Sign In
Search Icon
Menu Icon

Chapter 6: The Healthcare Coalition Emergency Management Program: Mitigation and Preparedness Activities


MSCC:  The Healthcare Coalition in Emergency Response and Recovery  


6.1 Implementation of the Healthcare Coalition Response Organization


This chapter focuses on mitigation and preparedness planning activities performed by the Healthcare Coalition preparedness organization. These activities should supplement the mitigation and preparedness planning that is required of each Coalition member.

One of the most important preparedness activities for a Healthcare Coalition will be establishing and implementing the Coalition’s emergency response plans. Whether a Coalition is starting this process for the first time or seeking to enhance existing response plans, this chapter offers several concepts for consideration.

A central focus of any preparedness organization is the development of an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). The EOP is an “all hazards” guidance document that specifies actions to be taken in response to an emergency or disaster.[63] Exhibit 6-1 presents the primary uses for the Healthcare Coalition EOP.

Exhibit 6-1. Primary uses of the Healthcare Coalition EOP

The EOP describes how the Healthcare Coalition response organization is structured and how it will respond during an emergency. The EOP is helpful in developing and conducting education, training, and exercises, as well as in evaluating the Healthcare Coalition’s performance in exercises or actual emergencies.

The EOP must be usable under emergency conditions to guide response actions, demobilization, recovery, and return to readiness. The components of an EOP designed for use during response are the specific “tools,” including call-down lists, operational checklists, mobilization and demobilization procedure checklists, reporting templates, and other standard operating procedures (SOPs).

Regardless of the Healthcare Coalition’s size or complexity, the following considerations are important for developing the EOP:

  • Establish the EOP writing team: Personnel developing the EOP should include representatives from the various members of the Coalition. If the development team is large (i.e., greater than 5-7 individuals), it may be advisable to break down the EOP into its component parts, have sub-groups address these parts, with the work products then reviewed by the larger group.
  • Establish a review process: Each Coalition member should have the opportunity to review and comment on EOP products as they are developed. In addition, it may be helpful to get feedback from external reviewers – most notably all relevant Jurisdictional Agencies (Tier 3), key vendors (e.g., hospital suppliers), or other stakeholders.
  • Promote buy-in from Coalition members and jurisdictional authorities: Executive leaders at each member organization, as well as key Jurisdictional Agencies, should be briefed whenever major elements of the EOP are completed. The briefings should highlight the advantages of participating in or supporting the Healthcare Coalition.
  • Incorporate NIMS principles: NIMS principles should be incorporated into the Coalition’s EOP so that personnel are training on and using a response plan that is specific to the Coalition rather than one containing generic ICS. The HVA provides the foundation for developing and refining the Coalition’s EOP (through the development of incident specific SOPs, etc.).

At a minimum, the Healthcare Coalition EOP should describe the structure of the Healthcare Coalition Response Team (HCRT), including an organizational chart with response positions, and the processes and procedures (“Concept of Operations”) that the Coalition follows through the progressive stages of response and recovery. It should also describe the specific interactions with Coalition member organizations and jurisdictional authorities (see Chapter 4).

FEMA resources offer widely accepted guidance on the format of an EOP.[64],[65] Key elements to consider for the EOP are summarized below.

