COMMUNITY RESILIENCE PLANNING GUIDEFOR BUILDINGS AND INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMSA Playbook
U.S. Department of Commerce
Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Walter Copan, NIST Director and Undersecretaryof Commerce for Standards and Technology

NIST SP 1190GB-16
https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1190GB-16

October 2020

INTRODUCTION:

WHY PLANNING FOR IMPROVED RESILIENCE AT THE COMMUNITYLEVEL IS SO IMPORTANT AND HOW THIS PLAYBOOK CAN HELP
With growing costs and disruptions from natural, technological, and human-caused hazards, many communities are
placing higher priority on understanding and mitigating their vulnerability to, and increasing their ability to recover from,these hazards. They also need to manage their resources and ability to address these issues while considering otherpressing demands.
A resilient built environment can:•Result in less physical, economic, environmental, and social damage and impact;•

Support a fuller, more robust, speedier recovery;•

Preserve and enhance community functions, such as health and education;•

Require less time and money to be spent on relief efforts and repairs; and•Promote “co-benefits,” such as a livable, walkable community connected to the natural environment.

All communities can improve their resilience and capacity to protect lives, livelihoods, and the quality of life for theirresidents and businesses. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Community Resilience Planning
Guide for Buildings and Infrastructure Systems (Guide) recognizes that communities must prioritize their limited
resources and that improving resilience is a process achieved over time.
The Guide‘s planning process provides a structured yet flexible way to set community-scale goals, align priorities andresources, identify key stakeholders, and develop plans for recovery of community functions. Community resilienceplanning can inform and integrate other community plans and also reduce conflicting goals between plans.

WHAT IS COMMUNITY RESILIENCE? WHY DOES IT MATTER?
Community resilience is the ability of a community to prepare for anticipated hazards, adapt to changing
conditions, and withstand and recover rapidly from disruptions.
Residents rely on buildings and infrastructure systems for many functions and services that support the activities
of daily living and that underpin the social and economic fabric of their community. By planning, prioritizing, andacting, communities can improve their resilience over time, in a cost-effective manner that is consistent with theirlong-term resilience goals.
If a disruptive event does occur, communities with resilience plans will be ready to respond, recover, and build
back better – if rebuilding is necessary.
Communities that plan and carry out resilience strategies will be better prepared for future events, making thecommunity more attractive to businesses and residents alike.

2This Playbook is intended to help communities
more easily use the Guide and improve community
resilience planning by addressing:•

The importance of connecting social andeconomic goals and services to the built
environment (i.e., buildings and infrastructure
systems or community lifelines).

•

The interdependencies of social and economic
functions with the built environment.

•

The value and practical ways of planningfor recovery – in addition to preparedness,
design, mitigation, and emergency response.

•

The benefits of a community-scale view ofresilience.

BASICS ABOUT THE NIST GUIDEThe NIST Guide is based on the experience andexpertise of community officials who have led
planning for and responses to hazard events, as wellas technical experts actively engaged in improving
resilience across the country. The Guide encourages
community leaders – government, private sector,
and individuals – as well as community stakeholders
to think more holistically and systematically
about community resilience and the role of thebuilt environment. It offers an approach to help
communities integrate all of their community plans
through community resilience planning and goals.

INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS ANDCOMMUNITY LIFELINES
While organized a bit differently, both infrastructure
systems and community lifelines refer to physicalnetworks that enable social functions that are essential
to human health, safety, and economic security.
Infrastructure Systems: The NIST Guide andPlaybook use Infrastructure Systems to describe
physical networks (systems and facilities) thatprovide functions and services to the community.
Infrastructure systems include transportation, energy,
communications, water and wastewater systems.
Building clusters (buildings with common functions)and supporting infrastructure systems are organizedby functional categories, such as health, economy,
education, or housing, for planning purposes. (SeeStep 2 for further discussion on building clusters andfunctional categories.)
Community Lifelines: FEMA uses Community
Lifelines to describe the integrated network ofassets, services, and capabilities that provide services
to support the recurring needs of the communityand enable all other aspects of society to function.
Community Lifelines provide services that are used
day-to-day to support the recurring needs of thecommunity and enable all other aspects of society
to function. Community lifelines comprise Safety
and Security; Food, Water, and Shelter; Health andMedical; Energy (Power and Fuel); Communications;
Transportation; and Hazardous Materials.

The Guide emphasizes the importance ofinterdependencies across the built environment,
which includes buildings and infrastructure systems– especially those providing transportation, energy,
communications, and water and wastewater services. The built environment supports vital social and economic
functions such as shelter, food, education, healthcare, business and government. Community services and functions
need to recover as quickly as possible, preferably within a specified period of time set by each community.
When recovery of key services and functions is delayed, community residents
face increasing challenges to remaining in the community. Residents may ask
questions like:•“Is the hospital in full operation, especially for emergencies?”•“Are the roads open for schools and businesses?”•“Can I get food from the supermarket and cash from the ATM?”

WHAT IS A COMMUNITY?
In the NIST Guide, community refers to a place designated bygeographical boundaries that functions under the jurisdiction of agovernance structure, such as a town, city, or county.

3

Depending on an event’s severity, many people and businesses may need assistance, possibly for an extended periodof time.
Community resilience planning helps to determine which buildings and infrastructure systems support critical needs– and must be functional during and immediately after an event. Resilience planning also helps set phased recovery
goals for the built environment in terms of community functions and when they should be restored in the subsequentdays, weeks, and months.

BEST PRACTICES FOR COMMUNITY RESILIENCE PLANNING
Communities can best address common issues with planning processes by ensuring:¾ Broad stakeholder involvement.
¾ Visible support of the community’s political leaders.
¾ Resilience goal integration into community comprehensive, land-use, hazard mitigation, economic, and otherdevelopment plans.
¾ Community plans that consists of prioritized, clearly identified, realistic resilience actions for implementation.
¾ Communities should develop plans that can be implemented and advance their resilience goals.
Resilience plans can be improved over time. Plans should address:¾ Prioritized gaps, vulnerabilities, and key issues.
¾ Appropriate levels of detail and accuracy based on available information and analyses.

The Guide applies to many types of hazard events and to large or small, urban or rural communities. There are manyreasons for communities to start or improve their resilience planning, which the Guide can assist with, such as:•

To help them prioritize their use of limited resources as they make resilience-focused investments andadministrative decisions.

