Nationwide Application of the Incident Command System Standardization is the Key.

In response to the devastating 1970 brushfire season in Southern California, a consortium of local, state, and federal fire agencies developed the Incident Command System (ICS). The consortium, called FIRESCOPE, [1] sought to design a system to facilitate the smooth interface of multiple agencies to respond effectively to sudden overwhelming threats.

Neither the birth of ICS among Southern California's wildland fire agencies nor its slow adoption by law enforcement is surprising. Fire agencies in Southern California face unique challenges every summer when hot, dry Santa Ana winds make suppression of vegetation fires in foothill communities nearly impossible, with frequent loss of lives and millions of dollars in property. Hence, it proves natural that a highly efficient interagency emergency response system evolved among these agencies.

ICS existed for nearly 10 years before the law enforcement community began to study and embrace the concept. [2] Some local agencies around the country, including both law enforcement and fire, discovered ICS through their interaction with the U.S. Forest Service, which had been one of the original FIRESCOPE participants and played a major role in the development of ICS. [3] Eventually, the National Interagency Incident Management System (NIIMS) adopted the FIRESCOPE ICS concept. [4] It has taken hold in many fire agencies coast-to-coast, as well as in a few nonfire disciplines, most notably the U.S. Coast Guard. [5] Adoption of ICS continues to spread. In fact, the National Fire Academy, administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, teaches the concept and both the National Fire Protection Association and the National Wildfire Coordinating Group employ ICS. In the states of California [6] and New York, [7] laws mandate its use by all disciplines of local and state emergency response agencies.

Fortunately, law enforcement generally does not face emergencies of such enormous scale; police agencies seldom must provide such extensive mutual aid to each other. As a result, many law enforcement managers understandably view their emergency response systems, often developed in isolation from one another, as effective.

However, the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics and subsequent events, both planned and spontaneous, stimulated progressive law enforcement leaders to search for more efficient ways to integrate not only allied police agencies but also other disciplines, such as fire and emergency medical services, at the scene of a crisis. While an individual agency's protocols and procedures may have worked well for years in a vacuum, the need for some standardization quickly becomes apparent when agencies must integrate their resources rapidly during the response to a major incident. It is no longer sufficient for an agency to develop and maintain a locally successful emergency response plan; such plans also must be compatible with those of surrounding jurisdictions and other disciplines, as well.

This became tragically apparent one hot, windy afternoon in Oakland, California, in 1991. In a few hours, the Tunnel Fire in the East Bay Hills destroyed 3,000 homes and took the lives of a police officer, a firefighter, and 25 civilians. To call the Tunnel Fire chaotic is, at best, an understatement. The Oakland Fire Department was overrun immediately by this rapidly escalating vegetation fire. Responding mutual aid resources became overwhelmed, as well.

Activation of the statewide Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System brought in hundreds of additional fire engines and other fire fighting resources to assist, but the raging fire also routed many of these units. The losses proved staggering. The development of a cohesive management organization was hours behind the rapidly expanding disaster. Fire units, law enforcement agencies, municipal water department personnel, emergency medical services, and other public safety agencies could not coordinate their efforts in time to significantly limit the destruction.

The 1991 Oakland disaster was not just a fire problem. Law enforcement, public works and utilities, the National Guard, health and safety services, and relief agencies encountered crushing difficulties. None of these organizations shared a common organizational system or compatible command structure. The Tunnel Fire pointed out the need for a common emergency management system throughout local and state government for use by all agencies with a first-responder role associated with public safety. As a result, in 1993, California enacted legislation establishing the Standardized Emergency Management System and mandating the use of FIRESCOPE (NIIMS) ICS for disaster management. [8]

THE CASE FOR NATIONAL STANDARDIZATION

As the rapid movement of large numbers of emergency response resources around the country becomes more common, a nationally standardized interdisciplinary emergency management system has become highly desirable. In fact, the possibility that terrorists might unleash weapons of mass destruction on American soil makes the necessity of quickly and efficiently integrating multidisciplinary resources from local, state, and federal agencies unprecedented. Emergency planners across the nation must decide not only which system to use as the standard, but also how much deviation from that standard is acceptable.

Clearly, law enforcement leaders must be able to modify any management system to accommodate local operational and political realities. However, to the extent that any standard system changes significantly, it loses its value as a tool to integrate dissimilar agencies with minimal confusion and uncertainty.

In practice, some agencies have made a wide range of modifications, yet retained the Incident Command System title. In truth, the organizational charts of some examples resemble the original FIRESCOPE model in title alone. Furthermore, problems and conflicts during some incidents indicate that fundamental ICS management concepts either are missing or not functioning as designed. Therefore, to avoid such difficulties, agencies should follow the basic ICS design.

ICS BASIC MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS

Eight basic management concepts--modular organization, unified command, manageable span-of-control, common terminology, consolidated action plans, comprehensive resource management, integrated communications, and predesignated incident facilities--contribute to the success of the Incident Command System. [9] When effectively applied in concert with each other, these concepts provide the basis for an effective and coordinated response to an emergency.

Modular Organization

ICS divides organizational responsibilities into five functions: command, operations, planning, logistics, and finance/administration, with each section subdivided to address various specific tasks. This basic organizational framework remains integral to ICS. Emergency response plans that do not incorporate this standardized five-part organization are not ICS, regardless of their titles.

The modular building blocks of ICS allow the organization to expand rapidly as the response to an incident escalates and to shrink as the crisis subsides. Only necessary elements of the ICS organization are actually staffed, depending on the nature and scope of the incident. Only in the largest and most complex operations would the full ICS organization be staffed.

Unified Command

In this day and age, few large emergencies involve only one agency; most are multidisciplinary and even multijurisdictional. The built-in ability for multiple agencies to coordinate their efforts for the common good while maintaining their autonomy, authority, and jurisdiction represents one of the most appealing aspects of ICS.

Under the unified command concept, each organization that has legal jurisdiction over a significant portion of an incident can participate in the command structure. ICS provides a separate interface for assisting or mutual-aid agencies that have no legal responsibility. Therefore, representation in a unified command depends on the location of the incident (whose turf is involved) and the nature of the incident (which disciplines are necessary to resolve the problem).

Unified command functions by collocating the leaders of these agencies at a single incident command post where they discuss objectives, select strategies, plan operations, and make the most efficient use of available resources. This is accomplished by consensus, not by a committee process. In other words, unified command participants must bring to the table a willingness to cooperate; they do not have to agree on every detail, but they must be willing to acknowledge each other's authority, communicate freely, consider each other's goals and priorities, and assist each other to the fullest extent possible.

Manageable Span-of-control

Key to the proper application of modular organization, this concept functions as a way to avoid overwhelming any one individual with so much responsibility that effectiveness suffers. Established ICS guidelines for span-of-control range from 1:3 to 1:7, with 1:5 being the norm. As the organization develops for any given incident, managers constantly must apply this concept by dividing responsibilities and assigning additional personnel as necessary to maintain an efficiently supervised organization. Similarly, as an event winds down, managers must consolidate responsibility and eliminate positions as they become unnecessary, promptly demobilizing parts of the organization no longer needed.

Common Terminology

The ability to communicate effectively with each other proves fundamental to any successful operation. The necessity of working with unfamiliar people and organizations combined with the stress of an unexpected emergency strains effective communication. ICS mitigates this problem by providing certain common definitions of organizational functions, resources, and facilities. Likewise, personnel must communicate in "clear text," eliminating codes, acronyms, and other jargon not universally understood.

Consolidated Action Plans

Every incident requires some sort of an action plan. Obviously, complex events of long duration require more elaborate planning. ICS provides a structured planning process in which managers develop lists of both tactical objectives and available resources, prioritize the objectives, and then assign resources to accomplish each objective in order of priority. When available resources become exhausted, managers must decide to either order additional resources or allow low priority objectives to wait. Consolidated action planning considers not just the tactical objectives but the logistical needs of the ICS organization, as well. In a unified command, objectives and strategies incorporated in the action plan should adequately address the policies and priorities of each agency sharing legal jurisdiction over the incident.

Comprehensive Resource Management

Efficient resource management stands as a hallmark of ICS. This is accomplished by employing standardized terms and definitions (common terminology), using a mandatory initial check-in procedure, tracking the status of each resource, and promptly reporting changes in resource status. The staff tracks the status of each resource after initial check-in and logs it as either "assigned" (already assigned a task), "available" (ready and waiting for an assignment), or "out of service" (not assigned and not available, such as a vehicle that needs repair or personnel who must rest). Because wasted time represents a major frustration for emergency workers, the ability to accurately assess what resources are available and put them to work without delay constitute a major benefit of ICS. While many organizations may do this well, standardization of the process will facilitate interagency coordination when an emergency arises.

Integrated Communications

More than any other ICS management concept, integrated communications requires prior planning. Coordination of frequency-sharing agreements, acquisition of compatible radio hardware, and installation of extra telephone lines and emergency generators represent just some of the steps that agencies may have to take to accomplish key inter- and intraorganizational communication during an emergency.

Predesignated Incident Facilities

This concept involves identifying locations and facilities before disaster strikes that agencies can use for many of the standardized ICS organizational functions. Common ICS terminology defines such incident facilities as an incident command post, incident base, staging areas, helibases, and other locations. If necessary, agencies must establish agreements to use convenient buildings, as well as determine methods of contacting responsible parties, obtaining keys, and even positioning supplies, prior to an actual critical incident.

THE GROWING USE OF ICS

Largely as a result of its adoption by the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, ICS has proven successful during incidents as diverse as wildland fires, floods, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, hazardous materials incidents, multicasualty accidents, and airplane crashes. Agencies also have employed ICS for the successful resolution of numerous planned events, such as political conventions, championship professional sports events, and visiting dignitaries.

INTERFACING WITH NONUSERS

The system retains its usefulness, even when working with agencies that have not embraced ICS. For example, contingency plans for response to a terrorist incident in California involve the immediate assimilation of the ranking on-scene FBI official into the unified command process. Although the FBI represents the lead federal agency during the crisis phase of the response, [10] local agencies still must respond effectively with local resources, likely unassisted, for the first crucial hours. Nonetheless, agencies should include FBI supervisors in the unified command as early as possible, primarily due to the probability of federal adjudication of such cases.

Once significant FBI resources begin to arrive and the FBI establishes a command post (historically dividing the FBI's response into command, operations, and support groups), [11] coordination with the local agencies incident command post would include collocation and exchanging counterparts in critical positions. In this way, local and state agencies continue to employ employies while accommodating the FBI's traditional command post and joint operations center structure. [12] Agencies should seek to develop similar arrangements with other federal agencies that do not use ICS yet, such as the National Transportation Safety Board during the response to transportation accidents.

CONCLUSION

Terrorist attacks, transportation accidents, natural disasters, and political and sporting events bring unseen burdens to public safety agencies. These incidents can cause agencies to flounder or succeed based on the amount of preparedness and cooperation among the various entities called upon to deal with such crises. For over 30 years, many emergency response agencies have turned to the Incident Command System to help them establish a cooperative effort that can handle critical situations. However, some agencies have found that the systems they developed did not match those created by allied agencies, even though the systems originated from the same ICS concept.

With the need for the ability to integrate multidisciplinary resources from local, state, and federal agencies increasing, emergency response planners must consider using a standard system and encouraging as little deviation from that standard as possible. While local agencies must have the ability to modify the system to meet their individual needs, they also must understand the importance of minimizing these changes to ensure compatibility with other organizations. Agencies must work together to ensure that their ability to successfully integrate their emergency response systems remains as certain as their commitment to the safety of the American public and their personnel who must face the dangers of a sudden threat.

Deputy Chief Cardwell commands the Specialized Operations Bureau of the San Bernardino County, California, Sheriff's Department.

Deputy Chief Cooney oversees operations for the Fire and Rescue Branch of the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services in Sacramento.

Endnotes

(1.) FIRESCOPE (Fire Fighting Resources of California Organized for Potential Emergencies) is a cooperative effort involving all agencies with fire fighting responsibilities in California; available from http://firescope.oes.ca.gov/; accessed June 27, 2000.

(2.) Jerome C. Ringhofer, Technology Transfer: Law Enforcement Application of the Incident Command System (Sacramento, CA: Commission of Peace Officer Standards and Training, Command College, 1986).

(3.) Ibid.

(4.) National Interagency Incident Management System--Information and Guides (Boise, ID: Boise Interagency Fire Center, 1983), Executive Summary, 1.

(5.) Incident Command System (USCG COMDTINST 16471.1, 1996); and Incident Command System (USCG COMDTJNST 3120.14, 1998).

(6.) California Government Code [sections] 8607.

(7.) Establishing a Management System for Emergency Response (New York, NY: Governor's Executive Order No. 26, 1996); available from http://www.nysemo.state.ny.us/ics/exorder.htm; accessed June 30, 2000.

(8.) Senate Bill 1841, leading to California Government Code [sections]8607.

(9.) Law Enforcement Incident Command System (LEICS) Field Operations Guide (San Bernardino, CA: San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, 1986), Section I, 7-

(10.) United States Policy on Counterterrorism (Washington, DC: Presidential Decision Directive 39, 1995).

(11.) Weapons of Mass Destruction Incident Contingency Plan (WMDICP) (Washington, DC: Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 1998).

(12.) Local Planning Guidance on Terrorism Response (Sacramento, CA: Governor's Office of Emergency Services, 1998). For additional information, see Robert A. Martin, "The Joint Terrorism Task Force: A Concept That Works," FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, March 1999, 23-27.

(13.) Law Enforcement Guide for Emergency Operations (Sacramento, CA: Governor's Office of Emergency Services, 1998).

Where to Find Reference Material

Agencies searching for ICS reference material must use caution to solicit from sources that have not altered the system substantially. Sources for bona fide FIRESCOPE/NIJMS ICS manuals, forms, and training supplies include the FIRESCOPE office located in Riverside, California, (http://firescope.oes.ca.gov/); the National Fire Academy in Emmitsburg, Maryland, (http://www.usfa.fema.gov/nfa/); and the National Wildfire Coordinating Group in Boise, Idaho, (http://www.nwcg.gov). Also, the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services publishes a law enforcement adaptation of FIRESCOPE ICS. [13]