Hire our zombie performers to spice up your personal the all hazards approach to emergency management surface), an E1 would be followed in quick succession by an E2 and E3. 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.
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. 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 SEMP is the overarching plan that provides a comprehensive and coordinated approach to EM activities. 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. 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.
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. Consider having members of the EM planning team designated by your institution's senior management. Understanding the internal context is essential to confirm that the risk assessment approach meets the needs of the institution and of its internal stakeholders. 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. 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. 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. 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.
Risk assessment is central to any risk management process as well as the EM planning cycle. The all-hazards risk assessment (AHRA) process should be open and transparent while respecting the federal institution's context. 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.
A risk register or log is used to record information about identified risks and to facilitate the monitoring and management of risks. 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.
The risk-rating matrix allows for decisions to be made about which risks need treatment and the priority for treatment implementation.
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. 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. The Branch delivered emergency preparedness communication activities that represent an average of $2.5 million in annual spending over the past five years. Two central pieces of legislation define shared emergency management responsibilities in Canada. The Strategic Coordination Division provides the secretariat function for emergency management governance bodies. Although mechanisms are currently being implemented to strengthen coordination within the Emergency Management and Regional Operations Branch, internal coordination of emergency management policy, planning and exercises activities was identified as a weakness. In terms of the achievement of outcomes, the Emergency Management Policy Division, Planning Unit and the National Exercises Division have made good progress against the 2009 Auditor General recommendations.
The Emergency Management Planning Unit has engaged other federal institutions in all-hazards risk assessment and emergency management planning activities; and has produced related guidance and tools. Build upon the terms of reference created for the newly established Deputy Minister Emergency Management Committee to ensure that strategic-level decision-making is aligned at all levels including the Assistant Deputy Minister Emergency Management Committee and sub-committees.
Consider the inclusion of emergency management planning and national exercises in the work of the Standing Forum for Senior Officials Responsible for Emergency Management. Pursue senior-level commitment from federal institutions through the newly established Deputy Minister Emergency Management Committee, as well as through strategic emergency management plans for implementation of lessons learned from various assessments. Place further emphasis on emerging policy areas, such as mitigation and community resiliency, and keep abreast of international trends to advance culture change within the emergency management community. Engage Assistant Deputy Minister Emergency Management Committee and Deputy Minister Emergency Management Committee in advancing the development and implementation of a governance model for national emergency preparedness activities (planning, training, exercising, evaluating, and implementation of lessons learned from these).
Finalize the four pillars of emergency management by building a mitigation program, contributing to increasing community resilience nationally.
Strengthen focus on Emergency Management policy research to better inform strategic evidence-based decision-making for the Government of Canada and to foster a more robust body of knowledge on the awareness of Emergency Management in Canadian society. Starting on April 1, 2006, PS received ongoing funding known as Core I capacity to maintain and strengthen the Department's core emergency management activities.


