Archives

Scoring Communications Systems: A Review

by John J. Fanning

The 9/11 attacks in New York demonstrated a real need for seamless communications between various first responder departments. Since that time, much money and effort has been placed on establishing communications systems throughout municipalities and counties in the US. In January of 2007, DHS issued findings of a review it undertook to assess the status of large cities and regions and grade them as to the effectiveness of their communications plan.

The DHS created a scoring process for these 75 regions (urban/metropolitan) throughout the United States, including U.S. territories outside of the states. Each score card grades regions on their level of implementation in regards to Governance, Standard operating Procedures SOP), and Usage of the SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum (a guide to interoperable communications).

One state may have several regions listed among the seventy-five that received scorecards. It is therefore important that every region is organized according to the Tactical Interoperable Communications Program (TICP). A region should have a decision making body which updates and reviews plan and organizes funding for interoperable communications. Regions should also have designated plans that are to be followed by first responders and agencies (federal, state, and other support groups). The SOPs for each region are already established by the TICP, however, it is necessary that all agencies follow them accordingly, along with the National Incident Management System/ Incident Command System (NIMS/ICS) procedures to prevent confusion.

WHAT THE SCORES MEAN:

Advanced Implementation (A)

Governance exists in a decision making body, which expands to properly represent the region and updates plans. Usage of interoperable communications occurs among first responders and during multi-agency exercises. SOPs are established and reviewed regularly. NIMS/ICS procedures are used successfully by all agencies in the region.

Established Implementation (B)

Governance exists in formal agreements which listing the roles and responsibilities of the decision making group. There are plans for communication needs and funding. Usage of interoperable communications occurs among first responders. Communication is clear during multi-agency exercises. SOPs are established and used. NIMS/ICS procedures are used by all agencies in the region and are carried out properly during exercises.

Intermediate Implementation (C)

Governance exists in formal agreements but informal practices. Communication plans and funding are just starting to form. Usage of interoperable communications occurs among first responders, but is unclear in multi-agency exercises. SOPs are established and are slowly being included in interoperability procedures of agencies. The NIMS/ICS procedures vary among agencies and can cause some confusion when exercises are practiced.

Early Implementation (D)

Governance is informal with no strategic plans for communications goals or funding. Usage of interoperable communications is weak and different among agencies. SOPs are established but not used or applied by all agencies. The National Incident Management System/ Incident Command System (NIMS/ICS) procedures are unclear and differ among agencies.

Archives