  • Goals and objectives: The EOP should describe the goals and objectives of the Healthcare Coalition response organization (those presented in Chapter 2 may serve as a template that can be adapted to a specific Coalition). These objectives can be relatively simple or robust depending on the type of support that the Coalition will provide in an emergency. In addition to providing strategic guidance, these statements can serve as outcome (goal) and output (objectives) metrics when evaluating the Coalition’s performance.
  • Scope: This includes a brief description of the emergency conditions when the EOP would be used, a list of Coalition partners, and a statement that the Coalition EOP does not supplant the plans, authorities, and responsibilities of the Coalition member organizations.
  • Authorities: Relevant authorities upon which the Healthcare Coalition is based should be cited. Generally, the authority is derived from the voluntary commitment of member organizations to participate in the Coalition. At the same time, the independent decision-making authority of Coalition members may be recognized. This section may also reference any formal instruments that establish or maintain the Coalition, such as a Memorandum of Understanding (see Chapter 7).
  • Base Plan: The EOP should contain a basic description of how the Coalition will be organized during emergency response. This is often addressed in a Concept of Operations and a separate System Description is not developed. However, Coalitions with a more complex structure may benefit from writing a detailed System Description.[66] The Concept of Operations focuses on the processes and procedures that the Coalition will follow during response and may be organized by the successive stages of response outlined in Chapter 3.
  • Functional Annexes: This section contains emergency response and recovery guidance that addresses sections of the Coalition’s response in greater detail than the Base Plan. Often, this section is written to address the five “functions” of ICS (i.e., Command, Operations, Planning, Logistics, and Finance/Administration). Functional annexes may not be necessary for a basic Coalition if the appropriate information is contained within the Base Plan. For Coalition EOPs that use functional annexes, the number and types will vary based on the complexity of the Coalition. As an example, a public information annex might be developed, which outlines how the Coalition will integrate the public message of Coalition members with the Jurisdictional Agency (Tier 3).
  • Hazard or Incident Specific Annexes: Concise guidance for priority hazards or specific situations should be outlined in these annexes. The hazards addressed should be determined by the Coalition’s HVA and the material should not duplicate information covered in the Base Plan or functional annexes. Potential examples might include a widespread power outage or the emergency evacuation of patients from one of the Coalition member’s facilities.
  • Tools/attachments: The most useful portions of an EOP during response are often the tools and attachments that can be included (as appendices) in the above listed sections. Job action sheets or operational checklists, mobilization checklists, call down lists, and pre-formatted forms for Coalition members to submit incident information can promote an effective HCRT response.


6.2 Other Healthcare Coalition Preparedness Activities

The remaining preparedness activities for the Coalition focus on evaluation and improvement of the Coalition’s response capabilities.

The Healthcare Coalition should use exercises to evaluate the Coalition’s EOP once the EOP has been implemented and personnel have received appropriate education and training. Exercises may evaluate specific elements of a Coalition’s EOP or evaluate the EOP in a broader context. Common elements that may be evaluated during an exercise include SOPs, organizational structure, or the effectiveness of specific technologies used by the Coalition during emergency response. An important consideration in designing an exercise is that the areas to be evaluated are pre-determined and an evaluation plan is established.

The Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) contains mandatory requirements if Federal emergency preparedness funds are used to develop and conduct the exercise.[69] While a full discussion of exercise preparation is beyond the scope of this handbook, key considerations for healthcare planners are presented in Exhibit 6-4.

Exhibit 6-4. Key considerations for exercise preparation

  • The purpose of the exercise should be clearly stipulated in the Exercise Plan. This drives the scenario to ensure that areas of focus receive proper attention during the exercise. The level of anticipated play by the participating entities should be established. Coalition members that are not able to participate should be kept informed of the exercise development process and the findings from the exercise.
  • The exercise scenario should be selected from hazards identified in the Coalition’s HVA and should not present a “doomsday” event. This will ensure a realistic test of the Coalition’s EOP and avoid a demoralizing “can’t win” situation.
  • Exercise evaluation should focus on the policies, processes, and procedures defined in the EOP and not on the performance of individuals. An evaluation plan should be developed prior to the exercise describing the evaluative process that will be used. Personnel should be designated to specifically evaluate the systems or processes that are objectives for the exercise.
  • The exercise schedule should promote broad participation by Coalition member organizations and any relevant Jurisdictional Agency(s) (Tier 3) or regional Coalitions (Tier 2), if applicable. Representatives from individual healthcare organizations and Jurisdictional Agency(s) should be involved in exercise development and scheduling.
  • A team should be designated to manage the exercise while it is being conducted. The size and complexity of this team will likely vary depending on the specific Coalition. The first priority of the management team should be the safety of exercise participants.

