The datasets developed during a project are provided to the community, and the information allows the community to determine whether the higher risk areas require more stringent building codes. Both regulatory and non-regulatory products are presented to the community in a series of Risk MAP meetings. The meetings also include information about Building Science Branch resources, such as the Building Science Toolkit CD, NFIP technical bulletins, disaster recovery advisories, building code assistance, web links, desk references, training resources, and technical publications, all of which can help the community meet FEMA's goal of fostering resilience through hazard-resistant structure design that leads to reducing the loss of life and property in hazard events.

Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies regardless of service delivery model have sought guidance on how to better integrate their emergency preparedness and response activities into similar processes occurring at the local, regional, State, tribal and Federal levels. The primary purpose of this project is to begin the process of providing that guidance as it relates to mass care incident deployment. The World Bank reported in 2005 that on aggregate, the reported number of natural disasters worldwide has been rapidly increasing, from fewer than 100 in 1975 to more than 400 in 2005. Terrorism, pandemic surge, and natural disasters have had a major impact on the science of planning for and responding to mass care incidents and remain a significant threat to the homeland. From the attacks of September 11th, 2001, the subsequent use of anthrax as a biological weapon, to the more recent surge concerns following the outbreak of H1N1 influenza, EMS have a real and immediate need for integration with the emergency management process, and to coordinate efforts with partners across the spectrum of the response community. The barriers identified from the literature review and interviews with national EMS leadership include: lack of access to emergency preparedness grant funding; underrepresentation on local, regional, and State level planning committees; and lack of systematic mandatory inclusion of all EMS provider types in State, regional, and local emergency plans. In December 2004, New York University's Center for Catastrophe Preparedness and Response held a national roundtable that included experts from major organizations representing the EMS system as a whole. The report from that meeting concluded that: "EMS providers, such as fire departments and hospital-based, commercial, and air ambulance services, ensure that patients receive the medical care they need during a terrorist attack. While EMS personnel, including Emergency Medical Technicians and paramedics, represent roughly one-third of traditional first responders (which also include law enforcement and fire service personnel), the EMS system receives only four percent of first responder funding. If EMS personnel are not prepared for a terrorist attack, their ability to provide medical care and transport to victims of an attack will be compromised. There will be an inadequate medical first response." In 2007, the Institute of Medicine in its landmark report Emergency Medical Services at the Crossroads issued a recommendation that stated: "The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the Department of Homeland Security and the States should elevate emergency and trauma care to a position of parity with other public safety entities in disaster planning and operations." Since the time of these reports Federal progress to address these issues has included the creation of the Office of Health Affairs (OHA) within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the creation of the Emergency Care Coordination Center (ECCC) within HHS, and the creation of the Federal Interagency Committee on EMS (FICEMS) Preparedness Committee. In an effort to increase the level of preparedness among EMS agencies, the National Emergency Medical Services Management Association (NEMSMA) approached the DHS and OHA to engage them in a partnership that would provide a greater understanding of the shortfalls in EMS emergency preparedness and provide resources to fill those gaps. The primary objective of this project is to understand model policies and practices across a spectrum of disciplines and provider types that will lead to a better prepared EMS deployment to mass care incidents. This project should serve as a foundation for further development of EMS specific policies and templates that improve EMS readiness to manage the full spectrum of hazards that face their communities.

Homeland Security Presidential Directive - 7 (December 2003) established the requirement to protect national critical infrastructures against acts that would diminish the responsibility of federal, state, and local government to perform essential missions to ensure the health and safety of the general public. HSPD-7 identified the Emergency Services as a national critical infrastructure sector that must be protected from all hazards. The Emergency Management and Response-Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EMR-ISAC) activities support the critical infrastructure protection and resilience of Emergency Services Sector departments and agencies nationwide. The fire service, emergency medical services, law enforcement, emergency management, and 9-1-1 Call Centers are the major components of the Emergency Services Sector. These components include search and rescue, hazardous materials (HAZMAT) teams, special weapons and tactics teams (SWAT), bomb squads, and other emergency support functions. This Job Aid is a guide to assist leaders of the Emergency Services Sector (ESS) with the process of critical infrastructure protection (CIP). The document intends only to provide a model process or template for the systematic protection of critical infrastructures. It is not a CIP training manual or a complete road map of procedures to be strictly followed. The CIP process described in this document can be easily adapted to assist the infrastructure protection objectives of any community, service, department, agency, or organization.

