to “write” the plan.

Regardless of the template used, planners will likely discover that the template will need to be adjusted to meet their jurisdiction’s needs. This observation does not mean that planners should not use templates or plans from other jurisdictions to help with writing style and structure. Instead, what it does mean is that planners must evaluate the usefulness of any planning tool (e.g., template, software) used as part of the planning process.

Additional Types of Plans Emergency operations involve several kinds of plans, just as they involve several kinds of actions. While the EOP is often the centerpiece of emergency planning efforts, it is not the only plan that addresses emergency management or homeland security missions. There are other types of plans that support and supplement the EOP and its annexes. Joint Operational Plans or Regional Coordination Plans typically involve multiple levels of government to address a specific incident or a special event. These plans should be developed in a manner consistent with this Guide and included as an annex or supplemental plan to the EOP, depending on the subject of the plan. Standing plans should be an annex to the related EOPs, while special events plans should be stand-alone supplements based on the information contained within the related EOPs. Administrative plans describe basic policies and procedures to support a governmental endeavor. Typically, they deal less with external work products than with internal processes. Examples include

3-9

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

plans for financial management, personnel management, records review, and labor relations activities. Such plans are not the direct concern of an EOP. However, planners should reference the administrative plan in the EOP if its provisions apply during an emergency. Planners should make similar references in the EOP for exceptions to normal administrative plans permitted during an emergency. Preparedness plans address the process for developing and maintaining capabilities for the whole community both pre- and post-incident. Preparedness plans should address capabilities needed for prevention, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation activities. These plans include the schedule for identifying and meeting training needs based on the expectations created by the EOP; the process and schedule for developing, conducting, and evaluating exercises and correcting identified deficiencies; and plans for procuring, retrofitting, or building facilities and equipment that could withstand the effects of the hazards facing the jurisdiction. Continuity plans outline essential functions that must be performed during an incident that disrupts normal operations and the methods by which these functions will be performed. They also describe the process for timely resumption of normal operations once the emergency has ended. COOP plans address the continued performance of core capabilities and critical operations during any potential incident. COG plans address the preservation and/or reconstitution of government to ensure that constitutional, legislative, and/or administrative responsibilities are maintained. Recovery plans developed prior to a disaster enable jurisdictions to effectively direct recovery activities and expedite a unified recovery effort. Pre-incident planning performed in conjunction with community development planning helps to establish recovery priorities, incorporate mitigation strategies in the wake of an incident, and identify options and changes that should be considered or implemented after an incident. Post-incident community recovery planning serves to integrate the range of complex decisions in the context of the incident and works as the foundation for allocating resources. Mitigation plans outline a jurisdiction’s strategy for mitigating the hazards it faces. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires jurisdictions seeking certain disaster assistance funding to have approved mitigation plans. Mitigation planning is often a long-term effort and may be part of or tied to the jurisdiction’s strategic development plan or similar documents. Mitigation planning committees may differ from operational planning teams in that they include zoning boards, floodplain managers, and individuals with long-term cultural or economic interests. Existing plans for mitigating hazards are relevant to an EOP since both originate from a hazard-based analysis and share similar component requirements. Prevention and protection plans typically tend to be more facility focused and procedural or tactical in their content. Common jurisdictional prevention and protection plans include fusion center operations plans, sector-specific or CIKR security plans, and incident-specific contingency action plans.

Procedural Documents Procedural documents describe how to accomplish specific activities needed to finish a task or achieve a goal or objective. Put simply, plans describe the “what” and procedures describe the “how.” Planners should prepare procedural documents to keep the plan free of unnecessary detail. The basic criterion is: What does the audience of this part of the plan need to know or have set out as a matter of public record? Information and how-to instructions used by an individual or small group should appear in procedural documents. The plan should reference procedural documents as appropriate. With regard to many responsibilities in the EOP, it is enough to assign the responsibility to an individual (by position or authority) or organization and specify the assignee’s accountability: to whom does the

