More Evidence That We Are Unprepared For Homeland Security
Report: Emergency Health Officers Strained For Time To Train
As a Navy Corpsman I was lucky enough to participate in several major disaster drills, including training regarding environmental and public health during those disasters, as well as triage, decontamination, chemical and biological casualty treatment and emergency medical treatment. As a US Army (National Guard: 91-C) Medic, I was required to participate in security training, including crowd control, urban street patrol tactics and building security. As part of my own efforts to stay abreast of disaster preparedness and such, I have studied most of the course materials offered by FEMA regarding weather disasters, major highway vehicular accidents and other disaster responses.
While I do not claim to be an expert on all matters related to public health, national security, disaster response, etc., I certainly can claim to have more expertise on these matters than the average US citizen. One thing I know for certain is that any response to a major disaster, security crisis or an attack--terrorist or military--requires time for training, practice coordinating and communicating with the various response agencies, and critical post-drill evaluations to assess where improvement and future training needs exist. So, when I read this article all kinds of red flags and warning bells went off.
The overwhelming failure of our federal government to execute two of its primary duties (ensuring "domestic tranquility" and providing for the "common defense") is becoming more apparent and more alarming every day.
Somewhere in the mid-to-late 1980s our nation abandoned its focus on civil defense. Prior to that time there was money available to provide for building "fallout shelters" (which could be used for both disaster and defense purposes), emergency supplies and stockpiles, civil defense and emergency response training, EMS disaster preparedness, public health and other aspects of being prepared for protecting our citizens and residents. The multiple failures in response to hurricanes and tornadoes, as well as severe winter weather like we have experienced recently in Colorado, are in part due to the cutting off of funds for civil defense.
Another part of these failures is because even when there was money for civil defense, the programs and services associated with being prepared for civil disturbances, disasters and/or attacks, the money was ill-spent and the level of preparedness remained a low-priority. Local, state and federal agencies failed to work on the plans and responses effectively. Civil defense shelters were not maintained or stocked properly. A lot of the duties and obligations of being prepared were sloughed off to less attentive agencies, such as a single person appointed to be the civil defense coordinator for a mid-size to large city (i.e. Lynn, Massachusetts: population @84,000) as part of a patronage system. The role of the US Public Health Service was cut back to a minimum, USPHS hospitals and research centers were closed, and the coordination between the USPHS, CDC, US military health organizations, local/county/state emergency response agencies, etc., were all left to flounder.
One would have anticipated that the DHS, FEMA, the various state versions of Emergency Management agencies, the USPHS, the other uniformed public health agencies, etc. would have ramped up its training, involvement and preparedness after the events of 9-11. After all, we were told by President Bush, FEMA representatives, DHS honchos and such that "everything possible is being done." Then Katrina and Rita hit our Gulf Coast and the reality hit us like a ton of bricks and we realized that our state of preparedness was at best a failure and at the worst a disaster in and of itself. Then we were told that "everything possible is being done" to ramp up the various agencies and processes, including FEMA and other federal agencies, to assure that we will be prepared. But the reality here is that FEMA is a failed agency. DHS is dysfunctional not only in terms of being prepared, but also in terms of its employees identifying it as the "worst place to be employed within the federal government," complete with numerous human resource, EEOC and training complaints.
While billions of dollars are being spent overseas in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo, Somalia, and elsewhere, our own needs are being ignored. Our needs are not taking a lesser priority, they are being ignored. So while President Bush and company are telling us that we are being protected, the truth of the matter is that if any terrorist group manages to get past the joke of national security measures we have in place, we are not prepared to deal with any of the possible results of such an attack. We are not prepared for a major earthquake, whether it occurs on the West Coast as is greatly anticipated, or along the East Coast where such an event is almost as likely (a fault runs from Maine down to Maryland, including Washington,DC). We are still not prepared to handle the predicted hurricanes that may reach levels of destruction that will make Katrina look like a minor squall. We still do not have an adequate tornado warning system in many areas where such storms are prevalent, despite the greatly improved detection and warning technologies. We are not prepared for an attack on a major chemical plant, railway or nuclear power plant, or the catastrophic chemical clouds, environmental contaminations, major casualties or potential nuclear meltdown that might occur in an attack or other disaster. The level and quality of security at nuclear and chemical plants is still questionable.
On top of all that, the federal and state agencies that would respond to these incidents are still not up to speed, as is illustrated by yet another news report, such as the one cited below. While this report discusses changes that are occurring, we have to ask why the level of preparation and ability to respond has remained largely ignored, not only during the late 1980s to the new millenium, but also since the events of 911.
As a Navy Corpsman I was lucky enough to participate in several major disaster drills, including training regarding environmental and public health during those disasters, as well as triage, decontamination, chemical and biological casualty treatment and emergency medical treatment. As a US Army (National Guard: 91-C) Medic, I was required to participate in security training, including crowd control, urban street patrol tactics and building security. As part of my own efforts to stay abreast of disaster preparedness and such, I have studied most of the course materials offered by FEMA regarding weather disasters, major highway vehicular accidents and other disaster responses.
While I do not claim to be an expert on all matters related to public health, national security, disaster response, etc., I certainly can claim to have more expertise on these matters than the average US citizen. One thing I know for certain is that any response to a major disaster, security crisis or an attack--terrorist or military--requires time for training, practice coordinating and communicating with the various response agencies, and critical post-drill evaluations to assess where improvement and future training needs exist. So, when I read this article all kinds of red flags and warning bells went off.
The overwhelming failure of our federal government to execute two of its primary duties (ensuring "domestic tranquility" and providing for the "common defense") is becoming more apparent and more alarming every day.
Somewhere in the mid-to-late 1980s our nation abandoned its focus on civil defense. Prior to that time there was money available to provide for building "fallout shelters" (which could be used for both disaster and defense purposes), emergency supplies and stockpiles, civil defense and emergency response training, EMS disaster preparedness, public health and other aspects of being prepared for protecting our citizens and residents. The multiple failures in response to hurricanes and tornadoes, as well as severe winter weather like we have experienced recently in Colorado, are in part due to the cutting off of funds for civil defense.
Another part of these failures is because even when there was money for civil defense, the programs and services associated with being prepared for civil disturbances, disasters and/or attacks, the money was ill-spent and the level of preparedness remained a low-priority. Local, state and federal agencies failed to work on the plans and responses effectively. Civil defense shelters were not maintained or stocked properly. A lot of the duties and obligations of being prepared were sloughed off to less attentive agencies, such as a single person appointed to be the civil defense coordinator for a mid-size to large city (i.e. Lynn, Massachusetts: population @84,000) as part of a patronage system. The role of the US Public Health Service was cut back to a minimum, USPHS hospitals and research centers were closed, and the coordination between the USPHS, CDC, US military health organizations, local/county/state emergency response agencies, etc., were all left to flounder.
One would have anticipated that the DHS, FEMA, the various state versions of Emergency Management agencies, the USPHS, the other uniformed public health agencies, etc. would have ramped up its training, involvement and preparedness after the events of 9-11. After all, we were told by President Bush, FEMA representatives, DHS honchos and such that "everything possible is being done." Then Katrina and Rita hit our Gulf Coast and the reality hit us like a ton of bricks and we realized that our state of preparedness was at best a failure and at the worst a disaster in and of itself. Then we were told that "everything possible is being done" to ramp up the various agencies and processes, including FEMA and other federal agencies, to assure that we will be prepared. But the reality here is that FEMA is a failed agency. DHS is dysfunctional not only in terms of being prepared, but also in terms of its employees identifying it as the "worst place to be employed within the federal government," complete with numerous human resource, EEOC and training complaints.
