The NRCEV has been in contact with DHS/OEC/FEMA in the attempt to obtain
recognition of NRCEV Certifications for EmComm volunteers. But, any such process
is slow.

--- In NRCEV@yahoogroups.com, "Ralph G. Rogers" <RalphGeraldRogers@...> wrote:
>
> It is more likely the Office of Emergency Communications(OEC) under the US
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will approve these kinds of Certfications
as they do with the Public Safety Communications Unit Leader (COM-L) course and
certification. RACES has now come under the influcence of the DHS and OEC.
>
> The OEC and APCO certifies for public safety communicators and organizations.
REACT and the Civil Air Patrol certify for their own organizations.
>
> FEMA courses are increasing becoming prerequesetes for many emergency and
disaster organization positions.
>
>
> Respectfully Yours,
> Ralph G. Rogers
>

It is more likely the Office of Emergency Communications(OEC) under the US
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will approve these kinds of Certfications
as they do with the Public Safety Communications Unit Leader (COM-L) course and
certification. RACES has now come under the influcence of the DHS and OEC.

The OEC and APCO certifies for public safety communicators and organizations.
REACT and the Civil Air Patrol certify for their own organizations.

FEMA courses are increasing becoming prerequesetes for many emergency and
disaster organization positions.


Respectfully Yours,
Ralph G. Rogers

K5RGR located in Dallas, Texas a Radio Operator with the Dallas County REACT and
a Squadron Radio Maintenance Officer with the Texas Civil Air Patrol.

----- Original Message -----

From: Chris

To: NRCEV@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 19:37

Subject: [NRCEV] Robert F. Crifasi, KC2RFC Join Board of Directors

Bob is a trained database manager/programmer and educator. His experiences in emergency services began with 18 years of service as a volunteer fire fighter. He holds an Amateur Radio General Class License. He has been the ARES County Emergency Coordinator (CEC) for Essex NJ since 2005. He is employed by the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. Bob is the Emergency Communications Coordinator for University Behavioral Health Care (part of UMDNJ), a member of their Emergency Preparedness Committee and the Facility Safety Coordinator at that campus. As CEC for Essex County he founded Essex County Emergency Communications. He is a RACES member in his home and work counties, and a CERT member in his home town of West Orange.

Bob's Education and Credentials include:

• BA Psychology - Hartwick College, Oneonta, NY
• MS Education- Hofstra University, Uniondale, NY
• ARRL Emergency Communications Courses: I, II and III
  
• National Incident Management System (IS-100HC, 200HC, 230, 235, 240, 241, 242, 244, 275, 300, 317, 400, 700, 800A, 802, Professional Development Series Certificate)

Please join us in welcoming Bob to the NRCEV team

Bob is a trained database manager/programmer and educator. His experiences in emergency services began with 18 years of service as a volunteer fire fighter. He holds an Amateur Radio General Class License. He has been the ARES County Emergency Coordinator (CEC) for Essex NJ since 2005. He is employed by the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. Bob is the Emergency Communications Coordinator for University Behavioral Health Care (part of UMDNJ), a member of their Emergency Preparedness Committee and the Facility Safety Coordinator at that campus. As CEC for Essex County he founded Essex County Emergency Communications. He is a RACES member in his home and work counties, and a CERT member in his home town of West Orange.

Bob's Education and Credentials include:

• BA Psychology - Hartwick College, Oneonta, NY
• MS Education- Hofstra University, Uniondale, NY
• ARRL Emergency Communications Courses: I, II and III
  
• National Incident Management System (IS-100HC, 200HC, 230, 235, 240, 241, 242, 244, 275, 300, 317, 400, 700, 800A, 802, Professional Development Series Certificate)

The interviews were very well done and informative.

Hope some people listen to them.

Benson

--- In NRCEV@yahoogroups.com, "Chris" <chris.snyder@...> wrote:
>
> Chris Snyder - NG3F, Exec. Director of the National Registry of
> Certified EmComm Volunteers (NRCEV) was interview by "HAP" Holly
> - KC9RP for The RAIN Report.   The RAIN Report is a weekly amateur radio
> program service
> Part 2 of this interview, describing the NRCEV certifications, was
> released today 3/28/09.
>
> This audio interview can be donwloaded here
> <http://www.therainreport.com/>
>

Part 2 of this interview, describing the NRCEV certifications, was released today 3/28/09.

This audio interview can be donwloaded here

Chris Snyder - NG3F, Exec. Director of the National Registry of Certified EmComm Volunteers (NRCEV) was interview by "HAP" Holly - KC9RP for The RAIN Report.   The RAIN Report is a weekly amateur radio program service

Part 1 of this interview, describing the evolution and goals of the NRCEV,  is date 3/20/09 and Part to will be release the weekend of 3/28/09.

Tim Bourdess resigned from the Certification Board at the beginning of this year.  Tim's work commitments were making it extremely difficult for him to give the time he want to the NRCEV.  We thank Tim for his service and wish him continued success in his career.

This month the NRCEV has the the honor of welcoming two new Commissioners to the Certification Board.