•

To more ably recover from hazard events by thinking through their goals, priorities, and current strengths andvulnerabilities, and asking informed questions.

•To accrue benefits of new investments and improvements in community spaces and infrastructure, even if ahazard event does not occur in the near future.

•

To take advantage of the fact that resilience planning is most effective prior to a hazard event.

•To integrate well-developed resilience goals into other planning documents so that they will be better
positioned to address opportunities to advance their resilience goals.

•

To improve eligibility for funding from federal agencies (e.g., FEMA, HUD, EDA) and other sources.

The Guide tackles the resilience planning challenge by focusing on the built environment and how it supports
community social and economic functions. The approach complements, but is broader than, the hazard mitigation
planning conducted by communities to meet Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requirements for
the Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grant, Flood Mitigation Assistance, and Building Resilient Infrastructure andCommunities (BRIC) Programs. NIST’s approach also is helpful for informing applications to, and management of,disaster mitigation and recovery grant programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD),
including the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Program, the Economic Development
Administration (EDA), including the development of a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS).

4There is no one-size-fits-all approach to community resilience. Although many communities have common
characteristics, each truly is unique. The NIST Guide seeks to convey the value of planning for resilience in a holistic,
integrated fashion as part of a fully integrated community planning process using the six-steps summarized in thegraphic.
SIX-STEP PROCESS TO PLANNING FOR COMMUNITY RESILIENCEWHAT A RESILIENT COMMUNITY LOOKS
LIKE

1.

In a perfectly resilient community, all buildings andinfrastructure systems would recover rapidly fromdesign level hazard events with little interruption
in services. Buildings would remain usable,
infrastructure systems would remain operational, andonly a few days would be needed to clean up themess and get back to normal operations.
In reality, buildings and infrastructure systems havebeen built over generations and are subject to aging
and deterioration, changes in use and demands, andfalling behind with regards to changing technologies,
codes, and regulations. Frequently, a number ofbuildings and supporting infrastructure systems do
not meet current minimum code requirements andare unlikely to contribute to community resilience intheir existing condition.

By setting desired recovery time performancegoals for building clusters based on needed social
functions and then assessing their anticipatedperformance, a community can determine therequired sequence of recovery activities for its built
environment.

2.

Social Dimensions• Characterize social functions and dependencies• Identify support by built environment• Identify key contacts

Built Environment• Identify and characterize built environment• Identify key contacts• Identify existing community plans

Link Social Functions and Built Environment• Define clusters

3.

DETERMINE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES• Establish long-term community goals• Establish performance goals• Define community hazards• Determine anticipated performance• Summarize results

PLAN DEVELOPMENT

4.

• Evaluate gaps
• Identify solutions• Develop implementation strategy

Not every building and infrastructure system isneeded immediately following a hazard event. But it
is important that they be available when needed tosupport recovery. For example:¾ Schools need to reopen quickly, but not before
the emergency response period is over, roads areopen for business, and families are settled.

• Identify leader• Identify team members• Identify key stakeholders

UNDERSTAND THE SITUATION

Newer facilities and systems specifically designed
for design level hazard events are more likely tocontribute to a community’s resilience if they require
only minor repairs and can resume occupancy andoperations shortly after the event.

¾ Hospitals and other emergency services areneeded immediately but recreation centers may
have delayed openings.

FORM A COLLABORATIVE PLANNING TEAM

5.

PLAN PREPARATION, REVIEW, AND APPROVAL• Document plan and strategy• Obtain feedback and approval• Finalize and approve plan

PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
AND MAINTAIN

6.

• Execute approved solutions• Evaluate and update• Modify strategy as needed5Improvements to community resilience do not occur
overnight and some priorities could take years or
decades to fully be achieved. Still, meaningful progress
can be made in shorter time frames. And there arealways “low-hanging” options that can be considered
once a community agrees on goals and directions.
That’s especially true if community resilience goals areintegrated into all community plans.
The Guide encourages users to obtain input and support
from public and private community stakeholders –local government as well as individuals, community
organizations, and service providers – to address
recovery as well as hazard preparedness, response,
mitigation, and adaptation goals. The Guide also helps
communities review their current situation, including
threats and vulnerabilities, and to identify performancegoals and gaps in the performance of buildings andinfrastructure. Then it assists communities in prioritizing
and addressing those gaps through resilience goals andplanning at the community scale.
All communities are encouraged to conduct thefirst three steps in the Guide. That will enable themto advance beyond the status quo by bringing key
stakeholders together (Step 1), characterizing thecommunity’s current social and economic needs aswell as its built environment (Step 2), and generating
performance goals and gaps for building clusters
to meet community functions and services (Step 3).
Just asking the questions and considering the issues
necessary to get to this point in the process can prove
useful for communities exploring or embarking on the
Guide’s process.

COMMUNITY RESILIENCE & HAZARDMITIGATION PLANNING
As of March 2020, 25,300 local jurisdictions in the U.S.
have developed hazard mitigation plans to reduce risk
from natural hazards and to ensure their eligibility for
FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grant Program.
Hazard mitigation is considered to be sustained action
taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to humanlife and property from hazards. The range of actions inhazard mitigation plans are similar to and complement
those addressed in local plans and regulations that
influence land use and development patterns, structure
and infrastructure projects, natural systems protection,and education and awareness programs. Communities
may use their hazard mitigation plan as a starting point
for developing a community resilience plan.
Planning for community resilience emphasizes
connecting mitigation and recovery phasesof preparedness, but also includes response,
protection, and prevention. Community resilience
involves understanding how communities and theirmembers’ social and economic activities rely on theinterconnected elements of the built environment andensuring the community’s goals for recovery of functionof social and economic activities drive the prioritizationand selection of risk-reducing activities. These activities
span a range of constructed and administrative
solutions (including those within a hazard mitigationplan). The process of developing hazard mitigation andcommunity resilience plans are complementary.

