In Case Of Emergency, Read Blog

Just before the start of the two-day Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, President Obama underscored the stakes: “the  single biggest threat to U.S. security — both short term, medium term and long term — would be the possibility of a terrorist organization obtaining a nuclear weapon…And we know that organizations like al-Qaeda are in the process of trying to secure a nuclear weapon — a weapon of mass destruction that they have no compunction at using.”

Much of the focus of the Summit is to continue to monitor and improve the control of nuclear materials from around the world and keep them out of the hands of terrorists and rogue nations. The hope is that this work will prevent the actual use of a nuclear weapon. However, as this is such an important issue, I would argue that the government should also be doing more to inform and prepare the public for a possibility of such an incident. Because contrary to popular opinion, there may be concrete steps that citizens might be able to do to mitigate the impact of such a disaster.

Last summer, I wrote a post about an Institute of Medicine report, “Assessing Medical Preparedness to Respond to a Terrorist Nuclear Event: Workshop Report.” It said that while a home-made nuclear bomb detonated in U.S. city would likely kill hundreds of thousands of people, there are actually things that can be done to increase the survivability for many others. That is, the committee argues, if the public is informed of those steps in advance. According to an article in New Scientist magazine:

as catastrophic as such an attack would be, it would not level an entire city, and a timely response could save many lives. Recent advances in techniques for mapping the path of radioactive fallout after an attack, combined with novel therapies for treating radiation victims, will improve survival chances, the report says.

“Clearly there would be loss of life, but it’s not hopeless,” says Georges Benjamin, head of the panel of doctors and public health officials that was convened by the National Academy of Sciences to assess the nation’s level of preparedness for such an attack. “We feel that there are things that one can do to mitigate it.”

Just knowing about the value of ’shelter in place’, for example, could be a lifesaver, according to the report:

For many people, the safest option would be to seek shelter in buildings or underground. Just staying inside could slash the immediate death toll from radiation by up to a factor of 100, or even 1000, [Fred] Mettler [of the New Mexico Veterans Administration Health Center] says. However, people must be told this in advance. “Without prior education, it would be a horrible issue,” he says.

President Obama At The Nuclear Security Summit (Reuters Photo)

In 2008, the Senate Homeland Security Committee held a series of interesting hearings on nuclear preparedness which also produced some tangible things people might be able to do in the event a nuclear attack. I wrote in a post, “What You Should Do If A Nuclear Bomb Explodes Nearby“: [Read more →]

I wanted to bring your attention to a recent panel held by George Washington University’s Homeland Security Policy Institute. The title of the event was “Improvised Explosive Devices: Perceptions and the Domestic Threat” After watching the webcast, I was struck by how each of the panelists, including the Washington D.C. police chief, highlighted the centrality of the public’s role in dealing with the IED threat here in the U.S..

Darby Miller Steiger from Gallup began the panel by presenting a new survey that found “a vast majority of Americans believe it is likely the U.S. will suffer an IED attack within the next two years. Few, however, believe an attack will happen in their community. Even in New York City and Washington, DC, only one in five respondents felt such an attack was likely to occur in their city.” In her presentation slides, Steiger elaborated that a ““I’m OK but you’re not’ phenomenon plays out, with only 9% believing their communities are at risk of an IED attack, yet 61% think the U.S. is likely to be attacked in next 2 years.”

The subsequent panelists picked up on the theme of better informing and preparing the public to both prevent and respond these potential attacks. The event featured: Corey Gruber, Assistant Deputy Administrator, National Preparedness Directorate, FEMA, Department of Homeland Security; Cathy Lanier, Chief, Metropolitan Police Department, Washington, DC and HSPI Steering Committee Member; Josh Meyer, Director, Education and Outreach, Medill National Security Journalism Initiative, Northwestern University; Mark Mueller, Acting Deputy Chief, Office for Bombing Prevention, National Protection and Programs Directorate, Department of Homeland Security; and, Adam Thiel, Chief, Alexandria Fire Department, Alexandria, Virginia and HSPI Steering Committee Member.

