Pacific NW Pilot - States Requirements Gathering Workbook



Pacific Northwest (PNW) State

Requirements Gathering Workbook

TABLE OF CONTENT

Foreword 2

Executive Summary 3

Introduction and Overview 5

Workbook Purpose and Scope 5

Roles and Responsibilities 7

Methodology 9

Planning Assumptions and Considerations 13

Appendix 14

Appendix A: Worksheet Completion Checklist 15

Appendix B: Operational Requirements Worksheets 16

Appendix C: Business Process Mapping Worksheet 21

Appendix D: Technical Inventory Worksheet 22

Appendix E: PNW Requirements Gathering Points-of-Contact Directory 25

Appendix F: Acronyms 26

Appendix G: Glossary 27

Foreword

On behalf of the Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), we want to thank everyone in Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington who are participating in the Pacific Northwest (PNW) Regional Pilot (henceforth referred to as, “PNW Regional Pilot”. As determined at the plenary meeting held on September 29-30, 2009, in Tacoma, WA, the pilot will develop and demonstrate the ability of the states’ to support a regional visualized information sharing platform. The next step in the pilot is to assist each state in gathering and documenting operational requirements, business process maps, and technical requirements. PNW State Requirements Gathering Workbook (WB) is designed to help states complete these tasks in an efficient and effective manner, and to ensure that information is collected in a consistent fashion from all pilot participants.

The PNW Regional Pilot will demonstrate a capability that significantly improves information sharing and thus aids decision making during emergencies and day-to-day operations from the local level to the national level, across all jurisdictions. This WB aids that process by providing an information-collection framework for steady state, pre-incident, incident, and post-incident actions performed by local, tribal, state, and Federal agencies. Sections of the WB will help document the processes that states currently use; identify the ideal processes for information sharing; determine the gaps between the current and ideal states; and develop solutions to bridge those gaps. The final product will assist our technology teams to develop a technical solution based on operators’ needs.

As we collectively move through the WB, the DHS Pilot Support Team (PST) is available to assist where needed. The PST will conduct on-site technical assistance visits; host and manage a collaborative workspace where states can post their results; and review requirements from other states as we work toward state-based solutions.

Completing the WB sections is no small task, and we thank you again for being part of this significant undertaking. We look forward to your continued participation and collaboration in developing state-by-state and regional emergency management processes.

Executive Summary

The WB provides a comprehensive overview of the requirements-gathering efforts performed by the five participating states, with support from DHS. The PNW Pilot is focused on steady state, pre-incident actions, incident actions, and post-incident actions, and the role these efforts play in reducing the loss of life and property during emergencies.

The PNW Pilot will address the needs of the state and regional emergency management community; improve emergency management efforts; and develop scalable information sharing models that other jurisdictions and regions across the Nation may employ. The WB is comprised of six key sections:

1. Introduction and Overview

• Provide an overview of Virtual USA (vUSA) and the PNW Regional Pilot

2. Workbook Purpose and Scope

• Defines the pilot process and provides a requirements workbook for documenting operational requirements

• Clarifies how state-, regional- and Federal-level information will be further developed into requirements

• Outlines a gap-analysis process between what already exists and capabilities for the desired future system

3. Roles and Responsibilities

• Define the roles of all stakeholders as it relates to the requirements WB completion

4. Methodology

• Explains how the workbook is customized to fit states’ needs, and how the states are oriented to the process of completing the workbook

• Highlights how states will compile and formulate requirements and the business mapping process

o Operation Worksheets

o Business Process Maps

o Technology Inventories of data layers, hardware, software, and systems

• Outlines a gap analysis process between current and future desired emergency management processes

• Outlines how the implementation team will assist states to update and test their information sharing capability

• Defines the regional demonstration, testing, and evaluation process and follow-on capstone demonstration

• Describes the After Action Conference and Report, which will indicate the next steps for developing next generation requirements and technical solutions

5 Planning Assumptions and Considerations

• Clarifies requirements planning assumptions and considerations for states, Federal agencies, and the PST

6. Appendix

• Appendix A: Workbook Completion Checklist

• Appendix B: Operational Requirements Worksheet

• Appendix C: Business Process Mapping Worksheet

• Appendix D: Technical Inventory Worksheet

• Appendix E: PNW Requirements Gathering Points-of-Contact Directory

• Appendix F: Acronyms

• Appendix G: Glossary

Introduction and Overview

Virtual USA and Pacific Northwest Regional Pilot Overview

• Supported by the First Responder Technologies (R-Tech) program, the Command, Control and Interoperability (CCI) Division within DHS S&T is leading the vUSA initiative. vUSA creates a cost-effective nationwide capability that significantly improves information sharing and enables improved decision making during emergencies and day-to-day operations. vUSA ensures that emergency management professionals at all levels have immediate access to the information they need to make decisions, when they need it, which shortens response times and saves lives and property.

