A Framework for Integrated Emergency Management

Author(s): David McLoughlin

Source: Public Administration Review , Jan., 1985, Vol. 45, Special Issue: Emergency
Management: A Challenge for Public Administration (Jan., 1985), pp. 165-172
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Society for Public Administration

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3135011

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Wiley and American Society for Public Administration are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Public Administration Review

This content downloaded from

104.151.62.50 on Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:48:40 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 165

A Framework for
Integrated Emergency Management
David McLoughlin, Federal Emergency Management Agency

In an average year in the United States, floods willState. The role of the state emergency management
cause $2 billion to $3 billion in damage. Tornadoes agency
will is similar in many ways to that of the local agen-
leave over 100 people dead. Fires will kill more than cy. For example, it must have an effective organization
6,000. These emergencies occur regularly and others andare develop and maintain necessary plans, facilities,
waiting to happen. These are 9,000 high hazard dams and
in equipment. On a day-to-day basis, it must manage
the country. Four billion tons of hazardous materials an active, ongoing emergency management program at
move through the transportation system each year. both state and local levels.
Thirty-nine states are at risk from earthquakes and 22 Most states have a single agency that takes "lead"
metropolitan areas from hurricanes. The issue is not responsibility for emergency preparedness and response
whether governments will be required to respond activities.
to The nature of these agencies and their lines of
emergencies but rather when and how frequently. The authority vary, but they fall into one of five general
time to think about emergencies is before they happen.types of state organizations. Authority in all cases is
This article provides a way of thinking about emer- legislated to the governor but is operated in (1) the exec-
gencies and what to do about them. utive office, or delegated (2) to a civilian department,
(3) to the adjutant general, (4) to the state police, or (5)
The Role of Governments to a council which oversees departmental activities.
in Emergency Management The state, however, has additional emergency respon-
sibilities not shared by local government. It is in a
All levels of government-local, state, and federal- unique position to gauge the emergency management
are involved in emergency management. While some needs of its political subdivisions, assess its own and
emergency responsibilities and functions are common to federal government resources, and facilitate the acquisi-
all three, each level of government also has its own tion and application of these resources. State govern-
unique responsibilities and resources. ment also gives direct guidance and assistance to local
Local. When a disaster strikes, it does so in one or jurisdictions in program development and channels
more local jurisdictions. Local government has the first federal guidance and assistance to communities. In a
line of official public responsibility. State and federal major emergency the state office ensures a coordinated
governments can be counted on for major support only response through the combined efforts of local, state,
when the damage has been unusually widespread and and federal agencies and private sector organizations.
severe. Local governments, therefore, have to develop Like local jurisdictions, states also have frequently
and maintain a program of emergency management to limited their disaster roles to the preparedness and re-
meet their responsibilities to provide for the protection sponse phases of emergency management.
and safety of the public. The local emergency manage- Federal. Extensive resources exist throughout the
ment agency supports this effort by working with the federal government to help state and local governments
departments of local government and private sector in emergency management. Federal Emergency Man-
organizations to develop emergency plans and capabili- agement Agency (FEMA) supports their emergency
ties that can respond to any natural or man-made management efforts by providing national program
hazard which threatens the community. Local emer- policy and guidance, as well as technical and financial
gency management responsibility is typically placed assistance. The agency's 10 regional offices provide the
either in an agency that reports to a mayor or city vital link in supporting state and local activities. In the
manager, or in an existing department such as police, event of a major disaster, FEMA is ready to provide
fire, or public safety. Traditionally, local emergency assistance when the demand exceeds the capacity of
managers have focused principally on preparedness and state and local resources to respond and recover. FEMA
response. During an actual emergency they act in a staff
capacity to the highest local official with responsibility
to assure coordination among governmental and non- David McLoughlin is the deputy associate director for State and Local
governmental forces and among higher and adjacent Programs and Support of the Federal Emergency Management Agen-
governments. cy (FEMA).

