CDEM Capability Assessment Report: Part 2 Capability Assessment Report: Part 2 ... are successfully embedded, ... “tsunami warning was confirmedâ€‌ the call went out to

  • View
    216

  • Download
    4

Embed Size (px)

Text of CDEM Capability Assessment Report: Part 2 Capability Assessment Report: Part 2 ... are successfully...

  • A review of CDEM Group capability by

    functional area, including results of the

    CDEM Monitoring and Evaluation

    Programme 2009-2012, observations

    on nationwide themes and issues, best

    practice, and case studies.

    CDEM

    Capability

    Assessment

    Report: Part 2

    April 2012

  • CDEM CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT: PART 2 2

  • CDEM CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT: PART 2 3

    Part 2: Results, Discussion, Best Practice and Case Studies by

    Functional Area

    INTRODUCTION AND INSTRUCTIONS.......................................................................................................................... 4

    1 PUBLIC EDUCATION...................................................................................................................................... 6 2 PUBLIC INFORMATION MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................ 9 3 BUILDING COMMUNITY RESILIENCE .............................................................................................................. 12 4 VOLUNTEER MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................................ 15 5 INTEGRATED PLANNING .............................................................................................................................. 18 6 CDEM RESEARCH...................................................................................................................................... 21 7 HAZARD RISK MANAGEMENT....................................................................................................................... 23 8 RISK REDUCTION........................................................................................................................................ 26 9 CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT.......................................................................................................................... 28 10 EXERCISING............................................................................................................................................... 31 11 PLANNING ................................................................................................................................................ 33 12 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTRES .............................................................................................................. 36 13 CONTROLLERS ........................................................................................................................................... 41 14 RESPONSE ARRANGEMENTS......................................................................................................................... 44 15 REGIONAL WELFARE COORDINATION ............................................................................................................ 48 16 LOCAL WELFARE MANAGEMENT .................................................................................................................. 51 17 LIFELINES COORDINATION ........................................................................................................................... 55 18 RECOVERY PLANNING ................................................................................................................................. 58 19 RECOVERY MANAGERS ............................................................................................................................... 60 20 RECOVERY MANAGEMENT........................................................................................................................... 62 21 CDEM GROUP JOINT COMMITTEE ............................................................................................................... 65 22 COORDINATING EXECUTIVE GROUP............................................................................................................... 68 23 GROUP ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURES ......................................................................................................... 71 24 GROUP WORK PROGRAMMES...................................................................................................................... 75 25 LOCAL WORK PROGRAMMES ....................................................................................................................... 77 26 CDEM GROUP FUNDING ............................................................................................................................ 79 27 BUSINESS CONTINUITY MANAGEMENT .......................................................................................................... 82

  • CDEM CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT: PART 2 4

    Introduction and Instructions

    Part 2 of the National Capability Assessment Report contains results and discussion at the

    performance indicator and measure level, which translates loosely to the main functional areas of

    CDEM within which most people work. For each functional area relevant indicator scores are

    shown, there is a discussion of capability observed, best practice is highlighted, and in most

    cases, a case study given.

    How To Compare Your Results With The National Statistics

    Scores for each indicator are shown as in Figure 1 to enable organisations to compare their score

    against a backdrop of the national high, average, and low scores.

    Figure 1: Example Indicator Scoring Showing National High, Average, and Low Scores

    Highest

    90.0%

    Natl Avg

    58.0%

    Lowest

    16.8%

    Where...

    Highest means the highest single CDEM Group score for this indicator.

    Natl Avg means the average of all 16 CDEM Group scores for this indicator.

    Lowest means the lowest single CDEM Group score for this indicator.

    The coloured bar shows where those scores sit against a backdrop of the capability assessment

    achievement zones, which are shown in Figure 2.

    Figure 2: Achievement Zones

    Target Environment (80-100%) signifying substantial to comprehensive

    achievement, with sustained organisational commitment.

    Satisfactory (40-80%) signifying considerable progress or achievement, but

    not yet comprehensive of needs.

    Requires Attention (0-40%) signifying no, minor, or some progress or

    achievement, with work still required to be effective.

    How To Find Your Indicator Scores

    There are two sets of scores you can use to compare against the national statistics:

    Your self-assessment via the CDEM Capability Assessment Tool.

    Your collective CDEM Group scores, as assessed by the MCDEM panel, and presented in

    your regions Capability Assessment Report.

    In the case of the former, you need only find the relevant indicator in your completed Capability

    Assessment Tool and compare the score to that presented here. In the case of the latter, you need

    to find the indicator on the relevant spider diagram in the Report, and read off the score from the

    central axis (shown on Figure 3).

  • CDEM CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT: PART 2 5

    Figure 3: How to read indicator scores on spider diagrams

    Key Performance Indicators

    0

    20

    40

    60

    80

    100

    KPI 1

    KPI 2

    KPI 3

    KPI 4

    KPI 5

    KPI 6KPI 7

    KPI 8

    KPI 9

    KPI 10

    KPI 11

    Target Environment

    Satisfactory

    Requires Attention

    MCDEM Assessment

    CDEMG Self Assessment

    Important Note re. Self-Assessment Capability Assessment Tool Files...

    It is important to check that the summary scoring on your assessment tool is accurate. If you have not

    scored N/A for every measure that you do not believe is relevant to you (i.e. including all the tabs

    that are not relevant to you), it may not be. This is the first thing that is checked when a self-

    assessment is received at MCDEM; in most cases these were sent back to the author with the

    corrections made if the N/As were omitted. But it is worth checking that you are looking at a corrected

    version. If not, you may find your scores are several points higher once this task is completed!

    CDEMG self assessment = 80%

    MCDEM assessment = 70%

  • CDEM CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT: PART 2 6

    1 Public Education

    RE

    SU

    LTS

    Public Education Programmes

    Highest 90.0%

    Natl Avg 58.0%

    Lowest 16.8%

    Goal 1, Objective A, Key Performance Indicator 1: Public education programme

    on hazards and risks is planned, coordinated and given priority by the

    organisation

    1 Organisation has a public education programme or plan that has been signed off by senior management or Board level

    48.8

    2 Organisation has a specific budget allocated for public education 48.8

    3 Organisation has a person tasked with the delivery of public education 66.3

    4 Degree to which you are satisfied public education programme is given appropriate priority by the organisation

    56.3

    5 Organisation takes steps to stay informed of best practice public education methodology 61.3

    6 Organisation participates in regional or national CDEM public education groups 87.5

    7 Public education programme is reviewed and updated every year 53.8

    58.0

    Goal 1, Objective A, Key Performance Indicator 1: Public education programme

    on hazards and risks is planned, coordinated and given priority by the

    organisation

    1 Organisation has a public education programme or plan that has been signed off by senior management or Board level

    48.8

    2 Organisation has a specific budget allocated for public educat