|
19SHSP Investment and Regional Project
<br />Investment Justification
<br />REVISED ATTACHMENT #2
<br />Washington is comprised of 39 counties with geography including forests, mountains, islands, rainforests, rivers, lakes, and plains.
<br />The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis ranked Washington 13 of 50 states for gross domestic product in 2017; several world-class
<br />organizations headquarter theiroperations within the state. Washington has marine, aviation, rail, and road transportation
<br />infrastructure to support its position as a bustling trade center. Approximately half of Washington's 7.5 million population lives in
<br />the Seattle metropolitan area located alongthe Puget Sound. This area is the centerof transportation, business, and industry and is
<br />the fastest growing region in the state. Over three-fourths of the state's population lives In densely settled urbanized areas.
<br />Understanding Washington's population is critical in orderto mitigate vulnerabilities, respond to Incidents, and effectively
<br />concentrate recovery efforts. Washington is subject toten natural hazards and seven human -caused hazards. The THIRA focuses on
<br />eight ofthose risks: earthquake, tsunami, flood, biological [communicable disease], wildfire, radiological, cyber incident, and
<br />terrorism. Planning, training, and exercise efforts are being restructured to encompass the entire spectrum of catastrophic Incidents
<br />within this context. Washington saw few significant changes in the 2018 Capabilities Assessment. The lowest rated capabilities were
<br />Situational Assessment, Mass Care Services, Economic Recovery, Health and Social Services, and Housing —all essential during a
<br />catastrophic Incident. -The strongest capabilities lie In Pubic Information and Warning and the most opportunity lie In Situational
<br />Assessment. The 2018 SPR results confirmed the findings from prioryears: Stakeholders at every level struggle to sustain emergency
<br />response capabilities with dwindling resources and are significantly challenged preparing for catastrophic disasters. Since the early
<br />2000s, cumulative emergency management funding at the state and local levels has reduced significantly causing an Increased
<br />dependence onfederal grantsto meet necessary emergency management requirements, As a result, many areas are in a
<br />sustainment mode when it comesto emergency management capability and capacity.
<br />Investment #3 - Regional Homeland Security Projects
<br />The State is divided Into 9 Homeland Security Regions, made up of 39 counties, which differ in many respects Including geography
<br />(from marineto desert), major industry (from large business to agricultural), and population (from dense urban settings to rural
<br />areas). Each Region develops projects to address their specific risks and hazards which sustain previously built capabilities orclose
<br />Identified gaps. While the communities may differ, emergency management priorities are similaracross the state and most
<br />initiatives can be tied back to building regional capability to respond and recover, and be in "a state of readiness" through planning,
<br />training, equipping, orexercising, should a natural or human -caused catastrophic incident occur. As communicated in the 2017 and
<br />confirmed In the 2018THIRA, Capabilities Estimation, & SPR, gaps have been identified in the following core capabilities. All
<br />jurisdictions have targeted efforts related to Operational Coordination. The foremost gaps are: 1) PLANNING: Plans lack horizontal
<br />and vertica I integration and need adjusting to be scalable for use during a catastrophic incident. Recovery needs to be incorporated.
<br />2) ORGANIZATION: Response and recovery to catastrophic Incidents will require additional trained personnel to support either large-
<br />scale or long-term activations. 3) EQUIPMENT: There is a lack of integration and interoperability of toolstoform a Common
<br />Operating Picture forall stakeholders. Additionally, equipment continues to age, with subsequent degradation occurring with
<br />routine usage, and there is a lack offunding to sustain and/or replace. Resiliency Is still an evolving concept without a formalized
<br />statewide, whole community approach tofocus efforts, While the State is introducing initiatives to combat that reality, local
<br />jurisdictions still struggle with gaps related to Community Resilience: 1) TRAINING: Individuals and businesses need to move from
<br />awareness to action. 2) EXERCISE: Communities are dependent on volunteers to exercise this capability and do not have the tools or
<br />expertise to engage stakeholders. Related to Resilience, jurisdictions recognize the need to communicate with all stakeholders and
<br />continue to expand the reach of their messaging. Initiatives are ongoing to address the identified Public Information and Warning
<br />gap related to 1) PLANNING: Plans do notfully address communicating with non-English speaking populations, immigrant groups,
<br />and individuals with disabilities.
<br />Regional Hazards and Risks - Reasons for the Work
<br />Terrorist targets Include:
<br />• Hydroelectricfacilities
<br />• Transportation
<br />• Public Events
<br />• Industry
<br />Primary aft -hazard risks Include:
<br />• Wildland Fires
<br />• Landslides
<br />• Floods
<br />• Winter Storms
<br />• Wind Storms
<br />• Earthquakes
<br />• Pandemic Incidents
<br />DHS-FEMA-HSGP-SHSP-FFY19 Page 3 of 9 Kittitas County, E20-087 Amendment A
<br />
|