This idea is active.
PPD-8 National Planning Frameworks »

What do the frameworks actually add?

I've gone through all of the frameworks, submitted some comments, can't really argue with many of the basic concepts (which predate the frameworks), and I have to ask what they actually add? I understand that the frameworks are supposed to be 30,000' perspectives, but they seem to be more like high orbit: nice concepts, platitudes, not much new (aside from mitigation now focusing on terrorism), and no actual useful guidance. It rekindles painful memories of empty documents of the past (NRP, NIPP, CI/KR sector). At least we're not calling them plans, but I have to wonder what new compliance activities this will generate at the local level. I'm trying, but it's not adding up. Put another way, are we better off with the frameworks/would we be worse off if they didn't exist? My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my employer.

Submitted by Jeff Rubin 2 years ago

Vote Activity Show

Comments (4)

  1. The National Response Framework (NRF) is a guide to how the Nation conducts all-hazards response.Along with the Emergency Support Function Annexes and Support Annexes

    supersedes the corresponding sections of the National Response Plan and explains the common discipline and structures that have been exercised and matured at the local, tribal, State, and national levels over time.

    Framework commits the Federal Government, in partnership with local, tribal, and State governments and the private sector, to complete both strategic and operational plans for the incident scenarios specified in the National Preparedness Guidelines. The methods, practices, or procedures may not be new or additive to some of us depending on or histories but on the otherside for those that previously practiced other methods, this puts everyone on the same page.

    1 year ago
    1. Jeff Rubin Idea Submitter

      I understand what the NRF is supposed to be (I must - I've taken every version of IS-800, which apparently is considered a capability rather than a one-time compliance action), and I get the desired end state. I just don't see the frameworks, particularly those other than the NRF, as change agents. If the astonishing tilt toward terrorism of the NMF is any indication, we seem to be in another phase of the sine-wave prioritization of terrorism vs. natural hazards, moving more towards the former. Call me cynical, but after 10 years of fad strategies raining down on the locals, I have a tough time seeing this as something new. I respect Craig Fugate and his leadership team, buy in completely on Whole Community, but this stuff just doesn't do it for me.

      1 year ago
  2. I understand the sentiment of your comment Jeff. There's certainly plenty of platitudes that could be constued as obvious tenets of the profession. However, I disagree that these are not useful. I'll use whole community as an example, this is the very premise of emergency management but how often do we see emergency managers operating in silos? Taking a government centric approach? Mistrusting partners? We've got to start from very high level to then build out the specific capabilities and gaps. Sometimes I've been left wondering "where's the meat" in these documents? Isn't everyone doing this? But that's the point, general as the principles are--they have to be defined to test them.

    1 year ago
  3. Excellent comment, Jeff. There's so much wordiness involved, so much "trendiness," so many efforts at complexity, that I cannot imagine this kind of effort being replicated at the local level (or even made sense of by most persons who will be doing planning at the local level). Unless FEMA is going to start using a "cookie cutter" fill-in-the-blanks computerized template to get these types of things in place throughout the "whole community," then I just don't see it getting done. The average citizen will find the jargon to be impenetrable and incomprehensible. Only the planners who already know the subject will understand what's being said, the number of local communities covered by these efforts will keep declining as the demands become impossibly complex, and FEMA will probably then use this decline to justify the withholding of various funds that will be used somewhere else in a shrinking federal budget.

    1 year ago