Please Note: The content you will see is the actual work product of the QHSR study groups and participants, it is not final, vetted DHS policy.

Disasters Vision, Goal, Objectives and Outcomes

Vision: A Nation that is resilient to all threats and hazards.

 

Goal 1:  Build the foundation for national resilience


Objective 1.1:  Develop and Implement a National Strategy for Resilience that engages governmental, private, and nongovernmental organizations collectively in providing for public health, safety and security.

  • Outcome 1.1.1: Resilience has been defined and/or described in a consistent, meaningful way.
  • Outcome 1.1.2: Stakeholders have been engaged continuously in the development of the National Strategy for Resilience.
  • Outcome 1.1.3: An implementation plan for the National Strategy for Resilience has been developed and put into effect, in coordination with stakeholders.
  • Outcome 1.1.4: Process for periodic review and update of Strategy in collaboration with stakeholders is established.
  • Outcome 1.1.5: Roles of all stakeholders in building national resilience are clearly described and accepted.

 

Objective 1.2:  Establish coordinated resilience research agenda.

  • Outcome 1.2.1: A National Resilience Research Working Group has been established.
  • Outcome 1.2.2: A National resilience research agenda has been established, including specific research objectives, milestones, and responsible organizations.
  • Outcome 1.2.3: Research results are transferred to practitioners in a usable format.
  • Outcome 1.2.4: Specific indicators have been identified to gauge the effectiveness of resilience-building efforts.
  • Outcome 1.2.5: Factors that influence psychological and social resilience have been identified and documented.

  • Outcome 1.2.6: Factors that motivate individuals and organizations to undertake actions to build resilience have been identified and documented.
  • Outcome 1.2.7: successful practices for building resilience at the community level have been identified and documented.

 

Objective 1.3:  Establish national resilience engagement campaign.

  • Outcome 1.3.1: A strategic resilience engagement plan has been developed in collaboration with stakeholders and put into effect.
  • Outcome 1.3.2: Measures of success have been identified and incorporated into the engagement plan.
  • Outcome 1.3.3: Engagement strategies have been tested at the local level through pilot programs.
  • Outcome 1.3.4: Resilience, risk reduction, and preparedness curricula have been developed and incorporated into teaching plans for schools and other educational institutions.

 

Objective 1.4:  Enable nationwide resilience building activities through new and existing programs and mechanisms.

  • Outcome 1.4.1: Federal doctrine, policies, guidance, and programs have been revised to support execution of the National Strategy for Resilience.
  • Outcome 1.4.2: Relevant National standards and accreditation programs (e.g., Emergency Management Accreditation Program) have been refined to incorporate and address resilience.
  • Outcome 1.4.3: An analytic approach has been established to evaluate and learn from incidents and exercises as means to understand resilience elements and principles.
  • Outcome 1.4.4: Incentives are developed nationally and in the states to engage state, local and tribal governments, the private sector, and individuals in resilience activities.

 

Goal 2: Institutionalize the use of risk management to inform planning objectives and the identification of capability requirements.


Objective 2.1:  Establish risk assessment methodologies that can be applied at the local, tribal, state, regional, and federal levels that produce risk information that can be readily shared.

  • Outcome 2.1.1: A standard approach to risk assessment has been developed among all stakeholders.
  • Outcome 2.1.2: Stakeholders have adopted the recommended risk assessment approach and methodologies.
  • Outcome 2.1.3: Essential elements of risk information, data dictionaries, and requisite protocols have been established and institutionalized to enable risk information sharing and aggregation at various levels.

 

Objective 2.2:  All levels of government assess risk using agreed upon methodologies, analyze risk data to identify consequences of an event, incident or occurrence that must be incorporated into plans, and share results.

  • Outcome 2.2.1: Stakeholders (Federal, State, tribal, and local) regularly and routinely conduct risk assessments using agreed upon methodology.
  • Outcome 2.2.2: Catastrophic risks are identified and their attendant consequences are accurately described.
  • Outcome 2.2.3: Risk information is shared among all potentially-affected entities and aggregated based on jurisdictional, geographic (regional), or risk footprint.

 

Objective 2.3:  Use risk and consequence information to reduce risks, develop response and recovery plans, and identify capability requirements.

  • Objective 2.3.1: Risk reduction based on empirical risk and consequence information is institutionalized as a standard and essential element of emergency management at all levels.
  • Objective 2.3.2: Disaster response and recovery plans at all levels are informed by and responsive to accurate risk information.
  • Objective 2.3.3: Preparedness processes at all levels routinely use risk and consequence information to generate planning and capability requirements.
  • Objective 2.3.4: The unique response and recovery requirements of catastrophic incidents are understood and addressed.

 

Goal 3: Build national resilience capacity


Objective 3.1:  Maximize the capacity nationwide to withstand the effects of incidents resulting from all hazards and threats.

  • Outcome 3.1.1: Every level of government actively engages with stakeholders regarding disaster risks.
  • Outcome 3.1.2: Based on identified risks, appropriate protective and mitigation measures are identified and implemented to reduce risk.
  • Outcome 3.1.3: Methodology for determining cost and benefit of protective and mitigation measures established and used in decision-making process.
  • Outcome 3.1.4: Critical infrastructure programs have incorporated measures to both harden and improve the resilience of essential systems and services (e.g., supply chain, communications, transportation, energy, health).
  • Outcome 3.1.5: Communities nationwide have improved and implemented building codes and land and water use policies based on resilience research.
  • Outcome 3.1.6: Communities, government entities, and private sector organizations have developed and exercised continuity plans.
  • Outcome 3.1.7: Effective alert and warning systems are in place and recognized by all stakeholders.

