Geospatial Data for Emergency Management: A Report on Current Use and Recommendations

1. For free PDF version of final report, Google “Successful Response“ Dr. Michael Goodchild June 7, 2007 Mapping Science Committee

2. Report Background • Requested by: NASA, NOAA, NGA, USGS • Goal: Evaluate the current use of geospatial data and tools in emergency management and make recommendations to improve that use • Process: • Authored by a committee of 13 with backgrounds in federal, state, and local emergency management agencies, academia, private industry, and NGOs • 3 meetings (DC [2], Irvine) and 1 workshop (DC) • Product: A report with a vision and recommendations for more effective use of geospatial data for EM and cooperation between different EM geospatial users • Audiences: DHS/FEMA, state/local emergency management agencies, private industry, academia

3. Michael F. Goodchild, Chair University of California, Santa Barbara Andrew J. Bruzewicz U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Susan L. Cutter University of South Carolina Paul J. Densham University College London Amy K. Donahue University of Connecticut J. Peter Gomez Xcel Energy Patricia S. Hu Oak Ridge National Laboratory Judith L. Klavans University of Maryland John J. Moeller Northrop Grumman TASC Mark Monmonier Syracuse University Bruce Oswald New York State Office of Cyber Security and Critical Information Infrastructure Carl Reed Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc. Ellis M. Stanley, Sr. City of Los Angeles, CA Emergency Preparedness Department Ann Frazier Study Director, Board on Earth Sciences and Resources Committee

4. Statement of Task • Assess the value of geospatial data and tools in disaster planning and disaster response • Identify the status of and needs for decision-support tools that assimilate data and model predictions for mapping vulnerability to catastrophe, scenario testing, disaster planning, and logistical support • Identify the mission-critical data requirements for effective decision-making • Examine technical and institutional mechanisms that enable rapid discovery, access, and assemblage of data from diverse sources • Assess training needs for developers and users of spatial decision-support systems • Examine potential conflicts between issues of security and the need for open access to data

5. Geospatial information is central in all aspects of emergency management Mitigation for future events Planning for future events Response and recovery Image credits: left, courtesy NGA; top, right courtesy FEMA; bottom right, courtesy John Palatiello, MAPPS/NYS Office of Cyber Security & Critical Infrastructure Coordination/EarthData International

6. Maps are essential in the earliest stages of search and rescue • Overhead images provide the best early source of information on damage • Importance of evacuation planning Image credits: top, courtesy Schad Meldrum, City of Oklahoma City; middle, courtesy NOAA; bottom, courtesy Richard Church, University of California, Santa Barbara

7. Geospatial data and tools have the potential to contribute to the saving of lives, the limitation of damage, and reduction in the costs to society of dealing with emergencies

8. Challenges

9. Special Needs of Geospatial for EM • Past few decades have seen massive investments in geospatial data and tools • But specific requirements of EM rarely addressed • Rapid operational capability & access to data • Extensive planning • Training of first responders • Tools that work under difficult circumstances of search & rescue

10. Human Systems • Effectiveness of geospatial data and tools dependent on • Training • Coordination among agencies • Sharing of data and tools • Planning and preparedness • Attention/resources invested in technology • These are the critical factors that must be addressed if future responses are to be more effective

11. Data • Data frequently scattered among multiple jurisdictions • Data often in disparate, incompatible formats • Lack of data interoperability at many levels • Lack of knowledge about what data exist & where • Restrictions on use of data, concerns about data security • Lack of training of data users • Lack of operational infrastructure in immediate aftermath of disaster

12. Recommendations

13. Planning • The role of geospatial data and tools should be addressed explicitly by the responsible agency in strategic planning documents at all levels • Geospatial procedures and plans developed for all but the smallest of emergencies should be multiagency

14. Governance • The current system of governance of the NSDI should be strengthened • Should include full range of agencies, governments, and sectors that share geospatial data and tools • DHS should play a leading role in ensuring that the special needs of emergency management for effective data sharing and collaboration are recognized as important in this new governance structure

15. Data Sharing • A new effort should be established to develop policies and guidelines that address the sharing of geospatial data in support of all phases of emergency management • led by DHS • within the framework and governance structure of NSDI • These policies and guidelines should define: • the conditions under which each type of data should be shared • roles and responsibilities of each participating organization • data quality requirements • interoperability requirements that should be implemented to facilitate sharing

16. Security Requirements • DHS should lead development of a nationally coordinated set of security requirements for data to be shared for emergency preparedness and response • Explore leveraging of existing organizations that could potentially serve as a “clearinghouse” for critical infrastructure data

17. Standing Contracts • Standing contracts and other procurement mechanisms should be put in place to permit emergency managers to acquire overhead imagery and other types of event-related geospatial data rapidly during disasters Photos courtesy of Paul Greenfield & Dale Dague, USDA FS

18. Preparedness Exercises • Address communication problems that currently inhibit communication between first responders and coordinating centers through intensive preparedness exercises • These exercises should: • Focus on clear objectives with respect to use of geospatial data and assets • Involve decision-making representatives from all levels of government, as well as other relevant organizations and institutions • Be coordinated nationally so that common problems can be identified • Be realistic in their complexity • Allow participants to work carefully through the geospatial challenges posed by disasters

19. Backup and Archiving • DHS should revise Emergency Support Function 5 of the National Response Plan to include backup and archiving of geospatial data, tools, and procedures developed as part of disaster response and recovery • DHS should assign responsibility and necessary funds to FEMA for archiving and backup in the Joint Field Offices during an incident

20. Research • NSF and federal agencies with responsibility for funding research on emergency management should support the adaptation, development, and improvement of geospatial tools for emergency management

21. Training • Academic emergency management curricula should increase the emphasis given to geospatial data and tools • Geospatial professionals who are likely to be involved in emergency response should receive increased training in emergency management business processes and practices

22. FEMA • FEMA should • expand its team of permanent geospatial professionals • develop strategies that will lead to more rapid deployment both in response to events and in advance of events when specific and reliable warnings are given

23. Tapping the Nation’s Resources • DHS should establish and maintain a secure list of appropriately qualified geospatial professionals who can support emergency response during disasters Photo courtesy of Paul Greenfield & Dale Dague, USDA FS

24. Funding • DHS should expand and focus a component of its grant programs to promote geospatial preparedness • To increase the nation’s level of geospatial preparedness, DHS, working with the Office of Management and Budget, should • Identify and request additional appropriations • Identify areas where funding can be better aligned

25. Spreading the Word • Briefings to sponsors (March), MAPPS (March), DHS/FEMA TBA • Hundreds of hard copy reports distributed • Sponsors • State emergency managers • State GIS coordinators • Other interested parties • Free PDF of report available online (Google “Successful Response”) • Copies of 4-page brief distributed • Report distributed at HAZUS training course at FEMA EMI • Articles in GeoWorld and GIM International