SPECIAL ISSUE 1985

This content downloaded from

104.151.62.50 on Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:48:40 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
166 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW

cost-effective emergency management capability. The

also coordinates the response of other federal agencies
IEMS approach represents a shift in emphasis from a
which administer their own disaster relief programs.
Until the establishment of FEMA, however, the narrow purpose, single hazard program orientation to
organizational history of federal emergency programsbroader, functional, and multi-hazard way of accom-
was a patchwork of agencies (see Figure 1). Depart- plishing emergency management objectives. IEMS em-
ments and councils were variously established and abol-phasizes and capitalizes on the commonalities of emer-
ished by executive orders, acts of Congress, admin- gency functions that exist across all hazards, while at the
istrative delegations, and reorganization plans. same time addressing elements unique to specific type
Although some kind of federal emergency programs of emergencies. In line with the agency's purpose an
had existed from the 1930s, it was with the passage of charter, IEMS is one more step toward realizing the
the Federal Civil Defense Act and the Disaster Relief goals for which FEMA was established.
Act in 1950 that such programs were institutionalized.
By the 1970s, however, many state and local govern-
ments had become increasingly concerned about the
lack of a central point-of-contact at the federal level for Components of Emergency Management
the management of all emergencies, whether natural or
man-made, including attack-related. State and local Too often when officials think of emergencies, they
think
government officials believed the lack of a comprehen- only of response and fail to consider the other
sive and integrated national policy for emergency essential components of an adequate emergency man-
agement program-mitigation, preparedness, and
mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery along
recovery. A balanced program includes:
with the dispersion of federal responsibilities among
numerous departments and agencies, was impeding
their ability to manage emergencies. In 1979, FEMA * Mitigation-Activities that reduce the degree of long-
was established to alleviate this situation. Its missions term risk to human life and property from natura
were to provide that single point-of-contact for state and man-made hazards; e.g., building codes, disaster
and local governments and to optimize the use of emer- insurance, land-use management, risk mapping, safe-
gency preparedness and response resources at all levels ty codes, and tax incentives and disincentives.
of government by taking advantage of the similarities in* Preparedness-Activities that develop operational
planning and response activities for both peacetime and capabilities for responding to an emergency; e.g.,
attack emergencies. Additionally, for the first time, emergency operations plans, warning systems, emer-
mitigation and recovery programs would be included in gency operating centers, emergency communications,
emergency management and addressed in a coordinated emergency public information, mutual aid agree-
manner. In reality, however, these objectives are only ments, resource management plans, and training and
now being realized after the new agency has developed exercises.
beyond its initial startup phase. In October 1981, all* Response-Activities taken immediately before, dur-
programs supporting state and local efforts in mitiga- ing, or directly after an emergency that save lives,
tion, preparedness, response, and recovery were pulled minimize property damage, or improve recovery;
together in one directorate. (Subsequently, the flood e.g., emergency plan activation, activation of emer-
plain management responsibilities were returned to the gency systems, emergency instructions to the public,
Federal Insurance Administration.) Although the emergency medical assistance, manning emergency
multiplicity of legislative and executive order mandates2 operations centers, reception and care, shelter and
still remain, the agency has made significant efforts to evacuation, and search and rescue.
consolidate its transfer of program funds to state * Recovery-Short-term activities that restore vital
governments through comprehensive cooperative agree- life-support systems to minimum operating standards
ments which are now negotiated yearly between FEMA and long-term activities that return life to normal;
and the states. e.g., debris clearance, contamination control, disas-
The consolidation and program integration envi- ter unemployment assistance, temporary housing,
sioned in the creation of FEMA have continued to and facility restoration.
evolve. Program implementation continues to be re-
The to
assessed with the aim of becoming more responsive emergency manager should be at the center of gov-
state and local emergency management needs andernmental
sup- efforts for all of these components which
need
portive of their efforts. FEMA believes that the most ef-to be coordinated with similar efforts in the private
fective way to do this is to continue to integrate sector.
emer- While emergency management issues have to
gency management activities across the spectrum compete
of with other serious issues for the time and atten-
hazards. The approach FEMA is taking to accomplish tion of responsible officials, nonetheless, decision
this integration is called the Integrated Emergencymakers must become knowledgeable of key issues in
Management System (IEMS)-a system comprised order
ofto make correct policy decisions and to support
many components to serve all levels of government the emergency
in program manager in the implementation
developing, maintaining, and managing an efficient of policy
and initiatives.

SPECIAL ISSUE 1985

SPECIAL ISSUE 1985

This content downloaded from

104.151.62.50 on Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:48:40 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A FRAMEWORK FOR INTEGRATED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 167

FIGURE 1

I FEDERAL EMERGENCY ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT |

WHITE HOUSE

NATIONAL EMERGENCY COUNCIL

(NEC IN WHITE HOUSE FROM 1933 1939

WAS PLACED IN EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF

THE PRESIDENT 1939)

OFFICE FOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT D. O. D.

