Caring for the Affected at Family Assistance Centers

On October 31, 1994, American Eagle Flight 4184 crashed near Roselawn, Indiana, killing all 68 people aboard. While first responders tended to the physical scene of the crash, no structure existed to meet the emotional or communication needs of victims’ families. They sought answers at airports, which led to the circulation of inaccurate or conflicting information. One family member who called the air carrier call center was incorrectly told their loved one was not on the flight—only to learn their true fate a few hours later. There was no coordinated system for family support or access to information.

This failure led to critical change. The tragedy of Flight 4184 and 11 other aviation disasters spurred the creation and passage of the Aviation Disaster Family Assistance Act of 1996. It formally established a process for delivering compassionate, coordinated support to families and survivors after aviation disasters, creating a foundation for a humanitarian approach to addressing individuals’ practical and informational needs in the wake of a tragedy.

Additionally, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) was given a new responsibility: to develop a system to support families and survivors in the wake of transportation disasters. As NTSB officials engaged directly with those affected by these events, clear patterns emerged. Survivors and families consistently voiced four pressing questions—each rooted in uncertainty and a need for information:

• Was my loved one involved?
• Where is my loved one now?
• Where can I get help to cope?
• What happened to their belongings?

These four fundamental concerns—notification of involvement, victim accounting, emotional support, and access to personal effects—were published by the NTSB, and the document became the cornerstone of what is now referred to as family assistance operations.

Today, Family Assistance Centers (FAC) embody those lessons learned. When activated, FACs bring together resources for psychosocial and spiritual support, victim identification updates, and reunification assistance. Yet, the effectiveness of an FAC is not only defined by the services it offers—it is shaped by how those services are delivered. Research and field experience both underscore that the tone, timing, setting, and cultural sensitivity of communication have a direct impact on the psychological well-being of survivors and their families.

This was evident in response to the 2017 Las Vegas Route 91 Harvest Festival mass fatality incident. Over 22,000 people attended the three-day festival, when on the third day, a gunman opened fire into the crowd from a high-rise hotel. He shot into the crowd for ten minutes, killing 58 people and wounding 850 more. On its first day of operation, the FAC that was established for the incident received over 1,000 individuals. They arrived not just seeking information but reassurance, clarity, connection, and care. Each embodied the basic human needs identified decades ago, reconfirming that these fundamental concerns are universal and underscoring the importance of addressing them.

Core Components of a Family Assistance Center

In mass casualty and mass fatality responses, human services centers—such as call centers, friends and relatives centers, passenger gathering areas at airports, and hospital-based Family Information Centers—are established to bring together those impacted during the critical early hours following an event. Within the first 72 hours, these centers provide a structured approach to addressing immediate informational and emotional needs, often serving as a bridge to a fully operational family and survivor assistance center.

Effective FACs are built on interagency planning embedded within all-hazards frameworks. Key stakeholders—including public health, behavioral health, medical examiner and coroner offices, law enforcement, nonprofits, and faith-based organizations—should define their roles and responsibilities through pre-established memoranda of understanding. Including culture-specific organizations ensures equal access and creates trust, particularly for historically marginalized communities.

FAC sites must strike a balance between function and emotional sensitivity. Ideal facilities are secure, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant, and adaptable (e.g., hotels and community centers) with designated zones for registration, consultation, childcare, and spiritual care. Privacy and soundproofing are essential, as are multilingual signage and media-free policies to maintain dignity and reduce re-traumatization.

They operate most effectively as centralized service hubs. Core offerings include mental health and grief support, spiritual care, legal aid, medical triage, immigration services, and victim compensation. Assigning each family a trained advocate or navigator reduces fragmentation, supports continuity, and minimizes the need for repeated trauma narratives.

Staffing an FAC requires a multidisciplinary team equipped to provide compassionate, trauma-informed, and culturally competent care. Core roles typically include behavioral health professionals, medical personnel, family advocates or navigators, spiritual care providers, interpreters, law enforcement or security staff, logistics and operations personnel, and administrative support. Each discipline is essential in addressing the emotional, informational, and physical needs of those affected. Additionally, anyone working directly with those affected should be trained in psychological first aid, trauma-informed care, cultural competence, and the Incident Command System. These core competencies help ensure that an FAC is a safe and supportive environment for survivors, their families, and victims’ families.

The need for coordinated, accurate, and timely information cannot be emphasized enough. From initial notifications to death updates, information must be coordinated across agencies and delivered by trained professionals in private, respectful settings. Media and curiosity seekers must be kept off-site, with strong protocols to protect privacy and respect for family autonomy.

Responder readiness and ensuring fit for duty are essential for anyone working directly with those impacted by a tragedy or disaster. Implementing wellness protocols that are practiced daily is crucial, along with a specific field deployment guide to be used while on the job. Self-care truly begins during “blue skies,” meaning that proactive measures should start today. Some basic operational considerations include limiting work shifts to no longer than eight hours, rotating job duties to prevent burnout, ensuring staff access to behavioral and spiritual care, and offering optional debriefings daily.

Additionally, providing time off when returning to regular duties is essential for maintaining staff well-being. Supporting staff wellness before, during, and after activation is not only beneficial for individuals, but it also maintains operational effectiveness and ensures the delivery of ethical services during challenging times.

FAC closure requires careful transition planning. Thresholds should be considered carefully based on the current event and the needs of the affected. If possible, there should be clear pathways to aftercare, and survivors should be connected to long-term services—grief counseling, legal aid, and victim assistance. Jurisdictions should conduct after-action reviews to refine plans and address gaps.

As community recovery progresses, jurisdictions may consider transitioning the FAC into a resiliency center—a long-term resource hub that supports ongoing mental health needs, collective healing, and community resilience. This transition reflects a shift from acute response to sustained recovery, offering hope and aligning with best practices in trauma-informed emergency management.

Additionally, transitioning from an FAC or resiliency center may lead to the formation of family or survivor associations focused on advocacy or community (peer) support. Local jurisdictions should support these initiatives and offer resources, as invited by those affected.

More Than Logistical Hubs

In 2014, the Families of Flight 4184 came together to commemorate the 20th year of the crash of American Eagle Flight 4184. Unbeknownst to most, legislation and infrastructure of modern FACs came about as a direct result of the events of those two days, including the importance of family briefings. This was the families’ and loved ones’ first and only family briefing, and one family member who had been carrying around a stack of newspapers from 1994 got to speak with members from the NTSB to ask questions about the death of their loved ones. The change in their faces and the overall shift in their body language as they sought answers to deeply personal questions finally said everything that needed to be said. At that moment, the contrast between them not having the provision of services at the FAC, and now having it, drove home its unbelievable value and impact.

Maya Angelou once said, “When we know better, we do better.” The evolution of family assistance center operations reflects this principle. Structured response protocols equip responders with clear roles and expectations, thereby reducing the psychological strain of uncertainty and creating a stable environment for survivors, their loved ones, and bereaved families. For those impacted, the FAC provides a safe, compassionate space to access accurate information and essential services, laying the groundwork for healing and long-term recovery.

FACs are more than logistical hubs; they are spaces of profound emotional significance. Their effectiveness depends on deliberate planning, interagency coordination, trauma-informed care, and cultural humility. In moments of crisis, a well-executed FAC can offer the affected clarity, connection, and compassion that they need to begin making sense of loss and changes in their lives, charting a path forward.