M. Clay Jackson, N7QNM from the State of Washington. Clay is an experienced emergency communications volunteer.  His service as a volunteer includes being a Service Support Volunteer for Eastside Fire and Rescue where he provides backup communications support during disasters, emergencies or other events, staffs Communications/Command vehicle and coordinate communications between Fire and other Public Safety Officials, and acts as Net Control for communications nets established to supplement normal communication.  Clay is the Training Officer for the Sammamish ARES/RACES Group where his duties include: conducting training for FCC Amateur Radio License Exams - with prior students have a 99.9%+ pass rate, developing drills and exercises for group, and staffing the City EOC in the event of a Disaster or other activation. Additionally, Clay is the Co-Founder of the Snohomish County Volunteer Search and Rescue Operations Support Unit, with which he has supported over 100 Search and Rescue Missions, served in all ICS General and Command Staff positions except IC and PIO on various missions, and conducted Radio Procedures and Amateur Radio Licensing classes.

Clay's Education and Credentials include:

• Master of Software Engineering- Seattle University, Seattle, WA
• National Incident Management System (IS-100, IS-200, IS-700, IS-800)
• Citizens Emergency Response Team
• Passed CISM Exam, Dec 2007
• Amateur Radio Extra Class License

and

Dan Bixby from the State of Minnesota. Dan is a training professional with over ten years of experience. He currently serves in a Communications equipment company. Dan is bilingual (French/English) and has traveled extensively around the world training radio and networking personnel. He has created a successful certification program and specializes in online teaching and learning.  Along with a Bachelor of Arts and a Bachelor of Science degree, Dan is currently working toward completing his Master of Science in Education, Online Teaching and Learning from California State University.

Release Date: December 18, 2008
Release Number: HQ-08-259

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The U.S. Department of Homeland Security's (DHS)
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) today released a revised
National Incident Management System (NIMS)-the national standard for
incident management.  NIMS establishes standardized incident
management processes, protocols, and procedures that all federal,
state, tribal and local responders will use to coordinate and conduct
response actions.

NIMS expands on the original version released in March 2004 by
clarifying existing NIMS concepts, better incorporating preparedness
and planning and improving the overall readability of the document.
The revised document also differentiates between the purposes of NIMS
and the National Response Framework (NRF) by identifying how NIMS
provides the action template for the management of incidents, while
the NRF provides the policy structure and mechanisms for
national-level policy for incident management.

"The National Incident Management System has been the single most
significant improvement in incident management since the Department of
Homeland Security was formed in 2003," FEMA Administrator David
Paulison said. "It has enhanced interoperability among emergency
responders at all levels of government and is the product of a
collaborative effort involving hundreds of emergency personnel from
across the nation.  We incorporated lessons learned from Hurricane
Katrina, clarified incident command system concepts, increased
emphasis on planning and mutual aid, expanded the
intelligence/investigation function, and better aligned the NIMS
document with the National Response Framework," said Paulison.

With the oversight of FEMA, the newly released NIMS followed an
extensive revision involving over 100 partners from all levels of
government, private sector, nongovernmental organizations (NGO), and
subject matter experts representing a broad spectrum of emergency
management and incident response disciplines.  Throughout three
official nationwide comment periods, FEMA reviewed nearly 6,000
comments from more than 280 individuals and organizations, including
extensive review and recommendations made by the National Advisory
Council (NAC).

The basic tenets of NIMS remain the same. There have been several
improvements to the revised NIMS document which will aid in
readability and usefulness of preparing, preventing, and responding to
incidents.  For example, the revised document places greater emphasis
on the role of preparedness and has reorganized its components to
mirror the progression of an incident.  Recognizing the importance of
private sector partners and NGOs in incident response, FEMA has
ensured that those entities have been more fully integrated throughout
NIMS.  The new document is consistent with the NRF, and together they
provide a single, comprehensive approach to incident management.

Further information on preparedness programs is available at
www.dhs.gov and www.fema.gov.

FEMA coordinates the federal government's role in preparing for,
preventing, mitigating the effects of, responding to, and recovering
from all domestic disasters, whether natural or man-made, including
acts of terror.

I agree that simply having "more of the same" is not a different type of
resource.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris" <chris.snyder@...>
To: <NRCEV@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 16:14
Subject: [NRCEV] Updated NRCEV Communications Support Team Certification
documents published


> Revised documents for Communications Support Team Certification has
> been published to the Documents page of the website.
>
> Major change is in the name of the team from ARCT to CST.
>
> The NRCEV is no longer using the resource typing matrix originally
> proposed. The original typing matrix was based on the one developed by
> the World Radio Relay League (WRRL). This typing matrix is the one
> that has been most familiar to those involved in emergency communications.
>
> However, after much research and discussion, the NRCEV has decided not
> to continue to utilize the modified WRRL typing matrix for two reasons.
>
> 1) Type I teams defined in the WRRL matrix are in actuality a Task
> Force as defined by NIMS and the NRP. The WRRL matrix, and the one
> modified by the NRCEV describe a Type I team as a combination of 1
> Type II team and 4 Type III teams.
>
> The NIMS/NRP definition of a "Task Force" is as follows: "Any
> combination of resources assembled in support of a specific mission or
> operational need. All resource elements within a Task Force must have
> common communications and a designated leader". Clearly, the Type I
> team described above falls under the Task Force definition.
>
> Additionally, The NIMS/NRP definition for a "Type" is: A
> classification of resources in the ICS that refers to capability. Type
> 1 is generally considered to be more capable than Types 2, 3, or 4,
> respectively, because of size; power; capacity; or, in the case of
> incident management teams, experience and qualifications.
>
> While, the Type I ARCT as defined the WRRL and original NRCEV typing
> definition is larger in number of personnel than the other Type ARCTs,
> the Type I does not specify any additional capabilities. Therefore, it
> can be argued it is not a different type of resource.
>
> 2) The National Integration Center (NIC) has already defined a
> resource type for Communications Support Teams (CST). The CST already
> defined is for Civil Air Patrol (CAP) resources. And the Type I CAP
> CST is appreciably different from the Type I ARCT proposed by the WRRL
> and that the NRCEV also originally adopted.
>
> Therefore, the NRCEV has concluded that, until a definitive ruling is
> made by the NIC on resource definitions for Amateur Radio EmComm
> resources, we should align the typing definitions for NRCEV CSTs with
> those already adopted, for similar resources, in order to remain
> compliant and consistent with both NRP definitions and existing
> resource typing structures established by the National Integration Center.
>
> Should the NIC publish a different typing matrix or adopt the one
> submitted by the WRRL, the NRCEV will make any necessary changes to
> remain compliant with NIMS.
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> http://www.nrcev.orgYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Revised documents for Communications Support Team Certification has
been published to the Documents page of the website.

Major change is in the name of the team from ARCT to CST.

The NRCEV is no longer using the resource typing matrix originally
proposed. The original typing matrix was based on the one developed by
the World Radio Relay League (WRRL). This typing matrix is the one
that has been most familiar to those involved in emergency communications.

However, after much research and discussion, the NRCEV has decided not
to continue to utilize the modified WRRL typing matrix for two reasons.

1) Type I teams defined in the WRRL matrix are in actuality a Task
Force as defined by NIMS and the NRP. The WRRL matrix, and the one
modified by the NRCEV describe a Type I team as a combination of 1
Type II team and 4 Type III teams.

The NIMS/NRP definition of a "Task Force" is as follows: "Any
combination of resources assembled in support of a specific mission or
operational need. All resource elements within a Task Force must have
common communications and a designated leader". Clearly, the Type I
team described above falls under the Task Force definition.

Additionally, The NIMS/NRP definition for a "Type" is: A
classification of resources in the ICS that refers to capability. Type
1 is generally considered to be more capable than Types 2, 3, or 4,
respectively, because of size; power; capacity; or, in the case of
incident management teams, experience and qualifications.

While, the Type I ARCT as defined the WRRL and original NRCEV typing
definition is larger in number of personnel than the other Type ARCTs,
the Type I does not specify any additional capabilities. Therefore, it
can be argued it is not a different type of resource.

2) The National Integration Center (NIC) has already defined a
resource type for Communications Support Teams (CST). The CST already
defined is for Civil Air Patrol (CAP) resources. And the Type I CAP
CST is appreciably different from the Type I ARCT proposed by the WRRL
and that the NRCEV also originally adopted.

Therefore, the NRCEV has concluded that, until a definitive ruling is
made by the NIC on resource definitions for Amateur Radio EmComm
resources, we should align the typing definitions for NRCEV CSTs with
those already adopted, for similar resources, in order to remain
compliant and consistent with both NRP definitions and existing
resource typing structures established by the National Integration Center.

Should the NIC publish a different typing matrix or adopt the one
submitted by the WRRL, the NRCEV will make any necessary changes to
remain compliant with NIMS.

This White Paper is a little dated, but still pertinent.  From the
NRCEV's perspective, the fact that this paper calls for the
credentialling of Amateur Radio Operators as far back as 2005 by non-
amateur radio communications experts helps to provide validation of
the need for our efforts in this area.

This White Paper was prepared by the Space & Advanced Communications
Research Institute (SACRI) at George Washington University.

Quoted from the cover Page:

"Note: This White Paper draws a number of sources including
presentations at the National Conference on Emergency Communications
(NCEC) held at the George Washington University on December 12-13,
2005. This conference featured some thirty different speakers
selected from the federal as well as state and local governments, a
wide range of industry spokespeople, several professional societies,
relief organizations and NGOs, universities, and other interested
parties. There were thirty different sponsors. These presentations,
the attendees at this conference and the many sponsors of this event
are included on the web page www.emergencycomconference.org (link is
no longer active - NRCEV) The sponsors are also listed in the
Appendices attached to this report. This White Paper also includes
elements drawn from relevant web sites and many other documents
prepared by concerned academic, standards and industry organizations
who have offered information and recommendations about emergency
communications as well as warning and recovery efforts in the wake
of Hurricane Katrina, the Pakistan Earthquake and the Asian Tsunami.
Although this White Paper has been extensively coordinated with many
individuals including speakers at the NCEC and its sponsors the
views expressed in this document are solely those of the team at
George Washington University that prepared this report."

This White Paper lists 27 major finding. Of most interest to EmComm
volunteers is Finding #8, which reads.

"Finding No. 8: Need for National Credential System to Aid in
Recovery. During a disaster different people from many different
sectors (electrical power, natural gas, fire, police, medical,
utilities, etc.) as well as from different governmental units, must
be available to respond effectively. This means they must have the
right access, coordinate their work and communicate.

Steps that that might be taken in this respect include:

(a) Issuance-at the national level-of recognized and federally
authenticated picture and badge credentials that allow needed access
to impacted areas so that communications technicians, utility and
infrastructure repair, etc. can restore critical services. This
would allow many different government agencies (local, tribal,
county, state, federal, national guard and authorized restoration
crews) to respond immediately without receiving local or state
credentials;

(b) Train and "credential" experienced amateur radio operators and
radio and television station personnel (at the federal and local
levels) in certain key functions, codes and operations so they can
more effectively assist with and coordinate disaster recovery
operations when other communications resource is not available."

You can read the full document at: http://www.nrcev.org/wp-
content/uploads/2008/11/final_version_white_paper.pdf

The NRCEV has released revised Individual Certification documents and they have been posted on the DOCUMENTS page on the NRCEV website at www.nrcev.org .

The Individual Certification program includes some major revisions. 

The primary revision is in the way that the certification requirements are identified.  In the original version, the requirements were simply identified by a title or subject.  They were based on the outline of the ARRL EmComm courses.  However, since we permit other training materials and courses to be used as well towards certification, this format did not provide adequate information for individuals to determine exactly what training would meet those requirements, unless they were using the ARRL courses.

This revision has been revised to include a Training Subject area, the titles of which are still similar to the original, but each Training Subject area now has a Learning Objective associated with it.  These Learning Objectives clearly detail what the individual is expected to have learned.  They have been written in the SMART format for objectives: Simple, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Task oriented.  This will assist individuals to know, exactly, whether or not the training they have obtained meets the certification requirement.

We have also removed two of the original requirements:

Affidavit of Criminal History: While, criminal background checks are valid when performed by served agencies, we realized, even from the outset, that almost universally, one organization does usually accept the criminal background check performed by another organization. Even if we wanted to include a background check, which we did not, that for certification we know that it would to be accepted.  However, we originally felt that something was needed.  So we included the Affidavit requirement.  Since then, for multiple reasons including the controversy with the American Red Cross background checks, we came to understand that if an "official" check would not likely be accepted, neither would a notarized Affidavit.  So, it became an unnecessary and therefore burdensome requirement, and has been removed.

Registration with an appropriate Emergency Management or Civil Defense organization:  While we still strongly encourage this for all EmComm volunteers, we came to realize, through comments and conversations with volunteers that can sometimes be a very difficult requirement to meet.  Especially, in those locations where Emergency Management or Civil Defense officials do not use EmComm volunteers, for various reasons.  Therefore, this requirement has been removed.

We previously announce that we are in the final stages of developing a Position Qualification program for EmComm Volunteers. As these documents become ready we will be posting them for national comment as well.  Part of developing this EmComm Positions Qualification System (EPQS) is revising the Individual Certification program so that they work in tandem with each other.  Together they will form a two part Certification/Qualification process.  Certification will validate an individual's level of training and preparation for Qualification.  Position Qualification will validate an individual's ability to perform in one or more specified EmComm positions.

The major change in the Certification program and requirements is in how Skill Verification is provided.  For initial Certification the Skill Verification process will remain intact.  It will also remain intact for Re-Certification until the EPQS program is launched.  After that time Qualification will be required, in at least one EPQS position for Re-Certification.  Certification and Qualification do not need to occur, and in fact are not expected to occur simultaneously.  The normal process will be that individual obtains Certification, then during the three year certification period they will become Qualified in a position.  So when reviewing the Certification Requirements & Training Objective document, please keep this in mind.

The NRCEV is always striving to improve our programs and the process by which we improve them.

As part of that improvement process the NRCEV has implemented a policy that all program documentation will be posted for national comment on our website.

This policy is designed to accomplish a number of very important objectives.

First and the most important, is to take every step possible to insure that the objectives, requirements and process of our programs and services are valid and accurate.

This means that we cannot rely solely on our own judgment, perspectives and/or opinions about what is valid and accurate.  In order to assure validity and accuracy we will need the input from individuals all across the country, encompassing the varied organizations, backgrounds and experiences that exist in the EmComm community.

Second that the documents which outline these objective, requirements and processes are clearly written and easy to understand.

We need to insure that the information and processes published in the documentation accurately communicate everything exactly as intended.  Even if everything is valid and accurate, if it is not written clearly and a way that is understandable we have not been successfully in communicating with the intended audience.

Third, by soliciting comments and suggestions and then incorporating those which are substantive and reasonable into the programs and the associated documentation, we hope to instill greater confidence and acceptance of our programs.

Our goal is to provide programs and services to the EmComm community which it deems meaningful and valuable.  To do so we need the cooperation of that community.  We want to provide the EmComm community a sense of ownership and a role in the success of our programs and services.  This will assist in the EmComm community viewing our programs and services as also their programs and services.

 

This first document that we are posting for national comment, Certification Requirement & Training Objectives, for individual EmComm volunteers is a major revision.  

The primary revision is in the way that the certification requirements are identified.  In the original version, the requirements were simply identified by a title or subject.  They were based on the outline of the ARRL EmComm courses.  However, since we permit other training materials and courses to used as well towards certification, this did not provide adequate information for individuals to determine exactly what would meet those requirements, unless they were using the ARRL courses.

