In its first survey, the DomPrep40 weighed in on a series of questions about Critical Infrastructure Protection in light of Resilience, a term prominent throughout last year’s National Dialogue on the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR) and now featured in the just-released report.
DomPrep40 member Dennis Schrader, a former FEMA deputy administrator for preparedness who prepared the survey, said that, “A majority of the current DomPrep40 participants have indicated their belief in the effectiveness of the NIPP [National Infrastructure Protection Plan], but it is clear that there is much more work to be done.”
Key Finding: A relationship between the public safety and public works engineering communities will have to emerge as the resilience concept takes hold.
The survey suggests that engineers are not now well integrated into public safety planning requirements. At least partially for that reason, the DomPrep40 seemed to recognize that the public and private engineering communities, and those involved in public safety disciplines, must improve and expand their interfacing opportunities with civil engineers.
Critical Infrastructure Protection Survey Results
Noteworthy: Only half of those surveyed maintain that the NIPP has produced tangible outcomes in private sector preparedness.
Noteworthy: Slightly more than half said that the NIPP has produced tangible outcomes in state and local public safety preparedness.
Noteworthy: It was the unanimous belief of those surveyed that resilience is a design outcome that complements infrastructure protection.
Noteworthy: Although most of those surveyed see infrastructure resilience as a concept in its infancy, just over one third see it as just beginning to take root in the engineering community – e.g., in those in the public works field.
Noteworthy: Engineers are heavily involved in, but apparently are not well integrated into, the professional development programs related to and prepared for the National Incident Management System (NIMS).
Noteworthy: There are mixed opinions on how to promote implementation of resilience strategies, but a significant minority of those replying saying to “Engineer it into systems.”
Certainly, one of the main goals of the QHSR National Dialogue was and is the establishment of resilience metrics. But precisely how implementation will actually proceed remains to be seen; however, on this last question only 10% actually opposed the establishment of resilience standards.
In this phase of the survey, the DomPrep40 indicated their recognition of the need to put engineering in resilience processes and systems. For the complete list of readings recommended by the DomPrep40, click “Recommendations”
How does the thinking of the DomPrep40 compare with your current understanding? In Part 2 of this Critical Infrastructure Protection survey, all DomPrep members will have the opportunity to participate and to either agree or disagree. Please Take the Survey!
John F. Morton
John F. Morton is the Strategic Advisor for DomPrep. He is also the Homeland Security Team Lead for the Project on National Security Reform (PNSR). A member of the DomPrep team since its founding, he has served as managing editor for writer assignments and interviewer for scores of DomPrep audio interviews.