Firefighters, emergency medical technicians (EMTs), and other emergency responders face many dangers daily from exposure to smoke, deadly temperatures, and stress to issues surrounding personal protective equipment (PPE), vehicle safety, and personal health. Although publicized firefighter fatalities are associated more often with burns and smoke inhalation, cardiovascular events, such as sudden cardiac death, account for the largest number of nonincident firefighter fatalities. Both the United States Fire Administration (USFA) and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) have been tracking firefighter fatalities since 1977. According to NFPA statistics, the number of sudden cardiac deaths has averaged between 40 and 50 deaths per year since the early 1990s. USFA statistics show that firefighters, as a group, are more likely than other American workers to die of a heart attack while on duty (USFA, 2002). Additional pertinent findings in the NFPA's 2005 U.S. Firefighter Fatalities Due to Sudden Cardiac Death, 1995-2004 include: Four hundred and forty firefighters out of 1,006 (or 43.7 percent) who died on the job experienced sudden cardiac death, typically triggered by stress or exertion; Fifty percent of all volunteer firefighter deaths and 39-percent of career firefighter deaths resulted from a heart attack; Ninety-seven percent of the victims had at least a 50-percent arterial blockage; Seventy-five percent of the firefighters who died of a heart attack were working with known or detectable heart conditions or risk factors, such as high cholesterol, high blood pressure, and diabetes. While sudden cardiac death is the leading cause of death among firefighters, other factors affecting firefighters' health, wellness, and safety result in multiple deaths and injuries each and every year. Through the collection of information on firefighter deaths, the USFA has established goals to reduce loss of life among firefighters (USFA, 2006). In order to achieve this goal, emphasis must be placed on reducing the risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease as well as on the mitigation of other issues affecting the health and safety of the Nation's firefighters. As part of another effort to determine the specific issues affecting firefighter health and wellness, the National Volunteer Fire Council (NVFC) Foundation developed a questionnaire to determine personal health, well-being, and safety practices among firefighters. A summary of findings from this study was shared with the NVFC and USFA for use in this project. The questionnaire was distributed to a study population of 364 firefighters, of which 149 were career firefighters, 165 were volunteers, and 50 indicated they were both volunteer and career. Results from the questionnaire revealed several trends in this sample firefighter population; however, the study population was not large enough to generalize these trends for all firefighters. Results from the NVFC Foundation's questionnaire are presented here. Based on these findings, it is clear that a structured personal health and fitness program, as well as safe operations to, from, and while at emergency scenes, become critical to firefighters' safety, well-being, and survival. As a result, we present this document on emergent health and safety issues for the volunteer fire and emergency services.

This report contains research on behaviors and other factors contributing to the rural fire problem; identifies mitigation programs, technologies, and strategies to address those problems; and proposes actions that USFA can take to better implement programs in rural communities. In the Spring of 2004, the U S Fire Administration (USFA) partnered with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) in a cooperative agreement project entitled Mitigating the Rural Fire Problem. The purpose of the project was to examine what can be done to reduce the high death rate from fires in rural U S communities. Rural communities, defined by the U S Census Bureau as communities with less than 2,500 population, have a fire death rate twice the national average. The objectives of the project were to a) conduct research on behaviors and other factors contributing to the rural fire problem, b) identify mitigation programs, technologies, and strategies to address those problems, and c) propose actions that USFA Public Education Division can take to better implement programs in rural communities. Research sources included a review of the published literature, some original statistical analysis, and information from national technical experts who have worked with NFPA.

