1. A De-Centralized Approach for Diverse Organizations

2.  Presented by The Port of Seattle Kristine Ball – COOP Coordinator Alisha Griswold – Training Specialist Ron Harmon – Emergency Manager

3.   The Port Mission  Economic interdependencies  Logistics of a complex enterprise  What drives our increased COOP focus  Unique and diverse regional role  Critical infrastructure  Other key features Our Organization

4.  To have each Port workgroup operational at the “Essential Function” level within 12 hours after a catastrophic event, at a location other than their daily work site. Our Planning Purpose

5.   The Port enterprise is largely divided geographically and operationally  Diverse personnel and team function  Historical attempts at planning were inconsistent across the enterprise  Scale of planning efforts were not feasible for one staff member to manage Project Justification

6.   Division-specific COOP teams  Workgroup-specific COOP plans  Piggy-backing on pre-scheduled exercises and disaster drills  Interactive and incentivized participation  Establishing buy-in from upper- management and supervisory staff Collaborative Strategies

7.   Workshops across the enterprise have garnered positive feedback from Port staff.  Representatives from Security, Operations, Environmental, Public Affairs, Information and Communications Management were present at the most recent sessions.  All workgroups are preparing to test their COOP plans following the 2012 “Great WA ShakeOut”. Project Status

8.  Our Prepared Staff

9. 

10.  COOP for Port Tenants “All Carrot and No Stick”

11.  Comprehensive business continuity planning, with limited jurisdictional authority, among stakeholders who vary significantly in geographic location, fiscal capacity, and staffing count. Our Challenge

12.  COOP for Port Tenants

13.   Previous offers of support with continuity planning were well received by tenants but few followed-up  Continuity planning often challenging for small and local-only businesses; limited time, staff, etc.  Limited jurisdictional authority to require COOP from tenants; Port relationship operates as a landlord  Tenants vary in size, function, and location  Local bagel shop, regional retailer, national coffee chain COOP for Port Tenants

14.  Additional Justification  Small businesses are incredibly vulnerable to operational hiccups, increasingly so during disasters  The Port’s mission is to provide opportunities for local business; to safeguard these engines of our economy  Public and private sector benefit from COOP  Enhanced resilience to unforeseen incidents  Closer partnerships due to planning process  More reliable resources to support recovery

15.  Impact to Small Business

16.   One-on-one coaching for COOP plans  Customized templates for tenants  New Port website with preparedness information and planning guidance  Public recognition and achievement badges for “COOP Certified” businesses  http://www.portseattle.org/Business/Airport- Tenants/Pages/Business-Continuity.aspx http://www.portseattle.org/Business/Airport- Tenants/Pages/Business-Continuity.aspx Strategies and Incentives

18.   Emergency Management and Public Affairs formally launched the program with a presentation to a tenant group on September 13 th, 2012  Interested companies include: local restaurants, national food chains, an international language education retailer, and national rental car agencies  Potential project reach of over 100 businesses Project Status

19.   Both COOP initiatives, internal and external, represent an investment in our stakeholders, which include our staff, our tenants, and our partners throughout the Puget Sound region.  We believe that positive-focused and cooperatively- structured preparedness activities will help us build more resilient Port Communities. Final Analysis

20.  Thanks for Listening! Questions and Follow-up to: Kristine Ball (206) 787-4632 Ball.K@PortSeattle.org