Reply to the following two discussion posts, one page each. These are direct replies/responses to the discussion posts on the crisis action incident they wrote about. Original discussion post instructions are at the bottom for reference.
Discuss your postings. What was similar and what was different regarding your perspective? What can be added, or what do you disagree with? Provide responses that enhance the author’s original posting and thought process. Be sure everyone has at least one response. Remember if you use sources, you must cite them in APA.
1. Resnick Discussion
The Southern area of the United States had always been used to storms making landfall and causing damage and destruction, but people generally understood the threats and how to prepare and recover from those storms that seemed like commonplace. That was until one Hurricane that changed everything for those citizens living inside of the City of New Orleans in 2005. Hurricane Katrina was predicted to make landfall directly into the city. Government officials and those in charge of the emergency management had plans and procedures for dealing with hurricanes, even ones that would make landfall over the city at a strong category 4 or 5 storm, which was the strongest on the scale of hurricanes. They had courses of action that they felt they could put in place, and handle whatever may come their way for the city and the citizens of the city.
In the military, we generally make multiple courses of action in preparation for an exercise or operation, and that should have happened in this case. One of the courses of action should have been the absolute worst-case scenario. However, that scenario either wasn’t actually the worst case, or it was put lower in priority than another course of action. The realization that the levees would totally fail, and floodwaters would inundate the city like never before seen was not something that initially wrapped around the minds of those planning the days before the hurricane. Once the levees failed and everyone realized that this was an entirely different kind of disaster, and a complex emergency on a scale the city had never seen, it was clear that additional resources were needed, and the scramble was on to get help from state, and federal entities. Even up to the federal level, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and other agencies just did not have the standardization and common operating picture that would have made a clear unified effort in the response to this disaster. Instead, there were logistical nightmares, communication dead ends, and people who thought they’d just ride out the storm, who now need to be rescued from their rooftops and in the meantime, are starving and dehydrating. Some of those people decided to make their way to the superdome and other places where they expected to find refuge and drinking water along with food and medical care. However, once they’d arrived the realization hit that there was no more water, food, or care to be given because supplies ran out and people were again stranded, waiting on logistical supplies and life giving needs like food and water that, if the worst case scenario course of action were followed, should have in theory allowed resources to be more strategically staged so that there was not such a large logistical and lifesaving gap.
As a person who was not directly involved in this disaster, but remembering vividly the coverage of it all, I cannot make assumptions on the local fire and rescue plans and operations during the disaster, but for sure, those who make policy, and those in the city government needed to better understand the crisis they could face if the levees broke, which they did. The hurricane could not have been avoided, but the aftermath, pain, and suffering felt by hundreds of thousands could have been less severe had there been a better plan put into place.
United States. Congress. House. Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for, & Response to Hurricane Katrina. (2006). A failure of initiative: Final report of the select bipartisan committee to investigate the preparation for and response to Hurricane Katrina (Vol. 109, No. 377). US Government Printing Office.
2. Beneux Discussion
About a year ago, there was an active shooter event at the local airport. At the time I was acting as the security consultant for the airport security division and happened to be at work that day. As the story goes, the individual had been pulled over by police on the nearby freeway, but he didn’t comply with directions given and resisted any interaction with police officers. He then tried to escape arrest by fleeing the scene. He ran his car up the free way flyover bridges and stopped at the top where he chose to get out of his car and threaten to jump. After a short time, the individual got back in the car and drove the wrong way down an on ramp which led to the exit lanes of the departure area of the airport. He then stopped his car, got out and started shooting at everyone in the area. most of the civilians in the area fled the scene without major injury. One person got hit in the lower leg with a ricochet bullet. A local police officer that was on duty at the time at the airport, engaged the individual but was unable to hit him. The individual then turned the gun on himself ending the danger.
My role; when the call came out over the radio of shots fired and active shooter, I responded with the security division to assist. With military training and this not being my first active shooter event, I did not hesitate to get involved. Once on scene, I took a small crew of security officers to evacuate and secure the passengers from the terminals. Then, once secured, and the notification that the individual was no longer a threat, we shifted into recovery mode. The problem was, that in all the confusion and chaos of passengers running, the security of the terminals and flights had been compromised. The time line seemed to be moving slowly for the basic roles and tasks that need to be accomplished so I moved to the command area to assess the situation. Here I learned quickly that there was a major flaw with the airport active shooter program. With multiple agencies in charge of their own areas, to include the FBI now on scene, I realized that everyone had an independent active shooter plan and all the departments were working independently. No communication between departments was happening because everyone assumed someone else was going to make the call on what to do next.
My resolve; I put myself into a central location and started having information between departments come to me so I could communicate the status and steps to the other departments and agencies. It became a situation where everyone wanted to be in charge but didn’t want to take directions from other areas. So in a sense, I became the operator switchboard controlling the flow of information between agencies. This way I was able to hold the passengers on the planes that needed to deplane until I could get TSA to clear the area and secure the entry portals. Then I had Police K-9 sweep the terminal and place it back into secured state. Once the plane passengers were removed and clear, then we can start processing passengers through the TSA checkpoint. I used security officers and TSA agents to control the crowd surge when the TSA checkpoint reopened this way we did not overload the metal detectors or create an unsecured state. Once all the traffic was cleared, I called for a member of each agency to meet for a debrief and action review.
This is where I addressed the issue of multiple active shooter plans running simultaneously and the breakdown of communication. Since then, I helped the airport build a multiple agency active shooter plan and crisis communication plan. The funny part was, that it wasn’t until the end of the meeting that someone asked who I was. It amazes me how easy it is to take control of a situation, even as a consultant, if you have a sound plan and strong communication skills. I met with TSA after the new plans were in place and reinforced the fact that just because you have a plan, it doesn’t mean it is a good plan unless it is tested, updated, and trained. The local airport has since built up a strong process for acting in a crisis and now have used some of the crowd control techniques I showed them to improve check in speed of passengers during normal operations.
Original Post Instructions:
Give an example of a crisis you’ve been involved in, observed, or read about. How well did leadership manage and communicate during the situation? Did the organization achieve closure, and if so, how quickly and effectively? In your assessment, knowing what you know now, did they consider everything that should have been considered?
