National Mitigation Framework - U.S. Department Of Defense
National MitigationFrameworkMay 2013
National Mitigation FrameworkExecutive Summar yThe National Mitigation Framework establishes a common platform and forum for coordinating andaddressing how the Nation manages risk through mitigation capabilities. Mitigation reduces theimpact of disasters by supporting protection and prevention activities, easing response, and speedingrecovery to create better prepared and more resilient communities. This Framework describesmitigation roles across the whole community. The Framework addresses how the Nation willdevelop, employ, and coordinate core mitigation capabilities to reduce loss of life and property bylessening the impact of disasters. Building on a wealth of objective and evidence-based knowledgeand community experience, the Framework seeks to increase risk awareness and leverage mitigationproducts, services, and assets across the whole community.While the National Mitigation Framework is new, mitigation has long existed at every level—fromthe family that creates a sheltering plan in case of a tornado, to corporate emergency plans foropening manufacturing plants to the community, to local codes and zoning that systemically addressrisks in a community’s buildings. Building widespread resilience throughout communities, however,is a priority for the Nation. Responsibility is shared by individuals; businesses; non-profitorganizations; and local, state, tribal, territorial, and Federal governments. Drawing upon the supportand guidance of the whole community, risk and vulnerability can be managed and communityresidents can feel confident knowing they live in safer, more secure, and resilient communities.Working together, risks can be recognized and addressed through a culture of preparedness andmitigation that is built and sustained over time. This begins with a comprehensive understanding ofrisk that is translated into plans and actions through partnerships. Aiming toward the ultimate goal ofsustainability and resilience, mitigation requires a process of continuous learning, adapting to change,managing risk, measuring successes, and evaluating progress.The four guiding principles for mitigation include Resilience and Sustainability, Leadership andLocally Focused Implementation, Engaged Partnerships and Inclusiveness, and Risk-consciousCulture. These principles lay the foundation for the Mitigation mission and the execution of its corecapabilities.Effective mitigation begins with identifying the threats and hazards a community faces anddetermining the associated vulnerabilities and consequences. Sound assessment requires riskinformation—based on credible science, technology, and intelligence—validated by experience.Understanding risks makes it possible to develop strategies and plans to manage them. Managingrisks from threats and hazards requires decision making to accept, avoid, reduce, or transfer thoserisks. Avoiding and reducing risks are ways to reduce the long-term vulnerability of a communityand build individual and community resilience. This Framework is driven by risk, rather than theoccurrence of incidents. By fostering comprehensive risk considerations, the Framework encouragesbehaviors and activities that will reduce the exposure and vulnerability of communities.The Nation increases its resilience when it manages risks across this spectrum, from narrow-impactincidents to widespread, severe, and catastrophic disasters. Building and sustaining a mitigationminded culture will make the Nation more socially, ecologically, and economically resilient before,during, and after an incident. Resilience in communities and the Nation depends on the wholecommunity working together.The National Mitigation Framework discusses seven core capabilities required for entities involvedin mitigation: threat and hazard identification, risk and disaster resilience assessment, planning,i
National Mitigation Frameworkcommunity resilience, public information and warning, long-term vulnerability reduction, andoperational coordination.Coordinating structures are composed of representatives from multiple departments or agencies,public and/or private sector organizations, or a combination of these. Coordinating structures are ableto facilitate the preparedness and delivery of capabilities, and they provide guidance, support, andintegration to aid in the preparedness of the whole community and building resilience at the local,regional, and national levels. They ensure ongoing communication and coordination among allparties involved in preparing and delivering capabilities.The coordinating structures for mitigation should focus on creating a national culture shift thatembeds risk management and mitigation in all planning, decision making, and development.Regardless of the level of the coordinating structure, consideration of risk management andmitigation will reduce the Nation’s risk and associated consequences. Given the risk-based premise(rather than an incident-based focus), the preponderance of the coordinating structures originate andare sustained at a regional and local scale.A Mitigation Framework Leadership Group (MitFLG) is being established to coordinate mitigationefforts across the Federal Government and to assess the effectiveness of mitigation capabilities asthey are developed and deployed across the Nation. The MitFLG will include relevant local, state,tribal, and Federal organizations. The MitFLG will have a balance of non-Federal members to ensureappropriate integration of Federal efforts across the whole community.In implementing the National Mitigation Framework to build national preparedness, partners areencouraged to develop a shared understanding of broad-level strategic implications as they makecritical decisions in building future capacity and capability. The whole community should beengaged in examining and implementing the strategy unifying principles and doctrine contained inthis Framework, considering both current and future requirements in the process.ii
