CERA

State Government

Emergency ServicesLocal Government

Community

Report to the State Emergency Management Committee

Community Emergency Risk Assessment Tool (CERAT) Trial

Contents

Background...........................................................................................................................................3

The CERA program and process...........................................................................................................3

CERA Risk assessment framework.......................................................................................................4

The CERA Tool (CERAT)......................................................................................................................6

Beneficial attributes of the CERAT........................................................................................................6

The CERA trial.......................................................................................................................................8

State Capability Framework...................................................................................................................9

Ongoing CERAT development............................................................................................................10

What should the database deliver?......................................................................................................10

Ongoing management of local government risk...................................................................................11

Ongoing benefits..................................................................................................................................11

Reporting risk to the community..........................................................................................................12

Table of Figures

Figure 1 CERA Risk Assessment Framework......................................................................................5

Figure 2 Extract from the State Capability Framework (draft)..............................................................10

Figure 3: CERAT Risk representation (Radar graph)..........................................................................13

Figure 4 CERAT Risk representation (Heat Map)................................................................................14

Background

Local Government in Western Australia is a key participant in the State’s emergency management framework and has responsibility along with the Hazard Management Agencies for identifying and analysing natural and technological hazard risk as it has a potential to impact their local community.

Emergency management planning at the local level should always commence with a robust and defendable emergency risk management process and up until February 2013, there has been no legislated requirement for reporting on risk management activities for Local Government. On 8 February 2013, the State Government legislated changes to the Local Government Act Audit Regulations in particular the inclusion of Regulation 17 requiring the Chief Executive Officer of a Local Government to report to the Council’s Audit Committee concerning the management of risk.

In addition to Regulation 17, the State Emergency Management Committee (SEMC) introduced Policy Statement 2.9 Risk Management further increasing the requirement for reporting by the Local Government sector.

The CERA program and process

The Western Australian Local Government Association (WALGA) as the peak body for Local Government in WA supports and assists Local Government in addressing their emergency management responsibilities outlined in the various pieces of legislation and policy in force in Western Australia.

As a key platform activity of emergency management planning, emergency risk management provides the Local Government and the community with a clear understanding of its risk profile and provides the building blocks with which to build concise and relevant Local Emergency Management Arrangements.

Emergency management in Western Australia is undergoing a period of great change and in keeping with those changes, Local Government are proactive in ensuring that as a sector with key responsibilities in emergency management we maintain high standards and align with State policy.

The Community Emergency Risk Assessment (CERA) provides a simple, efficient yet powerful approach to community centred emergency risk assessment. The program was originally developed by Victorian State Emergency Service (VicSES)using the expertise of risk managers Ernst and Young under funding obtained through the National Disaster Resilience Program (NDRP). The process has been designed around the international standard for risk management ISO 31,000:2009 and incorporates an Excel Spread Sheet tool. WALGA has obtained permission from the VicSES to trial and modify the program for Local Government in Western Australia.

Since WALGA EMS commenced working with the CERA product, we have made significant functionality and content changes in order to ensure a seamless fit with the State’s risk management framework for emergency risk management.

Community (community groups and business) – Community and business participation in the CERA process is encouraged and helps create an awareness in the community of emergency related risks.

Local Government – The CERA process is designed to assist Local Emergency Management Committees (LEMC) by informing development of their local emergency management arrangements. The CERA also assists the Local Government to identify hazards that present a high risk to their community and programs that will assist in protecting the community.

Page | 3

Emergency Management Agencies – The insights derived from the CERA process provide invaluable input to planning and response activities of emergency management agencies, in particular, CERA may reveal certain communities, facilities or locations that may require special consideration and/or support in addressing particular emergency risks.

State Government – Local level perceptions and assessment of emergency risks and controls, when aggregated, can provide invaluable insights and information for decision making at State level. In particular, the data may help reveal where investments in improved controls, collaboration and preparedness may yield significant benefit and return on investment – potentially reducing the total cost of risk for the State.

The key to the CERA process’s success will be to ensure that up-to-date and relevant hazard management information is available. Government agencies have been contacted throughout the trial of the CERA to supply this information and have expressed a desire to have the information centrally located and managed so as not to impact too heavily on their time. The challenge will be in the management of data and the method by which each HMA provides that information. Data management and the program for further development of the CERA are discussed later in this paper.

CERA Risk assessment framework

It is vital for the success of any community risk assessment process that all parties are equally involved from the outset. The LEMC as the committee established for its emergency management focus will be responsible for the overall management of the CERA process largely because of the expertise to be found within such a committee. The following diagram in Figure 1 outlines the various responsibilities throughout the process.

Page | 4

Establish the Context

The LEMC/local government establishes a project committee from the membership to administer the CERA project. The Project Committee is responsible for: The conduct of and overall management of the project and report to LEMCEnsuring the project context is correctDefines the approach and identifies key participantsDocuments the community context with emphasis on those factor impacting its risk profile i.e. topography, social and economic.

Risk Identification & Analysis

Through primary and secondary sources of information and data review the risks that may impact on the local community:Gather information/data relevant to risk within the local government districtIdentify new or emerging risksIdentify high risk areas/ communities at riskEstablish hazard specific work groups

Evaluate Emergency Risks

Risk Management Strategies (Identified by LEMC and reported through the Local Government Risk Management Framework

Reporting Mechanisms (Local government risk management framework)

Leveraging the outputs of step 2 determine the appropriate type and level of action to be taken i.e. monitoring and/or improvement of controls. Apply cost benefit analysis as requiredDetermine which risks may require further, in depth analysis.

Implement actions for improving or monitoring controlsImplement actions to improve collaboration with other communities, State and commonwealth agenciesLeverage the results of the CERA to inform the LEMA and other related documents/ processes.

Treat Emergency RisksC

ERA

Focus

Page | 5

Figure 1 CERA Risk Assessment Framework

The CERA Tool (CERAT)

The CERA tool is essentially a sophisticated spreadsheet that enables the input of hazard specific data collected from Hazard Management Agencies, non-government organisations, business and local government. The data capture reflects the PPRR elements of a specific hazard.

Beneficial attributes of the CERAT

Local Government Profile

The local government profile provides a space to describe and capture elements of the local community. The information can be captured in two ways:

1. A word based description guided by specific headings

2. A link to the ABS website Local Government Profiles page.

The ABS data is updated automatically but will only be available when the CERAT is connected to the web.

Source of risk selection

The risk selection panel enables the user a selection of up to 20 sources of risk. Sources of risk are divided into six categories:

1. Natural2. Transport related3. Human caused4. Infrastructure5. Technical6. Biological

Within each category there is an open selection area where an area specific source of risk might be entered. Each source of risk selected generates a risk specific code or identifier for that risk throughout the CERAT.

While it may be feasible for 20 sources of risk to be identified, initial assessment should enable the list to be trimmed to reflect the sources of risk that will have the greater impact on the community.

The dashboard

The CERAT Dashboard is the centre of the tool from which key information can be entered and manipulated throughout the CERA process. Each source of risk selected is listed along with a ratings panel to be completed during the analysis phase. Other important information such as:

Collaboration with other local governments of agencies; Vulnerable groups; Facilities at risk; Communities/towns/localities at risk

Are able to be identified as likely to be impacted should the source of risk impact the community or group at risk.

Page | 6

Risk sheets

Risk sheets are data entry points for the user where key information pertaining to prevention, preparedness response and recovery can be entered. The sheet incorporates the following information:

A risk description Causal factors Impacts. The impacts are constructed as risk statements describing the impact the source of

risk will have on the element of the community at risk (People, Infrastructure, Social, Economy or public administration)

It is essential that the data entered here is obtained from reliable sources before analysis of the risk can be completed. In addition to PPRR information, suggestions as to treatment options can be listed for future reference linked to either cause or impact.

Consolidated actions sheet

Each risk log is connected to the Consolidated Actions (Risk register). This page contains the risk description risk evaluation information and provides a mitigation program management tracker. The PPRR data is retained in the risk sheet.

The heat map

The Heat Map provides a graphic on which each analysed risk is plotted dependent upon its assessed risk level. Each risk’s position on the plot is determined by:

Its assessed residual consequence (Insignificant, minor, moderate, major, catastrophic); and The assessed control efficiency (monitor or improve)

Navigation tools

Throughout the CERAT are a number of navigation tools that enable the user to easily navigate specified areas of the CERAT dependent upon the current location within the CERAT. Also included is a handy index pane to enable quick navigation between sheets. Each sheet has a return button and a delete information button.

Printability

The CERA is designed to be printed in A3 format due to the amount of information that can be stored. Each sheet can be printed alone or the whole book can be printed in an easily readable format. When a sheet is printed, any navigation button on the sheet is rendered invisible in the printed version. The tool is designed primarily to be available to an operator using a desk or laptop computer as opposed to being printed.

The CERA trial

The CERA process has been trialled with two large city based local governments and one remote local government. The Cities of Swan and Rockingham and the Shire of Halls Creek. The City of Swan and the City of Rockingham are at varying stages of development of their Corporate Risk Management Frameworks while at the Shire of Halls Creek offers the different perspective of being a small organisation disadvantaged by remoteness and staff shortages. As a risk assessment process it was important that it demonstrate compatibility with each local government’s risk management framework or in the absence of a framework could still be managed efficiently.

Page | 7

Throughout the trial we were especially careful to ensure the risk assessment process outlined in the National Emergency Risk Assessment Guide (NERAG) was followed as closely as possible. It was important also to expose as many people as possible to the CERAT to ensure wide acceptability and comment. It has been received by all who have seen it well will some constructive feedback at workshops all of which has enabled the further developments of the CERAT. The current version is at version 0.05 with the tool going to version 1 once released to the respective local governments at the conclusion of their AWARE funded projects.

Agency Input

At the outset of the CERAT trial it became obvious that the process relied heavily on information provided by emergency management agencies and in particular the HMAs. The original CERAT did not provide a mechanism whereby that information could be collected. An Agency Input Tool was developed to guide agencies in the provision of the type of information required which matched the CERAT. Most agencies when approached were a little hesitant at first but as the CERA process was explained they were more forthcoming with information. Some agencies were anxious and rightly so that they would be inundated with requests from across the State should the CERA be rolled out widely. The timing of our approach to emergency management agencies coincided with their obligation to provide similar information to the Sate Risk Register process conducted by the SEMC Secretariat which impacted on the CERA process.

Local government input

Local government information on emergency management risk is essential as this process is mostly about local risk identification and management. Throughout the trial varied levels of information was received from within the local government. Future programs involving the CERA must ensure the information from the local government corporation is accessible. The project management team must have representatives of local government business areas included to ensure this occurs.

Page | 8

State Capability Framework

The overarching criteria for a risk management process to be accepted is whether or not it conforms to the accepted framework of the SEMC. SEMP 2.9 Risk Management is the guiding policy and outlines requirements of local government. The SEMC is currently designing the input tool for the State capability Framework. The CERA addresses each of the Key performance Indicators (KPI) in the SEMC Capability Framework for the following reasons:

Relevant hazard research and data analysis

The CERAT provides a mechanism whereby hazard management data from all agencies can be captured. During the trial, two documents were prepared to aid research and analysis of emergency risk. These documents:

CERA Risk Reference Guide (Web links to Natural and technological hazard information and research sites)

Emergency Event Almanac (Lists major emergency/disaster events occurring in Australia over the past 20 years )

Both documents are to be made available to interested persons.

Risk reduction and mitigation activities

The CERAT through the Consolidated Actions Sheet (Risk Register) enables the LEMC and the local government risk managers to track the progress of activities undertaken by the local government alone or through partnerships with other agencies to modify the impact of risks on the community. Information contained in the CERAT can easily be incorporated into the Capability Framework tool.

Developed and implemented a risk management plan

Because the CERAT is a living document capable of display and use in the committee environment, it is more likely that the local government and the LEMC membership will embrace the process and continually manage their risk. The tool will aid discussion at the LEMC and provide an updatable record of a robust review process. It is anticipated that if the CERA process is widely adopted by local government, the need for costly five yearly risk projects will be unwarranted.

Integrated approach to hazard risk

The CERAT provides for the management of local risks in partnership with other agencies. There is an opportunity to involve agencies around the LEMC table in risk reduction programs to the benefit of all and ensuring that programs suit the local area. Hazard reduction programs commenced at the local level may also inform hazard reduction programs at the State level reducing time, cost and duplication.

Page | 9

2.2 Risk Treatment Activities

Hazard and emergency-related risks are treated through activities and strategies that prevent the occurrence of a hazard and/or reduce its impact should it occur.

Relevant hazard research and data analysis is undertaken, assessed and applied to identify risk treatment and mitigation options. Organisations: • Enter collaborative research partnerships with researchers and institutions• Use research tools to collect data and information• Use research outcomes to direct emergency management activities

Risk reduction and mitigation activities are conducted that improve community resilience and lessen the likelihood, severity and/or duration of an emergency event.Organisations have developed and implemented a risk management plan to address their identified hazard-related risks which is reviewed and updated annually.