(ESTABLISHED IN 1947)
(OEM IN EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT)
(1940-1950)
!

OFFICE OF CIVIL DEFENSE PLANNING

FEDERAL CIVIL DEFENCE ADMIN. Patrial functions transfer (OCDP) (1948 1949)

i FCDA IN WHITE HOUSE) (1950 1956) ^ 4

OFFICE OF CIVIL DEFENSE LIAISON

(OCDL) (1949 19501
OFFICE OF DEFENSE AND CIVILIAN I I
MOBILIZATION

OFFICE OF CIVIL DEFENSE

MOBI LI ZATION

(ODCM. 1958 NAME CHANGED TO

OCDM IN 1958) INDEPENDENT AGENCIES:

(1958 1961)
r

. .
I
OFFICE OF CIVIL DEFENSE

1
OFFICE OF EMERGENCY PLANNING
(OCD) (1961 1972)
(OEP IN WHITE HOUSE) (1961- 968)

I
| " DEFENSE CIVIL PREPAREDNESS AGENCY
OFFICE OF EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
( DCPA) 1972 1978)
,OEP IN EXECUTIVE OFFICE nF THE PRESIDEN TI L- I

1968 1973

G. S. A. | H. U. D.

OFFICE OF PREPAREDNESS 1/2

2FEDERAL DISATER ASSISTANCE
(OP IN GSA) (1973 1975
(FDAA IN HUD) (1973 1978 )

I I
I
#3 FEDERAL PREPAREDNESS AGENCY I
(FPA IN GSA) (1975 1978)
I
I
I
I
I

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

(FEMA) 1979

A A
A A

#4 DAM SAFETY COORDINATION (1977) I I#8 FEDERAL INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION

{HUD) (1968)
(EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENTI I
I

#5 EARTHQUAKE HAZARD REDUCTION

(1978) rn
1r 7 NATIONAL FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL
(EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT) ADMINISTRATION
COMMERCEI 11974)

CONSEQUENCES MANAGEMENT IN TERRORISM #10 NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE

(EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT) COMMUNITY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM
(COMMERCE) (1973)

#7 WARNING AND EMERGENCY BROADCAST (1977)

(EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT)

SPECIAL ISSUE 1985

This content downloaded from

104.151.62.50 on Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:48:40 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 168 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW

FIGURE 2

The second part of the hazards analysis is knowledg

A Framework for Emergency Management of the community-areas and resources at risk to
damage, plus an assessment of the loss that would result
Local, state, and federal government in partnership
from the occurrence of the event. This knowledge in-
to protect people and property (while maintaining essen-
cludes such things as the number of people and the value
tial governmental functions) through a program of miti-
of property that could be affected, as well as the com-
gation, preparedness, response, and recovery-thismunications,
is transportation, food supply, or other
the framework of emergency management. This frame-
systems exposed to interruption.
work must relate the components in time and by se- When knowledge of hazards is combined with knowl-
quence of implementing actions. The Integrated Emer-edge of their potential impacts on the community, the
gency Management System, built on the concept result of a is the measure of the community's vulnerability.
common set of functions for all emergencies, is Adequate
the information about the hazards will enable a
framework recommended by FEMA. community to know how frequently damage from an
In order to provide a complete description of the event could occur, what the damage could be, and
IEMS framework, each element is described as it would
which portions of the community could be damaged.
apply to a community that has done little towards When the data for each hazard are combined and
developing its required capability. Communities thatanalyzed, the community can assign priorities to its
already have higher levels of capabilities may need emergency
only management needs.
to review certain elements to ensure that nothing has Capability Assessment. When the hazard analysis ha
been overlooked. The framework will include three been completed, the community then can assess its cur
paths. The first is outlined in Figure 2. rent capabilities-the resources available for an actual
HazardAnalysis. Knowing what can happen, the like-emergency. Such capabilities are easiest to measure
lihood of its happening, and having some idea of when
the matched against the functions they will support
magnitude of the problems that can arise, are essential
At the heart of an IEMS approach is the understanding
that there is a common set of functions required for
ingredients for emergency planning. A jurisdiction must
most emergencies and that a capability assessment
identify its potential hazards and determine the prob-
able impact each can have on people and property. should
This center on this common set. The set of functions
task need not be complicated or highly sophisticated to
suggested by FEMA is comprised of the following: (1)
provide useful results. What is important, however, is
emergency management organization; (2) emergency
operations planning; (3) resource management; (4)
that all hazards posing a potential threat to the jurisdic-
tion are identified and addressed in emergency plans. direction and control; (5) emergency communication;
(6) alerting and warning; (7) emergency public informa-
A hazards analysis consists of two parts. The first in-
volves knowledge of the kinds of hazards that might tion; (8) continuity of government; (9) shelter protec-
threaten the community. This knowledge includes tion; the (10) evacuation; (11) protective measures; (12)
probability of the event occurring at varying levels emergency
of support services; (13) emergency reporting;
intensity and at varyaing locations throughout the com- (14) training and education; and (15) exercises and
munity. Determinations of probability, intensity, drills.and This set is currently undergoing some revision.
location can be made on the basis of historical evidence,
The capabilities required for a community to perform
empirical research, or community perception. Some each of these functions should be assessed not in the
hazardous events occur frequently but do little damage abstract but against a set of standards based on emer
and, therefore, create little more than routine emer- gency experience. FEMA has developed a recommende
set which is available in its publication, Capability
gency needs. But there are other events that occur infre-
quently-or may never have occurred-yet would have Assessment and Standards (CPG 1-102).
catastrophic effects and require extraordinary The output of this assessment is twofold. First, the
responses. assets of the community for emergency operations will

