Preparedness: Strategic Planning

Assess and rank the threat(s). The first step to improving your emergency response preparedness is to conduct a thorough assessment of the threat.  Crisis communication expert Rene Henry describes five “generic” crises:

1. Terrorism;
2. Acts of nature including earthquakes, hurricanes and floods;
3. Sexual harassment and discrimination;
4. Violence in the workplace, and
5. Environmental pollution. 

 

This taxonomy provides a useful starting point for identifying threats, but every campus has its own unique attributes that will greatly affect your planning process.  What are the threats to your specific campus?  Are you in an area vulnerable to a terrorist threat?  Is their a chemical facility or risk of a train derailment in your immediate vicinity?  Are you in an area particularly susceptible to hurricanes or other extreme weather conditions?  Is your campus or a significant portion of your student body located in a high crime area?  Do commuters regularly travel through an at-risk area?  Are their any times of year when depression is particularly acute among students at your school?  Does the institution itself have facilities that might be considered dangerous, such as a nuclear reactor, laboratory, or large store of chemicals? 

To help prioritize planning, each threat should be ranked based on likelihood and severity.  For example, the likelihood of an off-campus physical assault might be a very likely event but the severity in terms of its effect of spreading to the entire campus community and requiring mobilizing the emergency response team might be relatively small.

The University of Georgia preparedness web site provides an interesting example of assessing campus specific threats and prioritizing.

… 11 major structure fires have occurred on the UGA campus since 1993, and the Athens community has been hit by tornadoes in 1973, 1985 and 2003 (UGA Risk Management Services, 2007). On the Athens campus, accidental gas leaks from construction projects or chemical spills are far more likely than any of the above scenarios.

Identify prevention methods.  While it is not the purpose of this document to cover the myriad of effective preventative and early warning processes, it is important not to underemphasize the importance of this step.  From mental health screening programs to proper physical security measures, prevention must not be overlooked or under-funded.  Prevention methods should be mapped out for each identified threat.

Define what constitutes an emergency. The next step is to identify what constitutes an emergency that requires a cross-functional response.  Is an off-campus crime an emergency requiring a coordinated response on campus?  Potentially, if the threat is severe enough and there is a risk of spillover onto the campus.  It is important to clearly define for your campus the triggers that initiate an emergency management plan-and they should be defined unambiguously. These constitute the situations for which you will create a clearly documented preparedness plan.  It is important to have generic procedures for unforeseen events, but data shows that over 80% of all situations experienced on a campus were envisioned prior to the event.  One example of classifying emergencies is that used by the University of Chicago, where emergencies are classified into three basic types. They are:

• Type One.   A Type One event or emergency is one that affects only one department or division of the University. It is assumed that Type One events can be handled by the affected department working in conjunction with the University Police and Safety Office. Typical of Type One events would be small, containable fires, or chemical spills.
• Type Two.  Type Two events are those that affect multiple departments or divisions of the University. These events, at the discretion of the Emergency Director, may convene portions or all of the Policy Group and the Emergency Management Group. Typical of Type Two events would be major fires, significant electrical outages, severe snowstorms and/or major windstorms.
• Type Three.   Events of this type are catastrophic in scale, affecting not only the University but the surrounding
  community as well. At the discretion of the Emergency Director, a full-scale response may be launched, utilizing the full extent of the University’s capabilities, in conjunction with municipal emergency facilities. Substantial civil disturbances, tornadoes, or acts of war would be examples of this type.

Identify constituents and roles. A situation on campus can involve a broad spectrum of people.  A best practice is to identify a broad working group that is involved in the planning process, appoint an emergency response manager, and then identify clear owners given the different types of situations.  Here, a clear distinction should be drawn between a working group and planning effort from the response team.  Often, the emergency response manager coordinates directly with the relevant “owner” of an incident.  For example, the overall response to a fire in a residence hall would be managed by the emergency response manager but the situational “owner” might by the Residence Hall Director.  Clear lines of responsibility and communication must be identified ahead of time.  The tendency during the chaos of responding to incident naturally pulls more people into the decision making process as they try to help, causing further confusion.  Institutions that identify the constituents, their roles and a clear chain of authority ahead of time are much better prepared to respond effectively.  Some key roles that should be included in an emergency preparedness council or working group include:

• Campus Safety
• Residence Hall
• Student Affairs
• Facilities
• PR/Communications
• Information Technology
• Local community law enforcement and emergency responders

If you appreciated this article and want to receive more valuable industry content like this, click here to sign up for our FREE digital newsletters!

Related Content