1 / 27

NECP Goal 2 Presentation to the Seattle UASI WG February 16, 2010

NECP Goal 2 Presentation to the Seattle UASI WG February 16, 2010. Alan H. Komenski SIEC Project Manager/State Interoperability Coordinator Washington State Patrol. National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP). NECP Overview and Background NECP Implementation NECP 2010 Update NECP Goal 1

toan
Download Presentation

NECP Goal 2 Presentation to the Seattle UASI WG February 16, 2010

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NECP Goal 2Presentation to the Seattle UASI WGFebruary 16, 2010 Alan H. Komenski SIEC Project Manager/State Interoperability Coordinator Washington State Patrol

  2. National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP) • NECP Overview and Background • NECP Implementation • NECP 2010 Update • NECP Goal 1 • NECP Goal 2

  3. National Emergency Communications Planlan • In Title XVIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Congress directed OEC to develop the NECP (in coordination with public / private stakeholders) • The NECP identifies the capabilities and initiatives needed for communications operability, interoperability, and continuity of communications for emergency responders nationwide • These will be familiar to you from the Interoperability Continuum

  4. National Emergency Communications Plan Vision – Emergency responders can communicate as needed, on demand, as authorized; at all levels of government; and across all disciplines • Released July 2008 – with 2010 Update • Developed in coordination with 150+ representatives from all major public safety organizations and private sector • Addresses operability, interoperability, continuity • First National Strategic Plan • 3 Performance-based Goals • 7 Objectives that set priorities • 92 Milestones to track progress • Implementation • Build capability/capacity (governance, exercises, SOP, usage) • National Assessments • Target resources (funding, technical assistance, training)

  5. NECP Goals • Goal 1: Urban Areas • By 2010, 90 percent of all high-risk urban areas designated within the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) are able to demonstrate response-level emergency communications within one hour for routine events involving multiple jurisdictions and agencies • All 60 UASIs demonstrated at varying levels • Seattle UASI performance measured during the 2010 Seafair event • Goal 2: Counties and County-Equivalents • By 2011, 75 percent of non-UASI jurisdictions are able to demonstrate response-level emergency communications within one hour for routine events involving multiple jurisdictions and agencies • Goal 3: All Jurisdictions • By 2013, 75 percent of all jurisdictions are able to demonstrate response-level emergency communications within three hours, in the event of a significant incident as outlined in national planning scenarios

  6. NECP Goal 2 NECP Goal 2 By 2011, 75 percent of non-UASI jurisdictions are able to demonstrate response-level emergency communications within one hour for routine events involving multiple jurisdictions and agencies.

  7. NECP Overview and Background NECP Goals • Two types of data to be collected: • Performance (response-level incident data) • Capabilities (based on Interoperability Continuum lanes) • Observations of routine multi-agency response emergency, planned events, or exercise • Multi-agency • Multi-jurisdictional

  8. NECP Goal Measurements for Counties • Two types of data to be collected: • Performance (response-level incident data) • Capabilities (based on Interoperability Continuum lanes) • County Level • Comprehensive look at emergency communications in the U.S. • Identify emergency communications needs at the local levels • Common geographical measurement area for establishing the new baseline • Tribal data • OEC will reach out directly to Federally-recognized Tribes • Counties do not need to collect Goal 2 data from Tribes

  9. Goal 2 Capability Data a • Questions are based on past efforts: • SAFECOM Continuum • 2006 Baseline Survey • TICP Initiative • Results should be generalized for the entire county and county-equivalent • Questions focus on: • Governance • SOPs • Technology • Training & Exercise • Usage

  10. Governance – The Decision Making Groups What are we measuring: The formality of and level of participation in interagency partnerships, forums, or governing bodies established to address common interoperability interests in the area.

  11. SOPs – Policies, Practices, and Procedures What are we measuring: The level of adequacy, participation in developing, and consistency of formalized SOPs to address common interoperability interests in the area.

  12. Technology – Standards and Emerging What are we measuring: The technology standards and equipment that are being utilized to effectively provide interagency communications in the area.

  13. Training and Exercise What are we measuring: The availability and regularity of training and exercise programs for communications interoperability.

  14. Usage – Frequency of Use and Familiarity What are we measuring: Ease and regularity of using interagency communications technologies and procedures within the area and across all types of events, including day-to-day, task force, and mutual aid operations.

  15. Goal 2 Performance Data • Counties can use a variety of methods to measure performance: • Real World Incidents • Planned Events • Exercises • Counties can use incidents, events, and exercise dating back to July 2008 • Criteria is same as used for Goal 1 UASI observations and focuses on 3 key areas: • Common Policies & Procedures • Leadership Roles & Responsibilities • Quality & Continuity of Communications • Performance Guide

  16. Goal 2 Considerations 23 • Two Types of Data to Assess • Capability • Performance • Use of Exercises or Pre-Planned Events • Consideration for “Significant Participation” • Involvement of Multiple Jurisdictions • A web-based reporting tool is available to collect and submit results to the SWIC. • https://franz.spawar.navy.mil/ • Paper forms are also available

  17. Resources: 24 • Outreach Materials • State Fact Sheet • State Goal 2 PowerPoint • Guidance Documents • County Capabilities Report on Interoperable Communications • Response-Level Communications Evaluation Form

  18. Goal 2 Implementation Timeline • Dates and milestones for Goal 2 collection • Kick off meeting - January 21 • Response-Level Communications Workshop • (If needed TBD, probably March) • Response-Level Communications Training Webinars • Various dates beginning January 25 through late August • Deadline for counties to submit data to SWIC – September 15

  19. Contact Information Contact Information: Alan H. Komenski SIEC Project Manager/State Interoperability Coordinator 425-401-7802 or 360-561-2109 Contact Information: Alan H. Komenski SIEC Project Manager/State Interoperability Coordinator 425-401-7802 or 360-561-2109 alan.komenski@wsp.wa.gov 27

More Related