The Guide process has two types of performance thatare evaluated for buildings and infrastructure systems: desired performance goals and anticipated performance.
Desired performance goals are specified by the community in terms of time to recover functions for systems thatare essential to the community and its recovery. It is important to note that desired performance goals are “hazard
agnostic” because the need for community services and functions does not vary by hazard event. The anticipatedperformance is an assessment of the time to recover function performance expected for existing community systems
if a hazard event occurred tomorrow. The difference between the desired performance (for all hazard events being
considered) and the anticipated performance (for specified hazard events) identifies gaps that can negatively affectcommunity recovery and long-term resilience.
Step 4 helps turn a community’s enhanced understanding of how its social and economic functions rely upon thebuilt environment and its interdependencies into a plan for moving ahead. After completing step 4, communities arestrongly encouraged to move on to Step 5 (Plan Preparation, Review and Approval) and Step 6 (Plan Implementationand Maintenance). Details can be seen in the sections that follow each of the 6 steps and via associated links toworksheet templates (online) and the full Guide.
PLAYBOOK USE AND APPLICATIONThis Playbook provides a practical, action-oriented aid to help communities follow the Guide’s six-step process. It
can assist communities seeking insights into resilience planning issues and help identify the most effective resilience-

6improvement projects. It also helps align community plans withresilience goals when seeking funds to support resilience activities.
The Playbook can be used without expert assistance but also offers
ways to engage experts in the planning and implementation stages.
This Playbook is designed to be a companion document to the
Guide, with a focus on actions to accomplish in each step; it
identifies the key concepts and approaches of the Guide. It can beespecially useful for communities that wish to address only severalof the steps – or simply to introduce the concept of the Guide’splanning process and the interdependencies of buildings andphysical infrastructure systems.
This Playbook is intended for communities of any size, at any stageof resilience planning, and a range of stakeholders:

DO I NEED TO START AT STEP 1?
Communities can make use of any of
the six steps in any order that makes
sense to them.
Some communities, for example, mayalready be on Steps 2 or 3.
However, reviewing Step 1 might help
them to identify and add important
players to their planning efforts.
This will help develop a more complete
plan through broader community input
and increase the chances of successful
implementation of the plan.

•

Elected or career officials in the public sector ranging
from Emergency Services, Public Works, Water andWastewater, Planning, Budgeting, Sustainability, and Citizen
Engagement.

•

Private sector businesses and industry including manufacturers as well as service providers and users.

•

Non-profits and individuals, including volunteers.

•

Generalists and technical experts, including consultants assisting communities with resilience planningand infrastructure projects.

RESOURCES FOR THIS PLAYBOOKThis Playbook is based on the NIST Guide and supplemental materials. It draws on the experience of several
communities that have put the Guide to use. Users are encouraged to go to the full Guide for more details whendesired. The Playbook also points to complementary materials developed by other federal agencies, non-profit
organizations, and states and localities. Appropriate links to sections of the Guide and supporting materials –including templates – are included in “Useful NIST Resources” at the end of each section and in the additional
resources available on NIST’s Community Resilience website.

Useful Resources

NIST Community Resilience Group website:
https://www.nist.gov/topics/community-resilience

NIST Community Resilience Planning Guide:
https://www.nist.gov/topics/community-resilience/planningguide
NIST Community Resilience Planning Guide Brochure:https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2019/04/03/
nist_community_resilience_12_page_brochure.pdf

Guide Brief 7 - Guide Use by All Community Types:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.
SP.1190GB-7.pdf
Guide Brief 15 - Additional Applications of the Community
Resilience Planning Guide: https://www.nist.gov/publications/guide-brief-15-additional-applications-community-resilienceplanning-guide
Playbook tables and templates: https://www.nist.gov/el/
communityresilience/community-resilience-planning-guideplaybook-templates-additional-resources

7

STEP 1: FORM A COLLABORATIVEPLANNING TEAM
Objective
Form a collaborative planning team to lead the development of a community
resilience plan that will be informed and supported by key decision-makers,
community leaders, and stakeholders across the public, non-profit, andprivate sectors.

Key Take-Aways
A diverse and representative planning team is an important factor for a robust
and successful community resilience plan.
• The resilience team representatives should reflect the community’s
composition, culture, and range of planning topics.
• Community engagement and buy-in are vital to success, including input
from diverse and under-represented groups.
• Teams should include stakeholders across the public, non-profit, andprivate sectors, such as: government, utilities, businesses, schools,
hospitals, and other key organizations and service providers.

Actions to Accomplish□ 1-1: Identify resilience leader for the community.
□ 1-2: Identify team members, and their roles and responsibilities.
□ 1-3: Establish the scope of the planning effort.*□ 1-4: Identify key public and private stakeholders.
* This new action item has been added to those listed in the NIST Guide.

8

PARTNERING FOR SUCCESS
Local government is the logical convener of community resilience planning initiatives, although stakeholders andchampions may come from other non-governmental organizations or regional government groups. The most effective
resilience planning efforts are championed by a collaborative planning team that provides leadership throughout theprocess and engages stakeholders and the broader community.
There are many ways to design and operate a planning team. Team representatives should reflect the composition,
culture, and range of planning topics in their communities, including recent, ongoing, or planned initiatives that relate
to resilience.
The planning team should consist of local representatives who understand the value of community resilience planning,are committed to the process, and are able to champion resilience and engage the relevant stakeholders.
Beyond the planning team, public and private owners and operators of buildings and infrastructure systems, leadersof organizations, and community members should be aware of the resilience planning effort. They may be involved asadvisors or help with specific tasks.
COMMUNITY RESILIENCE LEADER

Action 1-1: Identify a resilience leader for the community. A resilience leader is typically
identified by the local governing authority or body to promote and coordinate community
resilience.
A resilience leader serves as the community official for resilience efforts and coordination with elected community
leaders and key community stakeholders. Identification and recruitment of a collaborative planning team begins
with a resilience leader who directs the process, provides continuity, elevates the importance of resilience, convenes
stakeholders, communicates effectively, and engages public support. A community resilience leader may be a Chief
Resilience Officer (CRO), sustainability office head, emergency management professional, city planner, or other official
with qualifications to advance community resilience.
THE ROLE OF THE COMMUNITY RESILIENCE LEADER AND ELECTED OFFICIALS (ACTION 1-1)
Successful community resilience efforts require a resilience leader who has political support for the planning andimplementation process. Elected leaders endorse and act on recommendations of the planning effort that leadto greater community resilience.
Resilience leaders communicate the goals and objectives of the resilience planning effort to community
members, businesses, and other stakeholders and encourage their support and participation in the planning
effort and eventual implementation. They can elicit ideas and information from those who might otherwise notcontribute.
Resilience leaders inform elected leaders of findings, issues, and decision points during the planning process.
Dialogue with elected leaders is an essential part of the planning process to obtain important feedback onpriorities and funding.

