The Incident Command System - Gold Silver and Bronze Command Structure - Case Study Example

Incident Command System Contents INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………. Pg 1 HISTORY ……………………………………………………………………….. Pg 2 Gold Silver and Bronze command STRUCTURE...……………….. Pg 2 Sectorisation ……………………………………………………….………Pg 3 Span of Control …………………………………………………….……...Pg 5 Use of Command Support System …………………………….……..Pg 5 Tactical Advancements …………………………………………....…...Pg 5 Advantage ………………………………………………….….…………...Pg 6 ICS guidelines for a High-rise building……………...……………Pg 7 Harrow court high-rise incident………………………...………….Pg 8 Dynamic Risk Assessment ………………………………………………..Pg 9 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………….Pg 11 BIBIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………………Pg 12 Introduction The ICS {Incident Command System} is a management procedure to handle the entire range of dangerous issues arising throughout the retort to a hazardous situation. The Incident Command System involves skilled and well-trained recruits, amenities, apparatus, interactions, and measures all of these in commission within a common managerial composition to attain control over a perilous event. With Incident Command System in position, an absolute association is accessible that consists of the following sub-divisions: Command Operations Planning Logistics Finance Command support functions: safety, liaison, staging and information. The Incident Command System is deliberated to allocate for the participation of several agencies, together with manufacturing, national, state and local crisis management agencies. ICS terms are consequently premeditated for recognition and effectuation by all stages of industries and governments. As the ICS is a fundamental on a daily basis maneuvering system for all crisis situations, evolution of the system to huge functioning’s involves least modifications. (Murphy, 1998) For instance, the Incident Command System primarily imparts the management of all foremost confrontation tasks on solitary or a small number of personnel’s; as the crisis event develops in mass or density, the administration of all actions can be allocated to a number of supplementary officials to sustain the suitable level of control and competence. The fundamental organizational configuration is valid to miniature events, harmful substance leaks, huge industrialized conflagration disasters and occasions which do not unswervingly involve blazes and spills, such as cyclones, floods, rescue operations or events arising due to the terrorist activities. The managerial structure of the ICS is proficient to acclimatize to any unfortunate incident to which the officials would be anticipated to act in response. (Donald W. Walsh, 2005) ICS has been recapitulated as an "earliest-on-sight" formation, where the initial respondent on the crisis location have authority of the hazardous situation until the confrontation is resolute or the primary responder shifts the command of incident to an, added-experienced entity. History The Incident Command System was formulated initially in the state of California in the first half of the year 1970, during a gigantic scaled wildfire rescue operation. Due to the lack of safety guidelines to control a catastrophe the California witnessed enormous loss of millions of dollars as well as several precious human lives. The emergency control system managers are unable to control the incident due to the following reasons: Excessive number of persons deployed under sole authority. Diversified tragedy reaction divisional organizations. Deficiency of trustworthy confrontation knowledge. Insufficient and irreconcilable interactions. Lack of responsibility, together with uncertain manacles of authority and administration. Disaster supervisors felt that the current disaster management arrangements which were normally distinctive to every organization did not fulfill extents to cope with colossal mutual aid responses which include several different agencies. As an effect, a novel authority and control prototype was collaboratively urbanized to supply a reliable, incorporated outline for the managing of all incidents ranging from miniature incidents to huge emergencies. (National Fire Academy, 1993) Gold Silver and Bronze command structure The procedure of “Gold, Silver, Bronze command structure” is adapted by the crisis care services of the United Kingdom to set up a hierarchical outline for the authority and organization of key incidents and catastrophes. The fundamental of “Gold, Silver and Bronze Command Structure” was developed in the year 1985 by the metropolitan police of United Kingdom soon after a public riot occurred in London led by the murder of a cop “Keith Blakelock” Gold The Gold Commander is the supreme authority over the entire management resources available at the crisis scene controlling and issuing directives from a centralized control-room. The Gold Commanders are responsible for the development of strategies and their implementation towards controlling and remedies of the situation. The