The four-page "DRAFT Mitigation Framework Guiding Principles" doesn't really mention hazards until well into its third page. For our documents to *really* invite comments and commitment from the general public (or indeed, anyone outside of ourselves), it needs to use language that is self-explanatory, as much as possible. Mitigation is not a word that was meant to simply be tossed around on its own, in isolation. SOMETHING ...more »
PPD-8 National Planning Frameworks
Note: This particular conversation topic is closed. Thank you for your ideas, comments and votes. You can contribute to our open Presidential Policy Directive 8 (PPD-8) conversations -- they are listed in the left column of the page under "Active Campaigns."
The ideas we received so far were helpful in shaping the document and will also be considered as we continue to forge ahead in meeting the remaining milestones under PPD-8. To learn more about the status of PPD-8 efforts, visit www.fema.gov/ppd8. We appreciate your involvement.
The working drafts of the National Planning Frameworks are available for review and feedback here:www.fema.gov/ppd8. The Frameworks are part of Presidential Policy Directive 8 (PPD-8), which sets the vision for national preparedness. Together, the five Frameworks will outline the whole community’s roles, responsibilities and key actions to keep our nation safe and resilient. Each Framework is supported by its guiding principles, which capture basic mission-area values, and will help shape framework development and implementation. This month, the focus is on revising the National Response Framework, and developing the Prevention, Protection and Mitigation Frameworks. The National Disaster Recovery Framework was released in September.
As you read the Frameworks, please pay close attention to the core capabilities, roles and responsibilities, and coordinating structures identified in the working drafts.
We welcome your thoughts and ideas on any or all of the following:
- Examples of things you do related to the core capabilities.
- Examples of partnerships that could improve these activities.
- Examples of ways to integrate core capabilities across the mission areas.
The core capabilities are listed below by mission area for your convenience:
- Prevention: Forensics and Attribution; Intelligence and Information Sharing; Interdiction and Disruption; Screening, Search and Detection; Planning; Public Information and Warning; Operational Coordination
- Protection: Access Control and Verification; Cyber Security; Intelligence and Information Sharing; Interdiction and Disruption; Physical Protective Measures; Risk Management for Protection Programs and Activates; Screening, Search and Detection; Supply Chain Integrity and Security; Planning; Public Information and Warning; Operational Coordination
- Mitigation: Community Resilience; Long-term Vulnerability Reduction; Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment; Threats and Hazard Identification; Planning; Public Information and Warning; Operational Coordination
- Response: Critical Transportation; Environmental Response/Health and Safety; Fatality Management Services; Infrastructure Systems; Mass Care Services; Mass Search and Rescue Operations; On-scene Security and Protection; Operational Communications; Public and Private Services and Resources; Public Health and Medical Services; Situational Assessment; Planning; Public Information and Warning; Operational Coordination
Risks associated w/ climate trends e.g. sea level rise (SLR) will place additional populations at risk. Two recent reports published in March 2012 analyzed the vulnerability to SLR and flooding and storm surge. The first found 1 m SLR would place 3.7 million people at risk, some 2150 communities at some degree of exposure, with FL, LA, CA, NY and NJ at greatest risk. The second looked at the influence of SLR on storm ...more »
Just an observation that the draft Prevention Framework seems to omit discussion of cybersecurity. (Missed the official comment period - sorry.)
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. ...more »
Thousands of mitigation plans have been created under 44 CFR. Meanwhile, with DHS planning risk assessments and BZPPS and Fusion Centers and now a THIRA we are about to come to a nexus on risk assessments in this country. One plan says we have a bridge it is terror target. Why becuase it is important to the community. The other says it is essential or critical faciliity. Both have same bridge in differenent database in ...more »