An integrated approach to hazard risk management is adopted. Involvement and input from whole of organisation, whole of government and the wider community is sought.

Figure 2 Extract from the State Capability Framework (draft)

Ongoing CERAT development

The tool sourced from VicSES was basic and initial dry run trials uncovered many problems associated with the look and feel of the tool. Currently around 200 hours have gone into the background code and formatting that ensures the CERAT is as robust as possible. The user is able to navigate around the tool, input and change data without interfering with the tool itself.

The CERAT is at best an Excel spreadsheet tool and therefore has limitations as to its application. Currently it is a stand-alone tool that has merit. For State-wide adoption by local government, the CERAT will need to be re-configured using database technology which will transform the base tool into an application that has far reaching benefits not only for local government but for the State’s emergency risk management program.

What should the database deliver?

It is essential that any database created for use by local government be centrally managed through a web portal. This is an essential element to ensure emergency management hazard based data is both accessible by all users and current. The database would ideally provide the end user with a risk assessment tool. Each local government user could be defined by a sign-in code which would identify that user as belonging to a specific emergency management district e.g. Kimberley, Pilbara and Goldfields – Esperance. Depending on the emergency management district designation, the agency supplied data held within the database would be provided to that user. Hazard specific data could be updated annually and centrally managed ensuring up-to-date information is provided to the end user.

Page | 10

Local governments across the State engage in community risk assessment projects and these usually occur on average every five years. In all instances, a project of this type requires that government agencies and non-government organisations are required to provide hazard specific data to inform their risk study. In many instances data is provided multiple times to inform risk studies being conducted in neighbouring local governments. This is not only time consuming for the agencies concerned but represents a misuse of agency resources.

Hazard specific information that is centrally managed could be collected annually through an automatically generated email to specified emergency management contacts for the purpose of soliciting an update of currently recorded information. The relevant agency data would then be available to all depending upon the emergency management district.

Through a central reporting system, local governments will be able to enter specific queries to inform their risk management process along with the risk requirements of the State Capability Framework.

Ongoing management of local government risk

By using the CERA database and assuming that the initial CERA process outlined in table 1 has been progressed, each local government would then embark on a progressive risk management program in-line with the local government’s risk management framework. By managing their emergency management risk in this way, it would ensure that emergency management risk was embedded in the local government risk management framework and conform to the ISO 31,000 requirement of monitor and review.

Ongoing benefits

Local government across the board often struggle with the concept of emergency management and where it fits within the local government business structure. In most cases local governments tend to assign emergency management responsibility to a specific staff member as an add-on role while some employ emergency management specific personnel. The CERA process accessed through a central database will offer the following benefits:

Local government

Hazard specific data is provided automatically and is area specific; The CERA process is easily managed; The CERA process is a good fit for the local government risk management frameworks; The CERA database will provide reports to inform the local risk management process; The CERA database will provide risk information required by the State Capability Framework; The LEMC will have an increased ability to monitor and manage risk management activities

State agencies

Provide hazard specific data to local government once annually; One point of contact (WALGA); Remove the requirement to supply hazard specific data to multiple users; Reduce the requirement on regional staff to attend multiple risk workshops annually

SEMC

All local governments using one risk tool and process; All local governments having the capacity to inform both State and District about emergency

management risk and the local level; Emerging risks are easily identifiable

Page | 11

Reporting risk to the community

A question that is often asked both at the State and local level is how the community should be informed of natural and technological hazard risk and in what format should it be presented. From the State’s perspective there would be certain information not for public consumption and a similar argument could be posed at the local level. Within the CERAT a “Radar Graph” and “Heat Map” representation provides a pictorial snapshot of the local risk plotted in such a way as to be easily understood without the detail behind the analysis. Representations of theses graphs are provided in Figures 3 and 4 below.

Page | 12

Report – Community Emergency Risk Assessment Project | Page

Severe storm / Tornados

Bushfire

Fire - industrial

Hazardous materials incident

Coastal Erosion

Heatwave

Transport incident - Road

Human epidemic / pandemic

0.0

5.0

Maximum Fore-seeable Conse-quenceCurrent Mitigation / Control ActivitiesResidual Conse-quence (See calcula-tor above)Residual Likelihood / Frequency

Figure 3: CERAT Risk representation (Radar graph)

13

Report – Community Emergency Risk Assessment Project | Page

Figure 4 CERAT Risk representation (Heat Maps)

14