Recovery Phase - Assignment Example

Running Head: Recovery Phase Recovery Phase Customer's name: Institution: Customer's Course Tutor's Name 15th September, 2015 Introduction After a prolonged period of drought that lasted for about 10 years, Victoria braced itself for intense fire threat. The 2009 Victorian bushfires also termed as the Black Saturday Bushfires were almost 400 bushfires that took place on 7th February 2009 in Victoria Australia. The fire caused the highest number of casualties in loss of life and the police stated that about 173 people lost their lives, while about 5,000 people were injured. The fires also burnt down about 2,029 homes, 3,500 buildings and killed animals. A great number of towns in the north-east of Melbourne were destroyed while some were completely destroyed and this included towns such as Maryville, Strathewen, Kinglake, Narbethong and Flowerdale. A great number of houses in towns such as Humevale, Steels Creek, Calignee, and Wandong were also destroyed and damaged. In each of the towns, there were people who were killed and the fire displaced about 7,500 people and firemen and women who exceeded 4000 worked in trying to stop and control the fires. Despite these, the fires were still burning even after two weeks since the time they started. As a response to the bushfire disaster, the Victorian Government came up with the Victorian Bushfire Reconstruction and Recovery Authority (VBRRA). The body was charged with the duty of coordinating and overseeing the recovery as well as the rebuilding program in the affected areas. The body worked in partnership with affected all the affected communities, charities, councils, businesses, as well as with the state and central government agencies. The Victorian Bushfire Reconstruction and Recovery Authority (VBRRA) made noteworthy steps in the year subsequent to the tragedy. Homes were being reconstructed, businesses were returning to normalcy, a great number of community gatherings were taking place, and the renewal of the natural surroundings was in progress. On the other hand, regardless of these distinguished accomplishments, there was still a long journey ahead. This report sets out to outline; The principles that should guide management of the recovery phase Key strategies required to ensure the effective management of the recovery phase How to evaluate the effectiveness of the management of the recovery phase. Principles to guide management of the recovery phase Recovery from a disaster can take long periods, for instance, months or years since it aims at supporting the affected communities in trying to reconstruct the physical infrastructure as well as the social, emotional and physical well being. The process of restoring, rebuilding and rehabilitating a community continues in anticipation of the period when the disruption can be fully rectified and demands of all services being returned to the normally accepted levels and the needs of those who have being affected have been met in the most effective manner. Australia has a robust and world class healthcare system. Complex and natural disasters are likely to lead to a massive number of casualties that they may outstrip the ability of local health care systems to provide the much needed care. Additionally, the situation may further be compromised if health care infrastructures are damaged (Pan American Health Organization 2003). A major principle that could have guided the recovery phase of the Black Saturday bushfire is anticipation. The anticipation principle is crucial in the post emergency, emergency phases and in effective recovery. All emergencies such as the Black Saturday bushfire has both direct as well as indirect impacts that may not be evident amidst all the uncertainties, pressure and demanding circumstances of emergencies. In the Black Saturday bushfire, the risk was dynamic. New risks emerged while the previously recognized risks receded. The bushfire created a great demand for resources, time and management and this was a major challenge during the bush fire since a great number of people were affected and facilities such as hospitals were destroyed. This called for set up of temporary hospitals (Pan American Health Organization 2003). The other guiding principle in the recovery phase is preparedness. All individuals who would be involved in the recovery phase needed to be prepared appropriately. This requires a clear understanding of the roles as well as the responsibilities and how they will fit in the wider picture (Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing 2005). For instance, after the bushfires, the health care professionals had important roles to play to enhance rehabilitation of the people. These can be based on the fact that, the people will have been affected by the incident even emotionally. The fire incident also caused a great strain in the already existing government facilities and organizations. Based on the scale of the tragedy, it was obvious that present preparations would not be adequate to meet up the requirements of recuperation thus an astonishing comeback was necessary and that meant that, there was need for support from other entities outside the ordinary business of government of Australia. Another guiding principle in the recovery phase is subsidiarity. The approach to emergency situation such as the bush fires calls for a bottom up approach and this means that the operations ought to be managed and decisions made in the lowest possible level that is in the local area. In this case, the local agencies in Victoria acted as the building blocks of the recovery operations in the area. But since the case of the bush fire was a serious one, the government of Australia was involved and it offered the required level of support since it supported and at the same time supplemented the efforts of the locals through provision of the much needed resources and coordination (Goyet, 1999). The people also received support from other international bodies since the tragedy was severe and it lasted for a longer period of time. Direction is another major guiding principle in the recovery phase of major disasters such as the Black Saturday bushfire. When emergencies of such magnitude occur, the people who will be involved in the response and recovery phase are likely to face competing pressures and demands. They are also likely to vary based on the situation and event, the speed of the onset, the area located and other related events. So as to negotiate on the pressures, it would seem effective to have a clear set of objectives (Tarrant, 2010). This will play an essential role in establishing a number of priorities and thus the efforts and resources will be directed to where they are most required. For instance, they would choose if they want to build homes, schools and hospitals and in which order. The objectives will act as guide and offer direction