According to the Institute’s writeup of the panel:

Gruber stated that Gallup’s findings correlate with FEMA’s Personal Preparedness in America survey. Stating “information is the key,” Gruber noted that both data sets support the idea that information can have a direct and indirect effect on how people react in a crisis. He expanded his point by highlighting two important elements that shape crisis behavior. First, how information is received—how it is communicated to individuals. Second, how it is observed—what others observe the people around them doing with said information.

Mueller echoed the importance of an informed public. According to him, what is needed are mechanisms that would allow officials to build upon the knowledge and awareness that already resides within the public. Mueller also stressed the necessity of providing concrete guidance to the public, and the role citizens play in providing key intelligence. He argued that “quite often it is the alert clerk, it’s the off-duty police officer, it’s the neighbor” that notices key indicators that enable law enforcement and national level assets to intercede before a threat comes to fruition.

Building on this theme, Lanier stressed that we must recalibrate our thinking on who is actually responsible for preparing for and preventing attacks. She contends that citizens, not the government, have the primary responsibility. However the challenge is that, “there’s no picture in the public mind of how to get in touch with Homeland Security.”

Chief Lanier also made a point that her counterpoint in New York City Ray Kelly has also highlighted: one often overlooked responsibility of citizens is to tell their elected officials that local law enforcement needs ongoing resources for terrorism prevention even as time continues to pass since the nation was attacked.

On the other hand, I think it is up to law enforcement and government officials to be more open and frank with the public if they expect that level of understanding and involvement. Gallup’s Steiger reported that “while 8 in 10 report familiarity with the term IED, this does not necessarily mean that the public understands the threat and how to respond.” But there has been very little public conversation — outside industry events like this — about IED’s and the potential danger so it is not surprising that Americans would not be informed or prepared.

Panelists at the Homeland Security Policy Institute’s ”Improvised Explosive Devices: Perceptions and the Domestic Threat”

Thanks to Keith Robertory I just saw a fun and I think effective new blood donation PSA from the Australian Red Cross that I wanted to post. And, as someone who has benefited greatly from donated blood, I’m always looking for a reason to promote the subject on the blog.

Red Cross (Australia) Blood Donation PSA

Those of you inspired by the film crew to donate blood (but don’t live in Australia) can check the American Red Cross website which has information about giving. It also has a site, www.givelife.org, and a toll-free number, 1-800-448-3543, to find blood drives in your area.

The American Association of Blood Banks also has a website which allows you to search by zip codes for places (like hospitals) where you can donate blood and platelets. It is a relatively easy way that all of us can contribute to our society’s preparedness for emergencies.

In the wake of this week’s Baja California earthquake, San Diego’s KPBS had an interesting piece discussing why so few state residents have earthquake insurance.

[There] may be good reasons to get earthquake insurance, but there are reasons why most people decide to just take their chances. Those reasons boil down to the rarity of severe earthquakes, the cost of insurance and high deductibles.

If your house is totally destroyed by an earthquake, insurance is great. However, a typical earthquake policy has a 15 percent deductible. If you have earthquake insurance on a house that would cost $200,000 to replace, and an earthquake does damage to your home, you will have to pay $30,000 before you get your first dollar of coverage. The temblor that hit El Centro and Calexico this week will result in few insurance payouts, in light of those deductibles. [Read more →]

The Department of Homeland Security’s most significant policy outreach to the public in its six-year history has been the National Dialogue on the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review. The Dialogue was an innovative web-based outreach tool created by DHS and the National Academy of Public Administration(NAPA) last year to help solicit stakeholder input on the “Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR). (The QHSR is a congressionally-mandated process which helps guide the nation’s homeland security policies. The final QHSR report was released in February.)

Today, NAPA released its own report on the Dialogue process summarizing the feedback and offering lessons that can guide similar future efforts by DHS and other government entities. It’s an very good piece that should be reviewed not only by those in the homeland security business but anyone interested in opening government up to the public and other stakeholders. Many of the report’s recommendations are aimed at building upon the dialogue to expand outreach and engagement.

