Emergency management planning principles,go kit,information hurricane isaac,emergency alert system tsunami warning - Plans Download

Threats and risks to Canadians and Canada are becoming increasingly complex due to the diversity of natural hazards affecting our country and the growth of transnational threats arising from the consequences of terrorism, globalized disease outbreaks, climate change, critical infrastructure interdependencies and cyber attacks.
A key function of the Government of Canada is to protect the safety and security of Canadians. Effective EM results from a coordinated approach and a more uniform structure across federal government institutions.
A SEMP establishes a federal government institution's objectives, approach and structure for protecting Canadians and Canada from threats and hazards in their areas of responsibility and sets out how the institution will assist the coordinated federal emergency response. The development and employment of a SEMP is an important complement to such existing plans, because it promotes an integrated and coordinated approach to emergency management planning within federal institutions and across the federal government. Federal government institutions in the early stages of developing a SEMP may find it useful to read the material in Sections One and Two, while other institutions with more established plans may wish to proceed directly to Section Three.
Supporting templates and tools can contribute to effective emergency management planning and are provided with this Guide. The Emergency Management Planning Guide uses a step-by-step approach and provides instructions that are supplemented by the Blueprint and the Strategic Emergency Management Plan (SEMP) template provided in Annexes A and B, respectively.
The Emergency Management Planning Unit, Public Safety Canada, is responsible for producing, revising and updating this Guide. The purpose of this Guide is to assist federal officials, managers and coordinators responsible for emergency management (EM) planning. The EM plans of federal government institutions should address the risks to critical infrastructure within or related to the institution's areas of responsibility, as well as the measures for protecting this infrastructure. The SEMP is the overarching plan that provides a comprehensive and coordinated approach to EM activities. Given this variety of EM planning documents, the distinctions between them are summarized in the following table. A SEMP establishes a federal government institution's objectives, approach and structure for protecting Canadians and Canada from threats and hazards in their areas of responsibility, and sets out how the institution will assist the coordinated federal emergency response. It outlines the processes and mechanisms to facilitate an integrated Government of Canada response to an emergency and to eliminate the need for departments to coordinate a wider Government of Canada response.
It includes 13 emergency support functions that the federal government can implement in response to an emergency.
Operational plans may be based on all four pillars of EM planning, or focus on the specific activities of a single pillar. The National Strategy and Action Plan for Critical Infrastructure establishes a public-private sector approach to managing risks, responding effectively to disruptions, and recovering swiftly when incidents occur. Implementation of the Strategy will feature targeted and accurate information products, such as security briefings for each critical infrastructure sector. Emergency management (EM) refers to the management of emergencies concerning all hazards, including all activities and risk management measures related to prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. The Emergency Management Continuum is depicted in a wheel diagram where all four risk-based functions of emergency management are interconnected and interdependent in a system from prevention and mitigation to preparedness, response, and recovery. In the center of the wheel are the main elements that influence the development of a Strategic Emergency Management Plan (SEMP). Figure 1 highlights the four interdependent risk-based functions of EM: prevention and mitigation of, preparedness for, response to, and recovery from emergencies. The SEMP should ideally be reviewed on a cyclical basis as part of a federal government institution's planning cycle, as presented in Figure 2 below. This figure represents the optimal planning cycle federal institutions should consider for undertaking their emergency management planning activities. May: Senior Institutional Management reviews year-end reports from the previous year's activities.
September: Senior Institutional Management conducts mid-year check on progress of key performance objectives. February: Senior Institutional Management makes decision regarding the institution's strategic priorities for the upcoming fiscal year.
This section of the Guide outlines a recommended approach for developing a tailored SEMP and is supported by a blueprint and a SEMP template provided in Annexes A and B, respectively. Please note that Step 5 is presented under Section Four: Implementing and Maintaining the SEMP. Each step identifies inputs or considerations at the outset and concludes with the associated outputs. This step involves starting the formal planning process in recognition of the responsibility to prepare a SEMP. Consider having members of the EM planning team designated by your institution's senior management.
One of the most crucial steps in the EM planning process is to identify appropriate members for the EM planning team. Consider including a member of your institution's corporate planning area on the EM planning team in order to help align the EM planning cycle with the institution's overall business planning cycle.
Federal government institutions should consider identifying the range of experience and skill sets required in the EM planning team. The team members should have the skills and training required to adequately carry out their assigned duties. The team members should have the skills and training required to adequately carry out their assigned duties. The composition of the EM planning team will vary depending on institutional requirements; however, it is important that clear terms of reference (TOR) for the team be established and that individual assignments be clearly defined. After the EM planning team has clear authority and direction, the next step is to review any relevant existing legislation and policies.
Consider giving a team member the responsibility of analyzing the legislative and policy obligations applicable to the development of the SEMP.
As noted in Section Two, the EM planning process should be carried out as part of an institution's overall strategic and business planning processes—this will support their alignment. Developing the SEMP can be supported by a formal work or project plan to ensure that established timelines for plan development are met. As a next step, federal government institutions should consider developing a comprehensive understanding of the planning context.
Additional supporting planning tools and templates as well as an EM glossary are provided in Annexes C and D, respectively. An environmental scan involves being aware of the context in which an institution is operating so as to understand how it could be affected. As part of the environmental scan, the institution defines the internal and external parameters to be taken into account when managing the risk and setting the scope and risk criteria for the remaining risk assessment process. Additionally, federal government institutions are responsible for conducting mandate-specific risk assessments, including risks to critical infrastructure.
The Planning Context is represented in a target diagram that consists of three circles representing the factors federal institutions should consider in order to understand the context in which it operates and how it could potentially be affected. The outer and middle circles represent the external context in which the institution seeks to achieve its objectives. Understanding the internal context is essential to confirm that the risk assessment approach meets the needs of the institution and of its internal stakeholders.
