The 14th World Conference on Disaster Management held in Toronto this June wasn't the type of event to draw public CIOs. In fact, chances are it didn't appear on the radars of most involved in government IT.

Given the role information technology plays in most government efforts to predict, prepare for and effectively respond to crises and disasters -- everything from terrorist attacks to natural disasters -- the absence of public CIOs is something to think about. Perhaps their role has yet to fully evolve for a post-9/11 world.

Technology is an essential part of virtually all disaster readiness and management. Illustrating this point was the conference's accompanying trade show, which was well populated with vendors pitching a range of technological products beyond bomb disposal robots, and emergency pop-up medical and decontamination facilities. The IT area contained crisis management software, secure data backup, GIS-based disaster management and emergency satellite communication systems, among others.

However, an understanding of where we are in our disaster management thinking -- and where we must go -- brings home the point that perhaps CIOs and IT departments have a bigger role to play, one that is not adequately defined in many jurisdictions.

The challenges in disaster readiness and response are immense given today's political, social and economic realities. This is augmented by organizational and perceptional challenges, said Peter Power, former Scotland Yard terrorist expert and current crisis management adviser with Visor Consultants in London. "Crisis management frequently tends to deal only with what has happened, not with what is about to happen."

Or as Karl Hofmann, special assistant to the U.S. secretary and executive secretary of state, asked, "Are we preparing for the next disaster simply by reliving the last one? Or are we thinking ahead?"

Not only was that question at the forefront of U.S. State Department concerns, it was also the conference's general theme. And while there's still discussion about connecting silos for effective preparedness and response, planning for different or unexpected disasters now looms large in the minds of emergency response professionals.

Effective planning and preparation starts with ensuring the right people are involved -- something the State Department experience perhaps best illuminates.


State Department Lessons
"Whether we are speaking of natural disasters, such as the recent floods in Haiti and the Dominican Republic, or the earthquake in Iraq, or if we are speaking about man-made disasters such as Sept. 11, none of us has the luxury of treating them as my problem or your problem," said Hofmann. "They are all our problem."

The threat environment governments face today -- the disaster and crisis management landscape -- includes political instability overseas, humanitarian disasters and terrorist threats. Risks also include the possibility of failed states and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, as well as the struggle over ideas, Hoffman said. "We have the tools and strategies to deal with some of these, but certainly not all of them," he said. "And yet we have to move aggressively against all of these risks.

"Planning for disaster and crisis management, and exercising those plans, is all very well and good," he added. "But how do we in the U.S. government go about mitigating those risks ahead of time? Are we organized to include nontraditional and nonstate actors fully in our disaster and crisis planning, exercising and thinking? We've done a lot of this, but I think we have much more to do."

In particular, Hofmann discussed the need to involve nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in all planning phases. "No government or group of governments can effectively respond these days to a major disaster without the assistance of nongovernmental organizations," he said. "NGOs are key partners whether governments like it or not."

Somalia in 1994 is an example that makes the case for including NGOs. The Marine Corps General in charge of withdrawing U.S. and U.N. troops realized early that his operation wasn't going to succeed without close coordination with NGO representatives on the ground, and made them part of his planning by seeking their input and advice.

"We have faced the same challenges in Iraq, where NGOs have a significant role in helping Iraqis bring about the very transition in Iraq that we seek," said Hofmann. "Planning and coordinating with NGOs is, or should be, part of any standard response plan or operational scenario that any government contemplates up to, including armed conflict."

Hofmann also said new capabilities provided by information management tools allow disaster managers to influence events in ways that weren't possible a few years ago. Enhanced satellite imagery, for instance, can assist crisis and disaster response, whether it is imagery of the earthquake in Bam, Iran, the evacuation routes in Côte d'Ivoire, or overhead imagery of flooding in Haiti and the Dominican Republic.

The State Department maintains one operations control center 24/7, and has added full capabilities of several redundant secure communication channels to alternate operations control sites. "Multiplicity of means of communication was a key lesson we learned Sept. 11," said Hofmann. The State Department wrestles with that issue in its crisis management thinking: Is the organization overreliant on a specific set of technologies, particularly for vital communications? "It took us years after Sept. 11 to mitigate that problem," Hofmann added. "So we have to ask ourselves, 'Are we redundant enough? Are we overreliant on telephony, on cell phones, on the Web?' We are looking for the right mix, but I doubt we have found it yet."

According to Hofmann, experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq have also impacted the State Department's organization in preparing for future challenges, especially the need to create a small, stand-alone capability to deal with a wide range of disasters. "We see the need for a scaled structure to deal in the future with the situation we recently faced yet again in Haiti, or to deal with the kind of failed state situation we are grappling with -- and have been for the last two and a half years -- in Afghanistan," Hofmann said.

"What we have in mind is a structure that would be keyed to gaming, scenario building, joint interagency and civil military exercising, and a mechanism for pulling nongovernmental actors into our thinking before we face a crisis rather than after."


New Jersey Model for Preparedness
Some of the State Department's experience is echoed in New Jersey's efforts to prepare for disasters, especially regarding nongovernment involvement.