3-10

3. Format and Function: Identifying the Right Plan for the Job

person report or with whom does the person coordinate? For example, a plan assigning responsibility for extinguishing fires to the fire department would not detail procedures used at the scene or specify what fire equipment is most appropriate. In this situation, the EOP would defer to the fire department’s SOPs/SOGs. However, the plan would describe the relationship between the Incident Commander and the central organization directing the jurisdictional response to the emergency, of which the fire in question may be only a part. Overviews are brief concept summaries of an incident-related function, team, or capability. There are two types of overview documents. One type explains general protocols and procedures. This document serves as the bridge between all functional or hazard-specific planning annexes and procedural documentation. It could contain an EOC layout, describe activation levels, and identify which functions or sections are responsible for planning, operational, and support activities. An easy way to develop an overview document is to review the assignments and responsibilities outlined in the EOP and ensure that the overview document references the procedures developed to fulfill them. The second type of overview document is specific to a functional team or area. It describes the general responsibilities and tasks of a functional team. This overview document provides enough information to supporting personnel to aid in activities related to the function, team, or capability summarized by the document. It identifies qualifications to support the team, provides a summary of operational procedures, and defines possible missions in greater detail than is described in plan annexes. As an example, the overview document addressing transportation would describe the purpose of this function, composition of support personnel, requirements for the team or branch, and missions that might be required. It might also identify the hazards or conditions that determine when missions are assigned. A successful overview document helps orient a newly arriving member of the department or agency brought in to support a particular function, mission, or section. Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)/Standard Operating Guidelines (SOG) are complete reference documents that provide the purpose, authorities, duration, and details of the preferred method for performing a single function or a number of interrelated functions in a uniform manner. SOPs/SOGs often describe processes that evolved institutionally over the years or document common practices so that institutional experience is not lost to the organization as a result of staff turnover. SOPs/SOGs are sometimes task-specific (e.g., how to activate a siren system or issue an Emergency Alert System [EAS] message). SOPs/SOGs should grow naturally out of the responsibilities identified and described in the EOP. Staff members who typically engage in emergency activities should develop the procedures found in an SOP/SOG.

SOPs/SOGs may include checklists, call-down rosters, resource listings, maps, and charts. SOPs/SOGs may also describe how to notify staff; how to obtain and use equipment, supplies, and vehicles; how to obtain mutual aid; how to report information to organizational work centers and the EOC; and how to communicate with staff members who are operating from more than one location.

The planning team works with the senior representatives of tasked organizations to ensure that the SOPs/SOGs needed to implement the EOP do, in fact, exist and do not conflict with the EOP or with one another. Field Operations Guides (FOG) or handbooks are durable pocket or desk guides containing information required to perform specific assignments or functions. FOGs provide those individuals assigned to specific teams, branches, or functions with information about the procedures they are likely to perform or portions of an SOP/SOG appropriate for the missions they are likely to complete. The FOG is a short- form version of the SOP/SOG and serves as a resource document. When combined with the overview document, it gives an accurate and complete picture of the positions these individuals fill. In addition to relevant procedures, the FOG or handbook may include administrative procedures that staff must follow.

3-11

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101

Job aids are checklists or other materials that help users perform a task. Examples of job aids include telephone rosters, report templates, software or machine operating instructions, and task lists. Job aids are often included to help relatively inexperienced EOC personnel complete their assigned tasks or as a reference for experienced personnel. Job aids may also reduce complexity or the opportunity for error in executing a task (e.g., providing a lookup chart of temperature conversions rather than providing a formula for doing the conversion). These job aids do not eliminate the need for training, but may serve to address gaps in training during an incident.

Emergency Operations Plan Content The Basic Plan The basic plan provides an overview of the jurisdiction’s approach to emergency operations. It identifies emergency response policies, describes the response organization, and assigns tasks. Although the basic plan guides the development of the more operationally-oriented annexes, its primary audience consists of the jurisdiction’s senior official, his or her staff, agency heads, and the community (as appropriate). The elements listed in this section should meet the needs of this audience while providing a solid foundation for the development of supporting annexes.

Introductory Material Certain items that enhance accountability and ease of use should preface an EOP. Typical introductory material includes the following components:

• Cover Page. The cover page has the title of the plan. It should include a date and identify the jurisdiction(s) covered by the plan.

• Promulgation Document. Promulgation is the process that officially announces/declares a plan (or law). The promulgation document gives the plan official status. It gives both the authority and the responsibility to organizations to perform their tasks. It should also mention the responsibilities of tasked organizations with regard to preparing and maintaining their own procedures/guidelines and commit those organizations to carrying out the training, exercises, and plan maintenance needed to support the plan. In addition, the promulgation document allows senior officials to affirm their support for emergency management.