This revision has been revised to include a Training Subject area, the titles of which are still similar to the orginal, but each Training Subject now has  Learning Objective associated with it.  These Learning Objectives clearly detail what the individual is expected to have learned.  They have been written in the SMART format for objectives: Simple, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Task oriented.  This will assist individuals to know, exactly, whether or not the training they have obtained meets the certification requierment.

We have also removed two of the original requirements:

Affidavit of Criminal History: While, criminal background checks are valid when performed by served agencies, we realized, even from the outset, that almost univesrally, one organization does usually accept the criminal background check performed by another organization, we even if we wanted to include, which we do not, that for certification we know that it would to be accepted.  However, we originally felt that something was needed.  So we included the Affidavit requirement.  Since then, for multiple reasons including the controversy with the American Red Cross background checks, that if an "official" check would not likely be accepted, neither would be a notarized Affidavit.  So, it became a unnecessary and therefore burdensome requirement, and has been removed.

Registration with an appropriate Emergency Management or Civil Defense organization:  While we still strongly encourage this for all EmComm volunteers, we came to realize, thought comments and conversations with volunteers, that at least in some areas this is a very difficult requirement to meet.  Especially, in those locations where Emergency Management or Civil Defense officials do no use EmComm volunteers, for various reasons.  Therefore, this requirement has been removed.

We previously announce that we are in the final stages of developing a Position Qualification program for EmComm Volunteers. As these documents become ready we will be posting them for national comment as well.  Part of developing this EmComm Positions Qualification System (EPQS) is revising the Individual Certification program so that they work in tandem with each other.  Together they will form a two part Certification/Qualification process.  Cerification wil validate an individuals level of training and preparation for Qualification.  Position Qualification will validate an individuals ability to perform in one or more specied positions.

The major change in the Certification pogram and requirments is in how Skill Verification is provided.  For initial Certification the Skill Verification process will remain intact.  It will also remain intact for Re-Certification until the EPQS program is launched.  After that time Qualification will be required, in at least one EPQS position for Re-Certification.  Certification and Qualification to not need, and in fact are not expected to occur simultaneously.  The normal process will be that individual obtain Certification, then during the three year certification period they will become Qualified in a positions.  So when reviewing the Certification Requirements & Training Objective document, please keep this in mind.

The Draft Certification Requirements & Training Objectives can be found here  It is a 1MB pdf document

The Comment Matrix can be found here    It is a MS Word Document which will open Wod 97 or newer as well as WordPad.     Deadline for submitting comments is Friday May, 16, 2008.   Download the Comment Matrix, enter your comments then email them to the email address on the form.  You can also contact us with any questions you have regarding filling out the form or the Certification Requirements & Training Objective document.

We look forward to your comments and suggestions, please take the time to provide you input.

Thank you

NRCEV Staff

The following is an exert from the Intoduction of the NIMS Five-Year Training Plan.   The full plan can be downloaded in pdf here

⁸ Some information about the forthcoming National Emergency Responder Credentialing System is available at: http://www.oes.ca.gov/Operational/OESHome.nsf/PDF/NIMS%20Credentialing/$file/credentialingFAQ.pdf. It is also recommended that stakeholders adopt the same qualification and credentialing for service on smaller, day-to-day incidents

• Initiate development of a State/Territory-wide system to credential emergency management/response personnel to ensure proper authorization and access to an incident including those involving mutual aid agreements and/or assistance agreements.  [emphasis added by NRCEV]

Thanks for the lead. One fellow sent me 25 files!.
I'll look into yours first.

73, Barry
VE7VIE/WV2J


--- Kevin <kc2pko@...> wrote:

> Barry,
> Try Gwinnett County ARES out of Georgia
> (http://www.gwinnettares.org).
>  They have a wealth of information on their website.
> I do hope that
> you find what your looking for there.
>
> 73, Kevin
> KC2PKO
>
> --- In NRCEV@yahoogroups.com, "barry_bogart"
> <barry_bogart@...> wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone have an example of a strategic plan? I
> have been mandated
> > by my local group to create one. I have done this
> several times for
> > Information Technology, and I think comms are
> similar. I am talking
> > about a formal, classical strategic plan with a
> mission statement and
> > associated goals and objectives. I would also like
> a technology plan -
> > an assessment of what technology is appropriate
> for Emcomm (where
> > Winlink, APRS, ATV. ILRP, etc. fit in...).
> >
> > 73, Barry
> > VE7VIE and WV2J
> >
>
>
>

Barry,
Try Gwinnett County ARES out of Georgia (http://www.gwinnettares.org).
  They have a wealth of information on their website. I do hope that
you find what your looking for there.

73, Kevin
KC2PKO

--- In NRCEV@yahoogroups.com, "barry_bogart" <barry_bogart@...> wrote:
>
> Does anyone have an example of a strategic plan? I have been mandated
> by my local group to create one. I have done this several times for
> Information Technology, and I think comms are similar. I am talking
> about a formal, classical strategic plan with a mission statement and
> associated goals and objectives. I would also like a technology plan -
> an assessment of what technology is appropriate for Emcomm (where
> Winlink, APRS, ATV. ILRP, etc. fit in...).
>
> 73, Barry
> VE7VIE and WV2J
>

Does anyone have an example of a strategic plan? I have been mandated
by my local group to create one. I have done this several times for
Information Technology, and I think comms are similar. I am talking
about a formal, classical strategic plan with a mission statement and
associated goals and objectives. I would also like a technology plan -
an assessment of what technology is appropriate for Emcomm (where
Winlink, APRS, ATV. ILRP, etc. fit in...).