National Mitigation FrameworkTable of ContentsIntroduction . 1Framework Purpose and Organization .1Intended Audience .3Scope . 3Guiding Principles .4Risk Basis .5Roles and Responsibilities. 7Individuals, Families, and Households .8Communities .8Nongovernmental Organizations.9Private Sector Entities .9Local Governments .9State, Tribal, Territorial, and Insular Area Governments .10Federal Government .10Collaboration Across Roles .11Core Capabilities . 14Threats and Hazard Identification .15Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment.16Planning .18Community Resilience .20Public Information and Warning .22Long-term Vulnerability Reduction .24Operational Coordination .25Coordinating Structures and Integration . 26Local Coordinating Structures .27Multi-jurisdictional, State, and Sector Coordinating Structures .28Federal Coordinating Structures.29National Coordinating Structures .29iii
National Mitigation FrameworkIntegration .31Relationship to Other Mission Areas. 31Prevention Mission Area .32Protection Mission Area .32Response Mission Area .32Recovery Mission Area .33Operational Planning . 33Mitigation Operational Planning .33Planning Assumptions .35Framework Application .35Supporting Resources . 35Conclusion. 35iv
National Mitigation FrameworkIntroductionPresidential Policy Directive (PPD) 8: National Preparedness was released in March 2011 with thegoal of strengthening the security and resilience of the United States through systematic preparationfor the threats that pose the greatest risk to the security of the Nation. PPD-8 defines five missionareas—Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery—and mandates the developmentof a series of policy and planning documents to explain and guide the Nation’s approach to ensuringand enhancing national preparedness. This National Mitigation Framework, part of the NationalPreparedness System, sets the strategy and doctrine for building, sustaining, and delivering the corecapabilities for Mitigation identified in the National Preparedness Goal. This Framework considersthe full spectrum of threats and hazards, including natural, technological/accidental, andadversarial/human-caused.Prevention: The capabilities necessary to avoid, prevent, or stop a threatened or actualact of terrorism. As defined by PPD-8, the term “prevention” refers to preventing imminentthreats.Protection: The capabilities necessary to secure the homeland against acts of terrorismand manmade or natural disasters.Mitigation: The capabilities necessary to reduce loss of life and property by lesseningthe impact of disasters.Response: The capabilities necessary to save lives, protect property and theenvironment, and meet basic human needs after an incident has occurred.Recovery: The capabilities necessary to assist communities affected by an incident torecover effectively.F r a m ew o r k P u rp o s e an d O rg an i z at i o nThis Framework establishes a common platform and forum for coordinating and addressing how theNation manages risk through mitigation capabilities. It describes mitigation roles across the wholecommunity. 1 While businesses make money by taking risks, they lose money by failing to effectivelymanage those risks. Similarly, in the public sector, choices are made every day that affect theconsequences, duration, and costs of responding to and recovering from adverse incidents. Mitigationrequires systemically anticipating and adjusting to trends that could endanger the future of thecommunity. Appropriate choices made before an event can help to manage or reduce long-term riskand potentially reduce response requirements. Mitigation during the recovery phase helps strengthenand build a more resilient community to withstand future disasters.Building on long-held American values of civic engagement, the Nation must engage in an ongoingdialogue about how to prepare for the future. Demonstrating clear and measurable returns oninvestment through mitigation is essential to that dialogue and necessary to build a resilient, riskconscious culture. A mature, risk-conscious culture is ultimately measured by its reduction in loss of1The whole community includes individuals, families, and households; communities; the private and nonprofitsectors; faith-based organizations; and local, state, tribal, territorial, and Federal governments. Whole community isdefined in the National Preparedness Goal as “a focus on enabling the participation in national preparednessactivities of a wider range of players from the private and nonprofit sectors, including nongovernmentalorganizations and the general public, in conjunction with the participation of Federal, state, and local governmentalpartners in order to foster better coordination and working relationships.” The National Preparedness Goal is locatedonline at http://www.fema.gov/ppd8.1