silver commanders receive the flow of directives issued from the Control-room. (Panel, 2007) Silver Silver Commanders are the strategic Commanders responsible for the successful management and implementation of the received directives from the Gold commanders. Usually, the silver commanders operate from their command automobile control rooms, which are usually located at the JESCC “Joint Emergency Services Control Centre”. Silver commanders do not deal directly with the crisis. (Panel, 2007) Bronze The Bronze Commanders are the direct authorities responsible for managing and utilizing the resources available as per the directives received from the silver commanders. The bronze commanders are the direct respondents on a tragedy scene who face direct exposure with the calamity and it is their responsibility to ensure public safety and maintain minimum loss. However, if the occurrence of event is of a multifarious temperament, several Bronze commanders are deployed in accordance to their specializations to handle the event more efficiently. (Panel, 2007) Sectorisation Sorting out the substantial or serviceable areas of the calamity occurrence spot or crisis situation on the basis of its size, severity and complexity for the ease of management and control is known as “Sectorisation.” for the effectual management of incident, each sector has a different “Sector Commander” designated with a team of professionals. The procedure of Sectorisation an event depends on three major factors: 1. Serviceable Group: the “Serviceable” or “Functional” group refers to the group association of expert individuals to manage a specific assignment. 2. Geographical surroundings: it is referred to the Sectorisation on the basis of the geographical conditions of an event for instance, if there is a crisis situation on a building or a multistory then it would be categorized into the divisions for effective controlling. 3. Combination: The procedure of combination is implemented when due to the complex surroundings of hazardous spot the implementation of previous both factors is necessary. The margins of operational sectors ought to pursue usual topographical precincts: A huge structure could have a division covering every direction. A skyrocketing construction should be segmented vertically. A compound RTA might have a subdivision for all faction of means of transportation A wild-life fire can have a Sector for each firefighting frontage. A Sector can also be an area of accountability or expert role. In each possibility discussed above, the decisive aspect is that the capacity of managing sum of commotions effectively to be handled by solitary commander (Bernard J. Klaene, 2007) Source: www.westyorksfire.gov.uk Span of Control The “Span of Control” is the perimeter of the amount of errands and assets, managed by a sole commander; the Incident Command System necessitates that span of control of any sole authority ought to be amid three and seven while, five is considered to be reasonable. (Murphy, 1998) Use of Command Support System Command Support System facilitates all commanders and mobile command centers with a widespread operational database, on division and incident commanders’ fixed and itinerant display panels during the functioning at confrontation vicinity and at tactical level control displays back at control center of operations. As per the provisions made in ICS, when a incident develops complex in nature the IC is aided by the joining of a Support officer to mutually synchronize the smooth flow of information, response proceedings and material management and law enforcement agencies. Inner cordon is a perimeter setup instantaneously in the region of an incident. The bronze commanders are in charge of inner cordon. Outer cordon is a control room setup on a remote location on a safe distance from the incident to issue directives to the rescue operations to control the menace. (National Fire Academy, 1993) Tactical Advancements OFFENSIVE: In this mode, the firefighters perform forcibly entry in coordination with ventilation support and overhaul into the fire-ground and suppress fire by initiating a fast, aggressive, interior attack and searching for victims trapped. (Avillo, 2002) DEFENSIVE: It is implemented in case of fires where the fires are so extensive that the safe distance had to be maintained. All emergency professionals are directed to exterior operations only due to the high priority of “exposure protection” and less priority to building on fire. (Avillo, 2002) TRANSITIONAL: There are dreary areas circumstances in a fire-ground strategy, where the definite rudiments of both of these edges i.e. Offensive & Defensive, penetrates into the real fire-ground practice and are utilized in anecdotal extents to deal with the current and prospect tribulations. These tactical approaches are known as transitional tactics. (Avillo, 2002) Advantage It consumed lot of years and extreme field testing in allocating a consistent disaster management system to provide remedies for the issues that arise during an event. The Incident Command System was urbanized by an “interagency task force” operational in a supportive local, state, and national interagency endeavor called “FIRESCOPE.” (William M. Kramer, 1992) While, in the process of developing the system the four significant factors have been highlighted for a successful system: 1. The structure ought to be managerially bendable to congregate with the requirements of incidents of all sorts and sizes. 2. Emergency Control Agencies be required to be proficient to implement the system on a daily basis intended for usual circumstances as well as for huge disasters. 3. The method must be adequately customary to permit workers from several agencies and assorted geographic sites to swiftly bond into a general management formation. 4. The system has to be price efficient. By implementation of Incident Command System it enhances the communiqué and synchronization of several agencies, and assists the security of human life and belongings. ICS attains this primary objective by creating a modus operandi command center for an event or multiple incidents and by means of ordinary terms that make certain that each participating person will comprehend “what is being said and how to acknowledge it properly”. (Moats, 2007) The absence of an effective incident command system can lead to a severe catastrophe and uncontrollable number of mishaps triggered by an unfortunate incident. The death toll in addition to the monetary and trauma loss can arise up to hefty escalated figures. There are many rescue and law enforcement agencies operational for the management and protection of citizens. In case of a trauma all the responsible agencies commence their rescue operations separately and with their distributed resources and lack of unified command authority the strength to control the event diminishes resulting in creating havoc. Therefore, the ICS is a very significant procedure to unify all the service agencies into one organization. ICS guidelines for a High-rise building The ICS module for high-rise structures is planned to endow with effectual administration and manage necessary tasks at incidents stirring in hefty, multi-story complexes. These sorts of incidents might present considerable management, logistical and security challenges to disaster personnel. The mass and intricacy of the internal spaces that are usually inadequate, occasionally difficult access, with extensive reaction periods all donating to the tribulations faced by the crisis responders. In addition, nearly all high-rise constructions are outfitted with assorted environmental, fire safety, and life safety systems that have need for external maintenance and control. High-Rise Fire preliminary assault: The above chart (Fig. 1.1) illustrates the primary job with a Incident Commander managing a fire started on a solo floor of a high-rise construction. The Incident commander has positioned available resources to Fire assault, entrance management, Staging, and Base. The exigent temperament of high-rise incidents entails alteration to the regular ICS conceptions of a “Staging Area.” The imperfect access and upright travel space of huge high-rise constructions obliges for establishment of a “supply Staging Area” within the structure. The high-rise Staging Area ought to provide several purposes. The “Staging Area” is usually established two floors underneath of the hazard, as elongated as the ambiance is justifiable. The Base at a high-rise event looks a lot like a floor level Staging Area. The major distinction between Base and a typical Staging Area is that Base must be stretched to execute the task intrinsic to sustaining huge figures of staff and apparatus. (http://www.westyorksfire.gov.uk/) Harrow court high-rise incident On Feb 02, 2005, the residents of 17-storey Harrow court, Stevenage Hertfordshire witnessed a horrified blaze. The summit of the building block was blackened and seared and windows of the staircases were shattered due to the immense heat. As per the emergency services investigations, the blazes were ought to began about approximately 2:55 am. The rescue agencies and firefighters reached on the scene soon after and deployed more than 16 fire engines and 65 courageous firefighters. Due to the lack of ICS in Hertfordshire fire authority the authority fails to provide adequate measures, required to allocate their fire crews to fight this fire safely. Two brave firefighters “Michael Millar”, 26, from Stevenage, and “Jeff Wornham”, 28, from Royston loose their lives while saving the residents. About 71 citizens were timely evacuated from the residential complex as severe temperature liquefied window frames and conflagration had swelled to the floors above. It is perceptible that the Firefighters and administrative command officers in the primary turnout at Harrow Court have acknowledged inadequate proper Incident Command preparation and unconnectedly committed, realistic and theoretical section Fire Behavior guidance to covenant securely and efficiently with the circumstances they were tackled with. (www.guardian.co.uk) Dynamic Risk Assessment Source: www.westyorksfire.gov.uk The main purpose of Dynamic Risk Assessment is to evaluate the hazardous situation, tasks and risk prone lives. (http://www.westyorksfire.gov.uk/) While, assessing Dynamic Risk the factors considered includes the following: The availability and consistency of the fire protection tactics and equipped astuteness Identification of the essential errands. The possibilities of vulnerabilities in performing the rescue tasks in those particular circumstances. The danger related with the calamity to the firefighters, rescue workers, nearby community and the surroundings. Identification of the resources accessible Scheming the structure of task Dynamic Risk Assessment assesses the probable classification of job and recommends the proper structure according to the calamity. The initial point for the assessment is the measures that have been approved in the pre- scheduling and preparation. Dynamic Risk Assessment makes certain that the recruits are enough skilled to achieve the aims that has been allocated to them. Evaluating the Selected Job Structure Dynamic Risk Assessment evaluates the selected classification of multiple tasks on grounds detailed below: If the threat is comparative to the profit then it is recommended to advance with the rescue jobs only after making certain that: The AIMS that are pre-settled are well comprehended by the both personals and the teams involved. The tasks have been unmistakably allocated. The Safety procedures and events are well acknowledged by the rescuers. In case, if the outcome of the assessment is negative than it is recommended that: Initiate Supplementary Reins If feasible, eradicate, or trim down any left over dangers to an adequate intensity by initiating the supplementary control actions, like: Utilization of “PPE” such as the protection spectacles, security attachments etc. Utilization of “BA” Utilization of dedicated professional equipment such as “HP, TL etc.” Utilization of the security official(s).   RE-EVALUATION OF JOB STRUCTURES AND ADDED ACTIONS If the situation of calamity residues than, do the advantage achieved from the operations compensate the probable costs if the jeopardy are grasped? If the remuneration prevails over the danger ensue with the errands. If the risk prevails over the advantage, it is recommended to NOT carry on with the errands, and judge feasible substitutes. (Moats, 2007) The dynamic risk assessment was not performed at the Harrow Court Incident. Had there been an incident Command System present with the emergency control department, the loss of the two firemen’s could have been prevented. There was no proper plan of action prosecuted by the fire personnel’s present. The damage could have been minimized by the help of proper correlation between theory and practical happenings. (www.guardian.co.uk) Conclusion Crises administration, at all stages, is by no means lay extra strappingly to the examination than in a crisis condition. The goals are instantaneous and so are the consequences. What an individual and those around you do or don't do will have elongated enduring insinuations. To facilitate is why it is necessary to build up an incident command system bendable enough to clinch the strategic, as well as, the premeditated rudiments required for effectual retort. The objectives for instituting a flexible incident command system comprises: Effectual harmonization of actions amongst the groups performing a task. Premature caution and apparent directives to the common civic in the pretentious sector in case of event occurrence. Sustained evaluation of authentic or possible results on mutually onsite and offsite. Faultless configuration within the Multi-organization squads. In approximately each occasion of triumphant retort to a disaster, organization and rejoinder actions comprising of sound working implementation joined with better communiqué preponderate. Strategic confrontation command is necessary. It is the solitary command that protects precious human lives, possessions and other chattels. The capability to synchronize the assortment of talents essential to moderate a catastrophe necessitates a tactical incident command system. Bibliography Avillo, A. (2002). Fireground Strategies: Fire Engineering. PennWell Books. Bernard J. Klaene, B. J. (2007). Structural Firefighting: Strategies and Tactics. Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Donald W. Walsh, H. T. (2005). National Incident Management System: Principles and Practice. Jones & Bartlett Publishers. http://www.westyorksfire.gov.uk/. (n.d.). Moats, J. B. (2007). Agroterrorism: A Guide for First Responders. Texas A&M University Press. Murphy, J. (1998). Rapid Incident Command System . PennWell Books. National Fire Academy, F. E. (1993). Incident Command System. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Panel, L. E. (2007). LESLP Major Incident Procedure Manual: Major Incident Procedure Manual - Seventh Edition. The Stationery Office. William M. Kramer, C. W. (1992). Fire Officer's Guide to Disaster Control . PennWell Books. www.fbu.org.uk. (n.d.). www.guardian.co.uk. (n.d.). Read More