Stanford Emergency Management

All DOC Training Meeting

October 25, 2011

Agenda• Mass Notification system improvement project

• AlertSU system test results

• Satellite phone communications

• DOC Incident Planning process review

• FEMA Grant update

• DOC Expectations project  

• FEMA L-363 Course offering

2 of 29

Objectives• To specify university requirements for a mobile and web-

based check-in capability, including an administrative system to collect information to assist with response during an emergency

• To identify the most feasible options to provide this capability

• To recommend the best option for Stanford crisis management using a check-in capability, including high-level information concerning: timeline with phased deliverables, approximate costs, implementation strategy and plan, other pertinent information, as necessary

Vendors considered

Vendors

Blackboard Connect

Cassidian

GlobalAlert Link

HipLink & IntelliGuard

Mir3

MissionMode

Rave

Regroup

SendWordNow

VoloRecovery

WARN

xMatters

Finalist vendors

All three are proven vendors in the emergency notification industry, although MissionMode is not currently in the higher education sector.

Evaluation participants• Aaron Buzay, Res Ed• Bernadette Burnes-Line, Hospital• Bob Wheeler, LBRE • Brandon Bond, Hospital• Elaine Ray, University Communications• Elise McMath, EH&S• Keith Perry, EH&S• Lance Lougee, SLAC• Larry Gibbs, EH&S• Lee Connor, Student Affairs• Mark Mannia, DPS• Susie Claxton, Student Housing• Thomas Walters, R&DE• Tim Flood• Tim Torgenrud, ITS

• Agile• Gave the most thought to our RFP• Developed mock-up of their ideas of what we wanted• Clearly grasp our vision• Willing to engage in long-term development process with Stanford• Want to emerge from the pack with a superior product• Medium price – came down substantially in price• Therefore, desires a 5-year contract.

•Mike Mitchell of MissionMode: “We've tried to structure this so that Stanford remains a valuable and influential MissionMode customer far beyond the completion of our short-term development plans.”

RECOMMENDATIONWe attempted to make our choice as the best return on our

investment while enabling us to realize Stanford’s vision.

Comparison Bb Connect & MissionMode

Performs basic multi-modal notification

Rudimentary check-in features – check-in is phone only

Slow product release cycle Emergency is not primary

product focus No glimpse into their product

roadmap Little real results in working with

us

Performs more advanced multi-modal notification

Multi-modal check-in features, no app yet

Have incident management tool & collaboration features

Rapid product release cycle Will work on rapid timeline Willing to obligate themselves to

deliver our functionality within 90 days

Emergency is primary focus Willing to incorporate features we are

requesting into their base product

Bb Connect MissionMode

THREE CHALLENGING EFFORTS

System

Organization

Communication

The Project

Notification Emergency Check-In Common Operating Picture Use MDM to push to smart devices

Roles, responsibilities, authorities Training & practice Issue identification & resolution

Setting the right expectation Framing the necessity

Timeline Subject to Procurement, negotiation, & planning with MissionMode;

however … Bb Connect license expires Dec 12 (with 30-day notice) Must move quickly General framework can be established based on conversation, as follows:

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun …

Purchase

Phase 1*

Sep

Phases 2+: Design, Develop, Implement (in Phases)

Common Operating Picture

Organize

Check-In

*Phase 1 includes setup, configuration, replacement of Bb Connect for notification

Integrate with iStanford & MDM

AlertSU System Test Results

11 of 29

AlertSU Test Results

• Simultaneous activation of mass notification system and outdoor warning system, including websites, hotlines, radio, and cable system– Test began at 12:05 PM

• Mass Notification system test results

12 of 29

13 of 29

14 of 29

15 of 29

67

68

7461

69

6163

84

74

6965

67

SATELLITE PHONE OPTIONS

16 of 29

New ATT Sat Phone

• Previous model drawbacks– High purchase price– Monthly fee– Never use it

• New model– High purchase price– Monthly fee– Fully functional daily use ATT phone comparable in

size, weight and functionality to a regular phone.

17 of 29

Incident Planning Process

Incident Management

• We opened our DOC, what do we do now?

• When do you need to formalize the Planning process?– The incident will be prolonged (more than one

operational period)– Two or more groups are responding to the event– You have several Command positions activated

19 of 29

20 of 29

Who Does What?

IncidentCommander

OperationsSection

PlanningSection

LogisticsSection

Finance/AdminSection

Command: Develops incident objectives.Ensures Safety Analysis is completed. Approves IAP.

Operations: Establishes strategies and tactics to meet incident objectives.

Planning: Provides status reports, manages the planning process, and produces the IAP.

Finance/Admin: Conducts any needed cost analyses.

Logistics: Identifies the logistics requirements to support the tactics.

21 of 29

Incident/Event

Notifications

Initial Response& Assessment

Incident BriefUsing ICS-201

Initial IC/UCMeeting

TacticsMeeting

Preparing forthe PlanningMeeting

PlanningMeeting

Execute Plan& AssessProgress

New OpsPeriod Begins

IAP Prep &Approval

OperationsBriefing

Command &General StaffMeeting

Preparingfor theTacticsMeeting

Initi

al R

espo

nse

IC/UCDevelop/UpdateObjectivesMeeting

The Start of Each Planning Cycle

Planning for each operational period begins with the Incident Commander or Unified Command developing/ updating incident objectives.

Objectives are based on the continued assessment of the situation and the progress made.

Initi

al R

espo

nse

The Planning P

22 of 29

Effective Objectives

• S - Specific• M - Measurable• A - Attainable• R - Realistic• T - Time sensitive

23 of 29

24 of 29

Sample Strategy and Tactics

Tactics: Use truck-mounted pumps working from the road into spillway, and portable pumps on the east side discharging into Murkey Creek.

Strategy #1: Reduce/divert inflow.

Strategy #2: Release water from spillways.

Selected Strategy: Pump water from reservoir.

Resources: 5 crews with (3) 1,500-gpm truck-mounted pumps & (2) 500-gpm portable pumps

Objective: Reduce reservoir level to 35 feet by 0800 on 2/10.

FEMA Grant Project• Project 1

– Risk Assessment – Campus Plan Revisions– Table Top exercises

• Project 2– Emergency Management

Training • Target 200 courses• Current total 200+ completed

• Project 3– Medical response

• Project 4– Threat Assessment

• DOCs reporting completed training– Athletics, Business Affairs, DPS,

EHS, Engineering, GSB, H&S, IT Services, LBRE, R&DE, School of Medicine, SULAIR, Student Affairs

• DOCs who have not reported completed training– Alumni & Development Offices,

Dean of Research, Hoover Institution, Law School, President & Provost Offices, School of Earth, Sciences, School of Education, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford Campus Residential Leaseholders, Stanford Management Company, Vaden Health Center

25 of 29

DOC EXPECTATIONS PROJECT

26 of 29

DOC Expectations ProjectDOCs who have updated their pages• EHS• LB&RE• School of Earth Sciences• School of Humanities and Sciences• School of Medicine

DOCs who have not updated their pages• Department of Public Safety• ITS• R&DE• Vaden• Alumni & Development• Business Affairs• Dean of Research• GSB• Hoover• Law School• Pres/Provost Office• School of Education• School of Engineering• SLAC• SCRL• Stanford Management Company• Student Affairs• University Libraries

27 of 29

FEMA L-363 COURSE

28 of 29

L-363 Course

• Emergency Management for Higher Education– December 6, 7, 8– Mission College– Free!

29 of 29

Questions?

30 of 30