Each year, approximately 1,100 Americans 65 and older die in home fires and another 3,000 are injured. These statistics, combined with the fact that adults ages 50 or more care for and will soon enter this high-risk group, inspired USFA to develop a new public education campaign targeting people ages 50-plus, their families and caregivers. People between 65 and 74 are nearly twice as likely to die in a home fire as the rest of the population. People between 75 and 84 are nearly four times as likely to die in a fire. People ages 85 and older are more than five times as likely to die in a fire. A Fire Safety Campaign for People 50-Plus encourages people ages 50 and older - including the high risk 65-plus group - to practice fire-safe behaviors to reduce fire deaths and injuries. The strategy is to inform and motivate adults as they enter their fifties so that stronger fire safety and prevention practices are integrated into their lives prior to entering the higher fire-risk decades. In addition, many Baby Boomers are currently caring for family members ages 65-plus and can encourage fire safe habits.

The United States Fire Administration (USFA) is committed to using all means possible for reducing the incidence of injuries and deaths to firefighters. One of these means is to partner with other people and organizations who share this same admirable goal. One such organization is the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF). The IAFF has been deeply committed to improving the safety of its members and all firefighters as a whole. This is why the USFA was pleased to work with the IAFF through a cooperative agreement to develop this revised edition of Emergency Incident Rehabilitation.

Earthquakes are potentially the most destructive of all natural disasters in both loss of life and property damage. Casualties and structural damage result from intense ground shaking and such secondary effects as fires, landslides, ground subsidence, and flooding from dam collapse or tsunamis. While earthquakes in the United States are commonly associated with the West Coast, particularly California, 39 states altogether face some degree of seismic risk. Seventy million people and at least nine metropolitan areas are susceptible to severe earthquakes. Nevertheless, California has been the focal point of most earthquake studies due to its high frequency of events (two thirds of all earthquakes have occurred in California), large population and extensive property development. But the high frequency of earthquakes alone does not warrant the amount of official and scientific attention these events have received. It is the rare and devastating earthquake such as the 1906 San Francisco quake and the 1964 Alaska event, both of which measured more than 8 on the Richter Scale. Earthquakes of this magnitude could be expected in the United States, and most likely in California, every 60 to 100 years and less severe but major earthquakes every 15 to 20 years (Anderson, et al., 1981). The area currently believed to be at greatest risk of a massive earthquake is the Los Angeles-San Bernardino region. An event which could exceed 8 on the Richter Scale has an estimated annual probability of occurrence of 2 to 5 percent and its likelihood of occurrence in the next 20 to 30 years is regarded as -high." This earthquake could kill and injure between 15,000 and 69,000 persons (depending upon time of occurrence) and cause up to $17 billion in property damage (NSC/FEMA, 1980). Some studies have placed the property damage estimates as high as $50 billion (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1969). This report grew out of the City of Los Angeles Planning Partnership for which the Southern California Earthquake Preparedness Project (SCEPP) was asked to research and report on several issues pertaining to earthquake insurance. In the course of this research, it became obvious to both SCEPP and SCEPP's Policy Advisory Board that earthquake insurance and its role in the recovery process was a major policy issue. Thus, the research effort was expanded to incorporate broader issues and circulation of the report beyond the Los Angeles Planning Partnership. The report has five goals which correspond to its organization: (1) to outline the provisions (coverages, rates, deductibles, etc.) of earthquake insurance policies currently available to the major classes of insurance consumers-homeowners, businesses, local governments and special districts; (2) to determine the extent to which earthquake insurance is purchased by these parties and explore the circumstances surrounding purchase or non-purchase; (3) to review the salient issues in earthquake insurance from the standpoints of purchasers and providers; (4) to explore potential Federal roles in resolving these issues and in providing or promoting earthquake insurance; and finally, (5) to make reasonable policy recommendations involving both the Federal Government and other stakeholders in earthquake insurance toward a more adequate system of coverage.

This Orientation Manual provides practical information: both rescue techniques, and preparedness information for the first responder who will encounter people with visible and non-visible disabilities through their work. This publication can assist first responders in advance or make critical emergency decisions. This publication will help first responders to confidently work with the disability community toward the goal of protecting and saving lives and minimizing trauma.

Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies regardless of service delivery model have sought guidance on how to better integrate their emergency preparedness and response activities into similar processes occurring at the local, regional, State, tribal, and Federal levels. This primary purpose of this project is to begin the process of providing that guidance as it relates to mass care incident deployment.

