Jack Pagotto, P.Eng – EMSI Portfolio Manager

April 10, 2023 Briefing to PG5 Jack Pagotto, Portfolio Manager – Emergency Management & Systems Interoperability

1

Centre for Security SciencesCentre for Security Sciences

Emergency Management Systems InteroperabilityEmergency Management Systems Interoperability Summer SymposiumSummer Symposium

Science Outreach Panel Session – 17 June 2009Science Outreach Panel Session – 17 June 2009

2

IntroductionsIntroductions

• Jack Pagotto - CSS/PSTP EMSI Portfolio Manager

• Scott Milton/Michel Savoie - Public Safety Canada –

Interoperability Program Division

• Michael Johnstone - CFIA EOC Manager

• Kelly Forbes - CAE Professional Services

• Eva Dickson – Royal Military College

• Patricia Wait - Canadian General Standards Board

• Kendra Shaw - Radiation Protection Bureau, Health

Canada

OutlineOutline1. 1. EMSI PROGRAM & CoP OverviewEMSI PROGRAM & CoP Overview

2. 2. NEW PSTP/EMSI STUDIES:NEW PSTP/EMSI STUDIES:

“Enhancing Interoperability for Horizontal Information Exchange Across Crisis Support Organizations”

Mr. Michael Johnstone CFIA EOC & Kelly Forbes CAE PS Ltd.

“Study on Emerging Interoperability Frameworks, Standards and Architectures”

Mr Scott Milton & Michel Savoie, Public Safety Canada Interop. Division

3. 3. COMPLETED CRTI PROJECTS:COMPLETED CRTI PROJECTS:

Standard for Protection of First Responders From CBRN Events

Dr. Eva Dickson, Royal Military College, Patricia Wait – Canadian General Standards Board

Canadian Health Integrated Response Platform (CHIRP)

Kendra Shaw, Radiation Protection Bureau, Health Canada

4

Science and Technology, appropriately engaged, can be a strategic enabler of the federal public

safety and security agenda.

Dr. Bob Walker: ADM(S&T),CEO Defence R&D Canada

PSTP Program and Community of Practice OverviewEmergency Management & Systems Interoperability

Recent “EM Wake-up Calls”Recent “EM Wake-up Calls”

• 9/11 prompted us to …– Re-evaluate threats – re-assess vulnerabilities– ‘harden targets mentality’ (“shields up”)– Voice/comms interoperability gap

• Katrina highlighted … - the need for improved Response (EM) coordination - the importance of governance - Voice/comms interoperability gap

Canadian Communications Canadian Communications Interoperability Plan (V2.1)Interoperability Plan (V2.1)

• Vision:Vision: “We can communicate anywhere, anytime, with anyone, as required and authorized. Interoperability is a way of life and part of our culture.”

• 5 step action plan, modelled after US National Plan

• Initiated by CITIG (CPRC Interoperability Technologies Interest Group) in partnership with Public Safety Canada.

Introduce: Tom Black (Public Safety) & Lance Valcour (CPRC)

8

Public Security Technical Program Areas

Defeat CBRNE Threats

Defeat Chemical:

EC, DND, TC, PS

Defeat Biological:

PHAC, HC, AAFC, CFIA, EC

Defeat Radiological Nuclear:

NRCan, HC, DND, RCMP, CBSA, CNSC

Defeat Explosives:

NRCan, RCMP, CSIS, PS

Critical Infrastructure Protection

•Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment, Monitoring & Resiliency

PS & 10 Sector Dept

•E-Security or CyberRCMP, CSE, IC, PS, CSIS, NRCan

Security, Intelligence & Interdiction (SII)Security, Intelligence & Interdiction (SII)•Maritime Security (delivered by TC/ IMSWG, DND, DRDC/DSTM - we collaborate and leverage:

TC, RCMP CBSA, DFAIT, DFO, CSIS, DND

•First Responder, Policing and Officer Safety

RCMP, Coordinated by CPRC, CITIG •Border and Transportation Security

TC, PS, RCMP, CSIS, CBSA, DFO/CCG, DND/CF, (DHS S&T)

•Biometrics/Human Identity SystemsTC, DND/CF,CIC, RCMP , CBSA, PS (DHS-S&T)

•ForensicsRCMP, CSIS, CBSA, DND

Emergency Management &

Systems Interoperability • Risk and Vulnerability Assessment

A. Goudreau: DND/DRDC, PS, Government at large

• Emergency Management, Interoperability, Standards & Decision Support

PS (Ops & Interop Div), TBS, AAFC, CFIA, RCMP, HC, EC, CSE, DND [ADM(IM) DRDC, CanCOM], DFAIT, TC, IC, NRCan, Geoconnections, links via CPRC/CITIG

• Human Factors – Psycho-Social • Heavy Urban Search and Rescue

9

“Katrina was basically an emergency management “cluster””.

…. So we are NOT a cluster!

We are a “Community of Practice” (EMSI CoP)!!

Objectives/Scope

Share knowledge +S&T collaboration on:

• Interoperable EM Systems, Modelling and Decision Support;

• Standards, Architectures and Interoperability frameworks;

• Human Factors –Op Center Design

• Human Factors – Psychosocial factors

• Heavy Urban Search and Rescue.

Government of Canada’s priorities• Robust National Emergency Management

Capabilities; NATIONAL RESILIENCE• Seamless All-Hazards Response

EMSI Strategy1. assimilate & orient EMSI S&T base

– vision architectures?, standards frameworks?

2. enable mechanisms for gap analysis

- Scenario framework + capability goals

3. execute focussed S&T on options

Membership & Networks• Public Safety Canada – Ops (TBD), & IT Stds (Savoie)

– TBC: (Livingstone, Bertrand (CWID), others)

• Federal Emergency Op Center WG (13 OGDs, PSC/GOC Lead)• Treasury Board / CIO Standards Program (Brouzes & Bryson) • Transport Canada Ops Situation Center (Mondor, Martyn)• AgriCanada/CFIA NEOC (Falardeau, Johnstone)• Canadian Interoperable Technology Interest Group (Valcour)• NRCan Geoconnections (Dawe, Rankin, )• DRDC (Guitouni, Charpentier, Dorion, Funk. Masys)

–DRDC-A (Desharnais, Hazen, McIntyre), DRDC-O,-T, (TBD).

• DND (EISE: Guyatt, Campbell; MSOC: Lam; TBD: CanCmd) • Industry Associations (CATA, CADSI, Technopole, OMG-SIG, …) • Canadian Hazard/Risk Network (Academia, Fed & Regional EMO’s).• National Search & Rescue Secretariat• US DHS S&T Interop Directorate

Progress over past year• OMG hosted “EMSI” Information Day (27 June 08)• SAR Decision Support Tool Deficiencies Study• AAFC NEOC Gap Study (architectural TTx analysis)• EM Architecture Study• Decision Support Tools for Crisis Ops – 28 Oct Demo• Canadian Visual Analytics Centres (Vallerand)• M&S Tool for EM Training CD&E (JIBC) CRTI0058

(Final Tech Demo – 30 June at CEMC)• Public Safety S&T Planning Scenario Framework• Execution Strategy for Canadian Interop Communications Plan (CITIG, PS)• 5 EMSI CoP Info Sessions – Calls for Gaps• DHS S&T Workshop on Collaboration Opportunities

Emergency Management & Systems InteroperabilityEmergency Management & Systems InteroperabilityCommunity of PracticeCommunity of Practice (Interim Lead: J. Pagotto, Portfolio Manager CSS/PSTP)(Interim Lead: J. Pagotto, Portfolio Manager CSS/PSTP)

Emergent EM Gap-ThemesEmergent EM Gap-Themes• Communications interoperability (voice) amongst responders

is priority 1 gap (a governance issue)• Common Operating Picture(s) needed!

– a means for unifying/exchanging information– requires a national map

• Improve multi-agency response & planning– info exchange (“Responsibility to Share” vs “need to know” mentality)

– interoperable incident mgmt tools– EOC collaboration tools (pre-incident)

• National public alerting standard and capabilities• Improved public-private collaboration• Metrics for measuring interoperability

Example EMSI CoP Info sources/activities as input on 2009 S&T prioritization:

• US DHS May 2009: High Priority S&T List…. UK High Priority List (tomorrow!)• Public Safety Plans & Priorities for 2009 • National Security Statements • Canadian Communications Interoperability Plan V2.1 (Public Safety Canada) • EMSI Workshops and Information Sessions

– 21 Jan Inaugural CoP Info Session – 27 Mar TBS/EMSI "Whole of Government Alignment" Info Session – 1 Apr MASAS/EMSI info session

• 12-13 May Major Events Coordinated Security Solutions Lessons Learned workshop

• OMG EMSI Charter and Special Interest Group Workshop, Washington 26 March 2009 *** OASIS Summit Meetings on EM Interoperability – Sept 09 Washington

• CA/US Collaboration Opportunities Meeting with US DHS S&T Interoperability Branch 29 April 2009

• Data Exchange Standards Workshop 8-9 June (Public Safety Canada) • Emergency Operation Centers WG Meetings (16 Sept 2008, 3 June 2009) • MASAS Workshop 26-26 May, Geoconnections Program. • CA/US Collaboration Opportunities Meeting in "PNNL: EOC Tool Interoperability

Studies" with DHS S&T 1 June 2009. • Functional Planning Guidance from ADM(S&T) for 2009/2010 • Lessons learned reports from various exercises held throughout the year.

Emerging EMSI S&T Priorities for 2009?

– Establish Multi-agency geospatial situational awareness capability (COP) for 2-3 federal EOCs

– Pilot Study: National information exchange architecture and standards framework. (NIEM - Canadian profile)

– National alerting and notification standards development. (Common Alerting Protocol – Canadian profile)

– EOC Collaboration Tools (Portal)– Support to Major Events Framework (See MECSS!)– Border radio coverage gap study & Tech options

analysis for resolving identified gaps*

* May be imbedded as part of Canadian Communications Interop. Plan ‘roadmap implementation’ as special project (CSS partnership with PS).

OutlineOutline1. 1. EMSI PROGRAM & CoP OverviewEMSI PROGRAM & CoP Overview

2. 2. NEW PSTP/EMSI STUDIES:NEW PSTP/EMSI STUDIES:

“Enhancing Interoperability for Horizontal Information Exchange Across Crisis Support Organizations”

Mr. Michael Johnstone CFIA EOC & Kelly Forbes CAE PS Ltd.

“Study on Emerging Interoperability Frameworks, Standards and Architectures”

Mr Scott Milton & Michel Savoie, Public Safety Canada Interop. Division

3. 3. COMPLETED CRTI PROJECTS:COMPLETED CRTI PROJECTS:

Standard for Protection of First Responders From CBRN Events

Dr. Eva Dickson, Royal Military College, Patricia Wait – Canadian General Standards Board

Canadian Health Integrated Response Platform (CHIRP)

Kendra Shaw, Radiation Protection Bureau, Health Canada

CRTI 0058TD – C2SIM. Unified Interoperability Solution Set to Support CONOPS Framework Development -- Municipal-Provincial-Federal Collaboration for CBRN Response (& Emergency Mgmt Training)

Full Tech Demo & Briefing (all welcome – contact me!)Canadian Emergency Mgmt College 1300-1500 30 June 09

How can Science & Technology

help?

PSTP(Public Security

Technical Program

EMSI Panel Q&A

1) Most of the work we heard about today relates to standards that would support multi-agencies. What can we do to avoid developing interoperability solutions (standards) that “sit on the shelf”. Who should own their implementation and maintenance?

2) The US DHS S&T Interoperability program has targeted “Virtual USA” as a “unifying principle” for the way forward. How can Canada also exploit geospatial capabilities to promote interoperability? Can this also enhance technology insertion (new tools)?

http://es71crisis-pm.ess-demo.com/cap-cp/Login.aspx

Collaboration is the first element of the “cycle of preparedness”…

Information Sharing & Shared Understanding

Shared Understanding

Shared Operational PictureShared Operational Picture

Shared Tactical PictureShared Tactical PictureShared Tactical PictureShared Tactical PictureIncident Commander

CommunityCapability

CommunityCapability

CommunityCapability

CommunityCapability

StaffStaff/ Watch / Watch OfficersOfficers

StaffStaff/ Watch / Watch OfficersOfficers

Collaboration & Coordination

CommunityInformation

Sharing

Net-CentricInformation Sharing

CommonSemantics

CommonSemantics

Objective: Standards-based Collaborative Information Sharing among diverse Responders, Agencies, Communities, Systems & Services (private/public sectors).