While billions of dollars are being spent overseas in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo, Somalia, and elsewhere, our own needs are being ignored. Our needs are not taking a lesser priority, they are being ignored. So while President Bush and company are telling us that we are being protected, the truth of the matter is that if any terrorist group manages to get past the joke of national security measures we have in place, we are not prepared to deal with any of the possible results of such an attack. We are not prepared for a major earthquake, whether it occurs on the West Coast as is greatly anticipated, or along the East Coast where such an event is almost as likely (a fault runs from Maine down to Maryland, including Washington,DC). We are still not prepared to handle the predicted hurricanes that may reach levels of destruction that will make Katrina look like a minor squall. We still do not have an adequate tornado warning system in many areas where such storms are prevalent, despite the greatly improved detection and warning technologies. We are not prepared for an attack on a major chemical plant, railway or nuclear power plant, or the catastrophic chemical clouds, environmental contaminations, major casualties or potential nuclear meltdown that might occur in an attack or other disaster. The level and quality of security at nuclear and chemical plants is still questionable.
On top of all that, the federal and state agencies that would respond to these incidents are still not up to speed, as is illustrated by yet another news report, such as the one cited below. While this report discusses changes that are occurring, we have to ask why the level of preparation and ability to respond has remained largely ignored, not only during the late 1980s to the new millenium, but also since the events of 911.
Officers deployed as part of a uniformed service run by the Health and Human Services Department have trouble finding time to train, and many lack hands-on experience that would help them better respond to public health emergencies, according to a new report from the department's inspector general.
"[Public Health Service] Commissioned Corps officers deployed in response to hurricanes Katrina and Rita provided valuable services, but the Corps could improve its response to public health emergencies," the report found.
The corps is one of seven U.S. uniformed services and is made up of officers commissioned on the basis of their health-related training. Their role is to provide health care and other services in areas with a shortage of health professionals. The HHS secretary has the authority to make decisions about where to deploy the corps, and the president also may use it in times of war or emergency.
Officers in the health corps played a major part in the aftermath of Katrina and Rita, with 2,119 of them working with state, local and private agencies. State health officials said the corps officers integrated "seamlessly" into emergency operations centers in the early days of response, and especially helped states to identify and understand available federal assets.
But the report found that while most officers met readiness standards, the cost of meeting such standards was often high.
Officers are regularly employed with agencies within and outside HHS, meaning they must simultaneously fulfill their responsibilities to their regular agency and to the corps. As agency employees, officers must negotiate with their supervisors for time to maintain their readiness training. If they are unable to train during normal work hours, officers often must use personal time to meet the standards.
According to the report, 28 percent of officers said they spend more than 15 hours of personal time each month to keep up with the standards. Another 12 percent, many with young children or a workweek that greatly exceeds 40 hours, stated that maintaining their readiness status creates a significant hardship.
The report also found that 52 percent of officers sent out in response to the hurricanes had no deployment experience. Field commanders reported that inexperienced officers were unfamiliar with response protocols and that the more experienced officers had to spend time training and orienting the new officers in the field.
On the training front, 36 percent of officers said their training did not adequately prepare them for field operations. Most acknowledged that the computerized training models were overly broad and did little to prepare them for the conditions and situations they encountered. Another 13 percent expressed concern that their agency workloads limited their opportunity to undergo training.
Furthermore, though state officials generally were satisfied with the response effort, many needs remained unmet, especially in the nursing, mental health and dental areas, the report found. State officials said many officers lacked adequate skills in administering immunizations and providing primary, acute and emergency care.
The IG also found that agencies were unwilling or unable to allow some of the officers to deploy, while logistical difficulties delayed others. Many incurred mission-related expenses and were not reimbursed promptly, which could affect their ability to deploy to future public health emergencies, the report said.
The report is one of many assessing the government's response to the hurricanes, mainly Katrina. Criticisms emerged following the disaster, consisting of condemnations of mismanagement and a lack of preparedness, especially in the government's delayed response to the flooding of New Orleans.
The IG recommended that the corps implement more hands-on, focused training and seek funding to allow officers to be paid for the time spent keeping their skill up to date. Deployments should be staggered to mitigate the loss of experience as officers end their tours, the report said.
The report also suggested that deployable officers get government travel cards to make mission-related purchases so they do not have to use personal accounts. Lawmakers have sought to crack down on the use of government travel and purchase cards, however, stating that they need to have lower spending limits and stronger auditing standards.
The health corps is undergoing a transformation to improve response to public health emergencies, and officials said in response to the report that they are planning to address most of the shortcomings cited.
posted by Jim Downey at 12:54 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home