Vulnerability Assessment Grid Hls 530

Vulnerability Assessment Grid

HLS 530 (Critical Infrastructure Protection of Health Care Delivery Systems)

ERP Review

Perspective: [Hospital]

Critical Infrastructure: [Water Supply]

Risk Dimension

Potential Severity

Medium

Low

Command

Efficiency of notification

Issues lead to slower response times/lower preparedness

Reliability of communication with CWS

Proper notification guidelines/expectations between organizations not established

Planning

Adequate supplies

Generally available and kept stocked

Adequate staffing

Nursing shortage could lead to problems in large-scale situation (ERP Level III+)

Logistics

Coordination of staff

Lack of detail in chain of command/communication could create confusion

Utilization of space for treatment

Detailed plan for movement of regular patient population should be developed

Finance

Expensive over-preparedness

Inadequate/untimely information can lead to large unnecessary expenses; reduced general function

Low operating capital

Reduces flexibility somewhat

Environmental, Safety, and Health

General patient population

Possible quarantine needs must be taken into account in utilization of space

Access to alternate water supply

Maintenance of staff/patient health paramount; adequate on-site supply should be established

Legal Liability

Rushed care

Could lead to allegations of malpractice; well protected in emergency situations

Lack of approved ERP

Leaves hospital vulnerable legally and in purely practical terms

Perspective: [EMS]

Critical Infrastructure: [Water Supply]

Risk Dimension

Potential Severity

High

Medium

Low

Command

Possible disputes

Complex hierarchy of situation-dependent command

Coordination

Chain unclear in certain situations, especially higher level incidents

Planning

Possible over-responsiveness

Too many respondents can clog communications and hamper activity

Staging function

Likely an over-extended responsibility; consider breaking up

Logistics

Site-specific setup

Adaptability of equipment, staff to uneven ground/other conditions warrants attention

Coordination

Diffuse materials/missions; effective utilization of all resources requires more centralized command

Finance

Readiness of supplies/staff

For high level incidents, team must rely on state/federal response

Reserves

Damage to responsiveness for general EMS is high with resources allocated elsewhere

Environmental, Safety, and Health

Site specific issues

Safety hazards increased with unfamiliarity; possible ground contamination from spills

Elemental exposure

Depending on time of year/day and type of incident, on-site triage might present additional risks

Legal Liability

Greatest good policy

Non-treatment of extreme cases introduces some vulnerability

Safety Hazards

Risk of staff/patient injury due to fall/accident on site

ERP Analysis and Assessment

Hospital:

The hospital's ERP plan needs some fairly extensive reorganization leading to a more clarified and structured chain of command that better reflects the cooperative and coordinated layers ERPs as suggested in the literature (AWWA 2009; EPA 2004). Specifically, greater centralization of command and greater horizontal rather than vertical distribution of various officers and team leaders would present a more flexible and efficient operating scheme than the plan and command chain as currently outlined (AWWA 2009). Inter-organizational communication with the CWS agency and other governmental officials is also essential to the development and implementation of an effective emergency response plan, yet these external contact points have not been adequately included in the hospital's current plan, which will greatly reduce its ability to receive and react to accurate and current information. This in turn creates many inefficiencies in both cost and care (EPA 2004).

EMS: