There have been many news stories about the confusion surrounding all levels of the response to Hurricane Katrina. Much has focused on how the response phase of the incident was managed. One new perspective in the National Incident Management Systems is the concept that an incident management is more than just an incident-specific system. Effective incident management is a multi-phased approach that doesn’t necessarily begin or end with the incident itself.

Similar to the standard risk management concept of “avoidance,” the most effective method of dealing with an event or incident is to not have the event or incident occur at all. Incident management includes prevention of those events that can be prevented, such as establishing land use regulations for where structure should be built, building codes to govern how structures are built and used, and fire codes governing the activities in a structure that could be hazardous.

But in a not-so-perfect world, it’s not possible to prevent everything, so it’s prudent to prepare for incident and event such that any hazards associated with these activities are minimized. Preparation is both general and specific. General preparedness means the totality of what people engage in to minimize hazards, risk and our vulnerability should the worst occur. Specifically, preparedness is the actions taken to be ready for incidents most likely to occur within our circle of influence.

Response is by far the most critical aspect of incident management. As we saw with Katrina, no matter how good the plan, what people tend to remember is how we respond. If we are perceived to have responded effectively, focus on the “prevention” and “preparedness” is diminished. Unfortunately, the luck in otherwise substandard response efforts tend to create an false sense of success that can cause responders to focus more time applauding the response efforts than evaluating them performance based out comes. It is during this phase that the “command and management” element of NIMS are most important.

Recovery is generally about how equilibrium, balance and normalcy are restored. Depending on the magnitude of the incident, the “new normal” may be much different than pre-incident. It is during this period that the emotions of all involved; both the responder to and victims of and incident are at their highest levels, therefore this is the phase where care and concern for the effect of the incident management system on people is very important. This also the phase where important information about the overall effectiveness of the incident management effort is best collected and analyzed.

Mitigation is the tie between one event or incident and another. How are the lessons learned before one event or incident applied to minimize the impact of incident or event? This includes activities such as rebuilding and fortifying flood control measures, retrofitting smoke detectors or automatic sprinklers or starting and exercise program. This phase tends to be the most costly phase of IMS in that those responsible for making decision about mitigation efforts may have found their focus shifted to other issues with competing priorities.

A few keys to effective use of NIMS include seeing it often and using it on a regular basis. The more NIMS can become a part of the daily conversation of an organization, the less likely it will be dismissed as a “special program” when and incident occurs. The NIMS Integration Center suggests that organizations should:

• Incorporate NIMS into existing training programs and exercises;
• Ensure that federal preparedness funding supports state, local and tribal NIMS implementation;
• Incorporate NIMS into emergency operations plans;
• Promote intrastate mutual aid agreements;
• Coordinate and provide NIMS technical assistance to local entities; and
• Institutionalize the use of the Incident Command System.

It is easy to assume that success in the response phase is all that is necessary to get NIMS right. If organizations are engaging in all of the compliance activities and doing so in all phases of incident management, they are much more likely to be found complaint with NIMS and much more likely to be perceived not only as talking the talk, but could be applauded for walking the NIMS walk as well. However, the NIMS walk is a trip best taken in a circle.

I. David Daniels is Fire Chief of the Fulton County Georgia Fire Department, a metro department surrounding the City of Atlanta. He holds a Masters Degree in Human Resources Management and chair of the IAFC Safety, Health and Survival Section. He is a member of the NFPA’s Fire Service Occupational Safety and Health and the Professional Qualifications for Incident Management Functional Positions committees.