View the Tidal Basin EOP & EOC Approaches brochure to learn how we help jurisdictions design emergency plans and operational structures for resilience.
®
Government Support Services
Emergency Operations Plans and Emergency Operations Centers
Preparedness
Traditional Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) Format The Basic Plan contains broad, overarching information. This typically includes a description of expected hazards, basic agency roles and responsibilities, and plan implementation and maintenance. • Functional Annexes document the methods, procedures, and actions of critical functions during emergency operations. Examples include Mass Care and Sheltering Operations Annex, Communications Annex, and Public Information Annex. • Hazard-Specific Appendices focus on response strategies for specific hazards. Examples include Civil Unrest Appendix, Extreme Temperatures Appendix, and Hazardous Materials Spill Appendix. Emergency Support Function (ESF) Format The ESF Format is used in the National Response Framework to delineate federal response activities, and includes the following sections: the Basic Plan, Appendices, ESF Annexes, Support Annexes, and Incident Annexes. • The Basic Plan provides an overview of the jurisdiction’s emergency management system, and outlines the ESF’s activated during emergencies by detailing hazards, capabilities, needs, and demands. • Appendices contain relevant information not addressed in the Basic Plan, such as lists of terms and definitions, guidelines for revision, and forms.
• ESF Annexes delineate the ESF coordinator and any primary and support agencies. The ESF Annex describes mission assignments for each emergency phase and tasks to accomplish them. • Support Annexes describe multijurisdictional coordination. • Incident Annexes describe specific details for particular incident types, addressing relevant policies, concept of operations, and responsibilities. Agency/Department-Focused Format The Agency/Department-Focused Format describes tasks for each department or agency in separate sections. • The Basic Plan contains the overview of the jurisdiction’s abilities to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from emergencies. It summarizes tasks and defines how the plan is developed and updated. • The Lead Agency section outlines the emergency functions completed by individual response units. • The Support Agency section outlines the emergency functions completed by other agencies or community partners. • The Hazard-Specific Procedures section addresses the preparedness, response, and recovery strategies for each department.
Response
Recovery
Mitigation
Be stronger than before
tidalbasingroup.com
Common approaches Emergency Operations Centers (EOC)
Incident Command System (ICS) EOC Structure Many jurisdictions configure EOCs using the standard ICS structure. This approach aligns well with the on-scene incident organization, and titles in the standard ICS structure can be modified. There is no requirement for EOCs to organize using this approach.
EOC Director
Public Information Officer
Operations Coordination Section
Planning Coordination Section
Logistics Coordination Section
Finance/Administration Coordination Section
Incident Support Model (ISM) Structure This approach focuses on the most common EOC functions in a jurisdiction. This approach can be successful for jurisdictions with little operational capacity or jurisdiction, as it focuses on “support.”
EOC Manager
Officers, Liaisons and Advisors
Situational Awareness Section
Planning Support Section
Resources Support Section
Center Support Section
Departmental EOC Structure This approach organizes around existing department, agency, or business functions. This is a common approach in private sector EOCs.
Emergency Manager
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Public Works
Department of Public Safety
Department of Administration
Department of Education
Emergency Support Function (ESF) Structure This structure is centered around the federal Emergency Support Functions (ESFs). This approach is common in state EOCs, or within jurisdictions with large populations or complex response factors. Some EOCs will modify the ESF format, creating a hybrid ESF structure.
Regional Response Coordination Center FEMA Region X
RRCC Director Deputy Director
Admin Asst/Special Asst Congressional Liaison External Affairs ESF 15
Defense Coordinating Officer
Operations
Planning
Logistics
Finance/Admin
Emergency Services Branch – ESF 4, 8, 9, 10, 13
Comptroller/ Funds Control
Coordination Planning Unit – ESF 2, 7
Situation Status Unit ESF 15
Procurement Unit ESF 7
Resource/Demob Unit ESF 7
Resources Management Unit – ESF 2, 7
Individual Assistance Branch – ESF 6, 11, 14
Documentation Unit Reports Officer
Supply Unit ESF 2, 7
Public Assistance Branch ESF 1, 2, 3, 12, 14
Human Resource Unit
Information Technology Unit – ESF 2
Geo-Spatial Unit
Defense Coordinating Unit
Mitigation
tidalbasingroup.com
®
Which EOP or EOC works best?
EOP and EOC formats do not need to be aligned. For example, many jurisdictions go with a traditional EOP format but include ESFs into their EOC structure. Also, federal guidance identifies types of information that should be included in an EOP, and functions that should be performed by an EOC, but does not recommend one over another. Choosing the format for your jurisdiction’s Emergency Operations Plan and structure for the Emergency Operation Center can seem a bit overwhelming, but it doesn’t need to be. Every jurisdiction is unique; contact us to discuss your community’s unique needs.
For more information on our program support, visit our website.
EOP Formats
tidalbasingroup.com
Format
Pros
Cons
Most jurisdictions have used this format in the past so they are familiar with it; information is easy to find based on hazard or function. Aligns with the ESF functions at federal, state, and possibly local levels; focus on interdependency of roles and responsibilities. A commonly-used format that may be the best choice for small jurisdictions or private organizations as roles do not change significantly during a response.
Focus is placed more on hazard or function and less on interdependency of roles and responsibilities.
Traditional
May have to cross-reference many sections to find information.
ESF
Responsibilities are not typically as well-defined for different types of hazards or functions; can lead to some confusion during response.
Agency/ Department
EOC Structures
Structure Pros
Cons
Commonly used; understood by field personnel; aligns well with on-scene organization; ample training information available. Very focused on support and coordination; good for home-rule states at the county or regional level; new training available. Becoming more common; aligns with Federal and many state structures; objective-focused; works well in larger jurisdictions and those with complex incidents. Fairly common approach; can be modified to fit the specific needs of a jurisdiction.
May blur the line between field and EOC roles and be difficult for some staff to understand the difference. Recently introduced so not commonly used, but is expected to gain in popularity.
ICS
ISM
In smaller jurisdictions, there may not be enough personnel to support this type of approach.
ESF
Will require additional work on the front-end in planning and training.
Hybrid
Contact us today:
©Tidal Basin. All Rights Reserved.
Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4Powered by FlippingBook