Pacific Northwest Regional Pilot

• CCI and R-Tech will partner with five states (Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington) to implement a pilot program that leverages lessons learned and best practices from the Southeast Regional Operational Platform Pilot (SE ROPP). DHS will facilitate the development of a governance structure that defines a policy for sharing information. In this effort, DHS will also provide technical assistance to ensure that data sets from local, tribal, states and Federal sources can be visualized on individual platforms within participating pilot states. A major pilot milestone will be a capstone demonstration showing that the required technology, governance policies, and procedures are in place for seamless information sharing on demand and in a real-time setting.

Pacific Northwest Regional Pilot Operating Environment

• The WB was drafted by reflecting on each state’s response to the Capabilities Assessment completed in September 2009, and by conducting reviews of our conversations in the Tacoma, WA, plenary meeting. The stated goals of that meeting were to consider the diversity of the regional operating environment, and to maintain the integrity of each state’s current emergency management system. To do this, the requirements-gathering plan recognizes the uniqueness of each state, their current processes, and the barriers that they face in achieving their desired end state. At every step of the requirements-gathering process, the WB takes into consideration these unique operating environments by enabling state entities to provide the information they deem most useful and to invite participants (e.g., local, tribal, state, Federal, private sector, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs)) that they feel will be most helpful.

Workbook Purpose and Scope

The purpose of the WB is to establish a framework for gathering requirements for state and regional emergency management, and for actions performed by the five participating states, with support from DHS.

The PNW Pilot will:

• Address the needs of the state and regional emergency management community

• Provide a state-wide capability that the emergency management community will use to better support emergency management

• Provide a range of replicable and scalable information sharing models that can be used for emergency management activities within the region, as well as for other jurisdictions and regions across the Nation.

As a building block for vUSA, the PNW Pilot helps integrate existing information sharing frameworks and technologies to enable collaboration at the local, tribal, state, and Federal levels by providing critical context for information - thereby making it actionable. However, first and foremost, the goal will be to deliver improved emergency management capabilities to pilot participants. The PNW emergency management community is defined as:

State Level:

• State agencies and state-selected local, municipal, city, county, special districts, tribal, Urban Area Security Initiatives (UASI), private sector, NGO’s, and State level Emergency Support Functions (ESFs) and Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources (CI/KR) Sections.

Regional Level:

• Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA), Regions X and XIII including Regional ESF and CI/KR sections, and DHS Office of Infrastructure Protections (OIP) Protective Security Advisors (PSA) Program.

Federal Level:

• National Guard, FEMA Headquarters, DHS, and any additional Federal entities based upon recommendations from the Executive Steering Group and Regional Steering Group.

The scope of this pilot includes steady state, pre-incident, incident and post-incident activities within the PNW region. The WB also helps document the triggers that indicate transition points within the emergency management cycle. The categories of an incident are defined below:

Steady State

• Refers to operational periods when there are no incidents or threats significant enough to activate emergency operations (this is highly scalable depending on jurisdiction or agency, and whether it’s at the local, state or Federal level).  During steady state the focus is on monitoring and providing situational awareness through constant consistent reporting.

Pre-Incident

• Transition from steady state to increased monitoring as events or threats require more detailed situational awareness (e.g., storms show flood potential, forest fires impact populated areas)

Incident

• Activation: A major incident occurs or is imminent.  Response processes are put into place, and resources are poised to support incident response.

• Response: Immediate action is taken to save lives, protect property and the environment, and meet basic human needs. Response also includes the execution of emergency plans and actions to support short-term recovery.

• Recovery: Development, coordination, and execution of service- and site-restoration plans; assistance programs to promote restoration; additional measures for social, political, environmental, and economic restoration; evaluation of the incident to identify lessons learned; post-incident reporting; and the development of initiatives to mitigate the effects of future incidents.

Post Incident

• Demobilization: Return to steady state

• After Action Reporting (AAR): Review plans, processes, and actions during the incident and consolidate issues in the AAR. The AAR is used for process improvements, and could also be used as a performance assessment tool as future incidents are monitored to see whether improvement has occurred.

Roles and Responsibilities

To complete the WB, states will need to rely on the continued efforts of various working groups and support staff. The chart in Figure 1 demonstrates the WB completion work flow. The PST will support participants as each State Working Group (SWG) completes its WB and submits the results to the Operations Working Group (OWG) and Technical Working Group (TWG). The descriptions following the chart help define each working group’s responsibilities.

