DISASTER RESPONSE IN THE
PACIFIC NORTHWEST:HOW READY (OR NOT) ARE WE AND OUR FIRST RESPONDERS?
iSchool Research Symposium — Monday, June 3, 2019
Hans Jochen Scholl
University of Washington
Seattle, WA, USA
Email jscholl@uw.edu

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

1

WHAT I AM GOING TO TALK ABOUT➤ The Context➤ Specific Research Interest➤ The 2014 Oso/SR530 Landslide➤ The Cascadia Rising 2016 Exercise➤ Literature (I will skip this, please take a look at the papers)➤ Research Questions➤ Methodology (I will skip this to boot, please take a look at the papers)➤ Findings➤ Discussion➤ Conclusions and Future Research➤ Questions and Comments

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

2

THE CONTEXT➤ Who has grown up here?
➤ Who has lived here for more than 10 years?
➤ Who has recently arrived here (up to two years back)?

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest3

THE CONTEXT➤ Who has grown up here?
➤ Who has lived here for more than 10 years?
➤ Who has recently arrived here (up to two years back)?

➤ What is so special about the Pacific Northwest (PNW)?

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

4

SEATTLE HAZARD RANKING

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Earthquakes
Snow & Ice Storms
Windstorms
Power Outages
Cyber attack/disruption
Landslides

Seattle Hazard Identification And Vulnerability Analysis, 2019, Table 2.1

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

5

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY HAZARDS

Seattle Hazard Identification And Vulnerability Analysis, 2019, Table 2.3

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

6

GROWING AWARENESS, CONCERN, AND RESEARCH INTEREST➤ Trentham, G., & Scholl, H. J. (2008, January 7 to 10). Current Practices in Field Force Automation: Decision Support and Information

Management for the Field Force. Paper presented at the 41st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI.
➤ Scholl, H. J., & Patin, B. J. (2012). Resilient Information Infrastructures: Mobilizing Adaptive Capacities under Extreme Events. Paper
presented at the 18th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Seattle, WA.
➤ Chatfield, A. T., Scholl, H. J., & Brajawidagda, U. (2013). Tsunami early warnings via Twitter in government: Net-savvy citizens' coproduction of time-critical public information services. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 377-386.
➤ Chatfield, A. T., Scholl, H. J., & Brajawidagda, U. (2014, January 6-9). #Sandy Tweets: Citizens’ Co-Production of Time-Critical
Information during an Unfolding Catastrophe. Paper presented at the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences(HICSS-47), Waikoloa, HI.
➤ Scholl, H. J., & Chatfield, A. T. (2014). The Role of Resilient Information Infrastructures: The Case of Radio Fukushima during and after
the 2011 Eastern Japan Catastrophe. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age (IJPADA), 1(2), 1-24.
➤ Scholl, H. J., & Patin, B. J. (2014). Resilient Information Infrastructures: Criticality and Role in Responding to Catastrophic Incidents.
Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 8(1), 28-48.
➤ Scholl, H. J., Ballard, S., Carnes, S., Herman, A., & Parker, N. (2017). Informational Challenges in Early Disaster Response: The Massive
Oso/SR530 Landslide 2014 as Case in Point. Paper presented at the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences(HICSS-50), Waikoloa, HI. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/41458➤ Scholl, H. J., & Carnes, S. L. (2017). Managerial challenges in early disaster response: The case of the 2014 Oso/SR530 landslidedisaster. In ISCRAM (pp. 961-972). Albi, France: Proceedings of the 14th ISCRAM conference.
➤ Scholl, H. J., Hubbel, K., & Leonard, J. (2018). Communications and Technology Challenges to Situational Awareness: Insights from theCR16 Exercise. In Proceedings of the 1st ISCRAM Asia-Pacific Conference (pp. 1-15). Wellington, NZ: ISCRAM.
➤ Scholl, H. J., Hubbell, K., & Leonard, J. G. (2019). Information Sharing and Situational Awareness: Insights from the Cascadia Rising
Exercise of June 2016. In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-52) (pp. 1-11). Maui,HI.
➤ Scholl, H. J. (2019). Overwhelmed by Brute Force of Nature: First Response Management in the Wake of a Catastrophic Incident. In I.

Lindgren, M. Janssen, H. Lee, M. P. R. Bolívar, E. Tambouris, & H. J. Scholl (Eds.), Electronic Government: Proceedings of the 18th IFIP
WG 8.5 International Conference, EGOV 2019 (pp. [1-18] in print). Cham: Springer.
Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

7

GROWING AWARENESS, CONCERN, AND RESEARCH INTEREST➤ Trentham, G., & Scholl, H. J. (2008, January 7 to 10). Current Practices in Field Force Automation: Decision Support and Information

Management for the Field Force. Paper presented at the 41st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI.
➤ Scholl, H. J., & Patin, B. J. (2012). Resilient Information Infrastructures: Mobilizing Adaptive Capacities under Extreme Events. Paper
presented at the 18th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Seattle, WA.
➤ Chatfield, A. T., Scholl, H. J., & Brajawidagda, U. (2013). Tsunami early warnings via Twitter in government: Net-savvy citizens' coproduction of time-critical public information services. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 377-386.
➤ Chatfield, A. T., Scholl, H. J., & Brajawidagda, U. (2014, January 6-9). #Sandy Tweets: Citizens’ Co-Production of Time-Critical
Information during an Unfolding Catastrophe. Paper presented at the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences(HICSS-47), Waikoloa, HI.
➤ Scholl, H. J., & Chatfield, A. T. (2014). The Role of Resilient Information Infrastructures: The Case of Radio Fukushima during and after
the 2011 Eastern Japan Catastrophe. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age (IJPADA), 1(2), 1-24.
➤ Scholl, H. J., & Patin, B. J. (2014). Resilient Information Infrastructures: Criticality and Role in Responding to Catastrophic Incidents.
Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 8(1), 28-48.
➤ Scholl, H. J., Ballard, S., Carnes, S., Herman, A., & Parker, N. (2017). Informational Challenges in Early Disaster Response: The Massive
Oso/SR530 Landslide 2014 as Case in Point. Paper presented at the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences(HICSS-50), Waikoloa, HI. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/41458➤ Scholl, H. J., & Carnes, S. L. (2017). Managerial challenges in early disaster response: The case of the 2014 Oso/SR530 landslidedisaster. In ISCRAM (pp. 961-972). Albi, France: Proceedings of the 14th ISCRAM conference.
➤ Scholl, H. J., Hubbel, K., & Leonard, J. (2018). Communications and Technology Challenges to Situational Awareness: Insights from theCR16 Exercise. In Proceedings of the 1st ISCRAM Asia-Pacific Conference (pp. 1-15). Wellington, NZ: ISCRAM.
➤ Scholl, H. J., Hubbell, K., & Leonard, J. G. (2019). Information Sharing and Situational Awareness: Insights from the Cascadia Rising
Exercise of June 2016. In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-52) (pp. 1-11). Maui,HI.
➤ Scholl, H. J. (2019). Overwhelmed by Brute Force of Nature: First Response Management in the Wake of a Catastrophic Incident. In I.

Lindgren, M. Janssen, H. Lee, M. P. R. Bolívar, E. Tambouris, & H. J. Scholl (Eds.), Electronic Government: Proceedings of the 18th IFIP
WG 8.5 International Conference, EGOV 2019 (pp. [1-18] in print). Cham: Springer.
Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

8

OSO, WA - MARCH 22, 2014
➤ A hillside of about 180m in elevation from the valley

bottom collapsed and unleashed about 8m m3 of mud
and debris in an avalanche-like slide that ran acrossthe North Fork of the Stillaguamish River for about
1.7 km at top speeds of over 140 km/h to the otherside of the valley, where it bounced back.
➤ The slide instantly killed 43 people along with an
unknown number of animals, completely destroyedsome 50 buildings and structures, and covered State
Route 530 at a length of 1.6 km. Mud and debris
piled up in some areas to 21m in depth.
➤ A total of 119 government agencies and nongovernmental organizations were actively involved
and co-operated➤ Over 1,100 individuals were involved in the
response, some 350 of whom were from the WA
National Guard➤ Incident Command was passed from local (after day1) to regional (type-3), from regional (after day 5) tostate (type-2), from the first type-2 team to thesecond type-2 team (after day 17), and back (after day39) to the regional type-3 team➤ All victims were recovered and identified; the final
death toll was 43➤ Estimated cost (life, damage, and response): $1b
Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

9

THE CASCADIA RISING 2016 EXERCISE (1)Exercise Details➤ Conducted between June 7 and 10, 2016

(military: between June 7 and 14, 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 so
far➤ 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 E. Vidale

March 2011 Tōhoku earthquake andtsunami in Japan

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

10

THE CASCADIA RISING 2016 EXERCISE (2)The Threat➤ Ring of Fire
➤ Accounts for 90% of all

Slide content courtesy of Lt.Col. Clayton Braun, WA National Guard and Wikipedia

earthquakes, and 81% of theworld’s largest earthquakes➤ All but three of the world's 25
largest volcanic eruptions of
the last 11,700 years occurredat volcanoes in the Ring of Fire.
➤ Subduction zones are shown in
red➤ The CSZ fault line is part of the
Ring of Fire➤ The CSZ is the only significant
fault line on the Ring of Fire
without a major quake in the last
50 years (see blue stars)

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

11

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 be

expected 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 — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

12

LITERATURE (ON DISASTER CATEGORIZATION)
Category

Disaster Scale

DC-1

EVERYDAYEMERGENCY

DC-2

SEVERE EMERGENCY

DC-3

PARTIAL SMALL TOWN

Major Scale & Duration, Partial Scope

Crash of an airplane in a small town

DC-4

MASSIVE SMALL TOWN

Major Scale, Scope, Duration – Town

Forest fire that threatens to destroy
an entire community

DC-5

PARTIAL SMALL CITY

Major Scale, Duration, Partial Scope

Airliner crash in a small or medium
sized city

DC-6

MASSIVE SMALL CITY

Major Scale, Scope, Duration

Earthquake severely impacting mostof the city

DC-7

PARTIAL LARGE CITY

Major Scale, Duration, Partial Scope

Terrorist attack such as 9/11/2001,
Earthquake Christchurch, 2010

MASSIVE LARGE CITY

Major Scale, Scope, Duration

Severe earthquake in San
Francisco, 1906, Lisbon earthquake
and tsunami, 1755

DC-9

CATASTROPHE

Major Scale, Scope, Duration (Several
Populated Areas)

2004 Indian Ocean earthquake andtsunami, 2011 Tōhoku/East Japan
earthquake and tsunami

DC-10

ANNIHILATION

Major Scale, Scope, Duration (Society)

Delivery of weapons of mass
destruction (WMD)

DC-8

DIsruption

ExampleMinor in Scale, Scope, Duration; Minor in
Scope, Major in Scale & Duration; Partial in
Scope, Minor in Scale & Duration
Major in Scope, Minor in Scale & Duration;
Major in Scale & Duration, Minor in Scope

A single house afire
Snowstorm disrupting normal activity

Henry W. Fischer’s Disaster Categories (2003)
Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

13

RESEARCH INTEREST(From a Disaster Information Management Perspective AND a First Responders’ Perspective)➤ First responders’ biggest challenges in early response have beenreported as

1. Lack of situational awareness (SA) and/or shared situationalawareness (SSA) leading to an incomplete and distorted common
operating picture (COP)
2. Role of information and communication technologies (ICTs) as partof the solution or part of the problem
3. Attributable but not limited to 1. and 2. are managerial challenges
encountered by first responders➤ The Oso/SR530 Response Study and the Cascadia Rising 2016 Exercise

Study used the same theoretical lens, methodology, and instrument➤ So far, resulting in five peer-reviewed publications:Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

14

GROWING AWARENESS & CONCERN AND RESEARCH INTEREST➤ Trentham, G., & Scholl, H. J. (2008, January 7 to 10). Current Practices in Field Force Automation: Decision Support and Information

Management for the Field Force. Paper presented at the 41st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI.
➤ Scholl, H. J., & Patin, B. J. (2012). Resilient Information Infrastructures: Mobilizing Adaptive Capacities under Extreme Events. Paper
presented at the 18th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Seattle, WA.
➤ Chatfield, A. T., Scholl, H. J., & Brajawidagda, U. (2013). Tsunami early warnings via Twitter in government: Net-savvy citizens' coproduction of time-critical public information services. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 377-386.
➤ Chatfield, A. T., Scholl, H. J., & Brajawidagda, U. (2014, January 6-9). #Sandy Tweets: Citizens’ Co-Production of Time-Critical
Information during an Unfolding Catastrophe. Paper presented at the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences(HICSS-47), Waikoloa, HI.
➤ Scholl, H. J., & Chatfield, A. T. (2014). The Role of Resilient Information Infrastructures: The Case of Radio Fukushima during and after
the 2011 Eastern Japan Catastrophe. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age (IJPADA), 1(2), 1-24.
➤ Scholl, H. J., & Patin, B. J. (2014). Resilient Information Infrastructures: Criticality and Role in Responding to Catastrophic Incidents.
Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 8(1), 28-48.
➤ Scholl, H. J., Ballard, S., Carnes, S., Herman, A., & Parker, N. (2017). Informational Challenges in Early Disaster Response: The Massive
Oso/SR530 Landslide 2014 as Case in Point. Paper presented at the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences(HICSS-50), Waikoloa, HI. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/41458➤ Scholl, H. J., & Carnes, S. L. (2017). Managerial challenges in early disaster response: The case of the 2014 Oso/SR530 landslidedisaster. In ISCRAM (pp. 961-972). Albi, France: Proceedings of the. Best Insight Paper Award➤ Scholl, H. J., Hubbel, K., & Leonard, J. (2018). Communications and Technology Challenges to Situational Awareness: Insights from theCR16 Exercise. In Proceedings of the 1st ISCRAM Asia-Pacific Conference (pp. 1-15). Wellington, NZ: ISCRAM. Best Paper Runner-up➤ Scholl, H. J., Hubbell, K., & Leonard, J. G. (2019). Information Sharing and Situational Awareness: Insights from the Cascadia Rising
Exercise of June 2016. In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-52) (pp. 1-11). Maui,HI.
➤ Scholl, H. J. (2019). Overwhelmed by Brute Force of Nature: First Response Management in the Wake of a Catastrophic Incident. In I.

Lindgren, M. Janssen, H. Lee, M. P. R. Bolívar, E. Tambouris, & H. J. Scholl (Eds.), Electronic Government: Proceedings of the 18th IFIP
WG 8.5 International Conference, EGOV 2019 (pp. [1-18] in print). Cham: Springer.
Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

15

RESEARCH QUESTIONS➤ What are specific SA-related information sharing challenges for disaster response teams, andwhat are specific challenges to responders’ information behaviors?
➤ What are specific SA-related challenges for disaster response teams on diﬀerent levels of
involvement, and what are specific challenges to meet the information needs?
➤ What were specific managerial challenges during the multi-agency/multi-level response to the2014 Oso/SR530 Landslide?
➤ What were the specific challenges regarding the use of NIMS/ICS during the multi-agency/
multi-level response to the 2014 Oso/SR530 Landslide?

Oso/
SR530
Landslide2014➤ What are specific information-sharing challenges for professional responders in a catastrophic

incident response?
➤ What are specific SA/SSA-related challenges for professional responders in a catastrophic
incident response?
➤ What are specific SA/SSA-related communications challenges to professional disaster
responders on all levels in the early stages of response to a (simulated) catastrophe?
➤ 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 to a(simulated) catastrophe?
➤ How do coordination and collaboration challenges change or stay the same when responding
to a catastrophic incident (as opposed to a non-catastrophic emergency response)?
➤ How do other managerial challenges change or stay the same when responding to acatastrophic incident (as opposed to a non-catastrophic emergency response)?