73, Barry
VE7VIE and WV2J

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the NRCEV
group.

   File        : /Why a national certification/Why a National Certification for
EmComm Volunteers - Part 2.pdf
   Uploaded by : ng3f <chris.snyder@...>
   Description : Public Service Communications vs. Public Safety Communications

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NRCEV/files/Why%20a%20national%20certification/Why\
%20a%20National%20Certification%20for%20EmComm%20Volunteers%20-%20Part%202.pdf

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.htmlfiles

Regards,

ng3f <chris.snyder@...>

Public Service Communications vs. Public Safety Communications

Here's is the second installment in this series on why the NRCEV is promoting and offering national certifications for EmComm volunteers.

Traditionally, amateur radio operators participated in emergency communications (EmComm) as an extension of their participation in public service communications for parades, walk-a-thons and other similar events.  Public service communications are a way to use the hobby to provide a community service and can provide opportunities to practice EmComm procedures.

With the significant changes that have occurred, NIMS and other federal initiatives at the top of the list, amateur radio EmComm needs to move from the public service arena to the public safety arena.

To better clarify and understand this last point it will beneficial to provide some definitions.  It is with these two definition in mind that this article is written.

Public Service (community service): A service performed for the benefit of the public, especially by a nonprofit organization. (This is the definition we will use for traditional amateur radio public service communications provided during parades, walk-a-thons, talk to Santa program and other similar planned events.  I also place Health & Welfare message handling in this category.  While H&W traffic may be passed during a disaster, these types of messages do not have direct life safety or property protection implications.  Also, because the operations of those pass H&W messages more closely resembles that used during a public service event (e.g. not requiring significant coordination with emergency management disciplines) than for those conducting communications in direct support of disaster operations.).

Public Safety: Involves the protection of the general population from all manner of significant danger, injury, damage or harm, such as may occur in a natural disaster, and the prevention of the same. (This is the definition we will use for emergency communications provided during disasters and synonomus with EmComm).

Clearly, providing Public Safety Communications can be seen as, and is, providing a public service.  However, Public Service Communications rarely, especially for the types of events which they are typically provided, if ever, can be considered Public Safety Communications.

Should a valid argument be made that they can be considered the same, particularly in the techniques and procedures used, there is one significant area in which Public Service Communications and Public Safety Communications differ, and appropriately so.

That is in the attitude and mind set of the provider.

Both are appropriate and can be held by the same person.

Generally, they can be described as follows:

When performing traditional Public Service Communications, participation is usually seen as an extension of the amateur radio hobby where no special training is required beyond good operating habits.  Participants spend a few hours or sometimes a few days providing communications links or capabilities for a planned public event.  Occasionally, communications for medical or other assistance are made, however, most events occur without any significant emergencies or problems.  While participants typically provide communications support to an event sponsor, the amateur radio operations are not typically intergrated or coordinated with any other groups, as this is not usually necessary.  Public Service Communications are a great way to promote the hobby, "play with our equipment" and maybe conduct some EmComm training all while providing a service to the community or organization.  Basically, while Public Service Communications can provide an opportunity to practice EmComm techniques and procedures, it is done for fun. 

On the other hand, Public Safety Communications are always performed during real disaster or related training exercises.  Public Safety Communications should always be performed from the "service" aspect of Amateur Radio, not the "hobby" aspect.  Purely based on the circumstances under which participation occurs, any communications conducted have significant potential impact on life safety and property protection issues.  EmComm operations must be effectively integrated and coordinated with the overall management of the event.  This means participants must be trained and continue training on a regular basis.  They need to see themselves a part of a much larger team.  And the "game" this team plays in uses a different and more involved set of rules that all team members must play by.

Many people do not like this idea.  They say "we are only volunteers why should we have to do all this training?"  To that I say, if all you want to do is provide Public Service Communications, you don't have to do any of the training, but if you want to provide Public Safety Communications you need to decide you will, even if you don't like it.

As a comparison, look at volunteer EMTs (including EMT-Paramedics).  Just like those who volunteer for RACES, ARES or other EmComm groups, they are purely volunteers.  They are not paid and they don't spend every day or waking hour living and training to be an EMT.  Still, depending on the state, all EMTs must participate in local training as well as mandatory continuing education (Con-Ed) every year.  Most EMTs have to obtain 40 hours or more of Con-Ed every year.  In fact, volunteer EMTs have exactly the same requirements to maintain their certification/licensure that paid EMTs do, the laws and regulations do not treat them any differently.

Let me ask you, when you call for an ambulance, who do you expect to be riding on that ambulance?  EMTs that train on a regular basis and keep their skills sharp or someone who hasn't undergone any training but that simply signs up as a member of the ambulance squad?  Does it matter to you whether or not that EMT is a volunteer or paid?  Do you expect anything different from a volunteer than you do a paid EMT?  How about the doctors and nurses at the hospital?  Do they expect the same from all EMTs regardless of whether or not they are volunteers?

