SITUATIONAL AWARENESS
DURING A CATASTROPHIC
INCIDENT:
INSIGHTS FROM THE CR16 EXERCISE
Paper Presentation — Friday, January 11, 2019
Hans Jochen Scholl Karyn Hubbel Jeffrey Gene Leonard
University of Washington
Seattle, WA, USA
Email jscholl@uw.edu

University of Washington
Seattle, WA, USA
Email karyn22@uw.edu

University of Washington
Seattle, WA, USA
Email leonardj@uw.edu

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

1WHAT I AM GOING TO TALK ABOUT➤ The Cascadia Rising 2016 Exercise➤ Research Interest➤ Literature➤ Research Questions➤ Methodology➤ Findings➤ Discussion➤ Conclusions and Future Research➤ Questions and Comments

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

2

THE CASCADIA RISING 2016 EXERCISE (1)The Threat➤ Ring of Fire
➤ Accounts for 90% of allearthquakes, and 81% of theworld’s largest earthquakes➤ All but three of the world's 25

largest volcanic eruptions of thelast 11,700 years occurred atvolcanoes in the Ring of Fire.

➤ Subduction zones are shown inred➤ The CSZ fault line is part of theRing of Fire➤ The CSZ is the only significant
Slide content courtesy of Lt.Col. Braun, WA National Guard and Wikipedia

fault line on the Ring of Fire
without a major quake in the last
50 years (see blue stars)

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

3

THE CASCADIA RISING 2016 EXERCISE (2)Exercise Details➤ Conducted between June 7 and 10, 2016

(military: between June 7 and14, 2016)
after two years of preparation➤ Involved 23,000 participants

acrosslocal, state, federal, tribal, Departmentof Defense, and non-governmental
entities in Oregon, Washington, andIdaho with British Columbia associated➤ One of the largest exercises everconducted in the US; the largest multistate exercise in the Pacific Northwest sofar➤ Objective: Through disaster simulation,

the purpose of this exercise was to test
and validate catastrophic CSZ plans; theability of Emergency Operations Centers(EOCs), throughout the wholecommunity, to coordinate andcommunicate priorities and objectives;to share situational information; and torequest, order, and transport life-saving
resources to the areas most heavily
impacted➤ Scenario similar to the devastating
Picture and graph courtesy of John Vidale

March 2011 Tōhoku earthquake andtsunami in Japan

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

4THE CASCADIA RISING 2016 EXERCISE (3)Impact Area
➤ West of and including the Interstate-5 corridor➤ Zipper-like rupture from one end of the subduction line tothe other is expected to occur along the 800-mile-long
subduction line

➤ Thirty to forty-foot high tsunami would reach the coastline

about 20 to 30 minutes after the rupture➤ Several aftershocks of significant magnitude would beexpected to follow the initial rupture inflicting more damage➤ Impact on human lives and infrastructure would be thegreater the closer the location to the coastline➤ Impacted areas West of the Cascadian Mountain range would

be inaccessible by ground transport or sea transport forextended periods of time

➤ Relief would first come predominantly by air transport➤ Responders would find themselves stripped from using mostmodern information and communication technologies for thelack of power and intact communication infrastructures

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

5

RESEARCH INTEREST➤ First responders’ biggest challenges in early response are— the lack of situational awareness (SA) and/or sharedsituational awareness (SSA), which leads to an incomplete
and distorted common operating picture (COP)— Information and communication technologies (ICTs) are
not always part of the solution but rather part of theproblem➤ In this study we focus on the former, that is, informationsharing challenges as well as challenges to situationalawareness, information sharing challenges

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

6

LITERATURE (ON SITUATIONAL AWARENESS)➤ Situational Awareness (SA) and Shared SA (SSA)— Endsley presented a comprehensive SA framework, inwhich she distinguished(1) perception— (2) comprehension, and— (3) projection—

as three intertwined levels of SA (Endsley, 1995)— The notion of and discussion about SA/SSA was informed
and influenced by advances in other disciplines and not
developed in Disaster Sciences— Research needs to address in more detail, which level of
SSA is investigated, and how the three levels of SSA
transition from one another (including feedback)Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

7

LITERATURE (ON EEIS AND INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURES)➤ Essential Elements of Information (EEIs)— Itemized lists of assets and critical infrastructure that help guide

responders systematically through the collection of detailed and hazardspecific information (Scholl et al. 2017)— Strong hindrances to attaining even the entry level of SSA (perception)
were also identified in the absence of planning and pre-configuring EEIs
➤ Information Infrastructures— Lack of standardization of information sharing procedures and protocols
impeded all levels of SSA and prevented the necessary integration ofinformation from diﬀerent sources— Lack of unified disaster information architecture and a unified system
platform shared by responders at all levels (Seppänen et al 2013, 2015)— Developing and maintaining SA/SSA and a shared COP depends oninformation infrastructures, which support vertical and horizontal
information flows (Scholl & Patin 2014)
Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

8

RESEARCH QUESTIONS➤ Research Question #1 (RQ#1):— What are specific information-sharing challenges for

professional responders in a catastrophic incident
response?
➤ Research Question #2 (RQ#2):— What are specific SA/SSA-related challenges for professional
responders in a catastrophic incident response?

