So much of preparedness focuses on the Response mission area, which is necessary, given the need to protect life and property in the immediate aftermath of a disaster; but we should never leave disaster recovery by the way side. I’ve blogged in the past about the significant lack of Recovery mission area exercises we typically see, but we shouldn’t forget that the foundation of preparedness is planning. How does your pre-disaster recovery plan look?
If jurisdictions have a pre-disaster recovery plan at all (and I mean beyond two paragraphs in their comprehensive emergency management plan), it’s typically focused on debris management. This isn’t without good cause. Debris management is incredibly complex, has a lot of benchmarks to follow in terms of best practices, and must include all of FEMA’s requirements, which largely stem from lessons learned in debris management. Having a debris management plan in place can also qualify a jurisdiction to receive a higher percentage of reimbursement. That said, debris management isn’t the only aspect of recovery that must be planned for.
FEMA recently released the Pre-Disaster Recovery Planning Guide for State Governments (November 2016). I’ll admit, the first thing I looked for in the document were references to CPG-101, which is FEMA’s established standard for planning. I was thrilled to find that it’s not only mentioned, but much of the document is based upon CPG-101. Found in the document’s early narrative are topics such as the importance of aligning disaster recovery with hazard mitigation, as well as aligning disaster recovery with response. These are two important factors which make disaster recovery even more complex, as disaster recovery is clearly not only an end state itself, but also a bridge between response and mitigation.
The document also outlines the differences and similarities between pre-disaster recovery planning and post-disaster recovery planning. Another important distinction. Many give the excuse of not having a vigorous pre-disaster recovery plan because there are too many unknown variables to anticipate and plan for. I usually throw my bullshit flag on this statement. While there is some truth to the statement, it’s also a convenient excuse. For the same reasons why we create emergency operations plans before a disaster ever strikes, we must develop recovery plans before a disaster strikes. While there are unknowns, there are also many solid assumptions we can make for the foundation of our planning. We can identify key activities, assign responsibility, and work toward identifying gaps and building capability and capacity. Once a disaster does occur, we then pull people out of the response to begin drawing up more specific plans for disaster recovery, hopefully capitalizing on our pre-disaster planning efforts.
Much of the document is a breakdown of CPG-101 planning steps in the context of disaster recovery. They give some great examples and references throughout the document. From my quick review, this is a pretty solid document. While the intended audience is state government, I see easy applicability of this document to most, if not all, local governments – so long as it’s approached with a scaled perspective.
I’m very pleased that FEMA continues to tie preparedness standards together, doing away with decades long practices of response-oriented preparedness tasks being handled one way, while the tasks of other mission areas are handled very differently. Across the whole spectrum of preparedness, in consideration of every mission area and each of the POETE elements, we need to start identifying critical intersections which will help us capitalize on efforts. We need to do away with the isolation and siloing of these, and begin working more collaboratively. From this, we will see greater success.
Consume and ponder. Feedback is always appreciated.
© 2017 – Timothy Riecker, CEDP