Understanding the external context is important to ensure that external stakeholders, their objectives and concerns are considered. Consider reviewing your federal government institution's most current environmental scan, as well as the most current RCMP Environmental Scan (which can be found on the RCMP Web site), in order to develop a better understanding of pressures and issues facing your institution. Once all documentation is identified, consider conducting a gap analysis to determine whether the institution is currently meeting its obligations as identified in Step 1. During this process, consider conducting a full review and analysis of stakeholder documentation and reports. An inventory of critical assets and services will assist the planning team in identifying the associated threats, hazards, vulnerabilities and risks unique to their institution.
If a business impact analysis (BIA) has already been completed for your federal government institution's BCP, this analysis can greatly inform your criticality assessment. When conducting a criticality assessment, it is important to be objective when prioritizing the importance of institutional assets, as not all assets are critical to an institution's operations. Adopting the current Treasury Board Policy related to material and asset management and coding criteria will help structure an effective approach. A comprehensive but non-exhaustive list of hazards and threats relevant to the Canadian context can be found in Annex C, Appendix 3. Traditionally, a threat assessment is an analysis of intent and capabilities in the occurrence of a threat. A vulnerability assessment looks at an inadequacy or gap in the design, implementation or operation of an asset that could enable a threat or hazard to cause injury or disruption. In order to identify vulnerabilities, an institution should first identify and assess existing safeguards associated with critical assets and activities. Risk assessment is central to any risk management process as well as the EM planning cycle. The output of the risk assessment process is a clear understanding of risks, their likelihood and potential impact on achieving objectives.
The all-hazards risk assessment (AHRA) process should be open and transparent while respecting the federal institution's context. In this section, risks translate into events or circumstances that, if they materialize, could negatively affect the achievement of government objectives. Once the institution's context is clearly understood (refer to the environmental scan in Step 2-1), the next step is to find and recognize hazards, threats and possibly trends and drivers, and to describe them in risk statements. Risks can be identified though several mechanisms: structured interviews, brainstorming, affinity grouping, risk source analysis, checklists and scenario analysis. A risk register or log is used to record information about identified risks and to facilitate the monitoring and management of risks. The objective of risk analysis is to understand the nature and level of each risk in terms of its impact and likelihood. Qualitative analysis is conducted where non-tangible aspects of risk are to be considered, or where there is a lack of adequate information and the numerical data or resources necessary for a statistically significant quantitative approach.
Consider consulting your institution's subject matter experts when evaluating quantitative likelihood through historical data, simulation models and other methods.
Consequences can be expressed in terms of monetary, technical, operational, social or human impact criteria.
The purpose of risk evaluation is to help make decisions about which risks need treatment and the priority for treatment implementation. Risk criteria are based on internal and external contexts and reflect the institution's values, objectives, resources and risk appetite (over-arching expression of the amount and type of risk an institution is prepared to take).
Risks can be prioritized by comparing risks in terms of their individual likelihood and impact estimates. The risk-rating matrix allows for decisions to be made about which risks need treatment and the priority for treatment implementation. Risk treatment options can be prioritized by considering risk severity, effectiveness of risk controls, cost and benefits, the horizontal nature of the risk, and existing constraints.
Consider gathering a list of institutional risks and cross-referencing the existing plans (as identified in Step 2-1c) that address each risk.
This step will contribute to the concept that sound EM decision-making can be based on an understanding and evaluation of hazards, vulnerabilities and related risks. This step focuses on developing an informed EM approach for your institution based on the four pillars of EM.
Each institution should establish an EM governance structure to oversee the management of emergencies. In identifying members of your institution's EM governance structure, keep in mind the relationship between your institution's mandate and the four pillars of EM.
It is important that the planning team confirm the strategic priorities of the institution and of senior management so that they can be reflected in the SEMP. Consider developing an overview of these priorities and identifying potential areas for attention given risk probabilities and vulnerabilities.
The planning team should aim to clearly identify the planning constraints and institutional limitations that will influence the SEMP building blocks and the subsequent development of the SEMP.
The cross-reference table of existing plans by identified institutional risks provided in Annex C, Appendix 4, can assist in cross-referencing your most prevalent risks and the tools in place to address them (such as existing plans). A SEMP should inform each federal government institution's overall priorities and tie into its business and strategic planning activities.
The objective of planning activities associated with prevention and mitigation efforts is to reduce risk. The objective of planning activities associated with preparedness is to have an effective and coordinated approach to EM and operational readiness. Federal government institutions should consider personnel surge capacity requirements in their plans to support sustained operations, as well as the ability to react to any additional hazard or event that may occur while the response and recovery operations are taking place. The objective of planning activities associated with institutional responses to changing threats, hazards or specific incidents is to have an effective and integrated response in accordance with established strategic priorities. Think about engaging your communications branch so that they are aware of internal and external communications requirements. The objective of planning activities associated with the recovery component of EM is to provide for the restoration and continuity of critical services and operations. Once the event is over and response operations are completed, federal institutions should participate in any whole-of-government reviews as appropriate. The SEMP establishes a federal government institution's objectives, approach and structure for protecting Canadians and Canada from threats and hazards in their areas of responsibility, and sets out how the institution will assist the coordinated federal emergency response.
Home Government Public Safety Services Emergency Management & Homeland Security What is Emergency Management? Actions carried out immediately before, during, and immediately after a hazard impact, which are aimed at saving lives, reducing economic losses, and alleviating suffering.
Actions taken to return a community to normal or near-normal conditions, including the restoration of basic services and the repair of physical, social and economic damages.
Mitigation refers to measures that prevent an emergency, reduce the chance of an emergency happening, or reduce the damaging effects of unavoidable emergencies. Emergency or disaster management concept cycle, mitigation preparedness response and recovery phases of emergency planning.
Natural Safety Solutions have the experience, advice and resources to help you plan for emergencies and maintain the continuity of your business. Natural Safety Solutions see how incidents can disrupt a business, from the immediate and catastrophic impact of a fire or flood through to the less obvious and gradual impacts on your team of a flu pandemic, or even a volcano  and ash cloud.
Natural Safety Solutions can help you minimise the disruption to your products and services come what may.
The Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act (the Act) includes the provision that the Minister, MCSCS may formulate emergency plans respecting types of emergencies other than those arising in connection with nuclear facilities. The PERP describes the arrangements and measures that may be taken to safeguard the health, safety, welfare and property of the people of Ontario affected by an emergency.
While the focus of this plan is on emergency response, it also recognizes the important link to prevention, mitigation, preparedness (plans, training, public education, exercises, and emergency information), and recovery, as proactive components that are critical elements in any emergency response. Emergency Management Ontario (EMO) is the organization charged with responsibility to monitor, coordinate, and assist with the promotion, development, implementation and maintenance of emergency management programs in Ontario. This edition of the PERP supersedes and replaces the Provincial Emergency Response Plan, dated December 2005. An emergency is a situation or an impending situation that constitutes a danger of major proportions that could result in serious harm to persons or substantial damage to property and that is caused by the forces of nature, a disease or other health risk, an accident, or an act whether intentional or otherwise. Emergency management consists of organized programs and activities taken to deal with actual or potential emergencies or disasters.
Prevention refers to the actions taken to prevent the emergency itself and can greatly diminish the response and recovery activities required for certain emergencies. Preparedness refers to those measures taken prior to the emergency or disaster to ensure an effective response. Emergency Management Ontario (EMO) is the overall provincial emergency management organization, and is responsible for the promotion, development, implementation and maintenance of effective emergency management programs throughout Ontario, and for the coordination of these programs with the federal government.
The PERP is the plan that is used to coordinate overall provincial emergency response and outlines how EMO and the ministries respond to widespread or large-scale emergencies. Emergencies vary in intensity and complexity depending on factors such as time of occurrence, weather conditions, severity of impact, nature of the affected infrastructure and buildings, and demographics. Occasionally, emergencies arise that overwhelm the capacity of community authorities to completely carry out the emergency response operations necessary to save lives and protect property. If necessary, the province can declare an emergency and directly control the commitment and application of provincial resources, and possibly those of affected and unaffected communities. Provincial response support can be provided to the Government of Canada in the event of a national emergency. The aim of the PERP is to establish a framework for a systematic, coordinated and effective emergency response by the Province of Ontario to safeguard the health, safety, welfare and property of its citizens, as well as to protect the environment and economy of the area affected by an emergency, excluding nuclear emergencies.
The federal government, through Public Safety Canada (PS) is responsible for the national emergency response system. The Province has exclusive jurisdiction for matters of property and civil rights in the province and for all matters that affect the public health, safety and environment of the province, under this Act.
The federal government has also made arrangements with First Nations and with the province concerning emergency preparedness and response activities in Ontario under which the province agrees to provide assistance in emergency preparedness and response to First Nations communities. The Ontario government is responsible for protecting public health and safety, property and the environment within its borders.
The Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services (Minister, MCSCS) formulates the PERP under authority of subsection 8.1 of the Act.
References in this plan to the Minister, MCSCS will refer to those powers vested in the Solicitor General by the Act2. Pursuant to section 6 of the Act, ministers of the crown presiding over a ministry of the Government of Ontario and agencies, boards, commissions or other branches of government designated by the Lieutenant Governor in Council shall formulate emergency plans for the type of emergency assigned by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. Declaration of a provincial emergency may also be made by the Premier of Ontario, if the urgency of the situation requires that such a declaration be made immediately. Ministers’ emergency plans shall authorize Crown employees to take action under the emergency plans where an emergency exists but has not yet been declared to exist (section 9(a) of the Act). Ministers of the Crown and Crown employees are protected from personal liability for doing any act or neglecting to do any act in good faith in the implementation or intended implementation of emergency plans such as the PERP (subsection 11 (1) of the Act). Pursuant to section 14 of the Act, ministry emergency plans shall conform to the standards set out in regulations under the Act. Pursuant to subsection 6(1) of the Act, the Lieutenant Governor in Council may assign to a minister, the responsibility for the formulation of an emergency response plan to address a specific type of emergency. Ontario municipalities possess legislated responsibilities to establish emergency management programs under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act.


Coordination of provincial response to emergencies that occur in the North and in unorganized territories is the responsibility of the ministry to which the type of emergency that has occurred has been assigned through the OIC. Provincial ministries that are assigned a type of emergency by the OIC will produce emergency response plans according to their assigned type of emergency, to enable the Province of Ontario to respond effectively to each emergency. These plans identify issues arising from provincial emergencies that require a broader response than a primary ministry’s response capabilities, and outline how inter-ministerial issues will be coordinated.
Denotes a plan which is in the process of development, is subject to change as a result of internal or external review, and is also still subject to various approvals. Denotes a plan that has been extensively reviewed, which may or may not have been exercised or evaluated, and has yet to receive final approvals. Denotes a plan which has completed the review process, has likely been exercised and evaluated, and has received all of the necessary approvals. The Chief, EMO is responsible for monitoring, coordinating, and assisting with the promotion, development, maintenance, and, through the PEOC, the implementation of these plans.
Under certain circumstances, it may be necessary to enhance the coordination of provincial emergency response by implementing provisions from this plan. If the urgency of the situation requires that declaration of a provincial emergency be made immediately such a declaration may also be made by the Premier. 2.3 It is not possible, without the risk of serious delay, to ascertain whether the resources normally available can be relied upon. Therefore, an emergency could be declared if operational information indicates that existing government resources and legislative powers are insufficient to address the emergency. The process leading to a provincial declaration of emergency will vary depending on the situation. When a provincial declaration of emergency is made, the Premier (or minister designated to exercise the powers conferred on the Premier by the Act,) will ensure that the federal government is informed. Once a provincial declaration of emergency has been made the LGIC has the power to make emergency orders and may delegate these powers to a Minister or to the Deputy Minister of Emergency Planning and Management. A Minister to whom powers have been delegated may delegate any of his or her powers to the Deputy Minister of Emergency Planning and Management. These orders are only made if they are necessary and essential, would alleviate harm or damage, and are a reasonable alternative to other measures.
The decision-maker must determine whether it is reasonable to believe that the order will alleviate harm or damage.
The decision-maker must believe the order represents a reasonable alternative to other measures that are available to address the emergency.
This part of the test requires the consideration of options that may be available before an emergency order is made. The order must apply only to the areas where it is necessary and should be effective only for as long as necessary. Orders generally prevail over all Ontario statutes and regulations, with limited exceptions (E.g. It is important to note that this criterion does not require that all other alternatives be attempted prior to making an emergency order.
An order made by the LGIC or a Minister is revoked 14 days after it is made unless revoked sooner. A provincial emergency declaration may include the Province of Ontario in its entirety or any portion or area thereof. During an emergency, the Premier, or a Minister to whom the Premier delegates the responsibility, is required to regularly report to the public with respect to the emergency. The Premier is required to submit a report in respect of the emergency in the Assembly within 120 days after the termination of an emergency.
The Deputy Minister of Emergency Planning and Management is required to make a report to the Premier in respect of any orders that he made, within 90 days after the termination of an emergency, for the Premier to include in his report. The basic structure established for the response to a provincial emergency, following the IMS model, is illustrated in Figure 4.1.
The LGIC and the Premier of Ontario provide overall direction to the management of the emergency response. The mandate of the Cabinet Committee on Emergency Management (CCEM) is to ensure that the province is prepared to address emergency situations and assume other responsibilities, as Cabinet deems appropriate.
The PEOC provides overall coordination of the provincial response, based on the strategic direction from the Deputy Minister and CCEM. During all stages of response, EMO (through the Deputy Minister of Emergency Planning and Management) will ensure that both the Cabinet Committee on Emergency Management (CCEM) is kept fully informed of the emergency situation and receive current assessments and updates on which to base operational decisions.
The PEOC coordinates with the primary ministry to ensure that there is no duplication of effort, and that the operation runs smoothly. The Emergency Management division of Risk Management Services (RMS) is responsible for implementing programs and projects to enhance UNT's ability to mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from the overall effects of large scale disasters. The mission of RMS Emergency Management is to create a culture of preparedness by ensuring the campus community is actively involved in emergency preparedness.
UNT regularly develops and annually updates plans to describe the processes and procedures the university will use to respond to emergencies affecting the campus. Emergencies can quickly escalate in scope and severity, cross jurisdictional lines, take on international dimensions and result in significant human and economic losses. Federal government institutions are increasing their focus on emergency management (EM) activities, given the evolving risk environment in their areas of responsibility. This is why Public Safety Canada has developed this Emergency Management Planning Guide, which is intended to assist all federal government institutions in developing their all-hazards Strategic Emergency Management Plans (SEMPs). Many federal government institutions already have specific planning documents or processes to deal with aspects of emergency management that relate to their particular mandates; many also have a long track record of preparing and refining BCPs. An All-Hazards Risk Assessment Framework and associated tools are also under development and will be included in a subsequent version of the Guide. As a matter of process, the Emergency Management Planning Guide will be reviewed annually or as the situation dictates, and amendments will be made at that time. The Guide includes a Blueprint (see Annex A), a Strategic Emergency Management Plan (SEMP) template (see Annex B), and supporting step-by-step instructions, tools and tips to develop and maintain a comprehensive SEMP—an overarching plan that establishes a federal government institution's objectives, approach and structure, which generally sets out how the institution will assist with coordinated federal emergency management, including response. As such, federal institutions are to base EM plans on mandate-specific all-hazards risk assessments, as well as put in place institutional structures to provide governance for EM activities and align them with government-wide EM governance structures.
It reflects leading practices (such as those provided by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and Canadian Standards Association) and procedures within the Government of Canada, and should be read in conjunction with the Federal Emergency Response Plan, the Emergency Management Framework for Canada and the Federal Policy for Emergency Management. It should integrate and coordinate elements identified in operational plans and business continuity plans (BCPs). Each of these functions addresses a need that may arise before or during an emergency. It is intended that governments and industry partners will work together to assess risks to the sector, develop plans to address these risks, and conduct exercises to validate the plans. This work at the sector level will inform, and will be informed by, work at the organizational level such as EM plans and their component parts.
Those elements are as follows: Environmental Scan, Leadership Engagement, All-Hazards Risk Assessment, Training, Exercise, Capability Improvement Process, and Performance Assessment.
These functions can be undertaken sequentially or concurrently, and they are not independent of each other. In order to effectively depict the cycle, the four seasons are placed in a wheel diagram showing how spring, summer, fall, and winter are interconnected and continuously flow into one circle.
The upcoming year's critical objectives are indentified with input from the various Working Groups and the appropriate Business Lines.
Emergency Management resource requirements should be identified as early as possible to integrate into plans. Inputs should ideally be assembled, reviewed and well understood prior to engaging in each distinct planning activity as they form an important foundation for the work to be completed. The SEMP should be central to the federal government institution's EM activities and provide clear linkages for integrating and coordinating all other intra-departmental and inter-departmental emergency management plans.
The size and composition of the team may vary between federal government institutions; however, the planning team should ideally have the skill and experience necessary to develop the SEMP. This team should be established under the authority of the institution's governance framework and have clear directions, including objectives.
Training is available to address EM requirements at the Canadian Emergency Management College (CEMC) and the Canada School of Public Service.
Training is available to address EM requirements at the Canadian Emergency Management College (CEMC) and the Canada School of Public Service.
These TOR can identify the responsibilities assigned to each team member and the requirements to allow that member to carry out the assigned function. This is also an ideal time to involve institutional legal advisors to determine whether legislative requirements are being met. Update the analysis regularly, as legislation and policies can change and have an influence on the scope of your SEMP. After completing the above steps, the planning team should consider developing a detailed work plan that includes a schedule with realistic timelines, milestones that reflect the institutional planning cycle, and a responsibility assignment matrix with assigned tasks and deadlines.
It entails a process of gathering and analyzing information and typically considers both internal and external factors (see Figure 3: The Planning Context for additional information on the factors to consider).
It sets the time, scope and scale and contributes to adopting an approach that is appropriate to the situation of the institution and to the risks affecting the achievement of its objectives.
The key to any emergency planning is awareness of the potential situations that could impose risks on the organization and on Canadians and to assess those risks in terms of their impact and potential mitigation measures.
It is the environment in which the institution operates to achieve its objectives and which can be influenced by the institution to manage risk.
If gaps are identified, these should ideally be gathered and presented as part of Step 3 when developing the EM Planning Framework and confirming the institution's strategic EM priorities. Assets can be both tangible and intangible and can be assessed in terms of importance, value and sensitivity.
All available threat assessments should ideally be reviewed by analyzing the assessment's evaluation of hostile capability, intentions and activity, the environment influencing hostile and potentially hostile groups, and environmental considerations, including natural, health and safety hazards.
For further information, you may wish to consult the Canadian Disaster Database, which contains detailed disaster information on over 900 natural, technological and conflict events (excluding war) that have directly affected Canadians over the past century.
A threat awareness collection process should ideally link to the federal institution's information requirements and available resources. As appropriate, more specific terrorist threat and hazard information can be obtained from ITAC. With respect to known threats and hazards, a vulnerability exists when there is a situation or circumstance that, if left unchanged, may result in loss of life or may affect the confidentiality, integrity or availability of other mission-critical assets. It is a formal, systematic process for estimating the level of risk in terms of likelihood and consequences for the purpose of informing decision-making. It provides improved insight into the effectiveness of risk controls already in place and enables the analysis of additional risk mitigation measures. A risk assessment should generate a clear understanding of the risks, including their uncertainties, their likelihood and their potential impact on objectives. It should be tailored to the institution's needs and should identify any limitations such as insufficient information or resource constraints. Risks should be described in a way that conveys their context, point of origin and potential impact. Characterization of risks should use an appropriate breadth and scope; it can be difficult to establish a course of action to treat risks if the scope is too broad, while a scope that is too narrow will create too much information, thereby making it difficult to establish priorities. A risk register will typically describe each risk, assess the likelihood that it will occur, list possible consequences if it does occur, provide a grading or prioritization for each risk, and identify proposed mitigation strategies.
Probabilistic methods provide more information on the range of risks and can effectively capture uncertainty, but require more data and resources. It is usually used for analyzing threats with less tangible intent (judgements on terrorism, sabotage, etc.). Subject matter experts can also assist in evaluating likelihood from a qualitative perspective, for instance by using a Delphi technique (a group communication process for systematic forecasting). Additional information on analyzing likelihood and impact is provided in the Treasury Board Integrated Risk Management Framework Guidelines. Prioritization can be shown graphically in a logarithmic risk diagram, risk-rating matrix or other forms of visual representations. In order to prioritize risks, comparison is made based on their likelihood and impact estimates. Treatments that deal with negative consequences are also referred to as risk mitigation, risk elimination, risk prevention, risk reduction, risk repression and risk correction. These treatment options, forming recommendations, would be used to develop the risk treatment step in the risk management or emergency management cycle. A sample cross-reference table of existing plans by identified institutional risks is provided in Annex C, Appendix 4. The resulting SEMP building blocks will reflect strategic priorities—the desired balance between developing measures that respond to emergencies versus mitigating the risk. The EM planning governance structure may include representatives of an institution's senior management team, from all functional areas (such as programs) and all corporate areas (including communications, legal services and security).
It is also crucial that roles and responsibilities, lines of accountability and decision-making processes be aligned and well understood by all concerned.
For example, an institution can be constrained by the availability of training for EM planning team members and by the number of EM positions they have staffed. A further cross-referencing can then be undertaken with the four pillars of EM to help target specific activities in one or more of the following areas. The ICS helps to promote clear lines of authority, is scalable to large or small events, and is widely used by first responders such as police or fire departments in various jurisdictions. The cross-reference table provided in Annex C, Appendix 5, as stated above, can serve as a tool to complete this task.
It should be strategic and be designed to have safeguards and processes to trigger appropriate actions in response to changing threats and hazards, as well as in response to specific incidents and events.
Typical preparedness measures include developing mutual aid agreements and memorandums of understanding, training for both response personnel and concerned citizens, conducting disaster exercises to reinforce training and test capabilities, and presenting all-hazards education campaigns. Response actions may include activating the emergency operations center, evacuating threatened populations, opening shelters and providing mass care, emergency rescue and medical care, fire fighting, and urban search and rescue. Typical recovery actions include debris cleanup, financial assistance to individuals and governments, rebuilding of roads and bridges and key facilities, and sustained mass care for displaced human and animal populations.
Typical mitigation measures include establishing building codes and zoning requirements, installing shutters, and constructing barriers such as levees.
Whether you are a responder under the Civil Contingencies Act, affected by the HSE COMAH requirements  or a private enterprise, my experienced as an emergency planner enables me to provide advice on your incident management process, review or develop your response plans or complete an independent debrief and report on your response to a major incident. Natural Safety Solutions  can lead you through the Business Continuity Management process to simply improve your business’ resilience or gain an advantage over your competitors for public sector contracts by achieving BS 25999. The Province of Ontario Emergency Response Plan, also referred to as the Provincial Emergency Response Plan (PERP), fulfils the above provision of the Act. It sets out the basic mechanisms, organizational structures, responsibilities, and procedures to guide Ministers and their staff when involved in a coordinated provincial response to emergencies in Ontario.
EMO was also charged with the responsibility for writing the PERP, and it is an avenue through which to fulfil its mandate for emergency management across the province.
These situations could threaten public safety, public health, the environment, property, critical infrastructure and economic stability.