National Mitigation Frameworklife and whether it has sufficient capacity to continue to promote the social, ecological, and economicvitality of the community when adapting to changing conditions or recovering from an adverseincident.Starting with existing structures and capabilities, this Framework outlines how the Nation can expandits commitment to mitigation and strengthen resilience. The National Mitigation Frameworkdiscusses seven core capabilities required for entities involved in mitigation: Threats and Hazard Identification Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment Planning Community Resilience Public Information and Warning Long-term Vulnerability Reduction Operational Coordination.Those who play a role in mitigation range from an individual making decisions about how to managethe risks in his or her life, to local jurisdictions and large metropolitan regions working to managetheir community members’ risks from threats and hazards, to state and Federal agenciesadministering large, multi-purpose programs. The Nation increases its resilience when it managesrisks across this spectrum, from narrow-impact incidents to widespread, severe, and catastrophicdisasters. Building and sustaining a mitigation-minded culture will make the Nation more socially,ecologically, and economically resilient before, during, and after an incident. Resilience incommunities and the Nation depends on the whole community working together.Resilient communities proactively protect themselves against hazards, build selfsufficiency, and become more sustainable. Resilience involves technical,organizational, social, and economic dimensions. It is fostered not only by government,2but also by individual, organization, and business actions.Effective mitigation 3 begins with identifying the threats and hazards a community faces anddetermining the associated vulnerabilities and consequences. Sound assessment requires riskinformation—based on credible science, technology, and intelligence—validated by experience.Understanding risks makes it possible to develop strategies and plans to manage them. Managingrisks from threats and hazards requires decision making to accept, avoid, reduce, or transfer thoserisks. Avoiding and reducing risks are ways to reduce the long-term vulnerability of a communityand build individual and community resilience.When preparing for mitigation plans and activities, it is critical to consider the implications incontext of the economy, housing, health and social services, infrastructure, and natural and cultural2Godschalk, David R., et.al. 2009. “Estimating the Value of Foresight: Aggregate Analysis of Natural HazardMitigation Benefits and Costs.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 52(6):739-56.3PPD-8 includes a definition of “mitigation” that extends beyond the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief andEmergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act). The term “mitigation” under PPD-8 “refers to those capabilities necessaryto reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters. Mitigation capabilities include, but are notlimited to, community-wide risk reduction projects; efforts to improve the resilience of critical infrastructure andkey resource lifelines; risk reduction for specific vulnerabilities from natural hazards or acts of terrorism; andinitiatives to reduce future risks after a disaster has occurred.”2
National Mitigation Frameworkresources. Taking such a broad view enables leaders to assess existing interdependencies, associatedvulnerabilities, and cascading effects so that communities understand the risks thoroughly enough toplan not only for those identified and quantified but also for residual risks.America’s security and resilience work is never finished. While the Nation is safer, stronger, andbetter prepared than it was a decade ago, the commitment to safeguard the Nation against its greatestrisks, now and for decades to come, remains resolute.I n t en d ed A u d i en ceThe Mitigation Framework addresses individuals, nonprofit entities and nongovernmentalorganizations (NGOs), the private sector, communities, critical infrastructure interests, governments,and the Nation as a whole. Engaging the whole community is critical to success and individual andcommunity preparedness is a key component. By providing equal access to acquire and use thenecessary knowledge and skills, the whole community can contribute to and benefit from nationalpreparedness. This includes children, individuals with disabilities and others with access andfunctional needs; 4 those from religious, racial, and ethnically diverse backgrounds; and people withlimited English proficiency (LEP). Their contributions must be integrated into preparedness efforts,and their needs must be incorporated as the whole community plans and executes the corecapabilities.ScopePPD-8 directed the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop a National Preparedness Goal—through a coordinated effort with other Executive Branch departments and agencies and consultationwith local, state, tribal, and territorial governments, the private and nonprofit sectors, and thepublic—to define “the core capabilities necessary to prepare for the specific types of incidents thatpose the greatest risk to the security of the Nation” and a series of National Planning Frameworks tocoordinate efforts to deliver the capabilities defined in the Goal.The National Mitigation Framework is one of five frameworks developed to enable achievement ofthe goal of a secure and resilient Nation with the capabilities required to prevent, protect against,mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk across thewhole community. The Framework addresses how the Nation will develop, employ, and coordinatecore mitigation capabilities to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters.Building on a wealth of objective and evidence-based knowledge and community experience, theFramework seeks to increase risk awareness and leverage mitigation products, services, and assetsacross the whole community.Mitigation is the thread that permeates the fabric of national preparedness.This Framework describes the seven core capabilities necessary for successful mitigation that willlead to a more resilient Nation. This Framework is driven by risk rather than the occurrence ofincidents. By fostering comprehensive risk considerations, the Framework encourages behaviors andactivities that will reduce the exposure and vulnerability of communities.4Access and functional needs includes ensuring the equal access and meaningful participation of all individuals,without discrimination.3
National Mitigation FrameworkG u i d i n g P ri n ci p l esThe four guiding principles for mitigation include Resilience and Sustainability, Leadership andLocally Focused Implementation, Engaged Partnerships and Inclusiveness, and Risk-consciousCulture. These principles lay the foundation for the Mitigation mission and the execution of its corecapabilities.Resilience and SustainabilityPreparing people, property, critical infrastructure resources, and the economy to withstand or absorbthe impact of an incident and rebound in a manner that sustains their way of life in the aftermathmakes their communities and the Nation more resilient. Individuals, communities, NGOs, all levelsof government, and the private sector should consider the long-term economic, health, social, andenvironmental dimensions of their choices and ensure resilience is maintained and improved.Sustainability employs a longer-term approach through plans, policies, and actions that reflect acomprehensive understanding of the economic, social, and environmental systems within acommunity.5The National Mitigation Framework addresses two dimensions of resilience :Community resilience is an inclusive, informed process that addresses social,economic, natural and cultural, technical, and organizational dimensions within acommunity—preparing a community to consciously mitigate rather than ignore risks.Resilience is an outcome—the state of being able to adapt to changing conditions andthen withstand and rebound from the impacts of disasters and incidents.Leadership and Locally Focused ImplementationMitigation empowers formal and informal local leaders to embrace their ownership of buildingresilient and sustainable communities. Effective, ongoing mitigation is led by the local community,working together to identify, plan for, and reduce vulnerabilities and promote long-term personal andcommunity resilience and sustainability. Everyday discussions and actions can have unexpectedimplications for risk management and, therefore, should be viewed through the mitigation lens.Leaders at the state and national levels support local leadership by facilitating effective ongoingmitigation through setting a vision, aligning programs, and supporting local efforts as needed.Engaged Partnerships and InclusivenessMitigation is advanced through the collective actions of many groups. No one entity can accomplishthese goals. These partnerships may include: All levels of government Faith-based organizations Nonprofit organizations Private/corporate entities Public groups Community associations5The National Mitigation Framework builds on the definition of resilience as defined in the National PreparednessGoal, September 2011.4
National Mitigation Framework Academia Experts Professional groups Neighbors.Participation within these partnerships should include advocates for children, seniors, individualswith disabilities and others with access and functional needs, racially and ethnically diversecommunities, people with LEP, and animals. The most effective partnerships within a communitycapitalize on all available resources—identifying, developing, fostering, and strengthening new andexisting coordinating structures to create a unity of effort. Many of the community organizations andpartners have active roles in the other mission areas as well.Establishing trusted relationships among leaders and communities prior to a disaster is essential tocommunity resilience and sustainability. These relationships enhance and strengthen day-to-daymitigation efforts and are critical for timely and effective response and recovery activities during andafter a disaster event. This inclusiveness will generate public awareness and support to reach thecommon objective of mitigating risk and promoting resilience.Risk-conscious CultureThe American people, resources, economy, and way of life are bolstered and made more resilient byanticipating, communicating, and preparing for threats and hazards—both internal and external—through comprehensive and deliberate risk management. The value of a risk management approachor strategy to decision makers is not in the promotion of a particular course of action but rather in theability to distinguish among various risk management choices for accepting, avoiding, reducing, ortransferring the risk within the larger context.Nurturing a risk-conscious culture enables community leaders to routinely and systematicallyevaluate a wide variety of threats and hazards and then prioritize strategies, resources, and effortsusing a comprehensive approach. A risk-conscious culture involves providing clear, meaningful,consistent, accessible (including for people with LEP), and culturally appropriate or multidisciplinary messaging so that the whole community embraces mitigation and reduces its exposureand vulnerability to risk. Information should be communicated to LEP individuals throughinterpreters and translated documents. Information and messaging must ensure effectivecommunication with individuals with disabilities and others with access and functional needs,including the deaf, hard of hearing, blind, or people with low vision, through the use of appropriateauxiliary aids and services, such as sign language and other interpreters, and the captioning of audioand video materials. Systems, communities, and institutions that are robust, adaptable, and have thecapacity for rapid recovery contribute to overall public safety and security.Resilience is an end-state of effective risk management. Risk management includes identifyingopportunities to build resilience into planning, resourcing to reduce risk in advance of a hazard, andmitigating the consequences of disasters that occur. By focusing on the resilience of the communityas a whole, the community’s adaptive capacity to recover from all kinds of change is enhanced,whether that risk has been identified or not.R i s k Ba si sRisk is the potential for an unwanted outcome resulting from an incident or caused by systemicdegradation, as determined by its likelihood, associated consequences, and vulnerability to thoseconsequences.5
National Mitigation FrameworkThe Strategic National Risk Assessment (SNRA) was developed as part of the larger PPD-8 effort.The core capabilities in the National Preparedness Goal are informed by the results of the SNRA,which identifies the threats and hazards most likely to affect the Nation. The SNRA assigned threatsand hazards for the Nation into three categories: natural hazards; technological/accidental hazards;and adversarial/human-caused threats/hazards. 6 The risks and threats identified by SNRA include thefollowing: Natural hazards, including hurricanes, earthquakes, wildfires, and floods, present a significantand varied risk across the country. A virulent strain of pandemic influenza could kill hundreds of thousands of Americans, affectmillions more, and result in considerable economic loss. Additional human and animal infectiousdiseases, including those previously undiscovered, may also present significant risks. Technological and accidental hazards, such as dam failures or chemical substance spills orreleases, have the potential to cause extensive fatalities and severe economic impacts, and thelikelihood of occurrence may increase due to aging infrastructure. Terrorist organizations or affiliates may seek to acquire, build, and use weapons of massdestruction. Conventional terrorist attacks, including those by lone actors employing explosivesand armed attacks, present a continued risk to the Nation. Cyber attacks can have catastrophic consequences and may also have cascading effects such aspower grid or financial system failures.Mitigation, as a mission area, is specifically intended to minimize risks associated with these threatsand hazards. No single threat or hazard exists in isolation. As an example, a hurricane can lead toflooding, dam failures, and hazardous materials spills. The National Preparedness Goal, therefore,focuses on Mitigation core capabilities that can be applied to deal with cascading effects as well asother unknown risks. Figure 1 depicts some of the threats and hazards that guided the development ofthis Framework. Communities should consider them in their analyses.66Generally, “threats” relate to adversarial concerns.
National Mitigation FrameworkFigure 1: Examples of Threats and Hazards by CategoryPlanning for and managing the “greatest risks” are fundamental components of the NationalPreparedness Goal and the National Preparedness Syst
National Mitigation Framework . In implementing the National Mitigation Framework to build national preparedness, partners are . 1 While businesses make money by taking risks, they lose money by failing to effectively manage those risks. Similarly, in the public sector, choices are made every day that affect the .
Attachment 2 - Cemetery Mitigation Study . FMM Draft Cemetery Mitigation Plan . June 2015. Main Report Appendix A - USACE Mitigation Study dated June 2014 Appendix B - Cemetery Parcel Maps Appendix C - Historic Inundation Maps Appendix D - Cemetery Mitigation Study Site Plans Appendix E - Off Site Access Map Appendix F - Cost .
Hydraulic Fracturing and Horizontal Directional Drilling FEMA Policy #302-094-03 BACKGROUND . This policy applies to all Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) programs. HMA is comprised of the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program, and the Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program.
These principles lay the foundation for the Mitigation mission and the execution of its core capabilities. Effective mitigation begins with a comprehensive understanding of risk based on vulnerabilities to threats and hazards. Aiming toward the ultimate goal of sustainability and resilience, mitigation
Independent Personal Pronouns Personal Pronouns in Hebrew Person, Gender, Number Singular Person, Gender, Number Plural 3ms (he, it) א ִוה 3mp (they) Sֵה ,הַָּ֫ ֵה 3fs (she, it) א O ה 3fp (they) Uֵה , הַָּ֫ ֵה 2ms (you) הָּ תַא2mp (you all) Sֶּ תַא 2fs (you) ְ תַא 2fp (you
4.1ser Cooperative: Main Features U 14 4.2ser Cooperative Business Model: Risks and Mitigation Measures U 15 4.3gy Performance Contracting Business Model: Risks and Mitigation Measures Ener 18 5.1 Solar Battery Charging Stations: Potential Issues and Mitigation Measures 23 5.2ybrid Minigrid Systems: Issues and Mitigation Measures H 28
Local Mitigation Planning Handbook . is a tool for local governments to use in developing or updating a local hazard mitigation plan. The purpose of the . Handbook. is the following: 1. To provide guidance to local governments on developing or updating hazard mitigation plans to meet the requ
Figure 3: Comprehensive cyber-attack protection with detection & mitigation idest Attack Coverage, ncluding Lased Attacks Radware's attack mitigation solution offers a multi-vector attack detection and mitigation solution, handling attacks at the network layer, server based attacks, malware propagation and intrusion activities. The solution
Behavioral counterproductive behavior is a type of deviant behavior in an organization that is conceptualized as a form of deviation that combines different behaviors and is structured on the nature of the target (individual organization) and the degree of seriousness of the (minor-major) behavior. The dimension of the nature of the target (individual-organization) in question is whether the .