SPECIAL ISSUE 1985

This content downloaded from

104.151.62.50 on Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:48:40 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
A FRAMEWORK FOR INTEGRATED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 169

have been inventoried, and these will serve as cated on the to

inputs full range of potential hazards, their
the emergency operations planning effort. economic Second,implications,
the and emergency preparedness
shortfall in resources will serve as an input to principles. Education programs are needed for the
the third
path of the IEMS process which focuses ongeneral public as well. A public education program can
capability
improvement. develop an understanding of the importance of emer-
Emergency Planning. Conducting coordinated opera- gency preparedness and the role of citizens in contribut-
tions in emergencies is the executing of emergency ing to their safety.
operations plans. The payoff from emergency opera- Training should be followed by a continuing series of
tions is that lives are saved and property preserved. This exercises to assure a well-tuned emergency response
payoff results from the forces that have emergency mis- capability. In developing an exercise, the selection of the
sions doing "the right thing at the right time," while hazard should be based on actual or potential threats
making maximum effective use of existing resources and identified in the hazard analysis. Communities should
capabilities. Planning is essential to being able to take avoid concentrating on any single hazard year after
prompt and effective action. Experience in peacetime year, but should diversify to cover adequately all major
disasters shows repeatedly that when the heads of com- contingencies. While attack-related preparedness may
munity operating departments have been involved in the not be high on the list of public officials' immediate
planning process and when operations are conducted in concerns, it is-because of the great number of lives at
accordance with plans, reaction times are reduced and risk-critical, and an exercise based on this threat
coordination improved. should be included in a comprehensive exercise
Well-prepared plans specify what will be done, where, program.
when, and by whom, to meet the specific demands of Major exercises should involve the jurisdiction's chief
emergency conditions. Such plans can be developed executive, department heads and their key staff, and
only by representatives of operating departments and representatives from the private sector, such as Red
nongovernmental groups with emergency missions. Cross, Salvation Army, the information media,
"Paper plans" prepared by the emergency program hospitals, utilities, and volunteer groups. The active par-
manager working alone, with little participation by ticipation of the chief executive in the exercise, in par-
operating departments, are of little value. In an actual ticular, underlines its importance and encourages the
emergency they will not be used. The development of a full support of local government personnel as well as the
written plan, therefore, is not an end in itself. A written private sector. An exercise is only of limited value with-
emergency plan does not guarantee that actual opera- out the participation of the right people.
tions will be effective. But the process of planning that Finally, it is important that exercises be based on the
leads to the development of a written plan is extremely jurisdiction's currently existing resources. Exercises
valuable. This is because the officials who are respon- simulating an abundance of resources that are not avail-
sible for emergency operations have spent time deter- able will not objectively test the jurisdiction's opera-
mining which official will do what and how operations tional capability.
will be coordinated. Emergency Response. While the potential for lost
Emergency plans are also valuable for training and lives and property damage is always depressing to con-
for familiarizing new executives with their emergency sider, disasters are realities. When they occur, govern-
duties. Plans provide a point of departure for increased-ments must respond. Experience shows prepared
readiness actions to improve and activate capabilities governments
in do better than unprepared ones. While
periods of heightened risk, such as a hurricane watch or many planned actions will be modified as situations dic-
an international crisis. Finally, written plans provide tate,
a familiarity with the overall concept of operations
gained during the planning process can be the thread
basis for exercising key leaders, i.e., involving decision
makers in a simulated emergency environment. that ties the actions of each operating element together
Capability Maintenance. Once developed, the ability into a coordinated whole.
to take appropriate and effective action against any Once a government responds, invariably there are op-
hazard must be continually maintained or it will portunities to improve future responses. Evaluations are
diminish significantly over time. Plans must be updated, critical to such improvements and should be conducted
equipment must be serviced and tested, personnel must shortly after the incident while memories are still fresh.
be trained, and procedures and systems must be exer- The conclusions from these evaluations should be fed
cised. This is particularly important for jurisdictionsback into the planning process.
that do not experience frequent, large-scale emer- Recovery Efforts. Once the emergency has been
gencies. stabilized and the immediate life-saving and property
Elected or appointed government officials must be protection actions have been generally completed, atten-
kept aware of their responsibilities and authorities. tion must focus on returning community functions and
Police, fire, and other local government personnel need damaged areas to pre-emergency conditions. The short-
continuing training. Response personnel must keep fully term focus should be on returning vital life support
apprised of all possible hazard effects and understand systems to minimum operating standards. Longer term
how these effects can affect their operations. Business activities which may require a number of years should
and industry officials and planners also need to be edu- focus on restoring community life to normal. During