9

FORMING THE COLLABORATIVE PLANNING TEAM

Action 1-2: Identify collaborative planning team members and their respective roles
and responsibilities. Key public and private stakeholders should be identified who represent
community interests on the core and broadened planning teams, with defined roles,
responsibilities, and expectations for serving on the team.
There are multiple options for collaborative planning team members, and the composition of community interests
and representative stakeholders will vary by community. A team that encompasses key decision-makers, community
leaders, and stakeholders across the public, non-profit, and private domains is more likely to develop a community
resilience plan that reflects the interests and needs of all stakeholders and will be supported for implementation.
A diverse team can strategically engage relevant community stakeholders who have an interest in or impact onresilience planning efforts.
Considerations for identifying community resilience planning team members and key stakeholders are provided below,
using the roles illustrated in Figure 1-1.

Terms To Know...
Collaborative planning team: A resilience planning group that works together withall key stakeholders to forge a fact-based, prioritized plan that can be implemented to
improve community resilience. The team members collectively represent community
interests rather than solely representing their organizations or sectors.

1 Community Resilience Leader
2 Core Collaborative Planning Team
3 Broadened Collaborative Planning Team
4 The Engaged Community

Figure 1-1: Community Resilience Planning Team andCommunity Engagement

1. The community resilience leader communicates the goals and objectives of the resilience planning effort
to community members and stakeholders and encourages their support and participation in the planning
effort and its implementation. The community resilience leader may establish a core collaborative planningteam.
2. The core collaborative planning team should have key representatives for local government functions
such as: community planning, economic development, public works, engineering, emergency services,building and permitting, health and human services, housing, education, and sustainability. A core team canpromote an efficient launch and develop an outline or draft of the proposed scope of the resilience effort.
The core team can also identify others who should be brought onboard to form the broadened collaborativeplanning team and stakeholders who should be kept informed or made partners during the process.

103. The broadened collaborative planning team may include external stakeholders who can contribute tocommunity resilience, such as county, state, or federal agencies that manage facilities or infrastructure in thecommunity or provide funding for resilience plans and projects. Team members may include representatives
from utilities, schools, hospitals and other service providers along with residents’ interest groups. Additionally,
consultants or universities with special expertise, such as meteorological and climate trends or social
vulnerabilities, may provide input.
4. The engaged community includes agencies, organizations, and groups not represented on the planningteam that still need to be informed of progress and/or consulted for input on options and proposals. Althoughoften not part of the planning team, the engaged community should be included from the start of the planning
process. The early phases of planning may proceed more quickly without broad input – but the resulting plans
may lack robustness and be based on ill-supported assumptions. Inclusiveness will help ensure approval andsupport for implementation.
Using the Guide Templates. Tables 1-1 to 1-3 and Template 1-1’s tables provide examples of planning teammembers and their roles from local government, businesses and service professionals, and volunteer organizations.
Planning teams should include existing groups or committees, such as Local Emergency Planning Committees(LEPCs), Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (VOADs), and sustainability, energy, and environment committees.
It may not be practical to include a representative from each local government department or private institution on
the planning team. In that case, consider a representative for several offices or institutions (e.g., public works, local
hospital association). One example is to have a single leader who is knowledgeable about community mitigation,
response and recovery plans.
Tables 1-1, 1-2, 1-3. Examples to Help Form a Collaborative Planning Team (Action 1-2)

Table 1-1. Local Government Stakeholders Who Could Be Included on Planning Team (Action 1-2)
Office of the Chief Executive (e.g.,
Mayor)
Public Works Department, Facilities,
Plant Operations, General Services
Planning Department
Board of Education, Trustees andRegents, School District, Education
Department

Provides leadership, encourages collaboration among departments, and serves as the linkto stakeholders in organizing, compiling, and vetting the plan throughout the community.
Responsible for planning, constructing, and maintaining publicly owned buildings,
transportation, and infrastructure, and identifies emergency response and recovery routes.
Identifies pre-event land use and mitigation opportunities and post-event recovery
opportunities that will improve the city’s layout and reduce vulnerabilities.
Represents all levels of education and clarifies the system’s tolerance for disruptions andits ability to operate under temporary conditions.
See Website for Complete Table

Table 1-2. Possible Business and Service Professionals for the Collaborative Planning Team (Action 1-2)
Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Associations
Developers, Building Owners, andManagers
Utility Providers
Health, Healthcare Coalitions

Represents business and industry interests and includes leaders who will bring a clear
perspective on the economic impacts of potential disasters as well as resilience plans.
Provides building and housing owners’ perspective on resilience and recovery.
Includes communications, power, transportation, and water, wastewater providers.
Includes public health officials, providers of acute, sub-acute, rehabilitation, mental health,behavioral, and end-of-life care.
See Website for Complete Table

11

Table 1-3. Possible Community and Volunteer Organizations for the Collaborative Planning Team (Action 1-2)
Non-Governmental Organizations(NGOs)
Voluntary Organizations Active inDisaster (VOADs)
Community Associations

Brings members’ concerns to governments, advocates for and monitors policies, andencourages participation in resilience-related efforts.
Serves as a primary forum where organizations share knowledge and resources
throughout the disaster preparedness cycle to help survivors and their communities.
Provides neighborhood and resident views, including homeowners, renters, and vulnerable
populations.
See Website for Complete Table

DETERMINING THE PLAN’S SCOPE

Action 1-3: Establish the scope of the planning effort. Deciding on the scope of the resilienceplanning effort will play a big role in determining its success.
Determining the scope of the community resilience plan is key to defining success and setting expectations forcommunity engagement and implementation of the plan – and ensures adequate representation on the planningteam. The scope should consider factors such as what elements of the built environment will be included (e.g.,
government buildings and facilities, privately owned facilities) and associated stakeholders, and social and economic
functions supported by the selected infrastructure. It also should take into account the users or stakeholders who relyon the services provided by these facilities. Considerations for the planning team could include:•

Prevailing hazards and chronic stressors. A FEMA hazard mitigation plan approach may provide a list ofnatural hazards for consideration. The team can leverage the information from the FEMA-approved mitigation
plan and should decide whether it will address one or multiple prevailing hazards, or perhaps chronic stressors
like increasing temperatures. The team may determine that certain hazards are out of scope because they
are unlikely or because their potential impact might be so great that they are impractical to plan for from thestandpoint of recovery.