Through discussions with PS senior management and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Centre for Excellence in Evaluation, it was decided that this evaluation would be based on the PS Program Activity Architecture, rather than centered on incremental funding allocated under Core I and II. Emergency Management Policy Division: The Policy Division develops and implements national emergency management policy and research activities and contributes to the development of domestic legislation, policies and programs. Emergency Management Planning Unit: The purpose of the Unit is to identify emerging risks and planning gaps. Activities that fall into the category of emergency response and recovery such as the Government Operations Centre will be evaluated in future years as per the Departmental Evaluation Plan.
The evaluation was able to rely on key documents that assessed PS performance such as the Report by the Senate Committee on National Security and Defence (2008) and the 2009 Report of the Auditor General (Chapter 7, Emergency Management--Public Safety Canada). Communications Services Division activities led to Canadians being aware and informed of what to do in an emergency.
Although qualitative information from interviews was analyzed using a systematic approach, results are not statistically significant due to sample size. This report was submitted to program representatives and to the ADM, Emergency Management and Regional Operations Branch for review and acceptance.
In order to determine if there is a continuing need for the Initiative, the evaluation examined trends in threats and emergency events nationally and globally. Global trade, international travel and cyber capabilities mean that emergencies can now quickly escalate in scope, severity and complexity13.
There is also a need to take pro-active measures to increase public awareness of risks and to heighten peoples' sense of urgency to prepare, mitigate and purchase their own insurance against the hazards they face. As catastrophes are becoming more prominent and costly, governments are looking for ways to reduce costs associated with emergencies.
Within Canada, a number of factors have influenced the emergency management domain in the last several years and have acted as catalysts for program changes. The Emergency Management Policy Division has developed policies and frameworks aligned with new legislation and emerging policy directions such as mitigation. The Emergency Management Planning Unit was created in 2006 and began with a focus on pandemic planning through the Government of Canada Pandemic Secretariat, which it coordinates. The National Exercises Division has moved to a lifecycle approach, which includes a lessons learned process (known as the capability improvement process) designed to track implementation of corrective actions and the institutionalization of best practices. The Strategic Coordination Division provides support functions related to committee membership that generally includes 30+ primary and supporting federal Emergency Support Function institutions and the Federal, Provincial, Territorial Emergency Management Fora.
From a legislative perspective, the Emergency Management Act was enacted by Parliament in 2007 to clearly set out federal roles and responsibilities and to ensure that Canada can mitigate and be prepared to respond and recover from incidents affecting the safety and security of Canadians. The overarching legislative umbrella in emergency management is the Emergency Management Act (2007), which establishes the federal role in emergency management and the role of the Minister of Public Safety. Under the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Act, the Minister is responsible for exercising leadership at the national level relating to public safety and emergency preparedness.
Additionally, in exercising its mandated leadership at the national level, PS faces the challenge of effectively fulfilling its responsibilities under the Emergency Management Act, while recognizing areas of provincial and territorial jurisdiction under the Constitution Act, 1867. Document review indicates that the PS-mandated activities related to a whole-of-government approach are not duplicated by other federal or provincial organizations. 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.
Each of these functions addresses a need that may arise before or during an emergency. Those elements are as follows: Environmental Scan, Leadership Engagement, All-Hazards Risk Assessment, Training, Exercise, Capability Improvement Process, and Performance Assessment.
Emergency Management resource requirements should be identified as early as possible to integrate into plans. 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. 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.
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. 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. 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.
Additional information on analyzing likelihood and impact is provided in the Treasury Board Integrated Risk Management Framework Guidelines.
These treatment options, forming recommendations, would be used to develop the risk treatment step in the risk management or emergency management cycle.
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.
In the current global environment, the speed at which emergencies can escalate in scope and severity is increasing. Established committees provide a solid foundation for leadership and coordination of emergency management; however, there is room for improvement.
Further engagement is required to solidify acceptance and establish a truly comprehensive policy framework in which all necessary pieces and organizations are present. Canada is implementing all-hazards approaches and is taking steps to improve risk identification, assessment and prevention of disasters.
Build upon the terms of reference created for the newly established Deputy Minister Emergency Management Committee to ensure that strategic-level decision-making is aligned at all levels, including the Assistant Deputy Minister Emergency Management Committee and sub-committees. Place more emphasis on emerging policy areas, such as mitigation and community resiliency, and keep abreast of international trends to advance culture change within the emergency management community. Focusing the evaluation in this way allowed a logical connection to be made between the Core I and II activities and the achievement of outcomes connected to the Program Activity Architecture. The Unit is responsible for developing and implementing a coordinated approach to all-hazards risk assessment and emergency management planning, and promotes best practices.


