Unformatted text preview: es And Attitudes Oh My! Examining Perceptions from Select Academics, Practitioners And Consultants on the Subject of Emergency Management Carol L. Cwiak, North Dakota State University Concur ~ 3-9 II The principal deficiency in the discussion of guiding principals of EM at various governmental levels is the failure to document exactly what funding, personnel, logistics will be available in all circumstances and the lack of joint training and exercises to document and verify that capability and then to decide how to surge capability in advance. Additionally, exercise scenarios often fail to stress the system to determine weaknesses. 3-11 Q1D. Do you believe that homeland security focused programs operate under a different set of principles than emergency management? Q1Da. If YES, what do you believe those principles are: Yes it seems that the focus of terrorism is all about response and misses mitigation and preparedness. 3-2 Somewhat Concur ~ 3-6 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Concur ~ 3-9 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Somewhat Concur ~ 3-10 II Intelligence and fusion are principles that would fit BOTH molds. 3-3 Do Not Concur ~ 3-6 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Do Not Concur ~ 3-9 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Do Not Concur ~ Have no idea what this means. 3-10 II Threat Analysis, Target Hardening, Intelligence, Preemptive Action, Law Enforcement 3-4 Concur ~ 3-6 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Concur ~ 3-9 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Don't understand what's meant. 3-10 II 97 Issues, Principles And Attitudes Oh My! Examining Perceptions from Select Academics, Practitioners And Consultants on the Subject of Emergency Management Carol L. Cwiak, North Dakota State University Homeland security is primarily involved with interior defense of the country (i.e. return to civil defense, Patriot Act, etc.). This is obvious by the amount of federal spending on programs such as Coast Guard, border security, intelligence and port security. Of the approximately $42 Billion in the DHS budget only 20% was dedicated for preparedness, FEMA & Training. Of that 20%, significantly less was dedicated to state and local programs where all incidents and disasters response are initiated. A shift to federal response is continuing to occur while local programs suffer increasingly demanding standards mandated by the feds, while providing a rapidly diminishing supply of resources to accomplish the mission. 3-5 Concur ~ 3-6 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Concur ~ 3-9 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Do Not Concur ~ Disagree with viewpoint, though understand the funding and priority shifts cause problems. 3-10 II The Department of Homeland Security has one principle mission to prevent a terrorist attack from occurring on American soil. EM programs reducing the impacts of these events, preparing the public for these events and dealing with consequences of these events have been marginalized by DHS' singular focus on prevention. FEMA and the nation's EM system are ill served by being included in DHS. The focus of DHS and decision-makers, especially at the Federal government level, on the terrorism prevention mission resulted in reducing the capabilities and capacities of the nation's EM system to effectively practice all four phases of EM. The result was the Katrina failure. 3-6 Concur ~ 3-6 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Concur ~ 3-9 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Do Not Concur ~ Confusion as to whether HS focus explains one threat and one phase (response). 3-10 II I may be misreading this question. I believe that DHS has forced an artificial distinction between the two. They question that is more pertinent is "should homeland security operate under a different set of principles?" I don't believe it should. I think the issues related to homeland security could have been handled under existing emergency management principles and programs coupled with a reorganization of law enforcement and intelligence activities. We were doing this prior to September 11 through the civil defense programs and the Metropolitan Medical Response System programs. If one views terrorism as another potential hazard to a community, then the comprehensive emergency management model comes into play. You can certainly mitigate the risk through combination of structural (e.g. target hardening) or non-structural (e.g. intelligence sharing) mitigation measures. You can prepare to respond to it on tactical and operational levels. However, DHS has created a system that distinguishes between terrorism and other community
Issues, Principles And Attitudes Oh My! Examining Perceptions from Select Academics, Practitioners And Consultants on the Subject of Emergency Management Carol L. Cwiak, North Dakota State University risks and has diverted resources from emergency management programs to fund what are essentially operational initiatives without any strategic or tactical context. 3-7 Concur ~ 3-6 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Concur ~ 3-9 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Somewhat Concur ~ Is EM part of HS or vice versa? We've been having this debate for 5 years! 310 II By its very name, DHS' focus is "security" and not "safety". This causes a direct conflict of interests and a very different leadership focus. That focus, in today's environment, is too easily...
View Full Document
- Spring '08
- The American, Emergency service