Cascadia
RisingExercise
2016

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

16

DATA COLLECTION SUMMARY➤ 48 (31/17) individuals from diﬀerent responder groups(FEMA, State, Counties, Municipalities, etc)
➤ 59 hours (44.5/14.25) of interview recordings➤ 32 (9/23) After-action Reports (AARs)➤ Incident log files➤ Numerous planning documents, press releases, and otherdocuments➤ Tool and ICT demonstrations

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

17

FINDINGS (1)Lack of Situational Awareness (SA) and Common Operating Picture(COP) — Oso/SR530 Landslide➤

Five full days needed to finally arrive at the so-called projection stage
—
—
—
—
—

➤

According to M. Endsley, after an incident (i) SA progresses through the stages ofperception, comprehension, and projection
i+1d perception was not complete, i+2-3d comprehension increased leading to finallydispatching an IMT type-II team, which arrived on i+5d
Disconnect between air crews and ground responders
Lack of involvement of and coordination from County EOC
Physical obstacles (SR530 impassable, communication lines down, separation of
responders on either side of the slide)

No collection of Essential Elements of Information (EEIs)—lack of planning— Responders (including mutual aid responders from neighboring jurisdictions)
had to start from scratch— Spotty and unsystematic information sharing in the first few days to the response— No standards for information sharing— Multiple formats and media
Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

18

FINDINGS (2)Role of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) as
part of the solution or part of the problem — Oso/SR530 Landslide➤

Heterogeneity of logistics and other systems (including WebEOC) as well as
networking arrangements—➤➤

Media breaks
Radio communications as most important tool for coordinating and messaging
among responder teams——➤

Impossibility to easily, timely, and comprehensively share documents and messages
among responders

Incompatibility of radios
Need for frequency and equipment compatibility

Lack of an integrated and secure interoperability platform for vertical or horizontal
exchanges among responders

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

19

FINDINGS (3)Managerial challenges encountered by first responders — Oso/SR530
Landslide
➤
➤

➤
➤

➤
➤
➤
➤
➤
➤
➤

The evolution of a unified command structure during the response was slow
Frictions between the ICP and County EOC over requesting resources and the useof volunteers
EOC director refraining from involving himself; rather a new hire was put in charge
Influx and involvement of mutual-aid responders was uncoordinated andunmanaged
Information sharing among responders was happenstanceLack of and unwillingness to collaborate on part of the County’s medical examiner
Lack of standardized resource request procedures
Problem with scaling-up the response eﬀort
Lack of training and experience with NIMS/ICS
Confusion between NIMS/ICS and ESFs
Lack of standardization in NIMS/ICS and rising complexity in larger incidents

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

20

FINDINGS (4)Lack of Situational Awareness (SA) and Common Operating
Picture (COP) — Cascadia Rising➤

Lack of standardized information flows, protocols, and flow frequencies——➤

Information sources, information needs, and information overload/overflow
—
—

—
—

➤

➤

No standardized push mechanism nor any standardized pull mechanism for sharing
information between responder units, even within the same jurisdictions
Using the all-purpose standard ICS213 message forms does not do the trick
Problem of identifying the adequate lists and paths for distribution of important
information to recipients with a need to know
Lack of checklists known as hazard-specific “Essential Elements of Information” inmany jurisdictions
Balance between detail of information and aggregation/consolidation of information
Data overflow problems

Information inconsistencies, obsolescence, vetting, and information sharing
anxieties
Impacts of shift changes and physical separation

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

21

FINDINGS (5)Role of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) as part ofthe solution or part of the problem — Cascadia Rising➤ WebEOC™ — Javascript-based browser operated; runs from local servers
and/or in the Cloud; versions 7.3, 7.6, and 8.1 with an enhanced graphicaluser interface were in use; basically a logistics and event logging systems— Severe functional rigidities and limitations— Not self-explicatory nor intuitive to use in any way— Lack of integration of GIS metadata from the popular ArcGIS software— No sophisticated tracking or data manipulation methods like sorting certain data

— Multiple boards such as “status update,” “significant events,” “task manager” among

others along with user-generated ones

— Interoperability issues, performance issues, and workarounds— State WebEOC system crashed under the load and appeared to have been unavailable

for an extended period of time
— Lack of readiness for large incidents— Workaround in providing each other direct access to their respective WebEOC systems

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

22

FINDINGS (6)Role of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) as
part of the solution or part of the problem — Cascadia Rising➤ Radio technologies— Lack of HF Radio interoperability

Incompatible radios (frequency/equipment)— Interoperability as a major problem until both frequency/channel allocationand equipment compatibility via standardization have been secured—— Limitations of alternate and auxiliary communications

Bandwidth problems and equipment incompatibilities also hampered
backup infrastructure of stationary HF backup stations and satellite phones— Amateur (or, HAM) radio used at municipal, county, State, and Federal
levels as an auxiliary communication infrastructure— Lack of training on part of amateur HAM operators— Lack of bandwidth—

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

23

FINDINGS (7)Managerial challenges encountered by first responders — Cascadia Rising➤ Physical obstacles— Electrical power would be immediately lost in wide geographical areas and not

return for months and in some cases even for more than a year
— Grave impact on all communication infrastructures— Immensely degraded transportation infrastructure barriers and impediments of allkinds— “Islands” with no ingress nor egress
—
—
—
—
—
—

Blockages by landslides
Fallen trees
Tumbled-over buildings
Downed power lines
Cracked-up road surfaces
Fires, flooded areas, and spills of hazardous materials and fuels— Inter-jurisdictional coordination challenges———

Unified Command Structure was slowly formed
Lack of standards, for example, in resource request procedures
Lack of pre-disaster plan integration across jurisdictions (vertically and horizontally)
Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

24

FINDINGS (8)Managerial challenges encountered by first responders — Cascadia Rising➤ Lack of standardized operations, processes, and functions despite NIMS/ICS and NRF— No standards for processes and procedures➤ Staﬃng— Quite a number of responders did not report to duty

— Understaﬃng has to be expected as the norm (victimization, absenteeism, COIs, physicalobstacles)— Essential expertise was and will be missing— Extended work hours leading to fatigue, wear-down, and mistakes— Staﬀ rotation as work-around— Over-reliance on volunteers➤ Resource management— Worked well between FEMA and State, not so well between lower levels of gov and with
State/FEMA— Redundant and/or incomplete r resource requesting— Lack of familiarity with FEMA/federal reimbursement requirements— Push concept not well known -- further confusion— Lack of knowledge about advanced capabilities
Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

25

FINDINGS (9)Managerial challenges encountered by first responders — Cascadia Rising➤ Planning— Double work of lack of knowledge regarding pre-existing plans— Existing plans as starting points (not suited for M9+ CSZ)

— Missing plans for mass fatalities, mass care and sheltering, and mass evacuation as

well as fuel and fuel distribution— Basic elements missing (updated contact info, org charts, vendor lists, information
access points etc.)— Many continuity-of-operations plans (COOPs) out of date
— Lack of plan sharing and plan cycle synchronization— Lack of planning for paper-based response— Lack of planning for unprepared populations— Lack of preparedness for a humanitarian crisis of proportions— Need for paradigm shift from pull to push
— Need for paradigm shift from only operating from 100 percent vetted information
bases

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

26

DISCUSSION (1)➤ Persisting known problems (Oso to Cascadia)— 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 CR16 study re-confirmed exactly the unabated persistence of these key
issues➤ In the CR16 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 — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

27

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 of
the 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 status boards)➤ Shift overlaps for maintaining SSA/COP as low-hanging fruits➤ Need for contingency planning and extended paper-based

operations
Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

28

DISCUSSION (3)➤ State of currently used emergency ICTs in light of the 2004 DERMIS

recommendations— Extreme ease of learning was seen as a foremost requirement: Unmet by anyof the systems in use— Usability by trained responders: Met in part by all investigated systems— Conciseness (relating to a user interface): None of the systems comes evenclose to matching up with this requirement— Customizability to responders’ specific needs: In part met by WebEOC;
however, becoming very cumbersome when system is increasingly populated— Support for all EOC/IMT functions: Mainly lacking––for example, major GISrelated information could not easily be integrated into a system like
WebEOC— Independence from a particular physical location: Met by WebEOC; however
severe limitations in terms of scalability— Support for structured communication processes: Can be met by a number ofthe systems studied——lack of standardization in forms and processes
Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

29

DISCUSSION (4)➤ Manifold obstacles to coordination and collaboration

Coordination and collaboration heavily reliant on ICTs, which are heavily
reliant on properly functioning networks, which are heavily reliant on
the availability of electrical power— Degradation of other critical infrastructures, first and foremost,transportation, would severely stifle coordinated responses— Lack of plan integration and planning synchronization— Absence of standardization of structures, processes, procedures, andforms— Lack of policy decision alignment—➤ Addressing coordination & collaboration obstacles

Develop and negotiate among governments of all levels a “Regional
Disaster Response Coordination Framework" (home-rule state)— Need for defining mechanisms for policy decision alignment between
and among jurisdictions—

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

30

DISCUSSION (5)➤ Need to plan for and practice paper-based operations— CR16 with no focus on practicing paper-based operations— Paper-based and messenger-based response would inevitably be slow-so practice

badly needed— Gradual restoration of power and connectivity (with new outages)— Degraded connectivity for extended periods of time
— Planning and testing of up-/down-scalable paper/ICT-based operations➤ Planning for backup trained and expert staﬀ

— Staﬀ levels were predicted to go below the 50 percent threshold— Need for backup staﬃng also considering fatigue and wear-down➤ Resource management paradigm shift— From “pull” to “push” allocating unrequested resources in presumed areas— Assumptions and simulation model-based planning incorporating damage

forecasts— Conflict with both the NIMS/ICS response doctrine and the home rule
— Practical problems with push allocation (who is responsible?)— Need for pre-negotiated and pre-planned/practiced coordination frameworkHans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

31

DISCUSSION (6)➤ Need for extended training/re-training and funding— In particular, functional exercises in scaling between paper-based and ICT-

based operations— Funding for multiple, also functional exercises, not only CR22
— Need for CR22 to be more realistic➤ Exercise specifics— Current statewide planning and preparedness levels were found appropriate

only for responding to non-catastrophic incidents

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

32

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RESEARCH
Response to a catastrophe markedly diﬀers from responses to “regular”
emergencies and non-catastrophic disasters➤ 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 to be redeveloped and practiced along with their gradual transition to moreadvanced procedures and methods as soon as those become available➤

Cascadia Rising 2022

— It now is planned that the exercise will be repeated and conducted under theassumption of an even more severe scenario with stingier injects➤

Currently, the US Pacific Northwest would be caught absolutely flatfooted by a mega-thrust and tsunami

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

33

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT➤ Over 50 UW iSchool students from all programs learned through andcontributed to these studies (either independent study or volunteer)— Educational and practical experience in all phases of qualitative research— CITI training— FEMA courses IS100, IS200, ICS213, ICS700, and ICS800

1st Oso/SR530 Paper
Stephanie E Ballard, Jorge Borunda,
Ammi Bui, Tim Carlson, Sarah
Carnes, Sarah Carrier, Yi Fan Chang,Tif-fany B Coulson, Amanda
Cummings, Heather Diaz, Sherry
Shiyu Gao, Andy Herman, Akashdeep
Singh Jaswal, Tanu Khandelwal,
Cassondra Koldewyn, Divya Kothari,
Deborah Kyle, Josephine Lau, Kung
Jin Lee, Lysia Li, Audrey Lorberfeld,
Elan May Rinck, Randi L Mendel,Grace Morris, Neal Parker, Liz
Pritchard, Deepa Sudarshan Rao, Dan
Ray, Jorge Retamales, Tricia M
Rhodes, Rashmi Sharma, Yuzhou
Shen, Gagandeep Singh, Leili E Slutz,
Louis C Spinelli, Sonal Srivastava,
Jenna Telvik, Emily Thompson,
Aubrey Walter, Vaibhav Walvekar,
Grant Woods, Fan Yang, April Ybarra,
Katiana D Yeo, Yunjie Zhou, Yao
Zhou, and several graduate assistantsfrom Graduate Assistant Team.