SPECIAL ISSUE 1985

This content downloaded from

104.151.62.50 on Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:48:40 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
170 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW

FIGURE 3

recovery, significant opportunities for community plan-its occurrence. Second, they can change the way a
ning to reduce future emergency impacts are frequently hazard interacts with people and their support systems.
available. The relationship of these mitigation effortsThird,
to they can alter the way people live and the systems
the IEMS framework is outlined in Figure 3. they create.
Mitigation. Mitigation consists of planned and order- The definition of mitigation recognizes that virtually
ly efforts to prevent hazards that are preventableevery and emergency-related action "mitigates" the crisis if
lessen the impact of those that are not. Mitigationthe ac-definition of "to lessen" is employed. But some im-
tivities can act in three ways to prevent or reduce effects
portant distinctions between mitigation and the other
of potential hazards. First, they can act on the hazardcomponents
to of emergency management do exist. For
eliminate it or to reduce the frequency and intensity example,
of there are differences between the type of skills

FIGURE 4

SPECIAL ISSUE 1985

This content downloaded from

104.151.62.50 on Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:48:40 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
A FRAMEWORK FOR INTEGRATED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 171

necessary for local government or state officials to (CPG 1-103). When used in conjunction with
Planning
carry out mitigation and recovery (an emphasisthe on
hazards analysis and capability assessment results,
policy, political, and fund-raisiftg skills) and those use-
these plans should convince key officials of the need for
ful for preparedness and response (decision making, improvements. They will also present a logical, realistic
communication, and direction and control skills). schedule for the projects and activities that should be
Another important distinction lies in the long-term given priority over the next five years.
nature of mitigation. It is not only directed to the next Annual Development Increment. With the multi-year
disaster but to all future disasters. It is not only a development plan serving as a framework for building
response to a past disaster but an active search for ways increased capability, the details of what is going to be
to prevent or reduce impacts of future ones. Finally, it is done each year must be determined. Situations change
not a technique employed on only a few types of each year and perhaps more or less was accomplished
hazards, but rather one which applies to all types. than planned in the preceding year. These factors
The design and implementation of a hazard mitiga- should be reflected in modifications to the multi-year
tion strategy requires technical capability, resources, development plan and in deciding on the annual incre-
and the cooperative efforts of a number of diverse ment. Through this process, emergency program man-
groups. These groups include planners and local operat- agers can develop detailed descriptions of what they
ing departments, and private sector groups such as lend- plan to accomplish in the coming year and their require-
ing institutions. They need to devote attention and ments for financial and technical assistance in support
resources to all hazards even though the requirements of these efforts.
may be significant. Future savings in reduced destruc- Federal, State, and Local Resources. Governments
tion can be cost-effective even without considering the are expected to contribute financially to capability
primary benefits from reductions in injuries and deaths. development and maintenance efforts. Some activities
While many targets of opportunity will be present identified in the annual increment may be accomplished
after a disaster, an effective mitigation strategy should solely with local resources, while others may require
begin as soon as the hazards analysis is completed and state or federal support, or both. The federal govern-
should focus on a set of deliberate, well-reasoned policy ment provides policy and procedural guidance, financial
decisions based on a long-term view. Over time, the aid, technical support, and staff resources to assist state
cumulative effect of many mitigation actions, even if in- and local governments in developing and maintaining
dividually they are small, can make a significant impact capability. Whatever the source of funding and other
on the degree of risk faced by a community. However, support, each project and activity should be a building
in relating mitigation to capability improvement, few block in the jurisdiction's overall capability improve-
communities have adequate resources to meet all poten- ment program.