In the Spring of 2004, the U S Fire Administration (USFA) partnered with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) in a cooperative agreement project entitled Mitigating the Rural Fire Problem. The purpose of the project was to examine what can be done to reduce the high death rate from fires in rural U S communities

The original Earthquakes -A Teacher's Package for K-6 (FEMA 159) was developed as a joint effort of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) under contract with FEMA. NSTA's project team produced an excellent product. Since its publication in 1988, over 50,000 teachers have requested copies. This revised version brought members of the original project team together with a group of teachers who had used the materials extensively in their classroom and served as teacher-educators at FEMA's Tremor Troop workshops. About 75% of the original material remains unchanged: a few activities were removed and a few added. A major change was the addition of assessments throughout the units. The examples we provide relate to life outside the classroom and/or activities similar to those of scientists. We also added matrices linking activities to the National Science Education Standards. The Teacher's Package has five units. Each of the first four units is divided into three levels: Level 1, for grades K-2; Level 2, for grades 3-4; and Level 3, for grades 5-6. Since classes and individuals vary widely you may often find the procedures in the other levels helpful for your students. The last unit has four parts with activities for students in all grades, K-6. Unit L, Defining an Earthquake, builds on what students already know about earthquakes to establish a working definition of the phenomenon. Legends from near and far encourage children to create their own fanciful explanations, paving the way for the scientific explanations they will begin to learn in this unit. Unit I, Why and Where Earthquakes Occur, presents the modern scientific understanding of the Earth's structure and composition, and relates this to the cause of earthquakes. Unit II, Physical Results of Earthquakes, provides greater understanding of the processes that shape our active Earth. Earthquakes are put in the context of the large- and small-scale changes that are constantly at work on the continents as well as the ocean floor. Unit IV, Measuring Earthquakes, explains earthquakes in terms of wave movement and introduces students to the far-ranging effects of earthquakes. Unit V, Earthquake Safety and Survival, focuses on what to expect during an earthquake; how to cope safely; how to identify earthquake hazards; and how to reduce, eliminate, or avoid them.

This FEMA 154 Report, Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards: A Handbook, is the first of a two-volume publication on a recommended methodology for rapid visual screening of buildings for potential seismic hazards. The technical basis for the methodology, including the scoring system and its development, are contained in the companion FEMA 155 report, Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards: Supporting Documentation. The rapid visual screening procedure (RVS) has been developed for a broad audience, including building officials and inspectors, and government agency and private-sector building owners, to identify, inventory, and rank buildings that are potentially seismically hazardous. Although RVS is applicable to all buildings, its principal purpose is to identify (1) older buildings designed and constructed before the adoption of adequate seismic design and detailing requirements, (2) buildings on soft or poor soils, or (3) buildings having performance characteristics that negatively influence their seismic response. Once identified as potentially hazardous, such buildings should be further evaluated by a design professional experienced in seismic design to determine if, in fact, they are seismically hazardous. The RVS uses a methodology based on a "sidewalk survey" of a building and a Data Collection Form, which the person conducting the survey (hereafter referred to as the screener) completes, based on visual observation of the building from the exterior, and if possible, the interior. The Data Collection Form includes space for documenting building identification information, including its use and size, a photograph of the building, sketches, and documentation of pertinent data related to seismic performance, including the development of a numeric seismic hazard score. Once the decision to conduct rapid visual screening for a community or group of buildings has been made by the RVS authority, the screening effort can be expedited by pre-planning, including the training of screeners, and careful overall management of the process. Completion of the Data Collection Form in the field begins with identifying the primary structural lateral-load-resisting system and structural materials of the building. Basic Structural Hazard Scores for various building types are provided on the form, and the screener circles the appropriate one. For many buildings, viewed only from the exterior, this important decision requires the screener to be trained and experienced in building construction. The procedure presented in this Handbook is meant to be the preliminary screening phase of a multi-phase procedure for identifying potentially hazardous buildings. Buildings identified by this procedure must be analyzed in more detail by an experienced seismic design professional. Because rapid visual screening is designed to be performed from the street, with interior inspection not always possible, hazardous details will not always be visible, and seismically hazardous buildings may not be identified as such. Conversely, buildings initially identified as potentially hazardous by RVS may prove to be adequate.