Clearly defined roles and responsibilities are key to successful disaster recovery. Use the Recovery Organization Guide to gain clarity to fundamental questions of disaster recovery and learn who is responsible for delivering key components of recovery, particularly at the municipal level.
Report
Share
Report
Share
1 of 32
More Related Content
High River Recovery Toolkit 2 - Recovery Organization
2. • Understand your community’s risk profile in order to design an
effective disaster recovery organization
• Employ a deliberate, thoughtful approach to organizational
design that reflects your community’s strengths and
weaknesses with regard to human capital
• Establish the recovery team, build relationships, and train in
advance of the need
INTRODUCTION
3. To provide elected officials and key municipal leaders
within the Province of Alberta relevant information;
enabling them to consider, decide, create, and employ an
effective recovery organization that supports a disaster
recovery plan for their community.
INTENT
4. To understand the following:
• The differences between a theoretical recovery organization
designed to support a PDR ConPlan and that of a recovery
organization tailored to a disaster-specific recovery plan (DSRP)
• The relative roles and interplay of elected officials, public
servants, residents, NGOs, and stakeholders
DESIRED OUTCOMES
5. • The factors that affect the type of recovery organization suited
to a municipality’s circumstances
• The broad choices for design of a recovery organization
• The tasks, skills, and knowledge relevant to key positions within
a recovery organization
• The relationships between a municipal recovery organization
and the numerous stakeholders
DESIRED OUTCOMES
11. RECOVERY STAKEHOLDERS (BROAD-BASED)
• Government of Canada
• Public Safety Canada and FPT
Governance
• Task Force Model
• First Nations and Métis
• Government of Alberta
• The Media
12. RECOVERY STAKEHOLDERS (COMMUNITY
LEVEL)
• Elected Officials
• Committees of Council
• Residents
• Business Community
• Educational Institutions
• Non-Government Organizations
• Non-Profit and Voluntary Sectors
• Advisory Committees
13. NETWORK POWER
Emergency Management Stakeholder Relationship
Figure 2: Power Relationships Among Emergency Management Stakeholder (modified), Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2017.
18. ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
• The need to protect the personnel delivering business continuity
plans for the municipal government
• The potential impact on critical infrastructure that could affect the
organization’s effectiveness
• The potential impact on elected officials, public service, and any
private sector personnel from the actual disaster
For full list of organizational design considerations, go to Appendix 5 (Page 31)
of Guide 2: Recovery Organization in the Municipal Recovery Plan Toolkit
20. Reprioritization of effort, time, and monies to complete the newly
identified recovery projects and tasks with no change in government
structure. It implies that:
“BUSINESS AS USUAL” MODEL
• A relatively limited recovery operation is needed
• The existing municipal organization has standing surplus
capacity
• Some existing programs and/or services are not needed
within a business and can be eliminated
21. “INICIDENT COMMAND SYSTEM” MODEL
Figure 4: ICS Based Recovery Organization
(Government of British Columbia, 2016)
22. INICIDENT COMMAND SYSTEM
• Predicated on relatively short planning cycles
• Less inclusive decision-making construct
• Limited interaction with elected officials
• Lacks a broader long-term governmental policy analysis
capacity
• Not considered ideally suited for complex, lengthy disaster
recovery operations
24. KEY ACTION AREAS
• Key action areas represent logical groupings of tasks and projects
identified during planning
• Key action areas are not prescriptive and change based on the impact of
a specific disaster
• Supports delivery of a complex recovery operation
• Requires additional resources beyond what is typically available on a
standing basis at the municipal level
25. SUPPORTING DESIGN TOOLS
• All Hazards Risk Assessment
• Tasks and Functions
• Human Capital Inventory
• Organizational Analysis and Design
• Disaster Specific Recovery Organization
Refer to the Municipal Recovery Toolkit Guide #2 Appendix 2 to access
Process Flow design tools.
27. INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS
1) Input to Recovery Stakeholder Mapping: Pre-Disaster
2) Input to Organizational Design Tool
3) Input to NGO Coordination Matrix
28. IR #1 – RECOVERY STAKEHOLDER MAPPING
• IR #1: Input for recovery stakeholder
mapping will be drawn from the assembled
personnel to support follow-on drafting of the
PDR Contingency Plan
• Review: Appendix 7 of Guide #2
• Advice & Opinions: Subgroup dialogue and
plenary feedback
Method: Plenary Discussion Use Internet; Handouts
29. IR #2 – ORG DESIGN TOOL
• IR #2: Input will be gathered using the
organizational design tool from the
assembled personnel to inform follow-on
drafting of the PDR Contingency Plan
• Review: Appendix 4 of Guide #2
• Advice & Opinions: Subgroup dialogue and
plenary feedback
Method: Plenary Discussion Use Internet; Handouts
30. IR #3 – NGO COORDINATION MATRIX
• IR #3: Input will be gathered using the NGO
Coordination Matrix tool from the assembled
personnel to inform follow-on drafting of the
PDR Contingency Plan
• Review: Appendix 8 of Guide #2
• Advice & Opinions: Subgroup dialogue and
plenary feedback
Method: Plenary Discussion Use Internet; Handouts
31. SUMMARY
• No harm is done to personnel
• Response effectively transitions to recovery
• Business as usual is not compromised
• The government’s social contract remains intact
• Community recovers in-line with the selected metrics
• Increased resiliency (think all-hazards and opportunities)
• Community pride and spirit are intact
Intent. The intent of this municipal recovery guide is to introduce and define recovery frameworks, recovery planning, and decision-support tools to enable municipal elected officials, public servants, and key stakeholders in the drafting of a community-specific, all hazards pre-disaster recovery contingency plan.