[pic]

State Working Group (SWG):

• States will develop their own internal project structure to best match their needs.

• Representatives from these groups will staff the steering and working groups that will serve as the state’s voice on the various aspects of the project. The members may include: The Adjutant Generals (TAGs), emergency managers, State Chief Information Officers (CIO), Geographic Information System (GIS) personnel, and contingency planners, to name a few.

• The SWG will compile the data to complete the WB, communicate any questions or edits to the PST, and assist in scheduling meetings to complete the WB.

• Members of the SWGs are listed on a Pilot Directory maintained by the PST and available on the Community of Practice (CoP).

Operations Working Group (OWG):

• States will assign delegates to serve on the OWG taking into account their respective needs and resource constraints. Although there are no set requirements for candidates, members of previous pilot work groups have included: contingency planners, emergency managers, emergency responders, and public health officials, to name a few.

• The OWG will meet to assist each state in completing its operations worksheet in the WB. The OWG will also define the regional governance structure and operational requirements for a capstone demonstration of information sharing during winter storm and flood season.

• Members of the OWG are listed on a Pilot Directory maintained by the PST and available on the CoP

Technical Working Group (TWG):

• States will assign delegates to serve on the TWG as needed to take into account their respective needs and resource constraints. Candidates may hold technology related positions such as: (CIO), technical and analytic staff, (GIS) specialist, etc.

• The TWG will assist states in identifying and inventorying their relevant data, hardware, software, and systems in the technology worksheet of the WB.

• Members of the TWG are listed in a Pilot Directory maintained by the PST and available on the CoP.

Pilot Support Team (PST):

• The PST will be led by program managers from CCI and R-Tech.

o The team will consist of the pilot manager, operations manger, business process specialist, logistics manager and resource manager.

o There will be subject matter experts in: Operations, Business Process, GIS, Networking, Databases, Governance, and Resources.

• The PST will help states implement their capability by:

o Presenting and orienting state participants to the WB, its structure and the process for its completion. The PST will fully support the states on completing the WB.

o Using the WB information to create a map of the current and future state of its business processes.

o Assisting the state in identifying and implementing the operational and technical changes necessary to develop their state capability.

• Based on the state’s needs, the PST will also assist with outreach by creating briefing information, frequently asked questions (FAQs), and pilot updates to provide continuous external and internal communications though messaging, branding, and public and internal department awareness.

Methodology

Below is the methodology for gather requirements to assure that state systems can seamlessly share information. Although some activities can occur simultaneously, we recommend following the outlined sequence to achieve successful outcomes.

1. Assemble State Steering Group and Assign Members to Workgroups

• The goal of the WB is to document current emergency management operations procedures for the pilot.

• To document the processes and related shared information during steady state, pre-incident, incident, and post-incident activities, each state participant in the regional pilot will create an SWG, or populate their SWG with an existing working group.

• Working Group members are strongly encouraged to become members of the PNW Regional Pilot CoP to facilitate information sharing among pilot participants.

• In most cases, the SWG may include state representatives identified for the OWG, selected specialists from local jurisdictions, members from critical infrastructure, private sector, or NGOs and other interests involved within the states emergency management community.

• It may be prudent to have technical representatives available to provide inputs on data content and types, and to expose them early in the pilot operations process.

2. Complete WB Orientation with PST

• In coordination with the states, the PST will draft a Requirements WB to assist states in compiling their requirements for managing emergencies.

• State point-of-contacts (POCs) will review and comment on the WB, and submit suggestions on how to improve the process.

• Once the WB has been reviewed and revised, the PST will resubmit the agreed upon information to the Working Group Leads to distribute to members of the OWG and TWGs.

• The PST will host virtual orientation meetings for all the state points-of-contact and working group members to help the states understand the workbook content and processes.

• These meetings will also serve to establish more complete knowledge for participants that are involved in the requirements-gathering process. These meetings will also seek to find ways to streamline the assessment process, and to minimize the impact of this pilot on the state’s daily operations.

• Figure 2 outlines the WB review and completion process

[pic]

3. Complete Operational Requirements

• The operational requirements documented in the WB will help states understand the gap between current capabilities and the desired end state.

• State Operations Working Group members will answer the questions listed in Appendix B of the WB.

o The PST will coordinate the completion and formatting of Appendix B: Operational Requirements Worksheet

• The states will upload their findings on the CoP.

4. Initiate Business Process Mapping

• The SWG members are encouraged to submit concept of operations (CONOPs) standard operating procedures (SOPs), field operation guides (FOGs), and checklists; and to consult any local, state, tribal, Federal, private sector, and NGO resources as they see fit to accurately document their specific process.

• Once the PST receives the operations material, the business process specialist will create a flow chart of the documented processes. The business process specialist and the operations manager will collaborate with the state operations working groups to ensure that the actual process is demonstrated in the map and accurately depicted.

• The map will give the states and the PST an opportunity to understand how information is exchanged and how that process might be enhanced. Once completed, the map serves as the foundation for suggested changes and improvements.

• The PST will create flow charts or map the current and desired future business processes.

o The PST will coordinate the completion and formatting of Appendix C: Business Process Mapping Worksheet

• The PST will then pass on the maps to the implementation team for assessment.

5. Inventory Technical Requirements

• The technical inventories documented in the WB will help states understand the gap between what already exists and capabilities for the desired future system.

• The states Technical Working Groups will gather inventories of hardware, software, data and systems information.

o The PST will coordinate the completion and formatting of Appendix D: Technology Inventories of available information and data, hardware, software, and systems.

• The states will upload their findings on the CoP.

6. State Implementation Visits

• States will submit their operations requirements worksheets, the business process maps and the technology inventories to the PST for review.

• The PST will then build a plan for engagement based on the received information on the current and end state. Prior to visiting each state, the PST will complete a gap analysis of the current and desired end states to identify how to increase efficiency. For example, they may suggest automating a process, or making adjustments that speed delivery and improve decision making.

• The PST will visit each state to review and assess ways to implement needed changes to the state’s system.

• The WB information will serve as the foundation for the engagement research on a state’s current capability. The research will help the PST develop its plan and follow-on implementation team visit.

• At the end of the PST visit, the state will have an information capability that can be further enhanced with additional data and information as it is made available. The team will create a road map that the states will follow to complete the development of their capability.  

7. Technical and Process Development

• PST members will continue to work with states one-on-one, on a virtual basis to fulfill the implementation plan that was created during the implementation team meeting.

• Once the states are ready to demonstrate their capability, the PST will help coordinate a virtual event that showcases their capability. Wherever possible these should be done in conjunction with exercises already planned in the state

8. State Level Demonstration, Test and Evaluation

• The PST will work with states to test their systems and evaluate if it meets their intended purposes.

• Once the states are ready to demonstrate their capability, the PST will help coordinate a virtual event to showcase this capability.

9. Regional Level Demonstration, Test and Evaluation

• To build the pilot’s regional capability, the TWG will conduct iterative tests linked to regional requirements as defined by the work groups.

• Once the state capabilities are developed, the PST will work with the TWG to demonstrate a controlled experiment for the regional capability. The PST will work with the states to test a regional capability and evaluate if it meets the intended purposes for winter storms and floods.

• Once the region is ready to demonstrate its capability, the PST will help coordinate a virtual event to showcases this capability.

• In relation to the 2010/2011 Severe Weather and Flood Season, a capstone demonstration will be conducted to simulate visualized regional information sharing during a severe weather and/or flood incident.

• The demonstration is not the final step in the process, but it will serve to show the technology’s ability to bridge the operational gaps defined in the requirements document.

• The PST will work with the TWG to keep a record of lessons learned from the development stage as this will assist in potential future pilot demonstrations.

10. After Action Conference (AAC) and After Action Report

• Once the pilot’s participants have demonstrated the ability to share information, the PST will begin discussing how to proceed, and will coordinate an event to collect best practices from the pilot.

• The second phase is considered a time to build upon the regional success. Some examples of potential Phase II activities include:

o Integrating additional incident types

o Building out the state and regional geographic participation

To support the completion of the outlined methodology there are five appendices to the WB that will assist SWGs in documenting their processes. The Appendix consists of:

• A: Checklist - Documents the activities necessary to complete the worksheet

• B: Operational Requirements Worksheet - Provides guiding questions, whose answers will help standardize the process documentation

• C: Business Process Mapping Worksheet - Provides an explanation of value and use of process maps in requirements gathering

• D: Technology Inventory Worksheets - Provides assistance for state technologists in inventorying their data layers, hardware, software, and systems

• E: PNW Requirements Gathering Points-of Contact Directory - Lists the names and contact information of state leads on requirements gathering

• F: Acronyms - Reference list

• G: Glossary - Terms that helps define important aspects of the pilot

PST will incorporate the assistance of FEMA’s ESF and OIP’s PSA to leverage their increased expertise and regional knowledge. These groups will assist by contributing information related to the regions critical infrastructure and key resource (CI/KR) protection. The PST will manage this participation by communicating with all levels of the agencies (e.g., headquarters [HQ], regional, state). HQ will present information to the regional departments who will communicate with the state and local agencies in the pilot area. After communicating their information to the PST, state and local agencies will post their pilot data on the CoP for states to access.

Planning Assumptions and Considerations

The WB incorporates the following assumptions and considerations:

• The pilots top priorities are focused on:

o Recognizing each state’s unique operational environment

o Fusing state operational requirements into regional requirements, and use regional requirements to develop technology enhancements

o Demonstrating a regional information sharing capability for preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation during severe weather and flooding on a shared platform

• Emergency management activities will be conducted according to the principles from the National Incident Management System (NIMS), and by addressing incident phases as defined in the National Response Framework (NRF).

• This WB aids in the documenting of necessary operational requirements to develop the technical aspects of Phase I of the pilot.

• OWG members will collaborate with the PST to help determine a state operational regional information sharing solution.

• By graphically mapping a states information flow, the business process maps will help states and the PST identify opportunities for improvement of specific operational processes.

• Work activities outlined in this WB are to be executed without significant interruption to ongoing state government operations. State participants have regular access to the PST to aid and assist their efforts in contributing and compiling information.

• Working Group members will provide accurate information and collaborate on addressing regional concerns with regard to steady state, pre-incident, incident, and post-incident actions related to severe weather and floods.

• State pilot participation will be based upon the states’ day-to-day operations: in the event of “real-life” incidents, pilot scheduling adjustments can be made.

Appendix

A: Checklist

B: Operational Requirements Worksheet

C: Business Process Mapping Worksheet

D: Technology Inventory Worksheets

E: PNW Requirements Gathering Points-of-Contact Directory

F: Acronyms

G: Glossary

Appendix A: Worksheet Completion Checklist

Please use the checklist as a tool to track the process of completing the WB.

□ Assemble SWG and assign appropriate members to PNW Pilot Steering and Working Groups

□ Complete WB orientation with PST

□ Complete operations requirements worksheet

□ Submit CONOPs, FOGs, checklists, and SOPs, to name a few, for completion of state’s business process mapping

□ Compile inventories of hardware, software, data layers, and systems

□ Submit draft WB to PST for formatting and technical edits

□ State approves final WB submission

Appendix B: Operational Requirements Worksheets

The worksheet questions were designed to capture how states support emergency management during a steady state, pre-incident, incident, and post-incident. To document this valuable information, please refer to any emergency management documents that you use, such as: CONOPs, SOPs, FOGs, and checklists.

As the pilot will benefit from robust worksheet information, please include any additional information to best document how your processes are executed. Be sure to mention if you track incident management by Emergency Support Function (ESF) and/or by critical infrastructure sector (CI/KR). If necessary, PST can conduct additional working group sessions with the state POC to complete and confirm input into the WB.

Worksheet (WS) Purpose

The purpose of the WS is threefold:

1) Inventory the procedures that emergency managers follow during the steady state and the three phases of an emergency

2) Document the information sharing process that emergency managers follow to accurately and completely fulfill their procedures

3) Identify the desired process for steady state, pre-incident, incident and post-incident activities

Outcomes

The desired outcome of the completed Operational Requirements Worksheet is to develop baseline state requirements that improve information sharing during steady state, pre-incident, incident, and post-incident activities within and across state boundaries.

Steady State

A. Steady State Management Procedures

• What activities do you monitor during steady state?

• Is there any interstate context during steady state?

• Provide comments or additional information.

B. Steady State Activity Management and Information Sharing

• How do you receive steady state information?

• What is the quality of that information?

• What are the strengths of this method of information exchange?

• What are the barriers or weaknesses to this method of information exchange?

• Would the above actions change in an interstate context?

• Provide comments or additional information.

C. Desired Future Procedures and Information Sharing

• What are your desired steady state procedures?

• What is the ideal information that you would like to receive during steady state?

• Provide comments or additional information.

Pre-incident Actions

A. Pre-Incident Management Procedures

• What activities trigger your pre-incident actions?

• What questions do you need answered in the case of a no-notice incident or imminent threat?

• Who do you contact for answer to these questions?

• Would the above actions change in an interstate context? If so, how?

• Provide comments or additional information.

B. Pre-Incident Management and Information Sharing

• How do you receive information?

• What is the quality of that information?

• What are the strengths of this method of information exchange?

• What are the barriers or weaknesses to this method of information exchange?

• Would the above actions change in an interstate context? If so, how?

• Provide comments or additional information.

C. Desired Future Procedures and Information Sharing

• What are your desired pre-incident procedures?

• What is the ideal information that you would like to receive prior to an incident?

• Provide comments or additional information.

Incidents

A. Incident Management Procedures

• What activities trigger you to shift from pre-incident to the incident activities?

• What questions do you need answered during an incident?

• Who do you contact for the answers to these questions?

• How would you share response based information in various incident management channels?

• How do you accomplish this in an interstate context?

• Provide comments or additional information.

B. Incident Management and Information Sharing

• How do you receive information?

• What is the quality of that information?

• What are the strengths of this method of information exchange?

• What are the barriers or weaknesses to this method of information exchange?

• How do you accomplish this in an interstate context?

• Provide comments or additional information.

C. Incident Management Phase Desired Future Procedures and Information Sharing

• What are your desired incident procedures?

• What is the ideal information that you would like to receive during an incident?

• How often should the information be updated?

• Provide comments or additional information.

Post-Incidents

A. Incident Management Procedures

• What activities trigger you to shift from incident to post-incident actions?

• What questions do you need answered during post-incident actions?

• Who do you contact for the answers to these questions?

• How do you accomplish this in an interstate context?

• Provide comments or additional information.

B. Post-Incident Management and Information Sharing

• How do you receive information?

• What is the quality of that information?

• What are the strengths of this method of information exchange?

• What are the barriers or weaknesses to this method of information exchange?

• How do you accomplish this in an interstate context?

• Provide comments or additional information.

C. Desired Future Procedures and Information Sharing

• What are your desired post-incident procedures?

• What is the ideal information that you would like to receive during post-incident actions?

• Provide comments or additional information.

Appendix C: Business Process Mapping Worksheet

Business process mapping (BPM) is mapping exactly what a business entity does: who is responsible to what standard a process will be completed; and how the success of a business process can be determined.[1] The PST will map each state’s emergency management information sharing business processes to visually represent how a state shares information during steady state, pre-incident, incident and post-incident activities.

Mapping the processes is important so the PST can assist states in identifying the gaps between their current system and their desired end state. In many cases, this will also be the first time that emergency managers and state technology professionals will see maps of how they share information within their state.

During start-up of the requirements gathering process, states should submit the following documents to PST so they can create a draft process map and initiate the process of accurately drafting the current and end states.

• Concept of Operations (CONOPS),

• Standard operating procedures (SOP),

• Field operations guides (FOG), and

• Checklists

The PST will then review the documents and create a flow chart based on the information exchange as defined in the above documents. Once the PST is finished with the current state, the PST will create a similar document to map the desired future information sharing capability defined in the requirements workbook. During the drafting process the PST will confirm with the state operations working groups that the process accurately resembles their current process. Once finished, they will submit the process maps to the implementation team to assess and make system recommendations.

WS Purpose

The purpose of this worksheet is to:

1) Clarify the value of Business Process Mapping to the requirements-gathering process

2) Assist the PST in collecting information to map the states business processes

3) Identify what documents should be submitted to PST to complete BPM

Outcomes

Each state will receive process maps of the current and desired end states based on the documents submitted to the PST.

Appendix D: Technical Inventory Worksheet

The technology inventory is a tool used to help states track the current state of their information sharing environment. These inventories enable states to document their current data layers, hardware, software, and systems in one place. Once complete, the PST can compare the inventory against the operational requirements and the process maps to analyze the gaps between each state’s current and desired end states. Armed with this information, the PST will be able to advise state TWG members on a specific technology acquisition or development strategy.

Members of the state Technology Working Group should complete the below inventories to the best of their ability. This information will improve the PST’s understanding of each state’s current information, thereby increasing the states chances of successfully realizing its future system.

The worksheets below were created to help states easily document their technology inventories. Please add as many rows as necessary to fully document your inventory. This will allow the PST to provide these same inventories in an Excel format to any state who requests one.

WS Purpose

The purpose of the worksheet is to:

• Document states current data layers, hardware, software and systems inventories

• Baseline states current information sharing capability

• Compare the current capability against the desired end state and help the PST make customized suggestions

Outcome

States will have complete inventories of their current information sharing capabilities, and will be able to identify which adjustments will most efficiently achieve their desired end state.

Inventories

Systems Inventory

|System |Agency |Use |Users |Hardware |Software |

|Example |VDEM |VEOC Crisis Management/ Local sitrep |VEOC Staff/ESF's |Dell 5T |WebEOC 7.1 |

|WebEOC | |and RFA submittal. | | | |

|Example |Chesapeake Va |Local EOC Crisis Management |Local EOC staff | | |

|WebEOC | | | | | |

|Example VIPER |VDEM |Statewide Situational Awareness |Governors Office, VEOC| |ArcGIS Server 9.4 Adv |

| | | |Staff/ESF's and Local | | |

| | | |EM's | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

Available Data Inventory

|Category |Description |Source |Data Type |Update Period |Format or URL |

|Example Earthquakes|Recent Earthquakes|USGS |KMZ |Unknown | |

|Example Fires |MODIS Active Fire |USFS |ZIP - |1 Hour | |

| |Mapping Program | |Shapefile | | |

|Example Flooding |AHPS NWS Observed |NWS |KMZ |15 Minutes |

| |River Conditions | | | |z |

|  |  |  |  |  |  |

|  |  |  |  |  |  |

|  |  |  |  |  |  |

Facilities Inventory

|Sector |Link / Description |Resource Type |Source |

|Example - Chemical |ACRES - Brownfields Properties |Downloadable Dataset |USEPA |

|Example - Communications |Emergency Alert System (EAS) |Program Contact |VDEM |

|Example - Education |Colleges & Universities |Facilities Listing |SCHEV |

|  |  |  |  |

|  |  |  |  |

|  |  |  |  |

Plans and Procedures

|Plan |Layer Name |Data Source |URL |

|Example- Radiological Emergency |RERP Locality Address Points |VDEM |Contact VDEM GIS / Radiological Planning Branch |

|Response Plan | | | |

|Example - Hazardous Materials |Regional Hazardous Materials |VDEM |Contact VDEM GIS / Technological Hazards Division |

| |Officers | | |

|Example - Flooding |Repetitive Loss Properties |VDEM |Contact VDEM GIS / Mitigation Division |

|  |  |  |  |

|  |  |  |  |

|  |  |  |  |

Hazard Data Inventory

|Hazard |Description |Source |URL |

|Example – |Global Significant Earthquake Database |NGDC | |

|Earthquakes | | | |

|Example – Flood |National Flood Hazard Layer (Combined |FEMA | |

| |DFIRMs) | | |

|Example – |Costly Events |USGS | |

|Landslides | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

Basemap Data Inventory

|Source |URL |

|Example - ESRI ArcGIS Online - Standard (Free) | |

|Services | |

|Example - 2008 National Agriculture Imagery Program | |

|(NAIP) | |

|Example - VBMP 2009 Imagery |Contact VGIN |

|  |  |

|  |  |

|  |  |

Additional Comments

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

Appendix E: PNW Requirements Gathering Points-of-Contact Directory

|Name |State/Working Group/Affiliation |Email |Phone |

|D’Arcy Morgan |Regional Working Group |D’arcy.morgan1@. |(202) 254-5848 |

|Steve Stein |Regional Working Group |Steve.stein@ |(206) 528-3340 |

|Mike O’Hare |Alaska |Mike.ohare@ |(907) 428-7066 |

|Patrick Frischmuth |Idaho |pfrischmuth@bhs. |(208) 422.3025 |

|Jens Bolstad |Montana |jbolstad@ |(406) 841-3955 |

|Steve Knecht | |sknecht@ |(406) 841-3961 |

|Ken Murphy |Oregon |kmurphy@oem.state.or.us |(503) 378-2911 |

|Ron Weaver |Washington |Ronald.weaver1@us.army.mil |(253) 512-8530 |

|Scott Behunin |Private Sector-CI/KR |Scott.behunin@ |(801) 258-5274 |

Appendix F: Acronyms

|CCI |Command, Control and Interoperability |

|CI/KR |Critical Infrastructure/ Key Resources |

|CIO |Chief Information Officer |

|CONOPS |Concept of Operations |

|CoP |Community of Practice |

|DHS |Department of Homeland Security |

|ESF |Emergency Support Function |

|ESG |Executive Steering Group |

|EOC |Emergency Operations Center |

|FEMA |Federal Emergency Management Administration |

|FOG |Field Operation Guide |

|GIS |Geographic Information System |

|IOC |Initial Operating Procedure |

|NIMS |National Incident Management System |

|NGO |Non-Governmental Organization |

|NRF |National Response Framework |

|OIP |Office of Infrastructure Protection |

|OWG |Operational Working Group |

|PNNL |Pacific Northwest National Laboratory |

|POC |Point-of-Contact |

|PSA |Protective Security Advisors |

|PST |Pilot Support Team |

|R-Tech |First Responders Technology |

|RSG |Regional Steering Group |

|S&T |Science and Technology |

|SE ROPP |Southeast Regional Operation Pilot Program |

|SOP |Standard Operating Procedures |

|SWG |State Working Group |

|TWG |Technical Working Group |

|UASI |Urban Area Security Initiative |

|vUSA |Virtual USA |

|WB |Workbook |

|WS |Worksheet |

Appendix G: Glossary

|Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) |The FAQs sheet provides a list of frequently asked questions pertaining to a specific program, along |

|Sheet |with answers as they are developed and approved by CCI. The sheet is a support document for internal |

| |use and will not be distributed or made public. |

|Incident |Activation: A major incident occurs or is imminent.  Response processes are put into place, and |

| |resources are poised to go into Incident Response. |

| |Response:  Resources act upon pre-identified surge capabilities. (Other more expanded definitions are |

| |located in FEMA material) |

| |Recovery: Focus shifts to short and long-term recovery actions with a focus on restoration. |

|Incident Management |Refers to how incidents are managed across all homeland security activities, including prevention, |

| |protection, response, and recovery. |

|Infrastructure Liaison |Individual assigned by the DHS Security Office of Infrastructure Protection who advises the Unified |

| |Coordination Group on regionally or nationally significant infrastructure and key resources issues. |

|Mitigation[2] |Activities that provide a critical foundation in the effort to reduce loss of life and property from |

| |natural and/or manmade disasters. These activities avoid or lessen the impact of a disaster and |

| |provide value to the public by creating safer communities. Mitigation seeks to fix the cycle of |

| |disaster damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage. In most cases, these activities or actions, in |

| |most cases, will have a long-term sustained effect. |

|Pilot Updates |These are contained in a fact sheet to brief participants on the pilot accomplishments to date. The |

| |sheet will include region wide information and can be used to keep stakeholders abreast of the pilot’s |

| |current status. |

|Post-Incident |Demobilization: Return to steady state. |

| | |

| |After Action Reporting (AAR): Review plans, processes, and actions during the incident and consolidate |

| |issues in an AAR.  The AAR is used for process improvements.  It could also be used as a performance |

| |assessment tool, as future incidents are monitored to see whether progress has been made. |

|Pre-Incident |Steady State: Refers to operational periods where there are no incidents or threats significant enough |

| |to activate resources (this is highly scalable depending on the jurisdiction or agency, and whether it |

| |is at the local, state or Federal level).  During the steady state the focus is on monitoring and |

| |providing situational awareness through constant/consistent reporting. |

| | |

| |Transition steady state to increased monitoring: As events and threats require more detailed |

| |situational awareness (eg., storms show flood potential, forest fires impact populated areas etc). |

|Preparedness[3] |Actions that involve a combination of planning, resources, training, exercising, and organizing to |

| |build, sustain, and improve operational capabilities. Preparedness is the process of identifying the |

| |personnel, training, and equipment needed for a wide range of potential incidents, and developing |

| |jurisdiction-specific plans for delivering capabilities when needed for an incident. |

|Project Fact Sheet |A project fact sheet is a one-page overview of the vUSA, including background, goals, “elevator |

| |speech,” and additional relevant sections. |

|Project Overview Brief |A project overview brief is a PowerPoint presentation or series of slides that provide an overview of |

| |the project with graphics. This presentation may then be included in related state pilot decks to |

| |support related speaking opportunities. |

|Recovery[4] |The development, coordination, and execution of service- and site-restoration plans; the reconstitution|

| |of government operations and services; individual, private-sector, NGO, and public assistance programs |

| |to provide housing and to promote restoration; long-term care and treatment of affected persons; |

| |additional measures for social, political, environmental, and economic restoration; evaluation of the |

| |incident to identify lessons learned; post-incident reporting; and the development of initiatives to |

| |mitigate the effects of future incidents. |

|Response[5] |Immediate actions to save lives, protect property and the environment, and meet basic human needs. |

| |Response also includes the execution of emergency plans and actions to support short-term recovery. |

|Steady State |Operational periods when there are no incidents or threats significant enough to activate emergency |

| |operations (this is highly scalable depending on jurisdiction or agency, and whether it’s at the local,|

| |state or Federal level).  During steady state the focus is on monitoring and providing situational |

| |awareness through constant consistent reporting. |

[pic]

-----------------------

[1] , Feb 24, 2010

[2] National Response Framework, , 2/26/2010

[3] National Response Framework, , 2/26/2010

[4] National Response Framework, , 2/26/2010

[5] Ibid 4

-----------------------

Figure 1

PST

Complete WB

Figure 2

Business Process Maps

Tech Inventory

State Visit

ID SWG

AK SWG

WA SWG

OWG

TWG

Ops Worksheet

Approve WB

Complete Orientation

Assemble SWG

MT SWG

OR SWG

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download