tial emergencies. The deficiencies can be determined Annual Work Increment. As capability improvement
from the capability assessment previously described. projects and activities are completed, these improve-
This assessment is made against a set of standards ments will be reflected in the capability assessment and a
developed from past disaster experience. The identifieddecreasing capability shortfall as the results of the
shortfall is the primary input to any capability improve- process are reviewed each year. The additional resources
ment. It provides the specifics of what additional that can be committed to the emergency operations plan
resources are needed. The relationship of the various should cause a revision and updating of the plan. The
capability improvement activities is illustrated in Figure multi-year plan should also be modified to reflect the
4. changes in resources and the experience gained during
Capability Shortfall. The shortfall between current exercises and actual emergency operations.
capability and optimum capability represents the critical
gap that every community has to bridge if it wants an
adequate emergency management program. The areas
that do not measure up to the assessment standards IEMS in Summary
should receive primary consideration when the com-
munity's multi-year development plan is prepared. IEMS stresses an integrated approach to management
Multi- Year Development Plan. Based on the capabil- of emergencies across the full spectrum, including
ity shortfall, the community should prepare a multi-year natural and man-made disasters. There is a set of com-
development plan tailored to meet its unique situation mon operational functions across this emergency spec-
and requirements. The plan should outline what needs trum, such as evacuation, direction and control, emer-
to be done to reach the desired level of capability. Ideal- gency support services, and provision for other critical
ly, this plan should cover a five-year period so that long- resources. IEMS stresses the elements common to
term development projects can be properly scheduled disasters, while at the same time recognizing elem
and adequately funded. The plan should include all unique to specific types of emergencies. IEMS re
emergency management projects and activities to be nizes that while response to emergencies is the ce
undertaken by the jurisdiction regardless of the funding focus during a disaster, mitigation activities to re
source. A recommended format for the plan is available the degree of risk, preparedness activities to increase
in the FEMA publication, Multi-Year Development capability to respond, and recovery activities require

SPECIAL ISSUE 1985

This content downloaded from

104.151.62.50 on Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:48:40 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
172 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW

protection of their citizens. When the process i

return communities to normal are co-equal components
in an adequate program. pleted at all levels of governments, and when
If a community follows the steps outlined quired
in thelinkages among governmental levels are
IEMS process, its ability to deal with a wide range
plete, of
a nationwide integrated emergency mana
system
emergencies will be significantly improved. Key can be a reality.
officials
will be meeting their responsibility to provide for the

Notes

Executive Order 12148, Federal Emergency Management, July

1. This article is based on the following publications available from
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, P.O. Box 8181, 1979; Executive Order 11490, As Amended-Assigning Emer-
Washington, D.C. 20024: IEMS Process Overview, CPG 1-100,gency Management Preparedness Functions to Federal Depart-
ments and Agencies, October 1969; Public Law 81-920, The
September 1983; IEMS Hazards Analysis for Emergency Manage-
Federal Civil Defense Act of 1950, As Amended; Public Law
ment, CPG 1-101, September 1983; IEMS Capability Assessment
and Standards for State and Local Government, CPG 1-102,81-774, Defense Production Act of 1950, As Amended; Public
November 1983; IEMS Multiyear Development Planning, CPG Law 93-288, Disaster Relief Act of 1974, As Amended; Public Law
90-448, Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, Title XIII,
1-103, January 1984; Federal Assistance Handbook, CPG 1-3,
December 1976; Disaster Operations-A Handbook for Local National Flood Insurance; Public Law 93-498, Fire Prevention
and Control Act, As Amended, October 1974; and Public Law
Governments, CPG 1-6, July 1981; and Objectives for Local
Emergency Management, CPG 1-5, November 1980. 95-124, Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act, As Amended, Octo-
ber 1977.
2. The major FEMA legislative and executive order mandates are:

SPECIAL ISSUE 1985

This content downloaded from

104.151.62.50 on Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:48:40 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms