Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 20
GUIDE FOR EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS
Strategy--Measure
The International City/County Managers Associa-
Performance in the
tion Center for Performance Measurement collects
Field to Provide the
and analyzes the performance of a range of public
Basis for Continuous
safety services performance data (typically police,
Improvement
fire, and rescue response times and other service
Improvement in perfor-
characteristics) for more than 133 participating
mance requires the estab-
jurisdictions. This standardized database permits
lishment of clear objectives
participants to benchmark their jurisdiction
and related benchmarks
against comparables. The Journal of Emergency
together with the measure-
Management also conducts surveys and publishes
ment of task time and
average and best practices. See http://icma.org/
resource use for the vari-
documents/PerfMeas_small.pdf.
ous phases of ETO. Agree-
ment on what is to be mea-
sured across the traffic incident and emergency management community is
essential. This can be considered with a formal process for review and identifi-
cation and support for needed improvements.
Reality 5. Informal, Fragmented Activities
Within state DOTs, there is limited institutional commitment to ETO on average, as evi-
denced in policy, program, budget, or professional training. ETO remains a part-time or
subsidiary responsibility without the sustainable resources, staffing, or accountability of
a formal program. While few state DOTs are yet concerned with maintaining real-time
system performance as a priority, several are taking important steps in organization and
accountability.
Strategy--Formalize ETO as a Program with Appropriate Policies,
Authorization, Organization, Structure, and Resources
An effective approach will require "mainstreaming" ETO as a formal program
in DOTs and public safety agencies--in recognition of the special requirements
of improved performance. An appropriate policy and program framework must
be developed with organizational accountability and resources as the basis for
continuous improvement. The impact of the security and safety thrust of the
NIMS institutionalization will provide further impetus. In addition, a greater
degree of formality is essential in the relationship between state DOTs and the
public safety agencies to provide the basis for refining more effective roles and
relationships toward interagency cooperation.
The combination of these changes means transforming a set of ad hoc activities into a
formal program and establishing binding interagency relationships, priorities, and pro-
cedures. Bringing together TIM, disaster and ETO, and other special emergency trans-
portation preparations into a single management framework is the essence of ETO.
THE BOTTOM LINE: DEGREE AND TYPE OF CHANGE NEEDED
The logic of the guides is based on a belief that progress is possible and that the objec-
tives of the various agencies can all be simultaneously met at a higher level of effec-
tiveness. However, for state DOTs and public safety agencies, the focus on change in
their respective approaches is quite different, related to their roles and objectives.
Public safety agencies have principal authority and long-standing conventions for generic
incident response and emergency operations procedures. For public safety agencies,
20
OCR for page 21
GUIDE FOR EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS
introducing a focus on hazards, preparing tailored approaches, and requiring an effi-
ciency emphasis will all require a modest change to current approaches without com-
promising their public safety orientation.
Working with public safety agencies to accommodate a new emphasis on responsive-
ness and performance, state DOTs must not only make procedural modifications in field
practice, but also must adjust agency-level program activities. This should include chang-
ing priorities, establishing program structure, reorganizing lines of reporting, mobilizing
resources on a sustainable basis, setting performance objectives, and negotiating inter-
agency consensus. The changes are likely to involve both district (regional) and head-
quarters (division) level priority and resource reallocation.
21