It can also greatly diminish the response and recovery activities required for certain emergencies and may result in a long-term, cost-effective reduction of risk. Preparedness measures include plans, training, exercises, public education, alerting and notification systems, procedures, organization, infrastructure protection, and standards. The aim of these measures is to ensure that a controlled, coordinated, and effective response is quickly undertaken at the outset of the emergency to minimize its impact on public safety. The aim of these measures is to assist individuals, businesses and communities to return to a state of normalcy. In most instances, for emergencies outside the capability of the individual, families or businesses, communities1 manage emergencies.
On these occasions, direct provincial government assistance may be necessary to support emergency response activities. In the event of a national emergency, the federal government will implement its emergency response plans and, under the following legislation, will consult with the Province of Ontario.
The federal Governor in Council can declare a public welfare emergency, which includes an emergency caused by a real or imminent accident or pollution resulting in danger to life or property, social disruption or breakdown in the flow of essential goods and services, so serious as to be a national emergency. While a declaration of a public welfare emergency is in effect, the Governor in Council may make necessary orders or regulations that are necessary to deal with the emergency.
The Governor in Council must consult the provinces that are affected by the emergency before issuing a declaration of public welfare emergency. This assistance is provided on request from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) or a First Nations community. The following sections outline the legislative and regulatory framework associated with this responsibility.
1990, ChapterE.9, (hereafter referred to as the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act or the Act). In that respect, this plan may be used for all types of emergencies other than those arising in connection with nuclear facilities. Such emergency declaration is subject to the criteria set out in the legislation governing emergency declarations. The current Order in Council (OIC) assigning responsibilities to ministers is included as Annex A. The Act also defines the relationship between the Province and municipalities during actual emergencies.
Pursuant to section 3 of the Act, municipalities shall formulate plans to respond to emergencies and adopt these plans by by-law.
Municipal plans should reflect the coordination of services provided by all levels of local government in a given community. Pursuant to section 5 of the Act, the plans of lower-tier municipalities in an upper-tier municipality, excluding a county, shall conform to the plan of their upper-tier municipality. Municipal emergency plans shall authorize municipal employees to take action under emergency plans where an emergency exists but has not yet been declared to exist (subsection 9. Members of council and municipal employees are protected from personal liability for doing any act or neglecting to do any act in good faith in the implementation or intended implementation of emergency plans such as the PERP (subsection 11 (1) of the Act). Counties, with the consent of their municipalities, may coordinate the emergency plans for their municipalities under subsection 3. Pursuant to section 14 of the Act, municipal emergency response plans shall conform to the standards set by the Minister, MCSCS. MNDM is only responsible for abandoned mine emergencies and for providing support to the primary ministries for all other types of incidents.


These provisions also apply generally to agencies, boards and commissions (ABCs) designated by the Lieutenant Governor in Council5.
It is accepted that a nuclear emergency may nevertheless require the simultaneous implementation of the PERP to address many non-nuclear outcomes of such an emergency. Such emergency management programs include emergency plans, and to that end the PERP outlines general coordination requirements that all provincial ministries and municipalities should incorporate, as appropriate, into their emergency plans.
In such a case, all other ministries would be expected to act in a supporting role, within their competencies. This would include, for example, provision for participation in emergency training and exercises. EMO will monitor, coordinate and assist with the development and maintenance of such plans.
It describes both Ontario’s structure and processes for managing emergency responses, as well as the structure to be used by EMO in coordinating a provincial emergency response. These MERPs will be expected to support provincial emergency response, and be supporting and complementary to the PERP. Pursuant to section 8 of the EMCPA, the approval authority for the Provincial Emergency Response Plan (PERP) is the Minister, MCSCS. The PERP shall be fully reviewed, amended and brought forward for Ministerial approval at least once every four years. Regulations mandate that the members of each Ministry Action Group (MAG) and Municipal Emergency Control Group (MECG) complete the annual training that is required by the Chief, EMO. The Chief, EMO may also provide advice and assistance to ministers and municipalities for the development of their emergency management training programs. It will be risk-based and include a range of exercise activities of varying degrees of complexity and interaction. An Interim Plan is considered a working document and would be used to respond to an actual emergency. Depending on how plan development and approvals proceed, it may not always be necessary to have an Interim Plan. The Provincial Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA) Report, which provides a methodology for analyzing hazards and assesses the province’s vulnerability to potential hazards, forms the basis for the PERP. A disaster can occur with little or no warning and can cause an extreme emergency condition in any area of the province. Emergencies vary in scope and intensity, from small, localized incidents, with minimal damage, to multi-jurisdictional disasters with extensive devastation and loss of life. Communities have capabilities, plans and procedures to provide for the safety of their citizens in a time of emergency.
The Province of Ontario has emergency resources and expertise that may be used to satisfy emergency response needs that are beyond the capabilities of communities. The province may provide emergency response assistance that is supplemental to, and not a substitute for, community resources. Provincial assistance to communities is not dependent on a formal declaration of emergency by a community, except where prior agreements are in place. Should the emergency exceed community capabilities, the LGIC or the Premier may declare a provincial emergency and the premier or a designated minister may coordinate all emergency responses. Should the situation exceed the provincial capability the Premier or a designated minister may request emergency response assistance from the federal government. Mitigating hazards that pose further threat to life, property, the economy and the environment. Resources from the province or even the federal government may also be required, depending upon the nature and severity of the incident.
Should an emergency require a coordinated provincial response or should a ministry require assistance in responding to the emergency, the necessary provisions of the PERP will be implemented. All affected levels of government should remain fully engaged in the emergency response despite the involvement or declaration by other levels of government. Accordingly, it should seldom be necessary to declare a provincial or federal emergency even though resources from these jurisdictions will frequently be provided in support of an emergency declared by a municipality or a First Nation.