Intent. The intent of this municipal recovery guide is to provide elected officials and key municipal leaders within the Province of Alberta relevant information; enabling them to consider, decide, create, and employ an effective recovery organization that supports a disaster recovery plan for their community.
Desired Outcomes. Readers of Guide #2 will understand the following:
The differences between a theoretical recovery organization designed to support a PDR ConPlan and that of a recovery organization tailored to support a disaster-specific recovery plan (DSRP) which is flexed or tailored from the PDR ConPlan during the response phase
The relative roles and interplay of elected officials, public servants, residents, NGOs, and stakeholders
The factors that affect the type of recovery organization suited to a municipality’s circumstances
The broad choices for design of a recovery organization
The tasks, skills, and knowledge relevant to key positions within a recovery organization
The relationships between a municipal recovery organization and the numerous stakeholders including:
Elected Officials
Committees of Council
Advisory committees
Municipal employees
Provincial employees
Readers will be able to:
Consider and design a supporting municipal disaster recovery organization that reflects the context of their community as part of the drafting of a PDR ConPlan
Review a draft municipal DSRP during the response phase of a disaster, noting the specific functional needs
Design an effective recovery organization that will commence delivery of a DSRP within the context of their jurisdiction
A BROAD UNDERSTANDING OF THE STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED IN DISASTER RECOVERY IS USEFUL WHEN CONSIDERING HOW BEST TO INCORPORATE OR INTEGRATE THEIR EFFORTS INTO THE OVERALL RECOVERY EFFORT.
Recovery is complex. It can entail hundreds of stakeholders pursuing similar, or conversely, different objectives. It lacks a formal hierarchical decision-making model that encompasses all stakeholders. The environment is not typified by a well-defined binary world of yes or no, black or white, on or off. Rather your recovery organization will be assisted, influenced, aided, pushed, pulled, and even stopped from pursuing objectives by power that is often unknown by them.
The starting point in recovery organizational design is an all-hazards community-level risk assessment.
This should be followed by identification of anticipated tasks for the recovery organization from scenario and contingency planning in the event of a PDR ConPlan and from an assessment of actual damage in the event of a DSRP.
It should incorporate known strengths and weaknesses at the municipal level derived from a reflective, assessment tool.
It should be linked to thoughtful analysis of relevant organizational design factors.
The front end of disaster recovery typically requires a larger, more diverse recovery organization than that remaining over the span of several years. You should expect and plan to:
Decrease the size of the recovery organization over time
When appropriate based on:
An assessment of the recovery progress to date
Recovery progress remaining
Ongoing BAU workload
Funding levels
Risk associated with change
Integrate the processes and personnel into the BAU government structure (note: only required if the recovery model is unique from the status quo delivery of programs and services)
Eventually dissolve the recovery organization in its entirety
NEW IMAGE?
Although, seemingly simple to adopt, this recovery model may downplay or fail to recognize what is different in a community post-disaster. The business as usual government model may default to planning, prioritization, and decision making that is unaligned with the consequences of the disaster.
The Incident Command System is a codified, established means of assessing risk, identifying objectives, building a team, and managing an emergency primarily within the response phase of emergency management.
This recovery organizational model is predicated on relatively short planning cycles, a less inclusive decision-making construct, limited interaction with elected officials, and the lack of a broader long-term governmental policy analysis capacity. It is not considered ideally suited for complex, lengthy disaster recovery operations.
The Incident Command System is a codified, established means of assessing risk, identifying objectives, building a team, and managing an emergency primarily within the response phase of emergency management.
This recovery organizational model is predicated on relatively short planning cycles, a less inclusive decision-making construct, limited interaction with elected officials, and the lack of a broader long-term governmental policy analysis capacity. It is not considered ideally suited for complex, lengthy disaster recovery operations.
In addition to providing an overview of the learnings from this guide, the intent is to extract the community representative’s advice and opinions that supports the developing of the community specific, pre-disaster recovery plan. This session is designed to draw advice or opinions for the following information requirements:
What is the strategic vision from the Municipal leadership? The community’s long-term vision (10 – 20 years)? What does the community want to look like in the future?
Are the various extant municipal guidance to pre-disaster recovery plan development valid? Municipal Strategic Plan, HRVA, & MEMP.
Long-term disaster recovery is demanding work. It entails tight timelines for delivery of policy advice, support to residents, and completion of major projects. It lacks role clarity, is rarely a repeat work experience for those delivering, and requires the ability to decide in the absence of perfect information.
Notwithstanding, it can be a gratifying experience. Helping those impacted by a disaster reinforces the humanity and compassion resident in communities. It allows for healing at the personal and community level and, in many instances, generates new, enduring friendships.