Volunteer EMTs and firefighters and other volunteer first responders understand that when they are acting in those capacities they are performing public safety functions.  And to adequately perform those functions, to the expectations of the public and others they work and interact with, they must take their role seriously and do the things they are required to do.  Whether that is training in topics that are not job specific, obtaining continuing educations, participation in exercises or whatever else they are asked to do.

They may not like having to do all this, and just as EmComm volunteers, some will do only the minimum requirements, based on time availability or desire, and other will do much more. 

The point is, what makes us, as amateur radio operators, any different or more special that these other volunteers?  NOTHING !!!!  If we want to participate in the world of Public Safety by providing communications support, we need to get ourselves in the same mind set as volunteer EMTs.  At least during the times that we are involved in Public Safety Communications related activities, we need to be in that mind set.  When we are doing other things that are hobby related, which may be 90%-99% of the time for the average EmComm volunteer, then have fun and set the Public Safety Communications mind set aside.

Additionally, the skill set and licensing amateurs bring as EmComm volunteers set them apart from other "volunteers", such as those that volunteer with organizations such as the Red Cross or Salvation Army, who assist in running a shelter, operating feeding stations or handing out donated goods.  These other volunteers do not require any specialized skills or require and special official certifications or licensure.  Anyone, can volunteer in these capacities and provide the extra "sets of hands" that is much needed by these types of organizations in a disaster.  This skill set and licensing of amateurs, and others involved in EmComm, is unique and specialized enough to consider it a discipline, and as such obliges those of us involved to undertake the steps and activities necessary to become as individually proficient as we possibly can.

When I help out the local club provide communications for a community event, I approach it as an opportunity to enjoy the camaraderie of fellow amateur radio operators, provide a service to the community through supporting the event sponsors, promote amateur radio and sometimes utilize the opportunity to practice some EmComm techniques and procedures.

When I am functioning as an EmComm volunteer, I am doing so in the capacity of an emergency responder not a hobbyist.  While I receive satisfaction from the service I provide, my reason for being there is to support the efforts of those who are directly involved in responding to and managing the incident.  They expect me to be a team player, do what is necessary (whether or not it's related to communications), and understand where I fit into the overall response to the incident.  I am not there to "have fun" or socialize or to get headlines.  In fact, if I'm doing my job well, most people will not even know I'm there, except for those which whom I am directly working.

I believe we need to make a clear differentiation between Public Service Communications and Public Safety Communications.  There is and always will be a place in amateur radio for both types of activities.  Both provide opportunities for individuals to provide a service to their communities.  They contain some commonalities, but the expectations of and the requirements for participating in each of the activities are significantly different.

The NRCEV, and its programs, are targeted towards and designed for those who participate in Public Safety Communications - EmComm.  They are designed to bring EmComm in line with more traditional emergency responder disciplines by providing similar "credentials" for training and qualifications that have been required and/or utilized by these other disciplines. EmComm is not the place where we want to rely on spontaneous volunteers.  EmComm needs to be populated with dedicated and trained volunteers.  The NRCEV programs, most importantly, recognize those who working to meet a level of proficiency and expertise as EmComm volunteers, and then identifies them to those who make use of their services.  We strive to take commonly excepted EmComm training and marry them with emergency management training and design programs that mirror or at least are in line with those utilized by traditional first responder disciplines. 

Unfortunately, other efforts in this area, including the ARRL with their ARES database, are not intended to be a "universal" system for all EmComm volunteers regardless of the organization they belong to, the agencies they serve or what part of the country they live in.   They also do not appear to be trying to bring EmComm in line with other emergency responder disciplines.  We need to become a close active member of the emergency management/response family and not remain a distant cousin who only shows up when things are bad.  We need to be part of this group on an ongoing and regular basis.  We can't do this if we continue with a collective attitude of being so different or special that only doing things our (amateur radio centric) way will work.  We are acting like the kid with the ball who if he doesn't get his own way (by not making us follow the rules everyone else does) will take the ball and go home.  What most fail to realize is that we don't own the ball, and if we decide we don't want to play by the rules and leave, very few will miss us.  They aren't going to beg us to stay and play.  They are glad to have us and hope we will stay and play, but they are going to change the rules to get us to stay. 

The NRCEV, through its EmComm certifications and by developing an EmComm Position Qualification System, are attempting to provide the EmComm community with a set of tools and mechanisms, utilizing similar principles and practices used by traditional emergency responder disciplines, which will demonstrate our dedication and qualifications to be part of the larger emergency management/responder community.

I am supposedly in this system. They enrolled all
comers at Comms Academy in Seattle. Got a fancy ID
card on the spot, but haven't heard anything since. I
wonder if they picked up my ARRL Emcomm courses.

