Arizona: One Approach to doing a THIRA Presented by: Lisa Hansen, Assistant Director, Planning and Preparedness, Arizona Department of Homeland Security Steve Davis, Project Consultant, All Hands Consulting Session 5-5 Program Management and Sustainment Session 5-5 Program Management and Sustainment 1

 Lisa Hansen - Assistant Director, Planning and Preparedness Arizona Department of Homeland Security  Steve Davis – Project Manager, Phoenix Strategic Planning Project All Hands Consulting 2

 Preparedness is based on strengthening our collective security and resilience through systematic preparation for the threats that pose the greatest risk. Adapted from the Strategic National Risk Assessment

 The Arizona Department of Homeland Security (AZDOHS) conducted a Target Capabilities Assessment.  Arizona Division of Emergency Management (ADEM) conducted a Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA)  AZDOHS completed the 2011 State Preparedness Plan (SPR) 4

5

6 Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (Does not include Adversarial Threats)

7 Not assessed (5) 100% Capable (4) (3) (2) (1) No Capability 0% Arizona SPR Capability Scores

 State Strategy Goals:  Enhance Arizona’s Common Capabilities (Plans, Comms, etc.)  Prevent Terrorist Attacks  Enhance Border Security  Protect Critical Infrastructure & Key Resources  Respond to Incidents  Recover from Incidents 8

 Phoenix needed to update their Urban Area Homeland Security Strategy.  Phoenix asked to include a THIRA as part of the process.  THIRA guidance was not yet issued.  So, working with the State, we decided to validate the 2011 SPR as a means of doing the THIRA. 9

November December October September August JulyJanuary February March April May June Final UASI Investment Justifications THIRA DHS Guidance Funding Allocation Prioritize Core Capabilities Prioritized Core Capability Targets Develop Investment Justifications Inner Ring – Time Middle Ring – Process Outer Ring – Product Develop Initial Budget UASI Initial Budget to SAA UASI Homeland Security Grant Lifecycle Draft UASI Investment Justifications Guidance Summary & Budget Guide Review DHS Guidance Training & Exercise Plan Workshop Draft Regional T&E Plan Final Regional Training & Exercise Plan Planning Begins for New Grant Cycle UASI Strategy Assessment/ Review Revised Homeland Security Strategy Capabilities Assessment Capability Assessment Improvement Plan Improvement Plan Conference New Budget Conduct THIRA 10

 Phoenix Strategy:  Focused on Rapid Response Teams  Goals largely achieved  Needed to be updated Phoenix wanted a fresh start and asked that the new Strategy be based on an assessment of threats and capabilities. 11

 Research  Stakeholders  THIRA  Threat Assessment  Capabilities Assessment (Estimation)  Gap Analysis  Update Strategy 12

1. Assesses your threats and hazards 2. Assesses the vulnerability to those hazards 3. Estimate the consequences of those threats and hazards impacting the community 4. Establish capability targets 5. Estimate current capability vs. target 6. Captures the results of the THIRA and use it to update your Strategy 13

Objective: Conduct a State Preparedness Report (SPR) Validation Exercise to:  Conduct a Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment  Conduct a Capabilities Estimation  Perform a Gap Analysis  Prioritize Select Capabilities to Sustain and Enhance  Build and Resource Implementation Steps - Allocate Resources Based on Results 14

 We all have been doing threat assessments, capability assessments, analyzing gaps, and updating Strategies for almost 10 years now.  Now we do THIRA, capability estimation, and gap analysis to update the Strategy.  This should be part of the grant lifecycle.  The difference is: How will the THIRA data be used? 15

16

 What are they going to do with the data?  Will it impact funding allocation?  Inquiring minds want to know! 17

“There are no details yet as to whether states would be required to provide local governments with any role in the THIRA examination. FEMA would then choose which projects to fund from each state’s THIRA based on national priorities." National League of Cities 18

19

 Identify and assess risk (THIRA)  Estimate capabilities needed to address risks  Build or sustain required levels of capability  Develop and implement plans to deliver those capabilities  Validate and monitor progress  Review continuous improvement efforts 20

 Identify the Threats and Hazards of Concern. (Select a target for each threat/hazard selected.)  Give Threats and Hazards Context. (Determine which threat/hazard will require the maximum capacity.)  Examine the Capabilities using the Threats and Hazards. (Assess capabilities based on threat.)  Set Capability Targets. (What level do you need to achieve based on the threats.)  Apply the Results. (Use the results to drive Strategy.) 21

22 Highest Risk Hazard/Threats (Rated 5) Flood Drought Nuclear Accident Dam Failure Armed Assault

23 Each threat/hazard is used to put the capabilities into context. For each threat/hazard, we need to explain the different conditions under which a threat or hazard might occur. The Crosswalk Worksheet lists core capabilities vertically and threats/hazards are listed horizontally.