In some cases, prior warning may come from outside organizations that have access to scientific methods of predicting floods, forest fires, and severe weather. In these situations, each community would be expected to respond using its resources in accordance with its own plan. If they are well coordinated, the plans of a regional municipality and its area municipalities should be mutually supporting. Counties may also, with the consent of their constituent municipalities, coordinate planning and response activities with those lower-tiers.
However, the provision of resources alone from the provincial or federal government would not in itself necessitate any change in jurisdictional arrangements.
These plans, governing the provision of necessary services, together with the procedures by which Crown employees and other persons are to respond, constitute the initial provincial emergency response. These MERPs should identify the resources and the procedures that are necessary to recognize, contain and then resolve the cause of any emergency that falls within their assigned type of emergency.
Management of the emergency in accordance with the provincial Incident Management System (IMS).
When appropriate, actions to be taken upon the declaration of an emergency by the LGIC or the Premier.
This does not imply that ministries should not deal with municipalities, First Nations communities or the federal government within their ministries’ emergency response plans, but that the overall coordinating authority for plans is the Chief, EMO. This plan may also be implemented in conjunction with other emergency response plans that address specific hazards. Providing a copy of their most current emergency plans to the Chief, EMO under subsection 6.2 of the Act. Requesting assistance if necessary, in accordance with this PERP and established guidelines. Supporting a coordinated provincial emergency response in accordance with this plan and the ministry emergency response plan for the types of emergencies assigned to other ministers.
Supporting emergency response operations of First Nations communities, the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, or in other federal jurisdictions, if requested.
EMO is available to assist in the development of such plans for First Nations, and to assist in emergency response operations pursuant to agreement with Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC). Communities should advise the PEOC when an emergency occurs or if an emergency seems imminent. This sharing of emergency information will facilitate a more rapid emergency response and will reduce planning time. The emergency requires immediate action to prevent, reduce or mitigate the dangers posed by the emergency.
The declaration notification is passed to the PEOC, which will in turn inform the Regional Director, PS, of the emergency declaration.
This declaration can be renewed for one further period of 14 days given that it meets the test of the declared emergency.
The orders must only apply to the areas where it is necessary and should be effective for only as long as is necessary.
For example, if the matter could be addressed by an order under the Health Protection and Promotion Act (HPPA), the availability of the HPPA order should be considered to determine whether an emergency order is a reasonable alternative to address the emergency.
In other words, it does not require that an emergency order is the only alternative available.
If the Assembly is not in session, the Premier is required to submit the report within 7 days of the Assembly reconvening.
Organizational structures for incident management, including the provision for common response functions - Command, Operations, Planning, Logistics, and Finance and Administration. Develop the overall provincial emergency management response strategy of the Government of Ontario. Conduct high-level briefings and discussions of strategic issues with appropriate ministries. In this role, the Deputy Minister will ensure information and decisions are relayed between the CCEM and the PEOC, and vice versa in a timely and effective manner. The PEOC is responsible for implementing and monitoring the operational strategy decided on by the Cabinet Committee on Emergency Management. While the primary ministry executes its ministry emergency response plan for the type of emergency assigned to it based on the existing emergency, the PEOC will operate as the provincial coordinator, with a focus on coordination issues outside of the scope of the primary ministry.
EM can save lives, preserve the environment and protect property by raising the understanding of risks and by contributing to a safer, more prosperous and resilient Canada. It does not lay out the requirements for preparing related EM protocols, processes, and standard operating procedures (SOP) internal to the institution; however, these should be developed in support of the SEMP and related plans. As outlined in the Preface, many federal government institutions already have specific plans or processes to deal with aspects of emergency management; many also have a long track record of preparing and refining BCPs, which endeavour to ensure the continued availability of critical services.
Each season has its own wheel quadrant describing the activities usually undertaken in each month of the year. Planning can be triggered by the EM planning cycle or it can be initiated in preparation for, or in response to, an event that is induced either by nature or by human actions. Consideration should be given to having representation from several program and corporate areas, including (if applicable) regional representation.
Those federal government institutions that have mandated emergency support functions (ESFs) under the FERP should have these clearly identified. Notwithstanding the blueprint provided, this step is not proposed as a linear process, but rather as a set of related components and activities that can be undertaken in the sequence that best suits the institution. Scanning can be done on a regularly scheduled basis, such as annually, or on a continuous basis for environmental factors that are dynamic or that are of greatest interest to the institution. The following diagram illustrates the external and internal environmental factors to consider.
This process will add the extra assurance that your institution is linked in with partner agencies and others to assist in developing the broader environmental picture and in identifying EM-related interdependencies.
Each institution has its own strategic and operational objectives, with each being exposed to its own unique risks, and each having its own information and resource limitations. An all-hazards approach to risk management does not necessarily mean that all hazards will be assessed, evaluated and treated, but rather that all hazards will be considered.
The aim is to generate a comprehensive list of risks based on those events that might prevent, degrade or delay the achievement of objectives.
Risks should be realistic, based on drivers that exist in the institution's operating environment. It can be a useful tool for managing and addressing risks, as well as facilitating risk communication to stakeholders. Descriptive scales can be formed or adjusted to suit the circumstances, and different descriptions can be used for different risks. Risk evaluation is the process of comparing the results of the risk analysis against risk criteria to determine whether the level of risk is acceptable or intolerable. The one most commonly used is the risk matrix (Figure 4), which normally plots the likelihood and impact on the x- and y-axes (the measured components of risks).
Similarly, certain assumptions will be made that influence the development of the SEMP building blocks. Although planning considerations will vary from institution to institution, the following identifies the most common planning considerations associated with the four pillars of EM planning. It is an umbrella emergency response plan for the coordination of provincial response to any emergency. It also serves as the foundation for the development and coordination of provincial plans with those of municipalities, First Nations, and the Government of Canada and its agencies.
Prevention measures are broadly classified as either structural or non-structural and include capital improvements, regulations, building codes and public education programs. Similar to prevention, mitigation measures are broadly classified as either structural or non-structural and include capital improvements, regulations, building codes and public education programs. When an emergency occurs, the immediate focus of operations is on meeting the emergency needs of people, saving lives, and protecting property and the environment.
Recovery measures include environmental clean-up, return of evacuees, emergency financial assistance, and critical incident stress counseling. They do this either as a matter of routine by emergency responders (including police, fire and Emergency Medical Service (EMS)), or by implementing their emergency response plan, with or without declaring an emergency.
The orders or regulations made by the Governor in Council should not unduly impair the ability of the province to take measures, under provincial legislation, for dealing with the emergency. However, where the effects of a public welfare emergency are confined to one province, the federal government will not issue a declaration of a public welfare emergency or take other steps unless the Lieutenant Governor of the province has indicated to the federal Governor in Council that the emergency exceeds the capacity of the province to deal with it. Services provided by both upper and lower tiers, as well as municipal boards, should be included. 0.3(2) (b) of the Act, during a declared emergency the Premier, by order, may require any municipality to provide necessary assistance to an emergency area outside the jurisdiction of said municipality, and may also direct and control the provision of such assistance. If an emergency that has not been identified within the OIC occurs, MCSCS will be the primary ministry. The concepts and procedures for use by provincial and municipal officials in their respective emergency response plans are outlined in this plan. Those that have been assigned, under the OIC, the responsibility for a type of emergency, are expected to ensure that their emergency response plans are consistent with the PERP and coordinated in so far as possible with the emergency plans of other ministries. In addition, all Agencies, Boards and Commissions (ABCs) and any other branch of government would also be expected to provide a supporting role within their competencies. It is designed to integrate the efforts and resources of the Province of Ontario, municipalities, the private sector, and other nongovernmental organizations. Additionally, MAGs and MECGs must conduct an annual practice exercise for a simulated emergency incident in order to evaluate the respective ministry and municipal emergency response plan and their own procedures. A copy of the Provincial Glossary of Terms is included as Annex D, with a list of Acronyms at Appendix 1. Duplication and confusion can be kept to a minimum and the ability to conduct comprehensive, coordinated operations may be enhanced through the implementation of multi-disciplined actions that may be carried out irrespective of the hazard involved. They can escalate more rapidly than individuals or community response organizations are able to handle. In responding to an emergency, a ministry may implement provisions from its ministry emergency response plan formulated for the type of emergency assigned to it.
Where reliable prediction is possible, action can be taken before the onset of an emergency. Figure 3.1 depicts the normal two-way flow of emergency information between communities, ministries, other organizations and the PEOC. Therefore, an emergency could be declared if operational information indicates that immediate action is needed because of danger to individuals or property. Rather, it merely requires that the decision-maker give consideration to the reasonableness of an emergency order in relation to other options that may be available. The CCEM is the only Cabinet Committee for which membership has been specified by portfolio. EM planning, in particular, aims to strengthen resiliency by promoting an integrated and comprehensive approach that includes the four pillars of EM: prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. In addition, there are other existing EM planning documents and initiatives that apply to a range of federal government institutions, such as the Federal Emergency Response Plan (FERP) and deliverables under the National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure. This is also an ideal time to develop an initial budget for such items as training, exercises, research, workshops and other expenses that may be necessary during the development and implementation of the SEMP. Stakeholders may include First Nations, emergency first responders, the private sector (both business and industry), and volunteer and non-government organizations. This part of the process consists of three main activities: risk identification, risk analysis and risk evaluation.
It involves the identification of risk sources, areas of impact, events and their causes, as well as potential consequences. A risk portfolio or profile can be created from the register, helping to compile common risks in order to assess interdependencies and to prioritize groups of risks.
Existing controls, the cost of further risk treatment and any policy requirement implications are considered when deciding on additional mitigation measures.
Based on a risk diagram or rating matrix, a clustering of risks can be shown, leading to decisions on priorities.
The aim is to develop a SEMP that integrates and coordinates elements identified in hazard-specific plans and BCPs. For example, an assumption might be made that the resources required to develop the SEMP will be paid out of the current fiscal year's budget.
This effort may last from a few hours to several days or longer, depending on the situation. Recovery activities usually begin almost as soon as the response begins and continue after the response activities cease. Provincial resources deployed to deal with a significant hazardous materials incident could fall under the Provincial Counter-Terrorism Plan (PCTP)7 and the Supporting Plan for Terrorism Consequence Management (SPTCM)8, should there be a subsequent determination that the incident is terrorist related. This plan includes planning assumptions, roles and responsibilities, concept of operations, and plan maintenance instructions. Ministry plans generally require their Minister’s approval whereas municipal non-nuclear plans require passage of a by-law by council.
In many cases, these multi-disciplined actions parallel the normal day-to-day responsibilities and functions of provincial ministries and communities. Assistance may expand to the provision of personnel, equipment and other resources to assist a community in dealing with the cause of an emergency.
Institutions may choose to assess a portfolio of risks, as opposed to specific individual risks, which enables a holistic review of risk treatment decisions. Information can be gleaned from historical data, theoretical analyses, and informed and expert judgements. Qualitative analysis is often simpler, but also results in high uncertainty in the results. Such a plot can help establish acceptable or intolerable risk levels, and establish their respective actions. As response activities begin to taper off, the operational focus begins to shift from response to recovery. The plan description should include the term Approved Plan and the date approved for implementation, e.g.




Backup and restore plan
Emergency evacuation report form
Training fema gov emi
Tornado preparedness plan


Comments to “Emergency management planning principles”

  1. Boss_Mafiya writes:
    Amenities like water and heat - and trips it's just annoying, In no means am I an professional.
  2. ukusov writes:
    The components, support him or her to preserve warm, meet simple wellness any office provide.
  3. spychool writes:
    Lady and I wouldn't quit my man from buying.
  4. elnare writes:
    Distinction, The small photo prime proper get rid about the top of the.
  5. SEXPOTOLOQ writes:
    Things are what would you near.