On March 30, 2011, President Barack Obama signed the Presidential Policy Directive 8 also known as PPD-8 into law. This directive would replace the Homeland-Security Directive 8 that was signed into law by President George W. Bush. PPD-8 encompasses six areas for response. These include: National Preparedness, National Preparedness System, National Preparedness Report, National Preparedness Frameworks, Federal Interagency Operational Plans, and Build and Sustain Preparedness. The directive will guide people from the federal government down to the citizen on how to prevent, respond to, and recover from natural and man-made disasters in the United States of America. The replacement policy incorporates the new requirements of the Post Katrina …show more content…
Department of Homeland Security, 2011).
This is a continuous cycle of the National Preparedness System. This allows for consistent and reliable approach to decision-making, resource allocation, while measuring outcomes throughout preparedness and response. Identifying and assessing risk is paramount to the success of survival during a disaster of any kind man-made or natural alike. The risk assessment collects information on the threats of hazard as well as well as projected consequences (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2011). The information obtain is also used to determine the desired outcomes of the operation in affect.
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), “The National Preparedness Report evaluates and measures gains individuals and communities, private and nonprofit sectors, faith-based organizations, and all levels of governments have made in preparedness and identifies where challenges remain” (FEMA, 2016). This information can be used as a way to track the direction the United States is heading in relation to homeland security and disaster response. The report includes information from many sources including, but not limited to fusion centers, joint terrorism agencies, United States Coast Guard and many others. The information contained also includes statistics on training and responses throughout the United States of America. Furthermore, the information can be used with a “lessons learned” approach to evaluate the effectiveness
…show more content…
(FEMA, n.d.)
The Presidential Policy Directive 8 has brought the United States of America from a Pre-Katrina era where mistakes were made in response, communication and recovery. PPD-8 has allowed communities and citizens along with businesses to take part in the recovery of all types of disaster whether man-made or natural. Our country has a good plan in place to allow for building and sustainability after a disaster. The plans in process made preparedness, response, and recovery a responsibility of everyone both public servants or citizen. It allows for clear communication from the firehouse to the White House. Continuous improvements will be needed as time goes on. Evaluation of disasters will make this document every changing. The United States of America is in a good place today because of Presidential Policy Directive
Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 directly relates to the National Incident Management System and the National Response Framework. In fact, it directly correlates with their missions. HSPD-5 was the directive that needed to start things in motion; NIMS and the NRF are the aftermath of the directive. With the formation of NIMS and soon after the NRF, America can operate successfully under one national manage...
.... The lessons learned from the many events will provide an extensive knowledge base and benchmark that all emergency managers can draw from to better position citizens for survival of large scale evacuations and sheltering events.
Chapter 1-3 showed the beginnings of homeland security and the expansion and growth of Homeland Security. Chapter 4 shows the actions of homeland security, and the steps they take toward a problem to access it. The DHS above all needs to realized and understand how to address an attack quickly and efficiently, and have counter measure put into place beforehand. The DHS must be able to access the risks of any situation, and must decipher the potential hazard the situation could cause. When looking at the many functions of the DHS, nothing could be more important than the ability to understand or hinder or stop an attack man made or not. First Homeland Security studies the nature of the risk; this means that they study what is likely to happen in a certain situation. The texted explains risk as what can go wrong. A cigarette smoker takes a risk every time he lights up, and everyone take a risk when getting into a car. The DHS takes what they know from prior circumstances to determine the reality of the risk; the department must also anticipate any attack even without prior knowledge to the circumstance. The main questions of risk assessment are easy to understand, questions like will people be injured or harmed. But when looking at chapter 1 which asks the reader to look further into why terrorist commit terrorism, that’s when its easier to see the DHS skill at risk assessment. For example if you understand that a terrorist attack could be coming from radical Islamist terrorist; then you would understand a risk by understanding their motive behind the attack like their religious holidays. The DHS uses a three-fold method for risk assessment and they are threat, vulnerability and consequence. The Rand organization uses th...
The National Response Framework is a guide designed to assist local, State, and Federal governments in developing functional capabilities and identifying resources based on hazard identification and risk assessment. It outlines the operating structure and identifies key roles and responsibilities. It established a framework to identify capabilities based on resources and the current situation no matter the size or scale. It integrates organizational structures and standardizes how the Nation at all levels plans to react to incidents. The suspected terrorist attack will have health, economic, social, environment and political long-term effects for my community. This is why it is essential that local government’s response is coordinate with all responders. Response doctrine is comprised of five key principles: (1) engaged partnership, (2) tiered response, (3) scalable, flexible, and adaptable operational capabilities, (4) unity of effort through unified command, and (5) readiness to act. An introductory word about each follows. (Homeland Security, 2008)
The general topic for this literature review will be an examination of the Department of Defense and the National Guard in terms of Homeland Security. The areas of Homeland Defense and Civil Support will be primary subsections of Homeland Security which will be reviewed. For purposes of defining a time period none of the literature reviewed will be prior to September 11, 2001. The reasoning for this being to examine Homeland Defense using literature pertaining to 9/11 and the Boston Marathon Bombing, and Civil Support using literature pertaining to Hurricane Katrina.
The goal of 2011 of the National Preparedness Goal, and a month later by the National Preparedness System (NPS). ‘Prepare’, or ‘preparedness’ is a key term here, as is ‘risk’. In order to properly examine the National Preparedness System these terms… (2011 National Preparedness Goal). The National Preparedness Goal can only work in risk management planning with prudency coupled with dispensation of resources at the local levels. Depending on the budgetary issues the financial appropriation might not be enough to sustain a carefully planned risk management. The forefront for the local authorities to mitigate against risk is funding. Of the pro at the community level are the loyalties of its employees of the local government and local community, and on hand resources that amplifies its footprint with the community in making sure that there is an uninterrupted continuation of life. The local government can device a well thought out plan to activate most of its resources when the alarms are sounded of a pending
Both man-made and natural disasters are often devastating, resource draining and disruptive. Having a basic plan ready for these types of disaster events is key to the success of executing and implementing, as well as assessing the aftermath. There are many different ways to create an emergency operations plan (EOP) to encompass a natural and/or man-made disaster, including following the six stage planning process, collection of information, and identification of threats and hazards. The most important aspect of the US emergency management system in preparing for, mitigating, and responding to man-made and natural disasters is the creation, implementation and assessment of a community’s EOP.
As we move steadfast into the twenty-first century we are confronted with more complex and compromising issues affecting the intricately connected global system. New forms of aggression and threat are the faces that greet policy-makers as they spend countless hours configuring ways to counter future attacks such as terrorism or massive drug trafficking within and across national borders. Instead of submitting ourselves to the tyranny of chance, which cruelly deals out futures blighted with catastrophes that can remain vivid in our memories, President George W. Bush has issued a mandate in an attempt to regain control over future acts of aggression such as terrorism in the United State; he issued the Executive Order of Homeland Security as that initial step.
Federal intervention in the aftermath of natural disasters began after the San Francisco earthquake in 1906. This 8.3 magnitude earthquake killed 478, and left over 250,000 homeless. While the disaster itself was obviously unavoidable, the subsequent fires that burned throughout the city were a result of poor planning. (1, 17) In an effort to consolidate existing programs, and to improve the nation’s level of preparedness, President Carter created FEMA in 1979. Initially, FEMA was praised for improving communication between various levels of government, and multiple agencies during a crisis. (1,19)
The Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment need the whole community to pass on information, account for population-specific factors, and acknowledge the effects of a threat or hazard. Communities have to be educated and updated on threats and hazards that they may specifically face in order to accurately plan and prepare. All situations are usually handled starting at the lowest level, however, they will also have to discuss on how the federal government will assist if needed. “By providing the necessary knowledge and skills, we seek to enable the whole community to contribute to and benefit from national preparedness.” (FEMA, 2015). Local communities recognize their risks and conclude on how they will handle the significant amount of risks. Local governments discover and address their greatest risks by finishing the Threat and Hazard
...nse of security for those that have returned home to New Orleans. It must be some significant piece of mind knowing that our government’s finest stand between these people and Mother Nature. If any entity could withstand the massive onslaught of desolation storms of this magnitude, our federal government can. The biggest shame in everything we have learned from the Post Katrina Disaster response could probably be summed up by saying having the government prepare on our behalf is most likely the best strategic move, as the resources and competence of our government knows no bounds when it comes to keeping people safe from natural disasters. If only our government could have been available throughout the history of time to prepare for, defend against, and repair from the many natural occurrences of disasters that seem to be ever increasing in our world. (Woodruff)
So far in the American history, hurricane Katrina remains to be one of the most devastating hurricanes to have ever been witnessed. Though preparation were already in place to counter its effects, the storm’s impact turned out to be one of the most unprecedented ever seen. This is even notable from the way government agencies reacted to this disaster. It brought out the inefficiencies and inadequacies of the emergency units both at the federal and state level. This is because these governments’ response standards to this disaster were far much below the threshold expected. Government efforts could not match, and hence counter, the impacts of hurricane Katrina. This led to loss of massive property and people’s lives and property. Local and Federal governments face criticism up to date because the private sector seemed more prepared to counter effects of hurricane than the government.
There was no pre-planning in this disaster. What I learned from this is to take leadership in preparing for disasters, know what to do during the disaster, and teach others to do the same. The most important lesson that I learned is that citizens do not have to wait for their politicians and the federal government to provide resources to them. Many resources called social capital or community assets’ are already in our reach. Those places are schools, libraries, and even churches. Since Harvey, I have noticed that the local agencies have played a huge role in helping families recover over the past two weeks. Our federal government agencies are doing a lot but, there are other natural disasters occurring across the nation which splits FEMA time and resources in half. Such reason is why it is important for citizens to use the many avenues already provided to us within our community to repair what was lost and gain control over what is to
August 29, 2005 was one of the darkest days for the residents of the State of Louisiana. Katrina, a category 3 hurricane, ripped through New Orleans and the surrounding areas causing catastrophic loss of life and property. The federal government’s disaster response team, which was formed in 1978, titled the Federal Emergency Management Agency, (commonly referred to as FEMA) responded to the needs of the survivors. Unfortunately the Bush administration through FEMA showed gross ineptitude in its response to the disaster. Pre-Katrina the lack of response resulted in a largely unsuccessful evacuation. After the storm, aid to the citizens of New Orleans was slow and inadequate. When we look back at the federal government’s response to Hurricane Katrina, it appears that Bush’s FEMA botched much of the handling of the crisis and that overall, our “administration” could have responded to the situation much better.
On early morning of August 29th, 2005 on the Gulf Shore near New Orleans, a devastating hurricane struck. It wrecked havoc, demolishing anything in its path. Leaving nothing but mounds of trash. The surviving people were forced to leave due to massive flooding and the destruction of their homes. New Orleans was not the only place hit by Katrina but it was one of the areas that was hit the hardest. Millions of people were affected by this tragedy and the cost range was up in the billions. Crime rates went up, no one had a place to stay and water was polluted. The damage done by Katrina affected New Orleans and the other areas hit years after it struck. Restoration for the areas hit was going to need support from all of America and support groups across the country. No one was ready for this tragedy or could ever predict the horrible outcome.