|
19SHSP investment and Regional Project
<br />Investment Justification
<br />ATTACHMENT #2
<br />Washington is comprised of 39 counties with geography including forests, mountains, islands, rainforests, rivers, lakes,
<br />and plains. The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis ranked Washington 13 of 50 states for gross domestic product in
<br />2017; several world-class organizations headquarter their operations within the state. Washington has marine,
<br />aviation, rail, and road transportation infrastructure to support its position as a bustling trade center. Approximately
<br />half of Washington's 7.5 million population lives in the Seattle metropolitan area located along the Puget Sound. This
<br />area is the center of transportation, business, and industry and is the fastest growing region in the state. Over three-
<br />fourths of the state's population lives in densely settled urbanized areas. Understanding Washington's population is
<br />critical in order to mitigate vulnerabilities, respond to incidents, and effectively concentrate recovery efforts.
<br />Washington is subject to ten natural hazards and seven human -caused hazards. The THIRA focuses on eight of those
<br />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
<br />catastrophic incidents within this context. Washington saw few significant changes in the 2018 Capabilities Assessment
<br />The lowest rated capabilities were Situational Assessment, Mass Care Services, Economic Recovery, Health and Social
<br />Services, and Housing— all essential during a catastrophic incident. - The strongest capabilities lie in Pubic Information
<br />and Warning and the most opportunity lie in Situational Assessment The 2018 SPR results confirmed the findings from
<br />prior years: Stakeholders at every level struggle to sustain emergency response capabilities with dwindling resources
<br />and are significantly challenged preparing for catastrophic disasters. Since the early 2000s, cumulative emergency
<br />management funding at the state and local levels has reduced significantly causing an increased dependence on federal
<br />grants to meet necessary emergency management requirements. As a result, many areas are In a sustainment mode
<br />when it comes to 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
<br />geography (from marine to desert), major industry (from large business to agricultural), and population (from dense
<br />urban settings to rural areas). Each Region develops projects to address their specific risks and hazards which sustain
<br />previously built capabilities or close identified gaps. While the communities may differ, emergency management
<br />priorities are similar across the state and most Initiatives can be tied back to building regional capability to respond and
<br />recover, and be in "a state of readiness" through planning, training, equipping, or exercising, should a natural or human -
<br />caused catastrophic incident occur. As communicated in the 2017 and confirmed in the 2018 THIRA, Capabilities
<br />Estimation, & SPR, gaps have been identified in the following core capabilities. All jurisdictions have targeted efforts
<br />related to Operational Coordination. The foremost gaps are: 1) PLANNING: Plans lack horizontal and vertical
<br />integration and need adjusting to be scalable for use during a catastrophic incident Recovery needs to be
<br />Incorporated. 2) ORGANIZATION: Response and recovery to catastrophic incidents will require additional trained
<br />personnel to support either large-scale or long-term activations. 3) EQUIPMENT: There is a lack of integration and
<br />interoperability of tools to form a Common Operating Picture for all stakeholders. Additionally, equipment continues
<br />to age, with subsequent degradation occurring with routine usage, and there is a lack of funding to sustain and/or
<br />replace. Resiliency Is still an evolving concept without a formalized statewide, whole community approach to focus
<br />efforts. While the State is introducing initiatives to combat that reality, local jurisdictions still struggle with gaps related
<br />to Community Resilience: 1) TRAINING: Individuals and businesses need to move from awareness to action. 2)
<br />D(ERCISE: Communities are dependent on volunteers to exercise this capability and do not have the tools or expertise
<br />to engage stakeholders. Related to Resilience, jurisdictions recognize the need to communicate with all stakeholders
<br />and continue to expand the reach of their messaging. Initiatives are ongoing to address the identified Public
<br />Information and Warning gap related to 1) PLANNING: Plans do not fully address communicating with non-English
<br />speaking populations, immigrant groups, and individuals with disabilities.
<br />DHS-FEMA-HSGP-SHSP-FFY19 Page 32 of 37 Kittitas County. E22-260
<br />
|