73, Barry
VE7VIE/WV2J

--- DESloan@... wrote:

> Has anyone looked at the system that the state of
> Washington has been
> testing called MobileIRIS by IOMEDEX. More
> information can be found at
> _http://www.iomedex.com/_ (http://www.iomedex.com/)
> . From what i was told  when I singed
> up for the system a couple of years ago, the idea is
> to have an ID  that can be
> read in the field and will provide a list of all
> completed courses  and
> training that a responder has taken. In addiction
> the system can be used to  track
> victims of an incident and data can be entered from
> the field. Seems like  it
> is a good system and I hope that it will selected
> for use nation wide.
>
> Dave N0EOP
>
>
>
> ************************************** Get a sneak
> peek of the all-new AOL at
> http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
>

The NRCEV is in the last stages of developing a position qualification system for EmComm volunteers.  This system, when initiated, will be integrated with the existing Certification program.  For more details on this initiative go to the Position Qualifications  page on the NRCEV website

Chris, NG3F

----- Original Message -----
From: "eric conrad" <ecepie@...>
Subject: Re: [React-l] REACT Certified Emergency Communicator
> this goes for the record, i hope everyone will be
> enticed to undergo such training. one thing i ask, if
> this kind of certification can be credited by the FEMA
> or any governing emergency agencies?
>
> because if it is, then it's an additional stripe to
> our ranks.
>
> 73
>
> eric conrad epie
> dv9gvu
> REACT Kaamulan 6061, Inc. based in Edmonton, Alberta,
> Ca

Right now FEMA is just beginning to look at the concept of certification for
various categories of emergency response volunteers.  The position in the
August and September 2007 Draft for the National Response Plan and National
Response Framework view certification and qualification as factors to be
included in the future credentialing system, but there are no details yet.

Some fields have clearly established certification and qualification
programs already in place, particularly Emergency Medical Technicians /
Paramedics and different categories of Fire Fighters.  Other fields, such as
Police, have various sorts of professional standards but do not have a
clearly established and recognized nationwide certification yet.

The situation for Emergency Communicators is probably the furthest away from
having a certification program available.  The world is changing and the
EmComm volunteer community is lagging behind other emergency response
professions -- perhaps, at least in part, because there are very very few
EmComm full-time professionals.  The closest thing to a professional
association is APCO (the Association of Public-Safety Communications
Officials) which is almost entirely focused on Police and Fire Dispatchers
(positions which do not generally include any technical knowledge about
radio communications).  Meanwhile in most full-time emergency responder
agencies, radio communications are handled as a sideline by non-technical
push-to-talk radio operators.  The need for EmComm volunteers only arises in
the case of major emergencies that either exceed response capabilities
forcing unplanned inter-agency communications or disasters that knock out
significant parts of the existing communications infrastructure.  In the
past, these needs have typically been filled by CBers or Ham Radio Operators
on an ad hoc basis with little or no organization above the local level.
Such communications emergencies have rarely been of the scope and duration
to require large numbers of volunteers from outside a local area.   Until
the last few years, the communications expectations of both emergency
agencies and the public have been significantly lower than we see now.
Today nearly every man, woman, and child in North America expects to be able
to instantly communicate with anyone anywhere at any time.  Our emergency
response system communication "needs" reflect our non-emergency
expectations.  We have emergency response systems at the local, state, and
federal level that rely on the constant availability of real-time email and
multi-megabyte computer files.  All these changes are placing totally new
demands on the field of emergency communications.  At the same time, we have
the post-9/11 mentality that everyone needs a dozen official documents just
to prove they have a right to exist, much less be in the area of an
emergency.  The world of EmComm is changing, and we EmComm volunteers are
very slowly being dragged into the 21st Century.

Unless the world changes AGAIN, we are going to need to have some sort of
nationwide professional standard foe EmComm volunteers very soon - certainly
no later than the next five years - probably by 2010 we will see federal
mandates for a credentialing system that will require some sort of
certification and qualification program.  The old days when a ham radio
license all by itself was good enough are long gone and the attitude of some
old timers that "we don't need no stinkin' training" has no place in the
real world today.

While the REACT Certified Emergency Communicator program is a small step in
the right direction, it is not broad enough to become the standard for a
nationwide certification system for EmComm volunteers.  Our program was
developed specifically to identify and recognize those members within REACT
who had demonstrated both knowledge and experience in emergency
communications within the REACT framework.

There is a program just getting started which hopes to form the basis for
nationwide professional standards for EmComm volunteers.  That program is
the National Registry of Certified EmComm Volunteers (NRCEV).  This program
is still just beginning and there will certainly be some further adjustments
in the proposed standards for certification and position qualification as
the program continues to develop but the NRCEV is the program that I think
is most likely to gain acceptance as the nationwide standard.  The
requirements established by NRCEV cover somewhat more than REACT's internal
certification requirements.  For example, the entry level NRCEV
certification requires training on various EmComm topics, plus first aid and
CPR, and the minimum FEMA ICS courses required under NIMS.

The REACT Level I Emergency Communications training program meets the entry
level EmComm education requirement (as do the ARRL Level I EmComm course and
several ARES training programs).   You can find more information about NRCEV
on their website at http://www.nrcev.org and the NRCEV group on Yahoo.

73 de Tom
N4AOF / WPOL710

A copy of the Draft Five-Year NIMS Training Plan can be located at the following link: http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/index.shtm

Has anyone looked at the system that the state of Washington has been
testing called MobileIRIS by IOMEDEX. More information can be found at
_http://www.iomedex.com/_ (http://www.iomedex.com/) . From what i was told  when
I singed
up for the system a couple of years ago, the idea is to have an ID  that can be
read in the field and will provide a list of all completed courses  and
training that a responder has taken. In addiction the system can be used to 
track
victims of an incident and data can be entered from the field. Seems like  it
is a good system and I hope that it will selected for use nation wide.

Dave N0EOP



************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour