Harris County Case Study

 Aligning plans with emergency support functions (ESFs) can facilitate an efficient and effective response to emergencies. In this session, we will discuss Harris County’s experience converting its emergency operation plan (EOP) annexes to ESFs. 2

 Identify planning standards  Discuss the types of EOP formats that are available  Discuss the differences between the traditional EOP and the ESF  Describe the process the county used to convert the annexes  Discuss changes that will also be needed in the basic plan  Identify the benefits and challenges to converting

 National Response Framework ◦ Describes the all-hazards approach the nation will take in responding to emergency incidents ◦ core.pdf  The Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101, Version 2 (November 2010) ◦ Provides guidance to all levels of government in the development of EOPs. ◦ CPG_101_V2.pdf 4

 National Incident Management System (NIMS) ◦ Provides guidance in the management of incidents ◦  Texas Division of Emergency Management ◦ Provides checklists to assist local jurisdictions in meeting planning standards for annexes adableforms.htm#annexindex 5

 FEMA does not mandate a particular format for EOPs.  A format is acceptable if: ◦ Users understand it ◦ Users are comfortable with it ◦ Users can extract the information they need

 Agency- or department-focused  Functional  Emergency support function 7

 Used by smaller jurisdictions  Each department or agency’s tasks are listed in a separate annex 8

 Basic plan  Lead agencies  Support agencies  Hazard-specific procedures 9

 Fire  Law enforcement  Emergency medical  Emergency management  Public health  Others  Include agencies with a role in supporting the jurisdiction in an emergency  Describe hazard- specific strategies for any lead or support agency Hazard-Specific Procedures Lead Agencies Support Agencies 10

 Allows an agency or department to view their roles and responsibilities without having to review other agencies response tasks.  To find out the specific roles and responsibilities of other agencies or departments, one would have to go to each of the other departmental annexes. Pros Cons 11

 Most commonly used EOP format  Used by the state of Texas  Each functional annex includes general strategies for addressing specific missions (for example, communications, evacuation, etc.)  Each hazard-, threat-, or incident-specific annex identifies responsibilities for addressing each threat. 12

 Basic plan  Functional annexes  Hazard-, threat-, or incident-specific annexes 13

 A –Warning  B –Communications  C –Shelter and Mass Care  D –Radiological Protection  E –Evacuation  F –Firefighting  G –Law Enforcement  H –Health and Medical Services  I – Emergency Public Information  J –Recovery  K-Public Works and Engineering  L –Utilities  M –Resource Management  N –Direction and Control  O –Human Services  P –Hazard Mitigation  Q –Hazmat and Oil Spill Response  R –Search and Rescue  S –Transportation  T –Donations Management  U –Legal  V –Terrorist Incident Response 14

 Hurricane  Earthquake  Tornado  Hazardous Materials Incident  Terrorism  Flood  Radiological Incident  Biological Incident 15

 Authority  Purpose  Explanation of Terms  Situation and Assumptions  Concept of Operations  Organization and Assignment of Responsibilities  Direction and Control  Readiness Levels  Administration and Support  Development and Maintenance 16

 Used by most local jurisdictions  Templates are available through the state  Can accommodate most jurisdictions planning strategies  Not in sync with federal plans  Coordinating agencies and departments are not clearly identified at the beginning of the document.  Federal response (such as a joint field office) will be established according to ESF Pros Cons 17

 Provides the structure for coordinating federal response to an incident  Groups functions most frequently used to provide federal support to states and to facilitate interagency coordination 18

 Basic plan  ESF annexes  Support annexes  Hazard-, threat-, or incident- specific annexes 19

 1 –Transportation  2 – Communications  3 – Public Works and Engineering  4 – Firefighting  5 – Emergency Management  6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Housing, and Human Services  7 – Logistics Management and Resource Support  8 – Public Health and Medical Services  9 – Search and Rescue  10 – Oil and Hazardous Materials Response  11 – Agriculture and Natural Resources  12 – Energy  13 – Public Safety and Security  14 – Long-Term Community Recovery  15 – External Affairs 20

 Warning  Financial Management  Volunteer and Donations Management  Continuity of Operations  Worker Safety  Private Sector Coordination  Terrorism  Hurricane  Tornado  Earthquake  Flood/Dam Failure  Hazardous Materials Incident  Radiological Incident  Biological Incident Support Annexes Hazard-, Threat-, or Incident-Specific Annexes 21

 Identifies the coordinating department or agency  Identifies primary departments and agencies  Identifies supporting departments and agencies  Identifies scope 22

 Formed a planning team  Reviewed annex formats  Decided on general structure of the annex  Developed a template to structure the annexes by  Developed ESF annexes  Documented any planning gaps  Reviewed and revised annexes

 A – Warning  B – Communications  C – Shelter and Mass Care  D – Radiological Protection  E – Evacuation  F – Firefighting  G – Law Enforcement  H – Health and Medical Services  Support Annex  ESF 2 – Communications  ESF 6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Housing, and Human Services  ESF 10 – Oil and Hazardous Materials Response  ESF 16 – Evacuation  ESF 4 – Firefighting  ESF 13- Public Safety and Security  ESF 8 – Public Health and Medical Services Functional Annex ESF Annex 25

 I – Emergency Public Information  J – Recovery  K- Public Works and Engineering  L – Utilities  M – Resource Management  N – Direction and Control  O – Human Services  ESF 15 – External Affairs  ESF 14 – Long-Term Community Recovery  ESF 3 – Public Works and Engineering  ESF 12 – Energy  ESF 7 – Logistics Management and Resource Support  ESF 5 – Emergency Management  ESF 6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Housing, and Human Services Functional Annex ESF Annex 26

 P – Hazard Mitigation  Q – Hazmat and Oil Spill Response  R – Search and Rescue  S – Transportation  T – Donations Management  U – Legal  V – Terrorist Incident Response  ESF 14 – Long-Term Community Recovery  ESF 10 – Oil and Hazardous Materials Response  ESF 9 – Search and Rescue  ESF 1 – Transportation  Support Annex  Incident Specific Annex Functional Annex ESF Annex 27

 Should be revised to reference the ESFs throughout  Update charts showing responsibilities by department  Update charts showing primary, supporting, and coordinating responsibilities 28

29

30

 Plan structure used in the National Response Framework  Aligns EOP with federal response plans  Joint field offices are set up according to ESFs  Identifies the coordinating agency or department at the beginning of the ESF 31

 Meeting state standards ◦ Use state annex checklists to ensure annexes meet planning standards  Addressing annexes that do not fit an ESF ◦ Add additional ESF or use support or incident- specific annexes to ensure all plans are included  Making departments aware of the change ◦ Conduct training to make departments aware of changes to the EOP 32

 Inform stakeholders.  Provide charts to show how the existing format translates to the new ESF format.  Conduct training to familiarize stakeholders with the plans.  Conduct exercises to identify any deficiencies in the plans.  Prepare after action reports and improvement plans after each exercise and actual incident to make necessary plan improvements and address gaps. 33

34