Perhaps spurred on by its close proximity to New York City, as well as being the state from which the anthrax attacks were mailed, New Jersey today is widely regarded as a model of preparedness for other states. For example, New Jersey's cooperative agreement with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for bioterrorism planning, preparedness and response has been adopted for the rest of the states, according to Brendan McCluskey, deputy director of the Center for BioDefense at the University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey.

"Based on what we have been hearing from the federal government and other states about all the different programs we put together, I would say New Jersey has been state leader in disaster preparedness and that it continues to be a leader," said McCluskey.

A key factor in the state's success has been reaching out beyond government agencies. "We have been able to get all the different players from the state level, the county level, the local level, and then the private sector and the universities, and really get them to work together," explained McCluskey. "Whatever funding we do get into the state, we use it in enhanced ways so there is not just duplication."

This also applies to the IT sector, where an ad hoc group has been looking at homeland security technologies. "Again, it is a collaboration between state officials, academics and the private sector," McCluskey said. "For example, we have the National Guard, the university, the New Jersey Institute of Technology and New Jersey Network, which is the state's public television station, all working together."

This group came up with datacasting -- using the digital cable and digital television signal from New Jersey Network to transmit emergency messages, either to specific people, because it would be digitally encrypted, or to a broad audience.

New Jersey Gov. James McGreevey also recently signed an executive order creating another group, functionally distinct from this ad hoc technology group, but also involving technology. While the ad hoc group is looking at all technologies out there, the new group will test and formulate that technology to see if it fits the state's needs.

McCluskey credits New Jersey's progress to people's willingness to work together, and tearing down the walls that make for turf mindset. "I think New Jersey as a whole, and especially the individuals actually responsible for those things, has been very willing to accept others into their small circles so we don't have such rigid silos built up anymore," he said. "Additionally I think there is a recognition that no single agency is able to do everything all by themselves.

"There are good relationships out there," McCluskey added. "You've got to find them, build on them, enhance them and make sure they are solid, so if something does happen, everybody can come together and act as a whole."


Seattle Lessons
Seattle's Emergency Management program also works closely with nongovernment agencies -- in this case, it's with the Seattle business community.

Much work has been done with businesses to prepare for a major earthquake, since Seattle lies along a major fault line. However, in the IT sphere, the Business Emergency Network (BEN) is drawing some attention.

At the scene of a typical disaster, many things happen simultaneously, according to Ines Pearce, Seattle Project Impact program manager for the City of Seattle Emergency Management. At a scene of a dirty bomb or radiological dispersal device, for example, first responders -- the fire and police departments -- arrive, injured people are milling about, and the media arrive to interview and report.

Communications from the disaster scene go directly to Seattle's emergency operation center, and city plans are made based on that information.

"Beyond that, our next level of concern is to share information with the community," explained Pearce. "And one important part of the community are businesses. They need accurate information very quickly because there are decisions to make. Do I need to evacuate? Do I need to shut down? Do I need to shelter in place?

"The only way they are going to get credible information is from the city. If they get their information from the media, they are not getting it directly from the source. There are rumors. There is speculation. And the moment it gets repeated, people start thinking it is fact."

BEN is designed to provide accurate disaster or emergency information to the Seattle business community. For any emergency, one person in the emergency operations center feeds BEN with rapid, up-to-date accurate information. E-mail messages are sent to the BEN Hub, a select list of individuals and their backups -- each of whom are capable of receiving e-mail notification 24/7 and have their own e-mail lists composed of sectors of the business community.

Hub members are also trained to gather and filter questions back to the operations center liaison.

The key to BEN's organization is the hub, Pearce said. "It isn't just one big e-mail list, because the liaison person in the control center would be inundated with thousands of e-mails well beyond what would be manageable. So for instance, if the Boeing hub members get 100 of the same questions from their business mail list, they can then forward it back to operations liaison saying, 'This is the No. 1 question.' That way the system stays manageable. And at the same time, we are keeping things simple and workable while minimizing cost."

According to Pearce, it was important that communication was two-way. In testing the system, a message was delivered saying businesses had to shelter in place. A business wrote back saying, "We have daycare on-site. What happens when the parents show up to pick up the kids?"

"If you are sheltering in place, you don't let anyone from the outside in," explained Pearce. "So there were questions like that we were able to take care of."

So far BEN has been activated three times: once for the large power outage, once for a severe snow storm and once for the TOPOFF 2 dirty bomb simulation exercise in Seattle.


Questions to Ask
Much work is being done at all levels of government to prepare for man-made or natural disasters. In the end, however, emergency response structures built must withstand certain tests, according to Karl Hofmann.

• Are they duplicative, or do they add to coordination capabilities?
• Are they simply adding to an overreliance on certain technologies, or do they contain multiple redundancies to ensure effective communication or action?
• Do they continue to freeze out key actors in their planning, or do they include all players from the start -- including those outside government and those who might disagree with plans, but nevertheless still have a role to play?
• Will whatever is constructed be fighting the last war, managing the last crisis, or responding to the last disaster, or does it have the vision to anticipate and be ready for the next one?