•

The elements of the built environment. The team may decide to address government-owned buildings
for the first phase of its resilience planning effort. Considering this smaller subset may be easier for the team,but there are trade-offs – including the more limited view of resilience and implications for the community’s
ability to deal with and recover from a hazard event. The planning team should consider if privately owned
and managed elements of the built environment (e.g., electrical infrastructure) should be included to ensure
relevant private sector organizations’ input are solicited (related to Action 1-4). In any case, if a community is
conducting resilience planning while updating their hazard mitigation plan for FEMA, they may need to include
all buildings and infrastructure systems deemed critical by the community.

•

Concurrent updates of community plans. There are benefits in explicitly coordinating resilienceplanning with other planning efforts involving or led by the community – for example, comprehensive plans,
economic development plans, emergency management plans, and continuity of operations plans, as well assustainability or transportation planning efforts.

ENGAGING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE STAKEHOLDERS

Action 1-4: Identify key public and private stakeholders. The collaborative planning teamshould identify key stakeholders of public and private organizations, including infrastructureowners and operators and utility service providers.
When the planning team collaborates with public and private stakeholders, it improves understanding of thecommunity’s situation, gains community support for goals, identifies gaps and inconsistencies, and provides
information for prioritizing solutions. A planning team member may be designated to lead engagement andcollaboration with public and private organizations and individuals.

12

Public and private stakeholders should be engaged to understand issues and identify local priorities, constraints,
points of cooperation, and potential conflicts for community resilience plans. Additionally, stakeholders will be able to
make informed decisions on the operation, maintenance, upgrade, and replacement of their systems in accordancewith community resilience plans and their business objectives.
Considerations for engaging community stakeholders include:•

Support of key stakeholders: Socialize resilience plans in the community and with centers of community
influence (government and private sector) to build support and understanding before publicly initiating theplanning effort. Don’t surprise anyone!

•

Continuous community engagement: Continuous and active community outreach and engagement –via workshops, briefings, collaborative online dialogues and tools, or focus groups – should be conducted
throughout the planning and implementation process.

•Coordinator for community engagement: Appointing a team member to coordinate stakeholder
engagement will help ensure representative inclusion of varied views. External or public affairs officers may bewell positioned to serve in this role.

•

Data management and sharing: When needed, a cooperative arrangement with private stakeholders
that addresses concerns about information exchange and security for resilience planning can improve
collaboration and access to critical information.

•

Other resilience perspectives: Infrastructure stakeholders (e.g., communications, power, transportation,water and wastewater) may need to address resilience from a regional perspective of services andrequirements from federal or state regulations.

ENGAGEMENT WITH RESILIENCE STAKEHOLDERS (ACTION 1-4)
Community engagement is essential to successful community resilience planning and implementation. Local
champions can be influential in rallying the community around planning for resilience.
Local champions who are closely connected and engaged with neighborhood, business, or community
groups or who are actively engaged in other community-based activities are important contributors. Beyond
providing content and perspective, they can advocate for support from, and participation by, other community
stakeholders. They can also encourage community groups with diverse and traditionally underrepresented viewsand experiences to participate.
Have a plan for reaching out to and engaging the broader community early in the process to avoid becoming
insulated. Engagement, which is more substantial than outreach, is critical to the community providing input andbuilding support for planning and implementation. Supplement planning team meetings with active community
outreach and engagement – via workshops, briefings, collaborative online dialogues and tools, or focus groups.
Template 1-2 can assist the planning team with stakeholder engagement planning.

13

COLLABORATIVE PLANNING TEAMS: DIVERSE APPROACHES¾ Fort Collins and Larimer County (CO) collaborated to implement thefirst four steps in the NIST Guide as part of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) Regional Resilience Assessment Program (RRAP), withsupport from Idaho National Laboratory. A collaborative planning team was
led by an Emergency Management Coordinator from Larimer County and
FORT COLLINS
supported by the Emergency Management Director of Fort Collins. Team
members included representatives from the Fort Collins Department ofPlanning, Development, and Transportation, Fort Collins Utilities – Water
and Power & Light, and the Fort Collins Office of Social Sustainability.
The effort engaged community stakeholders from four Social Functions
identified in the NIST Guide (education, health, government, and nongovernmental organizations providing shelter) and four Utility Groups (water,
wastewater, power, communications).

NASHUA¾

The Boulder County Collaborative (CO) began its work as part of a
coalition of eight local governments in response to planned funding fromthe U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to the mostpressing housing and infrastructure needs in the state. Using the NIST
Guide process, the BCC held a series of workshops from November 2015
through March 2016 with a broad group of stakeholders, with focus groups
that included regional utility and service providers. A training workshop
also was conducted. The resulting standard draws on and complements
the Colorado Resilience Framework that already had been published. The
project’s Collaborative Planning Team was led by the City of Longmont
and included representatives from the Boulder County Collaborative’s
participating governments, utility service providers, the State of Colorado,
HUD, local emergency response organizations, neighborhood resource
associations, and interested community members.

¾

For its Resilient Nashua (NH) initiative, led by the city’s Office of Emergency
Management, Nashua established a diverse Collaborative Planning Team,
described by the project lead as “interested citizens to the city engineer,
the soup kitchen to the Country Club.” Nashua complemented the planningteam with a steering committee and met with existing community groups
and individuals in workshops as well as one-on-one sessions to ensuresolid input and two-way communications. The effort was initiated withscoping meetings held with city departments.

Useful NIST Resources

GB 14 - Forming a Collaborative Planning Team and Engaging the Community:
https://www.nist.gov/publications/guide-brief-14-forming-collaborative-planning-team-and-engaging-community
Playbook tables and templates: https://www.nist.gov/el/communityresilience/community-resilience-planning-guide-playbooktemplates-additional-resources

14

STEP 2: UNDERSTAND
THE SITUATION
Objective
Gather information about the community’s social and economic functions,buildings and infrastructure systems, and their interdependencies.

Key Take-Aways• The community’s social and economic functions and institutions drive theneeds of the built environment.
• Identifying building clusters that support social and economic functions
helps determine actions to improve resilience and set priorities.

