stanford emergency management all doc training meeting october 25, 2011
Post on 19-Dec-2015
214 views
TRANSCRIPT
Agenda• Mass Notification system improvement project
• AlertSU system test results
• Satellite phone communications
• DOC Incident Planning process review
• FEMA Grant update
• DOC Expectations project
• FEMA L-363 Course offering
2 of 29
Objectives
• To specify university requirements for a mobile and web-based check-in capability, including an administrative system to collect information to assist with response during an emergency
• To identify the most feasible options to provide this capability
• To recommend the best option for Stanford crisis management using a check-in capability, including high-level information concerning: timeline with phased deliverables, approximate costs, implementation strategy and plan, other pertinent information, as necessary
Vendors considered
Vendors
Blackboard Connect
Cassidian
GlobalAlert Link
HipLink & IntelliGuard
Mir3
MissionMode
Rave
Regroup
SendWordNow
VoloRecovery
WARN
xMatters
Finalist vendors
All three are proven vendors in the emergency notification industry, although MissionMode is not currently in the higher education sector.
Evaluation participants• Aaron Buzay, Res Ed• Bernadette Burnes-Line, Hospital• Bob Wheeler, LBRE • Brandon Bond, Hospital• Elaine Ray, University Communications• Elise McMath, EH&S• Keith Perry, EH&S• Lance Lougee, SLAC• Larry Gibbs, EH&S• Lee Connor, Student Affairs• Mark Mannia, DPS• Susie Claxton, Student Housing• Thomas Walters, R&DE• Tim Flood• Tim Torgenrud, ITS
• Agile• Gave the most thought to our RFP• Developed mock-up of their ideas of what we wanted• Clearly grasp our vision• Willing to engage in long-term development process with Stanford• Want to emerge from the pack with a superior product• Medium price – came down substantially in price• Therefore, desires a 5-year contract.
•Mike Mitchell of MissionMode: “We've tried to structure this so that Stanford remains a valuable and influential MissionMode customer far beyond the completion of our short-term development plans.”
RECOMMENDATIONWe attempted to make our choice as the best return on our
investment while enabling us to realize Stanford’s vision.
Comparison Bb Connect & MissionMode
Performs basic multi-modal notification
Rudimentary check-in features – check-in is phone only
Slow product release cycle Emergency is not primary
product focus No glimpse into their product
roadmap Little real results in working with
us
Performs more advanced multi-modal notification
Multi-modal check-in features, no app yet
Have incident management tool & collaboration features
Rapid product release cycle Will work on rapid timeline Willing to obligate themselves to
deliver our functionality within 90 days
Emergency is primary focus Willing to incorporate features we are
requesting into their base product
Bb Connect MissionMode
THREE CHALLENGING EFFORTS
System
Organization
Communication
The Project
Notification Emergency Check-In Common Operating Picture Use MDM to push to smart devices
Roles, responsibilities, authorities Training & practice Issue identification & resolution
Setting the right expectation Framing the necessity
Timeline Subject to Procurement, negotiation, & planning with MissionMode;
however … Bb Connect license expires Dec 12 (with 30-day notice) Must move quickly General framework can be established based on conversation, as follows:
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun …
Purchase
Phase 1*
Sep
Phases 2+: Design, Develop, Implement (in Phases)
Common Operating Picture
Organize
Check-In
*Phase 1 includes setup, configuration, replacement of Bb Connect for notification
Integrate with iStanford & MDM
AlertSU Test Results
• Simultaneous activation of mass notification system and outdoor warning system, including websites, hotlines, radio, and cable system– Test began at 12:05 PM
• Mass Notification system test results
12 of 29
New ATT Sat Phone
• Previous model drawbacks– High purchase price– Monthly fee– Never use it
• New model– High purchase price– Monthly fee– Fully functional daily use ATT phone comparable in
size, weight and functionality to a regular phone.
17 of 29
Incident Management
• We opened our DOC, what do we do now?
• When do you need to formalize the Planning process?– The incident will be prolonged (more than one
operational period)– Two or more groups are responding to the event– You have several Command positions activated
19 of 29
20 of 29
Who Does What?
IncidentCommanderIncidentCommander
OperationsSectionOperationsSection
PlanningSectionPlanningSection
LogisticsSectionLogisticsSection
Finance/AdminSectionFinance/AdminSection
Command: Develops incident objectives.Ensures Safety Analysis is completed. Approves IAP.
Operations: Establishes strategies and tactics to meet incident objectives.
Planning: Provides status reports, manages the planning process, and produces the IAP.
Finance/Admin: Conducts any needed cost analyses.
Logistics: Identifies the logistics requirements to support the tactics.
21 of 29
Incident/Event
Notifications
Initial Response& Assessment
Incident BriefUsing ICS-201
Initial IC/UCMeeting
TacticsMeeting
Preparing forthe PlanningMeeting
PlanningMeeting
Execute Plan& AssessProgress
New OpsPeriod Begins
IAP Prep &Approval
OperationsBriefing
Command &General StaffMeeting
Preparingfor theTacticsMeeting
Init
ial
Res
po
nse
IC/UCDevelop/UpdateObjectivesMeeting
The Start of Each Planning Cycle
Planning for each operational period begins with the Incident Commander or Unified Command developing/ updating incident objectives.
Objectives are based on the continued assessment of the situation and the progress made.
Init
ial
Re
sp
on
se
Effective Objectives
• S - Specific• M - Measurable• A - Attainable• R - Realistic• T - Time sensitive
23 of 29
24 of 29
Sample Strategy and Tactics
Tactics: Use truck-mounted pumps working from the road into spillway, and portable pumps on the east side discharging into Murkey Creek.
Strategy #1: Reduce/divert inflow.
Strategy #2: Release water from spillways.
Selected Strategy: Pump water from reservoir.
Resources: 5 crews with (3) 1,500-gpm truck-mounted pumps & (2) 500-gpm portable pumps
Objective: Reduce reservoir level to 35 feet by 0800 on 2/10.
FEMA Grant Project• Project 1
– Risk Assessment – Campus Plan Revisions– Table Top exercises
• Project 2– Emergency Management
Training • Target 200 courses• Current total 200+ completed
• Project 3– Medical response
• Project 4– Threat Assessment
• DOCs reporting completed training– Athletics, Business Affairs, DPS,
EHS, Engineering, GSB, H&S, IT Services, LBRE, R&DE, School of Medicine, SULAIR, Student Affairs
• DOCs who have not reported completed training– Alumni & Development Offices,
Dean of Research, Hoover Institution, Law School, President & Provost Offices, School of Earth, Sciences, School of Education, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford Campus Residential Leaseholders, Stanford Management Company, Vaden Health Center
25 of 29
DOC Expectations ProjectDOCs who have updated their pages• EHS• LB&RE• School of Earth Sciences• School of Humanities and Sciences• School of Medicine
DOCs who have not updated their pages• Department of Public Safety• ITS• R&DE• Vaden• Alumni & Development• Business Affairs• Dean of Research• GSB• Hoover• Law School• Pres/Provost Office• School of Education• School of Engineering• SLAC• SCRL• Stanford Management Company• Student Affairs• University Libraries
27 of 29
L-363 Course
• Emergency Management for Higher Education– December 6, 7, 8– Mission College– Free!
29 of 29