 

Objective 3.2:  Improve the capacity nationwide to respond effectively and recover quickly from all types of disasters.

  • Outcome 3.2.1: A National Recovery Strategy has been developed and implemented that incorporates resilience principles.
  • Outcome 3.2.2: Formalized mechanisms to integrate findings from exercises and real world incidents into future planning and operations have been established at every level of government.
  • Outcome 3.2.3:  Risk based regional and cross-jurisdictional plans have been developed to address specific interdependencies associated with catastrophic hazards.
  • Outcome 3.2.4: Organizations at all levels of government that have incident-management responsibilities routinely use the National Incident Management System.

  • Outcome 3.2.5: Local networks (private, NGO, community, and faith-based organizations, etc.) are routinely integrated into community planning, risk reduction and preparedness activities.
  • Outcome 3.2.6: A system to routinely assess response capacity gaps nationwide has been implemented.
  • Outcome 3.2.7: Steady state capabilities that provide core capacity for responding to and recovering from disasters have been enhanced relative to risk.
  • Outcome 3.2.8: The status of critical resource logistics and distribution is visible to key stakeholders in real or near real-time.
  • Objective 3.2.9: Robust communication capabilities are available during a disaster to support disaster response and recovery operations.
  • Objective 3.2.10: National mutual aid processes and protocols routinely support response and recovery operations.

 

Objective 3.3:  Develop the capacity nationwide to readily adapt to changes resulting from all types of disasters.

  • Outcome 3.3.1: The National Recovery Strategy explicitly addresses adaptation as a principle tenant of short and long-term recovery.
  • Outcome 3.3.2: Federal long-term recovery roles and responsibilities are defined, agreed upon, and codified.
  • Outcome 3.3.3: Federal programs that support long-term recovery (e.g., disaster assistance, mitigation, housing, small business support programs) are flexible and recognize risk in meeting communities’ long term recovery needs.
  • Outcome 3.3.4: National capabilities for long-term monitoring of health and social services impacts in the aftermath of disasters have been developed.
  • Outcome 3.3.5: The gaps between requirements and current capabilities, including the unique challenges posed by catastrophic hazards, are recognized and addressed.
  • Outcome 3.3.6: Communities have long-term recovery plans developed in collaboration with citizens, community organizations, private sector entities, and NGOs.

 

Goal 4:  Build the resilience of individuals and families


Objective 4.1: Collaborate with stakeholders to determine and address the issues that affect individuals’ preparedness.

  • Outcome 4.1.1: A comprehensive analysis of the factors that encourage or impede individual preparedness has been completed and shared with all stakeholders.
  • Outcome 4.1.2: Individual preparedness best practices are identified and shared.
  • Outcome 4.1.3: Communities routinely assess the effectiveness of their individual and family preparedness efforts.
  • Outcome 4.1.4: A coordinated strategy for encouraging individual disaster preparedness has been developed and is used.

 

Objective 4.2: Encourage individuals and families to be prepared to safely sustain themselves for a reasonable period of time and assist their neighbors in the aftermath of a disaster.

  • Outcome 4.2.1: Individuals understand their risks, responsibilities and the resources available to assist their preparations (e.g., ready.gov, Red Cross).
  • Outcome 4.2.2: Individuals and families have taken necessary steps to be prepared.
  • Outcome 4.2.3: Workplace and community leaders of businesses, non-profits, and faith based organizations motivate and incentivize individual preparedness.
  • Outcome 4.2.4: Schools help students prepare themselves, their families and their communities for disasters.
  • Outcome 4.2.5: Meaningful incentives [including recognition schemes] are in place to motivate individuals and families to be more prepared.
  • Outcome 4.2.6: Individuals possess the knowledge and skills necessary to assist their neighbors at the time of disasters or emergencies.
  • Outcome 4.2.7: Individuals participate in community disaster preparedness programs (e.g., Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT), Citizen Corps, Red Cross).
  • Outcome 4.2.8: State, local, tribal governments have removed liability impediments and support Good Samaritan laws for individuals providing assistance during and after disasters.

 

Objective 4.3: Foster community partnerships with individuals in building disaster preparedness.

  • Outcome 4.3.1: Public officials, emergency personnel and community leaders engage and empower individuals and families in community disaster preparedness efforts.
  • Outcome 4.3.2: Professionals with specialized expertise (e.g. medical staff, engineers) are recruited to serve as volunteers to support local emergency management efforts.
  • Outcome 4.3.3: Population who require specialized assistance before, during, and after disasters are identified and supported by their communities and local emergency management.
  • Outcome 4.3.4: Communities continue to recruit and train disaster preparedness volunteers (e.g., Citizen Corps and CERT).
  • Outcome 4.3.5: Communities include volunteers in community preparedness plans, exercises and other activities.
  • Outcome 4.3.6: Barriers that impair employers’ support of employee involvement in community resilience activities are identified and addressed.

  • Outcome 4.3.7: CERT and Citizen Corps capabilities are enhanced to allow more significant support to communities.