1. U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Silver Jackets Innovative Collaboration to Maximize Solutions

2. What is Silver Jackets?  Collaborative Team of Agencies  State  Federal  Regional M ANY A GENCIES – O NE S OLUTION

3. Silver Jackets Concept  Bring together State and Federal Agencies dealing with or impacting Mitigation Activities  Goal – Make the most of limited state and federal grant funds  Indiana is only the second state in the nation to form a Silver Jackets Team  Ohio is the first state  Each state sets up the team to meet their programmatic needs and desires. M ANY A GENCIES – O NE S OLUTION

4.  Simple name for a Team that blends the best ideas for the benefit of Indiana Citizens  FEMA – Blue Jackets  Army Corps of Engineers – Red Jackets  Other agencies – variety of colors Why Silver Jackets ? M ANY A GENCIES – O NE S OLUTION

5. Mission The members will establish an inter-agency communications team to:  enable effective sharing of information  Leverage available agency resources  Improve customer service  Promote wise stewardship of the taxpayers’ investment. MANY AGENCIES – ONE SOLUTION

6. What Silver Jackets Is NOT  Arbitrator between an agency and local entity  Project Review or Approval Organization  Separate or Additional Funding Source  Regulatory Arm of any agency M ANY A GENCIES – O NE S OLUTION

7. How it works  Host agency is IDHS  Regular monthly meetings  Training/workshops

8. Meeting process  Agency reports  Agencies bring issues to the meeting  Discuss info gaps & data needs  Find solutions among current service capabilities  Current grants or agency programs or policies  Collaborate on a combined solution  Existing programs  New initiatives

9. Discuss challenges encountered  Each Agency is able to bring challenges or issues to the meeting for others to consider  Find solutions among current service capabilities  Current grants or agency programs or policies  Collaborate on a combined solution M ANY A GENCIES – O NE S OLUTION

11. 2008 IN Floods  5 record floods  January  February  March  June  September  3 Disaster Declarations

12. During the flood- communications  Agency activities  Info for response  USGS brings  Flood hydrologic data – streamgage network  Flood Web page  “Eyes & ears” in the field  Rapid deployment streamgages  Satellite imagery

13. Enhanced Collaboration  Staff in EOC  Frequent communication between State/Fed partners  DNR, DHS, DOT, IDEM  National Guard  NWS  FEMA  COE

14. After the floods - collaboration  Setting HWMKs  USGS & IDNR  Flood documentation  FEMA  USGS  IDNR  IDHS  NWS  USACE  Local Agencies

16. Other accomplishments  Update IN Hazard Mitigation Plan  WebEOC training  “Stay Afloat” campaign  Outreach  Activity book  State Fair

17. Take Home Messages  By partnering we maximize agency resources for hazard mitigation and avoid overlap  We keep it open and welcome – recently added IN National Guard & Purdue University  Silver Jackets has worked great for IN – maybe it can work for your state MANY AGENCIES – ONE SOLUTION

18. Silver Jackets Mitigation Activities 6 new streamgages  HGMP for installation  Local/USGS funds for long- term O&M

19. How did we do??  Quality of products and services was high  Collaboration between agencies was excellent. The use of the internet web applications and access to real-time data enhanced interagency collaboration

20. How did we do??  Human factors played a major role in people’s responses to warnings and other flood information – additional study is needed  There is still room for improvement in flood forecasting, communicating forecast information to the public, and getting the public to take action

21. Key Findings & Recommendations  Finding 28: Flood inundation mapping will help the public, media, emergency managers, and others visualize the spatial extent and depth of flood waters in the vicinity of NWS river forecast locations.  Recommendation 28: The NWS should expand efforts with state and federal agencies and others to accelerate the implementation of flood inundation mapping across the United States.

22. Key Findings & Recommendations  Finding 29: The use of 100-year and 500-year flood terminology was confusing to some members of the public.  Recommendation 29a: The NWS should increase its education and outreach efforts on the meaning of existing flood terminology.  Recommendation 29b: The NWS should work with USACE, USGS, and other partners to assess how to communicate flood risk more effectively.

23. Perfect World  In a perfect world the public would use our information to take appropriate actions to prevent loss of life and/or property  The fact is people do not respond to warnings and weather information in a simple manner  People bring significant perceptual and behavioral histories to the decision-making table.

24. Final Thought  A whole suite of information – including people’s information sources, perceptions, experiences, and emotions relating to weather events – needs to be understood and carefully addressed to maximize the benefits of our information

25. Questions?