Incident Commander

Misc. Slides – research on “interoperability for Emergency Mgmt”

What is Interoperability and Why is Cross Discipline Awareness Important for First Responders

• With the advent of advanced computer and telecommunications systems interoperability has come to refer nearly exclusively to what the Institute of Electronics and Electrical Engineers (IEEE) defines as “the ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged” (IEEE Standard Computer Dictionary, 1990)

• While this is a sufficient definition for the specific types of interoperability systems (such as computers and telecommunications) it fails to properly recognize or address the implications of the broader sense of interoperability involving and occurring within social, political, organizational, and cultural systems.

• This limited view of interoperability to only computers and telecommunications systems, and not the broader societal view, may inadvertently lead to inadequate attention being given to the need for developing shared understanding of needs, practices, and capabilities across the first responder and emergency management communities in response to crises.

Shared Understanding

• Without shared understanding of the capabilities, methods, practices, and needs of the differing first responder disciplines (e.g., police, firefighters, emergency medical practitioners, public health and safety, etc.) valuable time, evidence, information, and operational performance is jeopardized.

• “Semantic interoperability” is key• ‘fire support’ can mean drastically different

things in a multi-agency scenario

Interoperability is More Than Just Communication and Computer Systems

• The need for interoperability is not fully understood by today’s crisis managers.

• While most grasp the necessity for technological systems interoperability, such as the use of common emergency frequencies, there is insufficient appreciation of interoperable personnel.

• Lerner, et al, (2005) defines the scope of interoperability as:

“All aspects of collaboration and interaction needed to effectively prepare for, and respond to, disasters and other public health emergencies. Individuals and agencies from each discipline must be willing and able to interact and exchange essential information with each other. While this concept appears relatively straightforward, it necessitates both infrastructure, as well as intra-agency cultural changes.”

What is Coordination and Collaboration?

• The issues of diverse cultures, differing mandates and imperfect awareness in the first responder community are calls for greater collaborative efforts in emergency management.

• These organizations with shared goals need to be united so that multiple threats to vulnerable populations which arise concurrently (as is the nature of a crisis) can be addressed.

• As an example Vernon (2007) notes that, “law enforcement, fire and EMS share some of the same priorities during a mass-shooting incident, so planning and interagency cooperation should be paramount.”

• Barbera and Olson (2004) further argues that interpersonal relationships existing within a flexible network of responders are essential to crisis response. Achieving effective collaboration requires an active and continuous process to increase individual and interagency awareness of each other’s capabilities, build trust, and developing reliance upon each other in times of crisis response.

• Lerner, et al, (2005) emphasizes the importance of collaboration noting “without interoperability among public health and these first-responder agencies, optimal response to a terrorist or disaster incident would be unlikely.”

Individual and Interagency Barriers to Fully Achieving First Responder Interoperability

• McConnell and Drennan (2006) recognize that one of the greatest difficulties facing the crisis management community arises from the vertical and horizontal fragmentation in today’s governing organizations, which creates significant roadblocks to crisis planning.

• They also noted that difficulties to collaboration from horizontal fragmentation may be largely overcome through development of interpersonal relationships between actors in the first responder community.

• Another significant obstacle to interoperability is the reliance on government funding programs. Many funding programs are competitive in nature and make it difficult to develop the relationships that are an essential part of interoperability.

Train as You Fight, Fight as You Train

• Helsloot and Ruitenberg (2004) outline a means of accomplishing coordination “through the normal planning and repetition activities, the establishment of personal contacts, development of liaison structures and shared operational facilities for emergency situations.”

• They go on to address the tendency of current crisis planning practices, which lean towards planning which incorporate go-between actor’s instead of direct interaction as occurs in actual field operations.

• They further note that instead of developing strict protocols for every possible situation, a process which requires greater rigidity and shortens the list of options available to responders, a more fluid response plan which incorporates the emergent properties of a crisis is preferable.

• It is important to note that they warn against creativity and flexibility taking the place of pre planning, stressing the continued need for clear and precise crisis response action plans. However, their ideal is one in which plans are clear, definitive and flexible.