Feedback for the exercise evaluation may be gathered in the form of assessments from the evaluators, role players, and the exercise participants. Two methods that are commonly used to obtain input from exercise participants include the following:

  • Post-exercise “hot wash.” This activity is usually conducted immediately following an exercise to identify key successes or challenges while they are still “fresh” in the minds of the participants. Representatives from all entities that participated in the exercise should be included.
  • After Action Report (AAR) process.[70] The AAR process is a formal and comprehensive process conducted after the exercise to analyze data and observations, positive and negative, related to system performance.


6.3 Healthcare Coalition Mitigation Activities

As defined in Chapter 5, mitigation activities prevent the occurrence of a hazard or minimize the impact of a hazard should it occur. Mitigation establishes resiliency for the Healthcare Coalition. While this handbook acknowledges the unique construct of each Healthcare Coalition, there are common considerations across all Coalitions.

The Coalition Notification Center’s function is a critical element to successful response. This entity could be impacted in several ways:

  • Facility: The facility housing the Coalition Notification Center function could be compromised by hazard impact. For example, a power outage could prevent the Coalition Notification Center from completing its responsibilities if no backup power source is available. The Coalition should evaluate this during their continuity of operations planning activities.
  • Personnel: Personnel from a Coalition member organization may have other duties in addition to conducting the Coalition Notification Center function, so an emergency may severely challenge that organization’s personnel.
  • Technology (equipment): Hazard impact may affect the technologies used at the facility that conducts the Coalition notification actions (e.g., radio, internet, etc.).

It is recommended that Coalitions examine resources that can provide backup capabilities for the Coalition Notification Center, even if the resource can only conduct the most essential Coalition Notification Center activities. Other mitigation considerations applicable to most Healthcare Coalitions include:

  • Response team personnel: Individuals rostered to serve on the HCRT may have difficulty being reached or responding, especially during the early stages of an incident. Having backup personnel taking secondary call may address this issue.
  • Communication technologies: Given the distributed nature in which the HCRT may operate, communications technology is important. Redundancy in communication methods is vital to maintain operations if the primary technology fails.




63. Blanchard, BW, Dictionary of Emergency Management and Related Terms, Definitions, Legislation and Acronyms. FEMA Higher Education Project (January, 2008).
64. FEMA, Producing Emergency Plans: A guide for All-Hazard Emergency Operations Planning for State, Territorial, Local and Tribal Governments; Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101, Interim Version 1.0, (August 1, 2008).
65. FEMA, IS-1 Emergency Manager: An Orientation to the Position, Emergency Management Institute (October, 2007).
66. In many EOP documents, the Systems Description is included within the Concept of Operations. Whether included within the Concept of Operations or not, the System Description should include an organizational chart with defined response positions.
67. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, National Incident Management System (NIMS) (December 18, 2008).
68. Fernandez LS, Barbera JA, van Dorp JR, Strategies for Managing Volunteers during Incident Response: A Systems Approach. Homeland Security Affairs (October 2006).
69. FEMA, Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP).
70. State of California, Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, Standardized Emergency Management Systems (SEMS) Guidelines, Part III. Supporting Documents (December, 1994).
71. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP), Volume 3: Exercise Evaluation and Improvement Planning, (February 2007).
72. Adapted from Senge P, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization; In Ott SJ, Parkes SJ, Simpson RB; Classic Readings in Organizational Behavior. Belmont, CA, Thomson Learning, (1990).
73. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP), Volume 3: Exercise Evaluation and Improvement Planning; February 2007.
74. Barbera JA, Macintyre AG, Shaw G, et al, Emergency Management Principles and Practices for Healthcare Systems. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration (2006).



<< Back                                                                                                                                                                    Next >>

































































​​
CIP Right-Nav