If you were one of 20,000 Americans who took part in any of the Dialogue’s three rounds, you will be interested to read in the report some of the ways that the stakeholder input impacted the development of the QHSR document. For example, in the first round, the QHSR study group panel reported:

• Users identified ambiguous terms in several vision statements and goals which they felt might cause confusion. Examples include “malicious actors” and “man made hazards,” both of which were included in Counterterrorism mission area statements.

• One of the most highly rated ideas was that DHS goals follow the “SMART” method of goal-setting: to ensure that goals are specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and time based.

• Users identified consistency gaps among mission areas. For example, some goals are naturally shared between the Counterterrorism and Disasters; yet some were listed under one area but not the other.

• Several users suggested that “mitigation” be added as a goal for Disasters.

• Users suggested that some Immigration goals did not seem to fit within the scope of the mission area.

These suggestions were integrated into the second round of the Dialogue and the following stakeholder ideas resulted:

[Read more →]

The White House last week released a “Surface Transportation Security Priority Assessment”. Phil Leggiere summarized the findings in Homeland Security Today:

Although progress has been made in improving surface transportation security, US ground transportation remains poorly organized and unacceptably vulnerable, according to a report issued late last week by the Obama administration.

The report, titled, Surface Transportation Security Priority Assessment, issued only days after last week’s suicide bombings on the Moscow subway system, describes the current ground security system as inefficient, and calls for more focused, collaborative effort between the public and private sector to identify and rectify continuing areas of risk.

I was struck right away in reading the report that the public’s role is mentioned in the first sentence:

Securing the Nation’s surface transportation network requires a coordinated effort among all levels of government, the private and nonprofit sectors, communities, and individual citizens. While much has been accomplished to date toward securing this network, a highly focused, collaborative effort is required to identify residual risks and associated solution paths. This report presents the results of a collaborative process that produced recommendations compiled from participating stakeholders’ individual recommendations for increasing the security of the surface transportation system.

However, the Assessment itself does not really mention the citizen’s role in its initial recommendations. Clearly, the public and private sector have the predominant responsibility for surface transportation security and are the priority. Yet, as the Assessment notes, riders also need to be made part of the effort. As the Administration continues work on this issue, it should make sure to give some attention to public piece of the equation. One way I think would be to building upon the “See Something, Say Something”-type information campaigns by providing more specifics and follow-up.

A day after Colorado State University released their forecast that the 2010 Atlantic hurricane season will be “above average”, FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate has recorded a video urging the public to begin preparations.

The preliminary report, according to CNN.com, predicts 15 named storms and eight of those becoming hurricanes:

Forecasters William Gray and Phil Klotzbach said that El Niño conditions will dissipate by summer and that unusually warm tropical Atlantic sea surface temperatures will persist, leading to favorable conditions for hurricanes to develop and intensify.

Of the eight expected hurricanes, the forecasters predict that four will strengthen to major hurricanes, meaning Category 3 or higher on the Saffir-Simpson scale of strength. Category 3 storms have sustained winds of at least 111 mph. The forecast said the probability of a major hurricane making landfall along the U.S. coastline is 69 percent….

Last year’s hurricane season was below average, with nine named tropical storms, three of which were hurricanes. The National Hurricane Center said it was the lowest number of tropical storms for the Atlantic basin since 1997.

The full report can be found here. In the short video, shot at FEMA’s National Response Coordination Center, Fugate challenges the public saying, “We’re getting ready…Are you?” and urges Americans to visit Ready.Gov. The Atlantic hurricane season begins on June 1.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano yesterday announced the formation of “the local, state, tribal, and federal Preparedness Task Force—a council of experts charged with assessing the state of the nation’s disaster preparedness and making recommendations to Secretary Napolitano about ways to build resiliency in communities across America.”