Actions to Accomplish□ 2-1: Assess existing community plans.
□ 2-2: Characterize community members and their needs.
□ 2-3: Characterize the community’s social functions and dependencies.
□ 2-4: Characterize the built environment.
□ 2-5: Link social functions to the built environment.

15

BUILD COMMUNITY RESILIENCE ON EXISTING PLANNING EFFORTS

Action 2-1: Assess existing community plans. The planning team should gather existing
community planning documents and review their scope, goals and objectives, timeframes, andactions that relate to community resilience. The team also should consider upcoming planning
initiatives.
In order to conduct effective resilience planning, a community needs a solid understanding of its population, socialand economic functions and institutions, and their dependence on buildings and infrastructure, particularly in times of
disruption due to hazard events. The actions in this step can promote a comprehensive understanding of community
characteristics, needs, and vulnerabilities.
Most communities have multiple planning documents that incorporate their views of the future and drive priorities.
These plans can provide a base set of information to identify opportunities to improve community resilience.
Documents may include comprehensive plans, general plans, land use plans, economic development plans, hazard
mitigation plans, local pre-disaster recovery plans, sustainability plans, etc. Assessing these documents through aresilience perspective will help the team to better understand the full range of community needs, priorities, and gaps,
as well as identify conflicts between plans. It can also be useful to identify when the plans will next be updated, as
updates are good opportunities to incorporate resilience goals into plans.
Assessing existing plans helps stakeholders to understand that community plans need to be integrated and thatthey may impact one another through unintended conflicts or gaps. For example, when Fort Collins, CO, began its
work, the planning team identified 27 plans produced by the city. All were reviewed to understand the city’s long-termgoals for development and inform the resilience planning process using the Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard(PIRS) method. Continuity of operations plans were included in the review to understand the desired performancefor covered facilities if a hazard event were to happen. In Nashua, NH, the team reviewed all relevant policies andrecommendations found in over 50 community plans. This process also identifies information already collected thatcan be used in later steps.

RESILIENCE SCORECARD HELPS COMMUNITIES INTEGRATE PLANS (ACTION 2-1)
The Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard (PIRS) method is helping communities to integrate all their plans– like those for transportation, parks, economic development, hazard mitigation, emergency management andcomprehensive land use – so that the plans work together to reduce vulnerability to hazards. For instance, acity’s hazard mitigation plan may call for acquisitions and buy-outs in high-hazard areas, while its comprehensive
land use plan may set goals to increase investments in the same location. Such plans are not only incompatible,
but actively increase vulnerability. PIRS, developed by the Institute for Sustainable Communities at Texas A&M
University, walks users through a process that (1) evaluates community plans with respect to hazard risk andhow well they target areas of the community that are most vulnerable, (2) identifies when and where those plans
are in conflict, and (3) resolves those conflicts across plans to reduce hazard vulnerability.

CHARACTERIZE THE COMMUNITY’S SOCIAL DIMENSIONSThe collaborative planning team should assess the community’s social institutions and built environment, focusing
on their role and importance in resilience in the face of hazard events. They should consider different kinds ofvulnerabilities and the needs of the entire population – remembering that all parts of the community are likely
vulnerable in some ways. This helps the team to spot potential gaps in services, as well as to link vital services torelevant infrastructure and buildings. Template 1-1, Table 1-5 suggests potential members of a social dimensions task
group.

16

Actions 2-2 to 2-5 describe the steps of information collection necessary to develop a comprehensive understandingof the connection between the community’s social dimensions and its built environment.

Action 2-2: Characterize community members and their needs. The planning team shouldcollect information that provides a data-informed perspective on the community’s population andcontextual factors, including demographic, social, and economic factors that are important tothe community’s residents, organizations, and businesses.
Community members’ present and future needs can be informed with data on population demographics, economic
indicators, social vulnerabilities, and social capital. Demographic information can include age, health, education,
income, employment, housing status, language, cultural background, and vulnerable populations (e.g., those withmedical needs, low income households, non-English speaking populations, and individuals with limited mobility). Links
for publicly available data to characterize the population are listed in Guide Brief 1 – Characterize the Population.
Understanding a community’s vulnerable populations’ needs, expectations, and reliance upon various community
social functions leads to a more inclusive, comprehensive, and respectful resilience planning process. Communities
should determine the needs of its most vulnerable populations, including those who may be underrepresented ingovernment decision-making organizations, and ensure their perspectives and needs are reflected in resilience efforts
and projects. This information will be especially useful in Step 4 – Plan Development. These vulnerable populations
may have differing needs and require unique solutions.

CONSIDER COMMUNITY MEMBERS (ACTION 2-2)
Demographics

Vulnerable populations¾ Are there geographic concentrations of
populations, such as low-income households,
older adults (ages 65+), individuals living withdisabilities, and others who may need additional
resources or assistance to deal with a hazard
event?

¾ Vulnerable populations may include individuals,
families, households, or non-household units withlower incomes, older adults, renters, those withlimited mobility, individuals who do not speak orread English, those with limited transportation
options.

¾ If so, where are they located? How might theirlocation further increase their vulnerabilities in theevent of a disaster?

¾ The locations where these individuals live andwork, and the community services they rely
upon, can be identified through connections withindividuals and organizations supporting vulnerable
populations.

¾ Is there a substantial non-English-speaking
population in the community?
¾ To what extent do residents have access totransportation in an emergency? Are there
residents without the ability to evacuate?
¾ What modes of public communication are needed
to reach all residents? Broadcast and radio
news, printed publications, online sources, public
meetings, etc.?
See Guide Brief 14.

¾ Some populations may be more at risk becauseof their physical location – for example, living ina flood-prone area, residing in older or poorly
maintained housing that may not be adequate forsheltering in place, or lacking means to evacuate.
¾ Needs for public transportation and other systems
may increase during evacuations or recovery
following a hazard event.
¾ If a community’s non-English-speaking population
is projected to increase, this may affect plans forcommunications related to hazard mitigation andother resilience efforts.

17

Data and input on community demographics and needs may be obtained from research centers, chambers ofcommerce, regional planning organizations, consulting firms, institutes of higher learning, faith-based institutions, andother organizations with data and/or analysis capabilities. Carrying out this step may call for assistance from local
and regional entities, such as city or county planning departments, that have expertise accessing, providing, andinterpreting social and economic data. Census data can be very helpful as well.
The planning team may also find it helpful to invite individuals with this expertise to serve as formal members of thesocial dimensions task group. Local colleges or universities can be ideal contributors or provide referrals.

Action 2-3: Characterize the community social functions and dependencies. The planningteam should inventory and describe the various social dimensions of the community andthe functions provided for residents, including vital services, important social and economic
institutions, and characteristics that make the community desirable to residents and businesses.
Identifying social functions and dependencies, as well as key contacts or representatives who can provide information
about social and economic institutions and decision making, is essential. Social functions address the needs ofindividuals and social institutions, such as government, health care, manufacturers, retail and service businesses,
faith-based and nonprofit organizations, educational institutions, day care centers, finance, and news media. Much of
the information may already be contained in existing planning documents.
ASPECTS OF SOCIAL DIMENSIONS TO CONSIDER (ACTION 2-3)
Social functions

Economic factors¾ What functions and services are provided by social
institutions?

¾ Is the community economically diverse, or does
it depend heavily on one type of business orindustry?

¾ What dependencies exist between social
institutions?
¾ What dependencies exist between social
institutions and the built environment?
¾ Which institutions are most vulnerable todisruptions in supply chains?
¾ Which institutions cannot be operated withtemporary measures (e.g., generators) or be
relocated temporarily?

18¾ Are key businesses or notable percentages of
employees located in hazard-prone areas in thecommunity?
¾ Are there specific businesses and industries not
currently involved with resilience planning that havea vested interest in supporting these efforts?

CHARACTERIZE THE COMMUNITY’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Action 2-4: Characterize the built environment. The planning team should characterize thebuilt environment – buildings and infrastructure systems – that community services and functions
rely upon. Dependencies between buildings and infrastructure systems should also be identified.
A community’s built environment is foundational to community functions, services, and the variety of daily activities of
its residents. The built environment includes, but is not limited to:•

Buildings (e.g., critical, commercial, industrial, residential)•

Transportation facilities (e.g., roads, tunnels, rail, airports, maritime ports)•

Energy systems (e.g., electric power, fuel systems)•

Communication systems (e.g., internet, phone, cellular)•

Water and wastewater systems (e.g., reservoirs, pumping stations, transmission network, water treatment
plants, storm water system, wastewater treatment)

Typical information collected for individual buildings and infrastructure systems includes ownership, location, current
use, size, age, construction type, zoning, current condition (e.g., maintenance, retrofits, or upgrades) – alongwith applicable codes, standards, and regulations at the time of design. Information on current conditions anddependencies on other buildings or infrastructure systems is also necessary to understand functional connections.
This information will contribute to understanding how the built environment is expected to perform if one or more of
the systems, or a segment of a system, stops providing services (e.g., energy services). Infrastructure data may becollected by public agencies or departments, regional planning commissions or metropolitan planning organizations,
or utilities – or they may be found in local plans (e.g., comprehensive plans, hazard mitigation plans) or GIS databases.
Some communities draw upon standing “service provider councils” or establish them as part of their resilienceplanning initiatives to define interdependencies among infrastructure systems and to develop compatible performancegoals and solutions. Additionally, community growth may have strained infrastructure capacity and the council can
provide input on future needs.
Related to risk levels, overlaying spatial hazard information with infrastructure locations using GIS-based maps canhelp communities understand whether their buildings or infrastructure systems are located in higher-risk areas. For
instance, many communities and key installations were established before flood zones were mapped or updated;consequently, buildings and infrastructure systems may be subject to flood damage. Other communities havebuildings and infrastructure systems located in liquefaction zones and may not perform well if a significant seismic
event occurs.
One way to help identify and prioritize buildings and infrastructure systems is to ask for community feedback on thequestion: “What institutions and services are most important to you?” Institutions and services often require more than
one building and can be addressed through building clusters that support functional categories oriented around typesof services provided. This information can help the planning team understand how elements of the built environment
work together to provide services before and after hazard events and will be used in Step 3. Further, functionality ofbuildings and building clusters can be used to assess the value of alternative resilience projects, instead of relying
solely upon replacement value of an asset. For example:•

Health care clusters: Hospitals and acute care facilities/services are under Critical Medical. Medical
provider offices are addressed under the Community Recovery functional category. Other health services,such as pharmacies, dialysis clinics, and treatment centers should also be included where they are most likely
to be located.

•

Business clusters: A large employer may be placed in the Housing/Neighborhoods functional category
under the Critical Retail building cluster. For instance, building and infrastructure repairs may be needed forshort-term recovery. Other businesses may be placed under the Housing/Neighborhoods/Businesses orCommunity Recovery functional categories. Banks and ATMs, gas stations, and supermarkets are examplesof other facilities/services that need to be considered for placement.

19

Terms To Know...
Building Clusters: The term cluster refers to a set of buildings—and supporting
infrastructure systems—that serve a common function (e.g., housing, healthcare, retail).
Clusters are groups of buildings that, taken as a whole, meet the community’s needs fordifferent types of services such as health, education, government, shelter, etc. Building
clusters may be collocated or have buildings distributed throughout the community.
Functional Categories: These are categories of community functions and services
needed during recovery after a hazard event. The main categories include:• Critical Facilities – Medical, Emergency Operations, Government, Non-ambulatory
Facilities.
• Emergency Housing – Shelters, Residential Shelter in Place.
• Housing/ Neighborhoods – Critical Retail, Religious and Spiritual Centers,
Residential Housing, K-12 Schools, Child Care, Hotels and Motels.
• Community Recovery – Manufacturing, Commodity Services, Service Professions,
Conference & Event Venues.
Additional functions and service can be identified for planning, as shown in Table 2-2 andTable 3-1 for Step 3.