2nd Oso/SR530 Paper
Stephanie E Ballard, Jorge Borunda, Ammi Bui,
Hyung Jin Byoun, Tim Carlson, Sarah L
Carnes, Sarah Carrier, Yi Fan Chang, Tiffany
Chiu, Tiffany B Coulson, Amanda Cummings,
Heather Diaz, Ryan Dzakovic, Sherry Shiyu
Gao, Andy Herman, Akashdeep Singh Jaswal,
Harsh Keswani, Tanu Khandelwal, Cassondra
Koldewyn, Divya Kothari, Priyanka Kshirsagar,
Janani Kumar, Deborah Kyle, Josephine Lau,
Kung Jin Lee, Lysia Li, Chang Jay Liu, Audrey
Lorberfeld, Ying Lu, Elan May Rinck, Randi L
Mendel, Grace Morris, Veslava Ovendale, Neal
Parker, Liz Pritchard, Deepa Sudarshan Rao,Dan Ray, Jorge Retamales, Tricia M Rhodes,
Rashmi Sharma, Yuzhou Shen, Gagandeep
Singh, Leili E Slutz, Emily K Smalligan, LouisC Spinelli, Sonal Srivastava, Rebecca Ta, Jenna
Telvik, Huong Thanh Thai, Emily Thompson,
Xiaobin Tuo, Aubrey Walter, Vaibhav Walvekar,
Grant Woods, Fan Yang, April Ybarra, Katiana
D Yeo, Yunjie Zhou, Yao Zhou, and several
graduate assistants from Graduate AssistantsTeam.

1st CR16 Paper

2nd CR16 Paper

3rd CR16 Paper

Ammi Bui, Hyung Jin Byoun, Ammi Bui, Hyung Jin Byoun, Sarah L. Ammi Bui, Hyung Jin Byoun, Sarah L.
Carnes, Nuo Chen, Tiffany Chiu, SuCarnes, Nuo Chen, Tiffany Chiu,
Sarah L. Carnes, Nuo Chen,
khman Dhillon, Sumedha Dubey,
Tiffany Chiu, Sumedha Dubey, Sumedha Dubey, Ryan Dzakovic,
Ryan Dzakovic, Andy Herman, Yun
Ryan Dzakovic, Andy Herman, Andy Herman, Yun Hsiao, Karyn
Hsiao, Karyn Hubbell, Harsh
Hubbell, Harsh Keswani, Manjiri
Yun Hsiao, Karyn Hubbell,
Keswani, Manjiri Khakar, Priyanka
Harsh Keswani, Manjiri
Khakar, Priyanka Kshirsagar, Janani
Kshirsagar, Janani Ku-mar, Kung Jin
Kumar,
Kung
Jin
Lee,
Jeff
Leonard,
Khakar, Priyanka Kshirsagar,
Lee, Jeff Leonard, Chang Jay Liu,
Chang
Jay
Liu,
Christy(Hsin-yu)Lu,
Janani Kumar, Kung Jin Lee,
Ying Lu, Rachel Mahre, Grace Morris, Christy (Hsin-yu) Lu, Ying Lu,
Jeff Leonard, Chang Jay Liu,
Christy (Hsin-yu) Lu, Ying Lu, Veslava Oven-dale, Xiaoyu Qu, Jason Rachel Mahre, Grace Morris, Veslava
Ovendale, Xiaoyu Qu, Jason Repko,
Rachel Mahre, Grace Morris,
Repko, Ed Slininger, Emily K.
Veslava Ovendale, Xiaoyu Qu, Smalligan, Sonal Srivastava, Rebecca Ed Slininger, Emily K. Smalligan,
Ta, Huong Thanh Thai, Xiaobin Tuo, Sonal Srivastava, Rebecca Ta, Huong
Jason Repko, Ed Slininger,
Fan Yang, Qiaosi Wang, and several
Thanh Thai, Xiaobin Tuo, Fan Yang,
Emily K. Smalligan, Sonal
Qiaosi Wang, and several graduate
Srivastava, Rebecca Ta, Huong graduate assistants from Graduate
Thanh Thai, Xiaobin Tuo, Fan Assistant Team. Special thanks to Sue assistants from Graduate AssistantTeam. Special thanks to Sue Morgan
Yang, Qiaosi Wang, and several Morgan who organized andwho organized and orchestrated theorchestrated
theonlinestreaming
graduate assistants fromand video recording of the weekly
online streaming and video recording
Graduate Assistants Team.
of the weekly project sessions.
project sessions.

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

34

AFTERTHOUGHT
Quoting Eric Holdeman➤

Four Modes of Denial"It will not happen during my lifetime.”— "It happens during my lifetime, but I will not be impacted.”— "It happens, I will be aﬀected, but I will be fine.”— "One cannot do anything about it anyway.”—

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

35

THANK YOU!

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

Hans J Scholl — University of Washington — iSchool Research Symposium — Disaster Response in the Pacific Northwest

36