The largest interview group was other federal institutions with a focus on those institutions that have responsibility for primary Emergency Support Functions as defined in the Federal Emergency Response Plan.
Financial data was collected using a template and was vetted through financial management advisors of each organizational unit. A management response and action plan was provided in response to the evaluation recommendations. The evaluation team then studied whether Initiative activities have ensured their continuing relevance by aligning with the evolving emergency management context.
There have been shifts in organizational accountability within the Canadian government with respect to emergency management.
The Canada's Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction was developed in 2010 to work with all partners to reduce disaster risks in Canada. In 2008-2009, the Unit launched work on developing a methodology for an all-hazards risk assessment and a coordinated approach to emergency management planning. More recent reports give prominence to national security issues and emergency management response (Government Operations Center and implementing the Federal Emergency Response Plan); however, they also highlight the importance of emergency management planning through development of an all-hazards risk assessment process, preparedness of Canadians through communications campaigns, and improvement of relationships with regional stakeholders. Past emergencies in Canada demonstrate the challenges inherent in protecting the lives, critical infrastructure, property, environment, economy, and the national security of Canada. This includes establishing policies and programs relating to emergency preparedness and cooperating with any province, foreign state, international organization or any other entity. 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. Those federal government institutions that have mandated emergency support functions (ESFs) under the FERP should have these clearly identified.
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 continuing importance of emergency management is evidenced through the creation of the Emergency Management Act, in 2007, international commitments, and the Prime Minister's June 2011 announcements regarding mitigation programs. Attendance by Assistant Deputy Ministers at the Emergency Management Committee is often delegated downward and meetings have an information focus rather than providing a forum for strategic and timely decision-making. Progress has been made toward the establishment of a comprehensive and coordinated approach to emergency management planning at the federal level. The federal government exercises leadership at the national level relating to emergency management responsibilities in its exclusive fields of jurisdictions and on lands and properties under federal responsibility.
Emergency response encompasses activities during or immediately before or after a disaster to manage its consequences; and recovery refers to the repair or restoration of conditions to an acceptable level through measures taken after a disaster. Associated emergency management activities were originally managed by the Emergency Management and National Security Branch. It has conducted assessments of federal institutions' Strategic Emergency Management Plans and coordinated all-hazards risk assessments. In addition, period 9 (third quarter) budget information was not available for all years of the analysis; thus, a valid budgets versus expenditures ratio could not be calculated. In order to do so, the evaluation team studied alignment with current practices in other countries and alignment with changes to the emergency management context in Canada.
A study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development makes a strong linkage between risk management and mitigation.
The Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness was created in 2001 within the Department of National Defence.
Whereas Budget 2006 invested in foundational activities related to emergency preparedness, recent strategic documents have given prominence to economic recovery and national security initiatives, e.g. Under Canada's Constitution Act, 1867, provinces and territories have primary responsibility for emergency management within their respective jurisdictions. The federal government is responsible for emergency management at the national level in its exclusive fields of jurisdictions and on lands and properties under federal responsibility. 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.
Stakeholders may include First Nations, emergency first responders, the private sector (both business and industry), and volunteer and non-government organizations. The aim is to develop a SEMP that integrates and coordinates elements identified in hazard-specific plans and BCPs. Public Safety Canada's programming has responded to the evolving emergency management context; however, gaps remain in the areas of mitigation and community resiliency. This is evidenced by the fact that federal institutions are starting to submit their Strategic Emergency Management Plans to Public Safety Canada for review.
PS was established to provide leadership and coordination across all federal institutions4 responsible for the safety of Canadians. In the summer of 2011, the Emergency Management and National Security Branch was divided into the National Security Branch and the Emergency Management and Regional Operations Branch. It also serves as federal lead for a coordinated federal and North American approach to pandemic planning. This funding was specifically intended for the advertising portion of the emergency preparedness campaign.
It was subsequently annexed to Solicitor General Canada as part of the creation of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada, in 2003. Nonetheless, the District of North Vancouver received the United Nations Sasakawa Award for Disaster Reduction in 2011, becoming the first community in Canada to ever win this award and a model among Canadian communities at engaging municipal and federal governments and the private sector in the promotion of a resilient approach to disaster risk reduction. However, PS exercises leadership by establishing policies, programs, and other measures respecting the preparation, maintenance, testing, and implementation of emergency management plans of other federal government institutions. Interviewees indicate that significant progress has been made among stakeholders in clarifying the PS role since the 2009 Auditor General report; but that the Emergency Management Act expects a high degree of organizational maturity on the part of departments and agencies. In this regard, Public Safety Canada has a central role to provide the leadership and coordination necessary to prepare for a whole-of-government (federal) emergency response. Changes are currently being made to the Assistant Deputy Minister Emergency Management Committee, and a Deputy Minister Emergency Management Committee is being established to provide further direction. The Capability Improvement Process was put in place within the last three years to support the implementation of lessons learned so that federal institutions are better prepared for future emergencies. Thus, accountability for emergency management currently falls under the Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) of the Emergency Management and Regional Operations Branch. The International Strategy for Disaster Reduction was established to support and coordinate this movement.18 The Hyogo Framework for Action is a 10-year plan to make the world safer from natural hazards. Key legislative changes were made through the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Act and the Emergency Management Act. This requires ongoing federal leadership, effective coordination of activities, sound legislative and policy foundation, and efficient collaboration among all levels of government, the private and not-for-profit sectors, and individuals. Given the low scores that federal institutions have obtained on their assessments, the Strategic Emergency Management Plan review process needs to continue.
Key Government of Canada reports on the state of emergency management initiatives were published (i.e.
The federal government will assist when requested, when the emergency transcends jurisdictional boundaries, or when its assistance is in the national interest. Finally, the general emergency management context has changed from a response-based approach to an all-hazards risk-based approach that takes into consideration all four pillars of emergency management, i.e.




Emergency broadcast system app
Books of electronics and communication


Comments

  1. 29.06.2014 at 13:24:18


    They are organized incredibly sturdy and and.

    Author: orxideya_girl
  2. 29.06.2014 at 19:17:27


    Datrex specializes in emergency preparedness and that this.

    Author: AUTOKILL
  3. 29.06.2014 at 22:52:43


    Year, I attempted to relive the excitement.

    Author: Naxcivanech
  4. 29.06.2014 at 12:46:14


    The cavity with the plastic more ring, it is necessary supplies.

    Author: surac