This blog has recommended that the Secretary create a task force on citizen and community preparedness so I think this is positive development. I also hope that citizen perspectives be reflected in the deliberations and ultimate recommendations. The members of the panel are a quality cross section of officials from throughout the nation. And, they will bring their experience as professionals as well as citizens to the task force. Yet sometimes it can be difficult for them to completely take off their official hats and put on their citizen ones in developing preparedness policy. So, I definitely suggest they make sure to elicit public input as part of their work. I look forward to following the task force’s activities.

The Washington Post’s Spencer Hsu reported Friday that the Obama Administration is reevaluating the nation’s policy on large-scale national disaster exercises. In the article, “National Disaster Exercises, Called Too Costly And Scripted, May Be Scaled Back,” Hsu writes that the Administration is:

considering whether to scale back next year’s National Level Exercise, the annual drill [previously called "TOPOFF"] that for the past decade has been a cornerstone of the nation’s efforts to prepare for a catastrophic terrorist attack or natural disaster…

White House officials and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano say they are trying to improve the national exercises, not undercut them. The drills have grown into unrealistic, costly and over-scripted productions, Napolitano has said, an “elaborate game” rather than opportunities for officials to work through problems.

The Administration’s reevaluation on training exercises comes after officials cancelled a planned major drill involving a mock ‘dirty bomb’ explosion in Las Vegas next month after Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) complained that it would scare tourists from visiting the city. As I wrote in a post last November, “What Happens In Vegas (Might Be Less Serious If Major FEMA Nuke Attack Exercise) Stays In Vegas”, I thought cancelling the Sin City exercise was misguided and an

example of how the public is too often infantilized when it comes to information on serious terrorist threats, including weapons of mass destruction — And, as a result, why we as citizens are not as prepared or as informed as we should be…the contention that somehow having a practice drill with a nuclear weapon would scare Americans from traveling to Vegas.

It just plays into the narrative (I would say canard) that the public cannot handle any discussion of serious potential terror threats (particularly involving weapons of mass destruction) without becoming scared out of their wits. And as a result, it prevents our leaders from having an open dialogue which might actually improve our ability to respond to a scenario.

In fact, I believe these large scale disaster drills should actually be used as an opportunity to better engage and inform the public, something that to date they have not been. Whatever model of emergency exercises are chosen after the current Administration debate, I feel strongly that the public should somehow be involved when they are carried out.

Most every top national and local government preparedness official I’ve spoken to believes that preparedness drills for the public would increase citizen readiness and engagement. The difficulty of course is organizing these events. So, if the government is going to undertake major exercises, the opportunity should not be lost to involve the citizenry. Short of an actual incident, a drill is the best way to get people to think through what they would do if something actually happened.

According to the Post article, the Obama Administration is considering making more of the drills surprises rather than being planned in advance, which some believe is a better way to test preparedness. That seems to make sense, but I think there is some value to having at least one scheduled exercise that might include the public and be a galvanizing day for U.S. preparedness. These national level drills are first and foremost to train government officials and responders, but why not also include citizens in some way. I believe that doing so would not only help the public get ready but would also be a useful addition to the exercises.

Next Month’s Scheduled National Level Exercise Was Not Welcome In Las Vegas

I am happy to report that I am now back blogging after another hiatus due to this pesky leukemia I have been wrestling with over the past year and a half.

Unfortunately, I had to stop work on the blog in early December when the disease reappeared after being in remission for a year. Soon after, I went into the hospital for a bone marrow transplant. I am now recovering from that procedure which so far appears to have been successful. I still have a ways to go, but I am doing well. I want to thank everyone for all their support throughout. I really appreciate it.

I also want to put in a plug for bone marrow donation. I am the lucky recipient of the marrow from a generous person whose decision to donate may end up saving my life. Contrary to popular (and my own previous) belief, being a donor is not hugely difficult or painful. And to register all it takes is a swab inside your cheek. For more information on the registration process and nearby donation registry drives, the website of the National Marrow Donor Program can be found here. It’s good to be back.