The Federal Emergency Management Agency institutionalized Emergency Management in 1979 (Lindsay, 2012). Since then, various local and state organizations have included emergency management in their practices. It shifted from specialized preparedness to narrowly defined or single categories of hazard to an all-hazard approach including potential threats to property and life through technological and environmental dangers and local and foreign risks. The whole idea of emergency management does not include a reduction in security but an increased emphasis on making the country’s emergency management capacity responsive to any significant emergency.
From the Second World War, emergency management has mostly focused on preparedness against a potential attack (Edwards, Goodrich, & Griffith, 2016). Community preparedness for all disasters needs establishing expertise and resources beforehand, and arranging how they can be utilized in the event an accident happens. However, preparation is merely a single phase of managing emergencies. The entire process has four stages including mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery.
Mitigation
It entails preventing or minimizing the effects of future events. Relief is attained via analyzing risks that provide information, which offers a base for usual mitigation actions (Lindsay, 2012). The Pentagon has developed risk mitigation measures to alleviate the likelihood of attacks happening and minimize the consequences. Several stakeholders have been allocated different roles regarding protecting the building from attacks. The Pentagon has identified hazards and risks and developed structural measures to minimize or eliminate the impact of an occurrence. The attacks that the Pentagon building is protected from include natural, criminal, terrorist and accidental hazards. Some of the human-made attacks include workplace violence, physical attacks and terrorist attacks (Gallagher, 2014). The natural attacks include wind-related events like severe tornados and flooding as well as winter storm events. Efficient preventive measures can disrupt the disaster destruction, restoration, and recurring damage cycle. It constructs safe societies by minimizing property damage and loss of life.
Some of the mitigation measures undertaken by the Pentagon include building codes that address risks like earthquakes, high winds, and fires. The demanding construction criterions implemented by people in the United States save the country above one billion dollars annually in prevented flood damages (Gallagher, 2014). For instance, houses build to NFIP standards incur less flood-related damages. After the 9/11 attacks, the damaged structures were rebuilt with more resilient materials. The Pentagon also acquired insurance plans to cover the building from any forms of threat. Insurance is a critical mitigation step. For instance, if floods lead to destruction, the flood insurance guards the owner’s investments and reduces the financial effect on them (Gallagher, 2014). The budgetary allocation may reach up to twenty-five percent of the institution’s expenditure.
Preparedness
The preparedness phase mostly entails developing plans for whom to call, where to go, and what to do before an event occurs and the action that will enhance a facility’s chances of handling an emergency successfully (Lindsay, 2012). Preparedness primary focus is to improve the capability to react to an occurrence by putting measures to ensure entities and personnel can respond to various incidences. Preparation entails arranging, consolidating, teaching, arming, training, assessing, and employing counteractive measures in an attempt to ascertain efficient synchronization when responding to an incident (Edwards, Goodrich, & Griffith, 2016). While mitigation focuses on averting a catastrophe from happening, preparedness concentrates on formulating procedures or paraphernalia when a threat strikes.
The Pentagon preparedness measures involve the installation of smoke detectors, holding disaster drills, installing the warning devices, and constructing shelters. It also consists of the provision of disaster preparedness kits such as candles, flashlights, medicine, and food. Other measures include identifying sheltering and assembling zones, creating the backup life-line services including sewage, water, and power, posting the emergency telephone numbers, and rehearsing the evacuation plans (Weaver, Fahey, & Cohen, 2016). Other preparedness activities taken by The Pentagon include training the personnel about emergency management, procuring resources including medical stockpiles, water, and food, conducting surveillance and intelligence activities to establish potential threats and adequate planning to enhance the emergency response plans. The preparedness depicted during the 9/11 attacks was due to hard work, outstanding leadership, extensive training, and sound organization exhibited by the team at Pentagon and Arlington County. It is during the preparedness phase that the facility emergency plan is developed.
Facility Emergency Plan (FEP) for Pentagon
Introduction
This FEP holds emergency information for the Pentagon’s dwellers (Kiefer, 2015). It establishes individuals responsible for an emergency within the facility. It also entails the procedures recommended for responding to emergencies...
References
Bigler, B.P. (n.d). Pentagon. Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/Pentagon
Edwards, F., Goodrich, D., & Griffith, J. (2016). Emergency Management Training for Transportation Agencies. Mineta Transportation Institute Publications.
Gallagher, M. A. (2014). Risk Assessment Framework: A Comprehensive Approach to Risk. Department of the Air Force Washington DC.
Hutcheson, D. W. (2014). The City of Virginia Beach Emergency Operations Center: Improving the Training and Management Needed for Coordinated Response and Recovery. National Fire Academy.
Jackson, M. A. (2015). Emergency Preparedness for a Radiological Disaster: Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant Release.
Lindsay, B.R. (2012, November 30). Federal Emergency Management: A Brief Introduction. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R42845.pdf
Kiefer, J. J. (2015). Recent Trends in Emergency Management. The Private Sector’s Role in Disasters: Leveraging the Private Sector in Emergency Management, 1-17.
Newton, J. (2013). Emergency Planning, Response, and Recovery. Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation, 2013(8), 6462-6467.
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now