Coordinated Multi-Disciplinary Response to a Critical Incident

¶ … Management Research
 
Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and the erratic responses to the Hurricane Katrina disaster in 2005, critical incident management has become the focus of a growing body of research. In addition, there is an ongoing need for timely and effective responses to manmade and natural disasters, and improved approaches continue to be identified. To gain some fresh insights into current critical incident management, this paper reviews three studies concerning a coordinated multi-disciplinary response to a critical incident as well as the National Incident Management System. A review of a final article concerning response and management of a chemical, biological, radiological and explosive incident is followed by a summary of the research and a description concerning how the research contributes to knowledge in these areas.
 
Review and Analysis
 
Coordinated Multi-Disciplinary Response to a Critical Incident.
 
In his study, “Responding to Bio-terrorism Requires a Concerted Effort,” Mughai (2002) describes the multi-disciplinary response to critical incidents provided by the Military Improved Response Program (MIRP) for instances of biological and chemical terrorism. The MIRP approach employs four different functional groups, each of which was tasked with identifying improved flexible strategies for a multi-disciplinary response to such events as follows:
 
1. Health and medical: improve the response capabilities against biological warfare by designing a set of alternative medical facilities;
 
2. Fire and hazmat: develop recommendations for firefighters and hazmat crews responding to chemical or biological terrorist incidents;
 
3. Law enforcement: define the role and conduct of criminal investigations for biological and chemical terrorism; and,
 
4. Fatality management: Partnering with the civilian medical examiner and public health communities to determine how military resources can best support the management of mass fatalities resulting from a biological or chemical incident.
 
Based on the findings that emerged from this exercise, a multi-disciplinary response template was devised that drew on these lessons learned which provides the framework for improved coordination of first responders.
 
National Incident Management System (NIMS)
 
A more recent report from Fazzini (2009) entitled, “The Importance of NIMS to Campus Emergency Response,” notes that in March, 2004, the National Incident Management Systems (NIMS) was launched by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to “provide a systematic, proactive approach for government agencies at all levels, non-government organizations, and the private sector to work seamlessly to prevent, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the effects of incidents . . . To reduce the loss of life, destruction of property” (p. 14). The NIMS operates by assigning responsibility for responses among four general areas: (a) planning, (b) operations, (c) logistics and (d) administration, and finance, each of which has its respective primary and secondary functions that are further delegated as needed. Although an incident commander will be part of any coordinated NIMS response effort, the four general areas are only staffed when they are needed as part of the coordinated response. An important lesson learned from this article was the importance of the NIMS for effective and efficient planning purposes, and the fact that only institutions that have implemented the NIMS are eligible for reimbursement by the federal government following responses to manmade or natural disasters making this initiative a cost-effective as well as worthwhile enterprise.
 
Response and Management of a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosive (CBRNE) Incident
 
Finally, an article by Magnuson and Wagner entitled, “Defense Department Task Forces to Beef Up Disaster Response” (2007), the point is made that the federal government has created special units specifically designed to facilitate disaster response. Known as the chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield explosive consequence management response force (CCMRF), these teams “assist and respond in the event of a major attack only when called up by the president or requested by a governor” and “the majority of personnel will come from the National Guard” (p. 12). A backup team is also available and if these resources are overwhelmed, new teams can be formed. In the case of a CBRNE incident, the plan calls for first responses by local emergency teams, followed by state agencies. The main theme to emerge from this article was that these resources are available when they are needed most, and are intended to supplement, rather than replace, existing on-scene local, state, tribal and federal resources.
 
Conclusion
 
The research showed that critical incident management demands a flexible framework in which all available resources can be coordinated to their best effect. Just as no battle plan survives the first shot, though, the articles reviewed above made it clear that even though “prior planning prevents poor performance,” the “best laid plans of men often go awry” as well. The need for a multidisciplinary disaster response, the National Incident Management System and the contingency plans for a CBRNE incident all reflect these factors as well.
 
References
 
Fazzini, M. (2009, September). The importance of NIMS to campus emergency response. FBI
 
Law Enforcement Bulletin, 78(9), 14-15.
 
Magnuson, S.