Emergency Manager How Does Mitigation

¶ … Emergency manager how does mitigation effect you and your responsibility?

In the wake two of most catastrophic disasters in United States history (the attacks of 9/11 and hurricane Katrina) and in the wake of what many consider disastrous emergency response to at least one of the two, emergency management mitigation has come to the forefront of the political and economic minds of the country. Calls for substantial change in the way that federal and local governments respond to disaster including preventative measures, such as the timing of evacuation orders, enforcement and assistance for evacuees as well as post disaster response, such as evacuating those who did not initially evacuate, providing emergency relief benefits in kind and in monetary forms are all essential issues that need to be addressed and need to have concrete plans and systems for the ease of action, before during and after disaster events. The purpose of mitigation is to realize the opportunity of immediately past disasters to analyze the actions that occurred, in the area of emergency management. The mitigation process is essential to understanding what was done correctly and what was done incorrectly or ineffectually to improve the future plan for reaction and recovery. As an emergency manager the mitigation process is an essential identifying process and can ultimately improve every aspect of emergency response. (Mileti, 2004, pg. 236) The areas that will be discussed in this work include the ways in which mitigation can improve communication during and immediately after a disaster occurs, the manner in which people can be better protected with preventative measures.

Communication:

One of the paramount concerns that has been proven time and time again is that there is a lack of clear goals for change on the part of local, state and federal officials. The simple fact that these and other entities must work together to solve problems, in a pre-disaster and post disaster circumstance also challenges the cause of the reduction of lost life and property. All of these complex issues in combination with the limited time that agencies and individuals have to respond in an emergency situation can make the situation far worse, creating a situation often contrary to the goal of reducing loss and risk. (Mileti, 2004, pg. 236) To solve this complex issue, communication is key and mitigating the communication plans including back up forms of communication and chain of command plans as essential to changing the ways in which an emergency manager deals with a potential or realized disaster.

A lesson can here be learned from analyzing the manner in which government officials and private industry responded to communication issues in the Hurricane Katrina disaster. A lesson learned from Katrina about communication is that private companies that did well in the wake of the disaster were able to rather quickly solve problems for their own people, through established and newly created systems of communication. Some of the companies that did well, by comparison created immediate alternative forms of communication to access employees who were in need of assistance. ("Lessons from New Orleans," 2005, pg. 58) These companies set of employee hotlines, to deal with immediate questions by employees in the affected areas and in so doing made every attempt, often very effectively to assist employees with issues of payment for work (some even paid employees during the period where no work was taking place to make sure that they would be able to return when operations began again) concerns about alternative housing and childcare, before these services where restored to the area. The communication tactic was in fact so successful that they retained more employees than comparable companies because their employees were supported through the worst of the situation, so they were able to return as soon as possible to begin the rebuilding process. These organizations established hot line centers outside the immediately effected area but through the process of mitigation many have determined that these systems should be in place all the time so that they do not have to scramble in a new event to establish them. Some companies are even contracting resources for technology such as satellite phones, as in the case of Katrina the land line infrastructure was mostly destroyed and cell traffic rendered this technology almost useless for many days. ("Lessons from New Orleans," 2005, pg. 58)

The idea behind relying on ones self to provide a backup plan for communication is only truly realized when mitigation occurs. The infrastructure of the local, state and federal governments may seem strong, but the idea that individuals and individual organizations will have less to deal with in quantity, when it comes to meeting people's immediate needs in a disaster, and can therefore ensure a better quality of response is one that all emergency managers should learn from this particular mitigation situation. Communication is key to ensuring a reduced loss of life as well as resources. One lesson learned was that the most successful of organizations in the process of communication, in the Katrina disaster were those that recognized that people came first and property second, as the largest asset of any business or region is the people who are employed by it and live in it. Though the local, state and federal governments recognize this fact the sheer numbers of people who needed to rely on them overtaxed their ability to provide relief. ("Lessons from New Orleans," 2005, pg. 58)

Prevention:

Lessons intoning the need for prevention have multiplied exponentially since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Many local and state governments have been seriously mitigating since the 9/11 attacks as a way to create a better system of security and reaction in the event of terrorist attacks. (Baum, 2003, pg. 28) One of the ways in which agencies are responding to the mitigation from 9/11 and other terrorist events is reestablishing the chain of command that collectively makes decisions regarding prevention measures for homeland security. One example in the literature that clearly effects all emergency managers is the understanding that the chain of command must be clear. So, that individuals in private and public institutions immediately know who to contact for assistance in any given situation and that the plans that they implement are decided and cemented by the group prior to the occurrence. Mitigation has determined that in situations where only one agency makes all the decisions regarding prevention and security, abuses occur, as these centralized sources either inadvertently or deliberately implement services and plans that better protect themselves, rather than everyone. (Baum, 2003, pg. 28)