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

9METHODOLOGY➤ Overall Design: An exploratory study design was chosen based on the theoretical framework of“Resilient Information Infrastructures (RIIs)” in disaster response (Scholl & Palin, 2014)➤ Instrument and Coding Scheme: Six topical areas were covered, (1) management andorganization, (2) technology, (3) information, (4) information infrastructure, (5) Resilient
information Infrastructures (RIIs)/resiliency. A total of twenty-five interview questions andprobes were incorporated➤ Sample: The purposive sample included responders from eight diﬀerent groups: (1) City
Emergency Operations Centers, (2) County Emergency Operations Centers, (3) Washington
State Emergency Management Division, (4) WA State Agencies, (5) Health Districts, (6)Regional Aviation, (7) Washington State National Guard, and (8) Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), region X. A total of 17 individuals were interviewed.
Furthermore, after-action reports (AARs) from twenty-three agencies from all eight respondergroups were collected and analyzed➤ Data Collection: Interviews were conducted in person between September 2016 and March2017 and lasted between 33 to 107 minutes➤ Data Analysis and Coding: The initial codebook, which was based on the aforementioned
conceptual RII framework, contained five category codes (one for each topical area) and 111
sub-category codes. Additional codes were inductively introduced during data collection, inindividual coding sessions, and inter-coder sessions
Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

10TOP-30 CODES AND SUB-CODES
Table 1
#Two Papers on“SituationalAwareness”

Code (grey) / Sub-codeTotals

1

Mgmt Org

9973

2

Informa2on

8074

3

inf_situa2onal_awareness

5311

4

Technology

5216

5

mgmt_chall_info_sharing

4449

6Informa2on Infrastructure

4088

7

mgmt_chall_resource

3827

8

Resilient IIs

3738

9

ict_use_info_sharing

3325

10

Governance

3156

11

mgmt_chall_org

2972

12

inf_common_operat_pic

2943

13

mgmt_external_partnerships

2773

14

mgmt_structure

2576

15

mgmt_chall_partnerships

2548

16

mgmt_preparedness_incl_lack_thereof

2485

17

ict_chall_using_icts

2278

18

mgmt_opera2onal_rules

2190

19

mgmt_chall_coordina2on

2014

20

mgmt_resources

1988

21

gov_resp_roles

1716

22

ict_use_in/for_sit_awareness

1662

23

inf_lack_access

1583

24

ict_use_support_collab

1563

25

ii_vulnerabil2es

1561

26

mgmt_training_incl_lack_of_training

1548

27

inf_need_resources

1420

28

inf_quality

1392

29

mgmt_assign_roles

1358

30

ii_means_info_handling

1335

Forthcoming
Paper on“ManagerialChallenges”

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

11

CODE FREQUENCY DESCRIPTOR BUBBLE PLOT (DEDOOSE)

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

12CONCEPT ANALYSISConcepts

Vignette Candidate

Excerpt Header

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

13

LOGICAL AND CHRONOLOGICAL MAPS OF CONCEPTS
Concept Cluster

Concepts

Concept Sub-cluster

Sub-cluster Relations

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

14

FINDINGS (1)Ad RQ#1 (What are specific information-sharing challenges for professional responders in a catastrophic incident
response? )➤ Lack of Standardized Information Flows, Protocols, and Flow Frequencies— Absence of clear-cut definitions and prescriptions of what information had togo where, when, in what frequency, in what format, and at what level of detail— Information needs of horizontally and vertically working response units wereunclear, or, at least, not clearly known— No standardized push mechanism nor any standardized pull mechanism forsharing information between responder units, even within the same
jurisdictions— Using the standard ICS213 message form, which only specifies the elements ofbasic messaging, does not do the trick➤ Information Sources, Information Needs, and Information Overload/Overflow— Problem of identifying the adequate lists and paths for distribution ofimportant information to recipients with a need to know
— Lack of checklists known as hazard-specific “Essential Elements ofInformation” in many jurisdictions
Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

15

FINDINGS (2)Ad RQ#1 (What are specific information-sharing challenges for professional responders in a catastrophic incidentresponse?)— Balance between detail of information and aggregation/consolidation of information— Data overflow problems➤ Information Inconsistencies, Obsolescence, Vetting, and Information Sharing