as well as coherence to the activities of all the agencies involved the recovery phase. Additionally, the recovery phase should be responsive and timely. The recovery functions are put in place as soon as the disaster strikes. There also needs to be speedy as well as inclusive evaluation of effects on families, individuals and communities involved in the whole recovery process, for example, social, community, economic, infrastructure and environment. In addition, phased recovery policies should be implemented for the instance, intermediate and long-term responsive to sprouting needs. The other principle that is critical to the recovery phase is information and the manner in which it is communicated and maintaining the flow between all the involved partners, agencies as well as to the wider public. Effective information management is greatly dependent on apposite preparatory measures being put in place so as to build and enhance situation awareness at the local and national levels (McNaughton, Wills & Lallemant, 2015). Another principle to aid in the management of a recovery phase is integration. Responding to the emergencies and recovering from them is an activity that is likely to encompass a great number of people. Their role, involvement and prominence may change over time. Furthermore, based on the severity and nature of the situation and events, high level of involvement is needed in both the local and national levels (Tarrant, 2010). The contribution made by all involved organizations should always be integrated. The wide range of organizations involved in the recovery phase pose a number of difficulties for the effective management of the operations and this emphasizes the significance of developing structures to ensure that the involved agencies act as a sound multi agency group, consult and decide on the main issues and issues guidance to the recovery phase partners to follow. This can only be arrived at if the processes and structures are created through planning and they are embedded through exercising and training. Moreover, the various opportunities for improvement in the community need to be identified and applied. Furthermore, when rebuilding is being done, it should look into ways of mitigating the risks in the future should such incidences occur (Gunn & Masellis, 1996). Cooperation and coordination is another set of management principles in the recovery phase of disasters. Based on the fact that recovery is a multi-agency action and these organizations may not be bound by any hierarchical relationships. Though one organization may be on the lead, decision making ought to aim at being inclusive so as to come up with consensual decisions. Mutual understanding and trust are essential building blocks to effective operation of the recovery phase. All organizations need to understand their functions, manner of working, constraints and priorities. Openness between the involved agencies needs to be supported and they should also ensure confidentially of the shared information. Through the cooperation and coordination, the intended results would be arrived at in an easier way and the affected communities and buildings will be reconstructed within a short period of time (Nigg, 1995). The last principle is continuity. Emergency recovery arrangements are based on the assumption that organizations that perform recovery related activities on a daily basis are best placed to exercise them in demanding situations. The expertise, resources, experience and relationships will play an essential role when deployed in a different way. Recovery phase can be tested on daily working practices (Berke et al., 1993). In this case the recovery arrangements should always preserve the already established structures as well as ways of doing certain things that the people are already aware of at an earlier date. This will ease the manner in which the recovery phase takes place. Strategies to ensure effective management of the recovery phase There exist a number of strategies to ensure effective management of the recovery phase. One of the major strategies is the establishment of a disaster recovery authority and good leadership. Leadership has an essential role in the way in which disaster recovery occurs. The betterment and safety of the community are similar in post disaster priorities. Through good leadership, the agencies can come up with a list of aspects to be considered in order of priority. In the authority, there should be open and frequent communication to the executive members to ensure that major decisions are made in a quick and effective manner. Furthermore, the authority should be empowered to ensure the eventually success in the recovery process. The authority also needs to make time and focus on the long term for recovery. The authority ought to come up with a list of principles that will guide and at the same time, shape all the decision involved in the recovery phase. Those in leadership roles should also ensure that there is effective and efficient management. This can be done by adopting the core management functions. Personnel and leaders involved in the recovery phase should have the appropriate skills, training and personal attributes. In addition, recovery operatives also need to be given adequate assistance and support in dealing with trauma (McNaughton, Wills & Lallemant, 2015). Another major strategy to ensure the effective management of the recovery phase is the harnessing of all the resources that are required in the recovery phase. The authority also needs to ensure that they have structures, control and processes in place that have a balance between control and flexibility. All the parties involved should be able to make their own decisions and know how to make the right decisions. In addition, the authority should always ensure that the affected community is at the centre of the recovery phase. The authority needs to understand that, though some people in the community did not lose much, they may have severe and adverse psychological challenges which need to be addressed. Thus, the period of disillusionment of the community members should be shortened and the depth of the trough shortened (Gunn & Masellis, 1996). Up-front planning of communication and any related aspects also need to be done. The authority needs to appreciate and acknowledge the fact that all the communities are dissimilar. Thus the recovery phase solutions also needs to be tailored to fit the community that have been affected thus a one size fit all approach is not applicable approach. Another strategy would be to manage the overwhelming generosity that is received from a disaster. In line with encouraging monetary donations from well wishers it would be essential to understand the real needs of the communities and individuals. Additionally physical donations ought to be line with the needs in the community. For instance, it would