1. Emergency Management Systems Interoperability
Centre for Security Sciences
Emergency Management Systems Interoperability
Summer Symposium Science Outreach Panel Session – 17 June 2009
25 March Briefing to PG5
Jack Pagotto, Portfolio Manager – Emergency Management & Systems Interoperability
Je m’appelle Jack Pagotto et je suis le gestionnaire de portefeuille “Gestion des Urgences et Interoperabilite. Je vous souhaite bienvenue cette apres midi. Welcome to the Emergency Management Systems Interop panel session.
I am a relatively recent addition to the CSS, my background is in Defence R&D, primarily in the CBRNE protective equipment and detection domain having worked at the bench for 15 years prior to moving into the scientific intelligence area, still assessing emerging technologies as they contribute to WMD including a novel class of blast explosives somewhat related to the formulations you saw used in the Oklahoma incident a few years ago. And finally, just prior to joining CSS I led a tech demo project on capability engineering that provided an excellent foundation for the capability based approaches Alain Goudreau described a couple of days ago.
I’d like to do a quick introduction of the panel members that are up here with me …. <next slide>

2. Introductions 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
Scott Milton and/or Michel Savoie are from Public Safety Canada’s Interoperability Division and are project leads for one of our PSTP funded studies that you will hear about shortly.
Michael Johnstone is the Manager of the CFIA EOC and along with Kelly Forbes who is supporting him from CAE Professional services, will talk about the second of two new EMSI studies that we are just in the process of launching as a result of call 1.
Finally, we’ll be closing off the afternoon with two CRTI project closure presentations to be provided by Eva Dixson and Patricia Wait from RMC and Canadian General Standards Board, and last but not least Kendra Shaw from the Radiation Protection Bureau at Health Canada.
============================================================================
More Details for bios if needed:
Kendra Shaw is a GIS specialist (14 years) who has been working with the Radiation Protection Bureau on projects related to the Federal Nuclear Emergency Plan for about 5 years. Eric Pellerin who was associated with this work has recently moved on to the Radiation Surveillance division. Kendra’s projects is an interesting and very topical one for us because it is actually a hybrid from collaboration between two CRTI clusters, the Rad cluster and the Bio cluster. Kendra’s project will show how providing interoperability between decision support tools can allow cross linking of domains between two specialty domains. Kendra is also involved with another GIS initiative involving a Geoconferencing tool that also enables communication between op centers using maps.
Michel Savoie as I mentioned previously is from the Public Safety Law Enforcement and Interoperability Program Division, he’s been working with Service Canada for 13 years and has had some experience working with Treasury Board Secretariat in the IT domain.
Kelly Forbes is from CAE Professional services and has proven to be a key player in more than a few PSTP projects – she has a PhD in cognitive pyschcology and has more than 14 years experience working in this area – Kelly may look familiar to some of you as she’s also involved as team member in another CIP related project, and she also helps us with the EMSI CoP development effort.
Eva Dixson is a professor from the Royal Military College, I believe Eva is fairly well known to the CRTI community and has been on other projects with some of you – she will be sharing the briefing slot with Trish Wait from Canadian General Standards Board who collaborated with her to complete this project.

3. Outline 1. EMSI PROGRAM & CoP Overview 2. 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. 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. PSTP Program and Community of Practice Overview
Emergency Management & Systems Interoperability
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 4

5. 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
It is impossible to talk about Emergency Management gaps without referring to the now – cliches of Katrina and 9/11.
Katrina truly was a landmark event in the EM world as it fully demonstrated the dramatic impact of governance failure.
Another significant capability gap that came out loud and clear in both events was the lack of interoperable communications for basic voice comms.

6. Canadian Communications Interoperability Plan (V2.1)
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 Cyber
RCMP, CSE, IC, PS, CSIS, NRCan
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 Systems
TC, DND/CF,CIC, RCMP , CBSA, PS (DHS-S&T)
Forensics
RCMP, 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 8

9. “Katrina was basically an emergency management “cluster””.
…. So we are NOT a cluster!
We are a “Community of Practice” (EMSI CoP)!!

10. Emergency Management & Systems Interoperability
Community of Practice (Interim Lead: J. Pagotto, Portfolio Manager CSS/PSTP)
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 Strategy
assimilate & orient EMSI S&T base
vision architectures?, standards frameworks?
enable mechanisms for gap analysis
- Scenario framework + capability goals
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
Key points to mention on each quadrant:
Objectives/Scope: self explanatory note that due to complexity/breadth of EMSI scope we have focussed much of our effort on only the first two areas so far. We intend to develop the Human Factors area in relation to an “S&T support package” for Op Center design that will involve specialists in the people/process/tools aspects (i.e. People: psychosocial aspects associated with crisis operations under stress, multidisciplinary teams and inter-organization collaboration; Processes: ergonomics/workflow optimization of op center designs, and Tools: decision support and situational awareness C2 tools.)
Note that the developing the Search and Rescue S&T area was temporarily put on hold as it was realized that the National Search and Rescue “New Initiatives Fund” was supporting S&T, however it is expected that the HUSAR area is a gap area that EMSI will need to establish activity.
Membership and Networks: EMSI community is extremely dispersed both geographically and organizationally. It would be impossible to include all EMO representatives in a ‘cluster like’ organization so the strategy for EMSI has been to leverage heavily pre-existing network mechanisms that bring EOC and EMO technical experts together on a regular basis. The logical lead for an EMSI community of practice should be from Public Safety Canada and ideally from the Ops Directorate because of their lead or central role in terms of executing the FERP. However due to staffing shortages a dedicated CoP lead is not possible at this time and therefore the EMSI Portfolio manager is fulfilling this role on an acting basis.
EMSI Strategy: Interoperability of public safety capabilities has been a topic of much deliberation over the past 5 years. An “Inteorperability Program” that was initiated as an “Integrated Justice” initiative several years ago, evolved to a public safety MC submission on a much broader context for interoperability in For a variety of complex reasons this program was not funded. A substantial amount of interoperability related foundation work was generated (e.g. Canadian Public Safety Information Network as an example) but has not been advanced. In addition at an international level, interoperability standards and architectures have been an area of rapid evolution and advancement over the past 5 years. The desire to improve interoperability amongst military and civilian organizations that respond to crisis operations is common to a large number of nations and international organizations. Hence there is a need to gather, assimilate, analyze the current state of the art in this direction before initiating S&T into exploiting the knowledge that can be brought to bear on the problem. The EMSI Strategy is therefore to spiral up the community of practice linkages while assimilating/clarifying existing best practice information that is available now. A good illustration for the need to pull this together is the significant number of “vision architecture” type initiatives that are currently on-going in parallel across OGDs. In some cases these initiatives are well-linked, however we believe in most cases there is a need for improved horizontal information sharing to ensure they are in alignment and/or can leverage from each other strategically.
As in the OODA loop therefore, we intend to observe (assimilate) and orient our CoP with the current situation on interoperability through a “S&T Guidance on Interoperability of Public Safety Capabilities” curriculum in partnership with Treasury Board CIO and the Public Safety Technology & Standards Directorate (possibly to be extended to include the GOC Common Operating Environment project). Building on this knowledge, the intent is to build “enablers” that will facilitate scientific gap analysis of EM systems. Enablers include such key tools as a asic “architectural representation” of the Canadian national EM capabilities, some clearly defined performance goals, and scenarios and metrics by which to assess them with. With these in place, gaps studies and options analyses on S&T supported solutions can be executed.
Progress to Date – Self explanatory. A few highlights are the AAFC NEOC study which provided a good demonstration of the utility of architecture-based gap analysis. This study is now reported and the stakeholders have strongly endorsed the value of the study and the need to continue to apply this technique in the future. Leveraging existing networks such as OMG, CATA, CITIG and NVAC (which spun off CVAC) are also worthy of mention. The OMG for example is an internationally recognized non-profit standards organization with memberships from world leading industries in the IT systems domain as well as government representatives from all of the key western and european partners; As a result of an EMSI-initiative OMG is now in the process of setting up a “Special Interest Group” under the C4ISR technical panel area that will invite international participation on the topic of “Interoperability Standards for EM Systems and Architectures”.
“Interoperability Curriculum “ is in red to draw attention to this very significant recent development. We are now in partnership with Treasury Board’s CIO and Interoperability Program and the Public Safety Technology & Standards directorate to bring together a set of concise 1-2 hour tutorials that will clearly present the best available S&T advice on interoperability standards/frameworks to GoC stakeholders. These tutorials are intended to simplify the onerous task of communicating/absorbing standards-related information that can be complex and difficult to understand.

11. Emergent 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

12. 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 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.

13. 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).

14. Outline 1. EMSI PROGRAM & CoP Overview 2. 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. 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

15. 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 June 09

16. How can Science & Technology help
How can Science & Technology help? PSTP (Public Security Technical Program

17. EMSI Panel Q&A
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?
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)?

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

19. Information Sharing & Shared Understanding
Objective: Standards-based Collaborative Information Sharing among diverse Responders, Agencies, Communities, Systems & Services (private/public sectors).
Shared Understanding
Shared Operational Picture
Shared Tactical Picture
Incident Commander
Community
Capability
Staff / Watch Officers
Incident Commander
Net-Centric
Information Sharing
Common
Semantics
Community
Information
Sharing
Collaboration & Coordination

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

22. 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.

23. 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

24. 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.”

25. 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.”

26. 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.

27. 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.