Anxieties— Information is incomplete, ambiguous, and even contradictory. Time consuming

process of vetting, de-conflicting, and verifing— Only vetted information was passed on at the expense of potentially valuable timelost
— Obsoleted information even before the vetting was complete— Reluctance to sharing information beyond their own functional needs, or for otherreasons➤ Impacts of Shift Changes and Physical Separation— Shift changes were found a missed opportunity for eﬀective information sharing

between responders (fatigue, lack of planning or protocol, or other reasons)— Lack of relaying important information including COP causing costly double work
Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

16

FINDINGS (3)Ad RQ#2 (What are specific SA/SSA-related challenges for professional responders in a catastrophic incident response?)➤ Reliance on Trustworthy Channels, Quickness of Information Collection, and Issuesof Verification— No standardization of the information vetting and verification process leading to SSA/COP— Trustworthiness of exchanged information resting on the trust that was pre-establishedbetween sender and receiver rather than the message content itself, or other criteria andindicators of veracityVarious COTS (commercial-oﬀ-the shelf) systems— Slow information collection leading to incomplete and delayed SSA/COP➤ Importance of SSA/COP Visualization and Regular Status Updates— Pre-incident planning needs to focus on identifying means of how data can bemeaningfully filtered without losing essential information in the process— Information overload to occur only as long as modern ICTs and networks are fully
functional— Near-total blackout creates the more likely and prevailing problem of not obtaining
important information— Importance of SSA/COP visualization, both low- and high-tech, based on interactivecharts, status boards, and otherwise
Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

17

FINDINGS (4)Ad RQ#2 (What are specific SA/SSA-related information and communication technology(ICT) challenges to professional disaster responders on all levels in the early stages of response toa (simulated) catastrophe?)➤ Damage Assessment and the Important Role of Essential

Elements of Information— Immediate assessing of damage to critical infrastructures also
relative to responders’ own capabilities— Windshield surveys conducted by Police and Fire for initial
information collection on damage— EEI checklists proved invaluable when trying to instill order
into the information collection, management, anddissemination process— Far from all juris-dictions had developed these checklists andstandard-ized processes for information collection and handlingHans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

18

DISCUSSION (1)➤ Persisting Known Problems— Several SSA/COP-related issues had been observed and analyzed before(missing standards for information sharing, the need for developing hazardspecific EEI checklists and contact lists,lack of information integration— The current study re-confirmed exactly the unabated persistence of these keyissues➤ This study: Additional issues and more detail regarding the known problems— Need for Standardizing Information Collection, Verification, and Dissemination
Methods— Inclusion of mechanisms and methods for collection (push and/or pull)— Verification methods and levels (for example, confidence levels from unverified,verified in part, or fully verified)— Dissemination methods and formats (for example, standardized SitReps)ICT
mirror infrastructures outside impact area as alternative➤ Importance of “Essential Elements of Information” (hazard-specific lists) provide
guidance through information collection and dissemination regarding assets ofcritical infrastructures
Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

19

DISCUSSION (2)➤ Rethinking the Information Sharing Paradigm— Vetting and verifying information before passing on or using it for

informing response eﬀorts ("erring on the side of caution”)— Passing on information with a status label, which informs the recipient ofthe vetting status, might be preferable to hoarding and siloing
information. This change of information sharing practice and policy may
need some eﬀort to implement including culture change eﬀorts➤ Information Integration and Visualization— Separate formats basically stayed separate and were not compiled into asingle whole, so that information remained incomplete and distorted.
— Once properly integrated information needs to be also adequately
visualized (interactive charts or on paper/whiteboard-based statusboards)➤ Shift Overlaps for Maintaining SSA/COP as Low-hanging Fruits➤ Need for Contingency Planning and Paper-based Operations

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

20CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RESEARCH➤Response to a Catastrophe Markedly Diﬀers from Responses to “Regular”
Emergencies and Non-catastrophic Disasters—➤Balance between a high degree of procedural flexibility, while maintaining adherence
to basic response paradigms and principles determines to a great part the quality of
the SSA/COP

Need for Scalability (Back to Pre-IT Times and Back Forward)— Paper-based, runner- based, as well as low- or no-technology-based operations need tobe redeveloped and practiced along with their gradual transition to more advanced
procedures and methods as soon as those become available➤

Cascadia 2022

— It was recommended (and now is planned) that the exercise be repeated andconducted under the assumption of an even more severe scenario with stingier injects— Practicing SSA/COP operations in a long-term blackout information environment aswell as under the assumption of massive initial decimation in local response assets
and capabilities➤

Currently, the US Pacific Northwest would be caught absolutely flat-footed
by a mega-thrustHans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident21

THANK YOU!

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

Hans J Scholl et al — University of Washington — HICSS-52 January 2019 — Situational Awareness During a Catastrophic Incident

22