seem inappropriate to offer clothing’s that are not worn in certain communities. Additional time should be an essential aspect and it should be used to sort out the information needed from the disaster zones and the form the providers of the various services and goods. The community needs to be trusted since they know what is best for them (Emergency Management Australia, 2002). Empowerments in a way aids in the recovery phase. As a matter of fact processes should be established so as to manage the high profile donors. Another strategy to ensure effectiveness of the recovery process is partnership. Strong links ought to be developed between the respondents and the personnel involved in the recovery process. The partnership ought to be done between the various non-government sectors, government sector and the public sectors. In regard to these, the volunteers are essential assets in the recovery phase (Lebowitz, 2014). Skilful deployments as well as the management of volunteer resources are important. Effective coordination is an aspect that is related to partnership and it is more related to the gathering and exchange of information agreeing on the priorities and then targeting the resources based on the most urgent needs. In addition, there should be frequent monitoring and reporting of the progress. How to evaluate the effectiveness of the management of the recovery phase A number of recovery programs have played an essential role in the revitalization of the urban centers, preserving some of the historic buildings and reducing the vulnerability of the area. In some instincts disasters have provided the community with reconstruction booms that enables the re-planning projects and community reconstruction. Despite this, the government and agencies need to be realistic on what they can achieve. A disaster can only bring about limited development opportunities and it cannot undo the decades of underdevelopment. A major way of measuring the recovery process is through a scale. The recovery phase can be analyzed using various scales such as household, individual, business, neighborhood and the community. The damage level as well as the progress of the recovery can be evaluated frequently based on the scale that is applied in the evaluation (Walsh et al., 2015). For instance, in situations when the household and whilst business elements may not work, the return of the labor and economic labor markets can actually suggest that there is a successful recovery ay the community level. Preferably, all the above stated scales ought to be analyzed jointly this will play an essential role in scaling the recovery from a disaster. Another way of evaluating the effectiveness of the management of the recovery phase is to use different perceptions. Results of an evaluation are likely to vary based on the perspective of the evaluator that is used. For example, by making use of a recipient, funding provider, independent and local provider as the source of the evaluation. In most instances the locals may view the recovery phase as unsuccessful one, while the government may offer a different opinion. Administrative levels have more practical concocts to evaluate the recovery phase, at the same time as businesses and individual households seems to be more idealistic. Thus, evaluation needs to be involved all the involved parties that is the recipient, funding provider, independent and local provider. Through this accurate and precise level of recovery will be arrived at since a number of factors will be considered prior to arriving to the decision. For instance, it would be essential to evaluate the number of building that have been rebuilt under a certain period of time and how much more time is needed to complete the remaining buildings (Gibson & Tarrant 2010). Conclusion A major area of significance that the Black Saturday Bushfires has shone some light on relates to bushfire preparation, chiefly for homeowners. During major bushfire such as the Black Saturday ones, fire trucks are not effective since they cannot cover all the homes in a certain area. This is based on the fact that those homesteads that were well prepared for tragedies such as the bush fire had higher survival rates as compared to those who were unprepared. The recovery pace seems to be a significant gauge of the effectiveness of the recovery. The communities affected might budge rapidly to reconstruct their residences, on the other hand, they may do so after some months, or at times they may not desire to reconstruct at all. Government there needs to play an essential role by instilling public self-confidence and speeding up the process of recovery. By rapidly reopening and start rebuilding of community buildings, schools and other public infrastructure, local job creation and trade and industrial activities are likely to arise. The speed at which the society recovers will over and over again depend on the efficiency of government in put into practice programs across the reconstruction, people, economic and environment magnitude of the disaster recovery structure. References Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing (2005). A health perspective in a counter-terrorist environment, The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 20, 2. Berke, P., Jack, D., and Dennis, W. (1993). Recovery after Disaster: Achieving Sustainable Development, Mitigation and Equity. Disasters 17, 2, 93-109. Emergency Management Australia (2002). Guidelines for Psychological service Practice. Australian Emergency Manual Series. Gibson, C. & Tarrant, M. (2010). A conceptual models approach to organizational resilience. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management 25, 2. Goyet, C. (1999). Stop Propagating Disaster Myths. Australian Journal of Emergency Management. Gunn, S. & Masellis, M. (1996). Evaluation of Disaster Medical Response: A Proposal for a Research Template. Annals of Burns and Fire Disasters, IX, 4. Lebowitz, A. (2014). Community Collaboration as a Disaster Mental Health Competency: A Systematic literature review. Community Mental Health J, 51, 125–131. McNaughton, E., Wills, J & Lallemant, D 2015, Leading in disaster recovery. A companion through the chaos. Nigg, M. (1995). Disaster Recovery as a Social Process. Article No. 284. Newark, DE: University of Delaware, Disaster Research Center. Pan American Health Organization (2003). WHO-PAHO Guidelines for the Use of Foreign Field Hospitals in the Aftermath of Sudden Impact Disasters. Pan American Health Organization. Tarrant, N. (2010). The Organization: Risk, resilience and governance. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 25, 2. Walsh, L., Craddock, H., Gulley, K., Strauss-Riggs, K., & Schor, K. (2015). Building health care system capacity: training health care professionals in disaster preparedness health care coalitions. Pre-hospital Disaster Med. 30, 2, 123-130. Read More