 Choose the most appropriate incident descriptions for each threat/hazard.  These escalate in severity - minor to very severe.  Select the highest severity incident that you aim to manage using local capabilities only.  This is your target operational level, not your current capability.  Outside mutual aid should not be considered. 24

What is a “Transportation System Failure” and should it be considered a hazard? 1. Failure in single-use transportation system; Impact limited to immediate geographical area. 2. Failure in single-use transportation system; Highly localized effects on other transportation systems or other services. 3. Failure in multi-use transportation system; Localized effects, potentially impacting other services. 4. Failure in multi-use transportation system; Multi-state/regional effects impacting other services and sectors. 5. Failure in multi-use transportation system; National effects impacting other services. 25

We worked in the SPR spreadsheet tool to validate the entries in the SPR. 26

"Which threat or hazard will require the maximum capacity?" 27

28 For each capability, select the single threat/hazard that most stresses it. Base your selection the threats/hazards that are relevant to your jurisdiction. Which threat/hazard requires the maximum capacity for this capability?

"How close to the target is the jurisdiction?"  Current capability levels are assessed in terms of how close you are to meeting the target hazard level.  Assessments are made for each of six POETE capability elements.  Consider organic assets only. (More later)  If mutual aid improves your overall assessment, you indicate the extent of the improvement separately.  If a capability gap exists, provide a description of the specific nature of the gap. 29

30 Scores indicate the estimated level of preparedness for each POETE element. The assessment uses a 1‐5 scale, where level 1 indicates little‐to‐no capability and level 5 indicates 100% of the capability desired. Each POETE capability element is rated on the 1‐5 scale. Not assessed (5) 100% Capable (4) (3) (2) (1) No Capability 0%

31

 Each POETE category has a place to capture a description of gaps, advances and notes. 32

33  Organic Capability and Mutual Aid.  Impact on Investments  Understanding Risks  Using a State Preparedness for a UASI  Capabilities Issues  The new NPGP “Vision”

 New term, needs to be understood. - The term was only used in DoD from what we saw.  Organic does not mean having a capability without chemicals.  It means having a standing capability - the POETE to do the job.  We included automatic mutual aid but not resources that required the state or feds.  However the State had plans and resources that could not be ignored. 34

 The THIRA will be used to support Investment Justifications.  If an Investment Justification is not linked to THIRA results, projects may not be funded.  The Federal Preparedness Coordinator (FPC) in each FEMA Region is to review State and UASI THIRAs. 35

 The SPR is done at a State-level, UASIs need to adjust if for their own perspective on threats and capabilities.  Threats/Hazards need to be looked at locally based on what is in other plans and stakeholder experience.  While hazards are addressed in HIRA, threats are not well known in terms of likelihood – it is more about what you want to prepare for. 36

 Capabilities may be driven by events outside of your region. New Madrid, upheaval in Mexico, or a Northridge scenario may send evacuees to your area for mass care.  Need to think about that and how resources such as ARC may be depleted.  The SPR tool has the same core capability showing up in different mission areas. This was confusing.  Cross cutting capabilities looked at by each mission group but then need to be combined, they have different perspectives on most stressing hazard and gaps. 37

 We updated the Strategy to:  Align with the new Core Capabilities  Address the gaps for priority Core Capabilities  Align with the AZDOHS Strategy  Base implementation steps on resourcing the prioritized Core Capabilities. 38

 Once gaps have been identified you need to work to close the gaps.  Capabilities (objectives) prioritized based on gaps.  Implementation Steps designed close gaps for priority capabilities.  Implementation Steps need to be funded to close the gaps. 39

40 AZ State 2011 SPRPhoenix UASI 2012 SPR

 The Gap Analysis is to be based on the difference between the consequences of the threats and current levels of capabilities  A capability of 5 has no gap  A capability of 4 has a small gap  A capability of 3 a bigger gap, etc… 41

 New goals aligned with the NPG Mission Areas and Core Capabilities.  Improve Prevention Capabilities  Improve Protection Capabilities  Improve Mitigation Capabilities  Improve Response Capabilities  Improve Recovery Capabilities  Improve Programmatic Capabilities 42

Questions? Contact : Lisa Hansen: Steve Davis: 43