Using the Guide Templates. Table 2-1 provides an example of linking social functions and services to building
clusters for Critical Facilities. Template 2-1 provides a listing of information the planning team may wish to collect tocomplete Action 2-4. Templates 2-2 and 2-3 for the built environment - building cluster and infrastructure systems –are organized by functional categories. These templates also include links to social functions and services. Other
functional categories are Emergency Housing, Housing and Neighborhoods, and Community Recovery.
BUILDING CLUSTERS AND FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES (ACTION 2-4A)
The NIST Guide identifies four building clusters by functional category and phases of recovery:¾ Critical Facilities (short-term recovery)¾ Emergency Housing (short-term recovery)¾ Housing/Neighborhoods (intermediate recovery)¾ Community Recovery (long-term recovery)
Each building cluster has general goals for time-to-recovery of functionality as indicated by the phases ofrecovery: short-term, intermediate, and long-term.
The short-term phase focuses on rescue, stabilization, and preparing for recovery and is expected to occur overa period of days.
The intermediate phase focuses on restoring neighborhoods, workforce, and caring for particularly impacted orotherwise vulnerable populations and extends for weeks to months.
The long-term phase relates to restoring the community’s economy, social institutions and physical infrastructure
and may continue for years after the initial event.

20

Table 2-1. Example of linking the functional category of Critical Facilities
and its Building Cluster to social functions and services (Action 2-4)

Functional Category

Building Cluster

Functions and Service Provided

Critical Medical

Acute careAcute Care Hospitals

Triage, emergency care
Transportation coordination

Emergency Operations
Centers

9-1-1 services, dispatch
Emergency Operations
Incident response coordination (e.g., utilities, public safety agencies, etc.)

Critical Government - First
Responder Facilities
Critical Facilities

Transportation, road access, debris removal
Communication
Internal IT System functionality
Fire, emergency services
Police, public safety
Building safety assessment
Response services documentation and records
Trash, debris landfill

Non-ambulatory Facilities Prisons, nursing homes, etc.

Shelter, food, care, security
Adult care, nursing, custodial care

KEEPING RECORDS OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT (ACTION 2-4B)
Federal reimbursements after a hazard event require data and records about disbursements related to postincident recovery, payments to subsidize housing, and other recovery costs. Maintaining records of infrastructure
related information both prior to hazard events (including photos, procurement records, and contracts) can help
facilitate completion of applications. Examples include:¾ Codes and standards adoption and enforcement.
¾ Conditions of roadways and bridges.
¾ Installation of plastic water distribution lines – since wildfires may cause these pipes to fail – and even melt –making it difficult for the local government to prove that they were in-place.
¾ Land and housing values – which are critical to funding following a disaster and also help local governments
to analyze the market and understand needed incentives.

21

CONNECT COMMUNITY SOCIAL DIMENSIONS TO THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Action 2-5: Link social functions to the built environment. The planning team should identify
links between social functions and the buildings and infrastructure systems that support them for
day-to-day operations and during a recovery process. Informed by these links, building clusters
and supporting infrastructure should be defined by how they support social functions.
Once the social dimensions and built environment are characterized, social functions can be linked to their support bybuildings and infrastructure systems. This requires fact-finding and coordination among planning team members andstakeholders.
Table 2-2 offers examples of links between various social institutions and transportation systems, as well as possible
direct and indirect impacts of transportation system damage. The Guide provides similar tables (Guide Tables 10-6
through 10-8) for other infrastructure systems that can assist planners understanding and identifying these linkages.
This action will offer fresh insights into how social functions and services depend on the built environment – and theinterdependencies among those systems.
Table 2-2. Example of linking social institutions and transportation systems (Action 2-5)

Social Institution

Purpose of Transportation
within each Social Institution
Access to and from housing

FamilyEconomic

How Actualized
within Built
Environment

Roads, bridges, andtunnels
Airports
Railways and stations
Distribute goods for processing Seaports
Obtain labor and capital
Pipelines
Distribute intermediate goods Public transit
Distribute final goods for sale
Bring sellers (providers) andconsumers together
Getting to and from work

Possible Impacts if Transportation Systems
are Damaged
DirectDisplaced population (lackof access)Inability to physicallyconnect with others

IndirectDemand forshort-term/ nearby
shelter

Loss of access to raw
materials
Loss of employment
Increase in commuting
time and cost
Consumers unable toobtain goods and services

Loss of taxes,
market share
Price increases

Note: The entire table should be completed by the planning team; Example in Guide Chapter 10.

Mapping and GIS capabilities can also help team members and stakeholders understand the linkages and improve
communication. Other organizations in the private sector or other levels of government may be able to assist.

22Useful Resources

Guide Brief 1 - Characterize the Population:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-1.pdf
Guide Brief 2 - Identify Social Institutions:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-2.pdf
Guide Brief 5 - Assessing Energy System Dependencies:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-5.pdf
Guide Brief 6 - How Communities Can Work with Communication Service Providers
to Understand Communication Systems:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-6.pdf
Guide Brief 10 - Linking Social Dimensions and Building Clusters:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-10.pdf
Guide Brief 14 – Forming a Collaborative Planning Team and Engaging the Community
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-14.pdf
NISTIR 8231 - Implementation of the NIST Community Resilience Planning Guide for Buildings and Infrastructure Systems:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2018/NIST.IR.8231.pdf (See pages 69-72)
Playbook tables and templates: https://www.nist.gov/el/communityresilience/community-resilience-planning-guideplaybook-templates-additional-resources

23

STEP 3: DETERMINE GOALSAND OBJECTIVES
Objective
Determine the community’s resilience goals and relate them to theperformance of the built environment and its ability to support the recovery ofcommunity functions after a hazard event.

Key Take-Aways• Community resilience plans are based on long-term growth anddevelopment goals.
• Community resilience goals need to be incorporated into othercommunity plans to facilitate coordination and minimize conflicts
and gaps between plans.
• There are two types of performance needed to assess the built
environment: 1) desired performance goals for recovery of function(independent of hazard type) and 2) anticipated performance forrecovery of function if an event were to occur in the near future.

Actions to Accomplish□ 3-1: Identify long-term community goals.
□ 3-2: Determine desired performance goals for buildings and infrastructure
systems.

□ 3-3: Define community hazards and levels.
□ 3-4: Determine anticipated performance of buildings and infrastructure
systems to support social functions for hazard events.

□ 3-5: Summarize the results.
24

IDENTIFY LONG-TERM COMMUNITY GOALS

Action 3-1: Identify long-term community goals. The planning team should identify long-term
community goals that will inform or be affected by community resilience plans.
Identifying community-level goals will assist in developing resilience strategies so that prioritized investments inbuildings and infrastructure will also promote the community’s ability to prepare for anticipated hazards, adapt
to changing conditions, and withstand and recover rapidly from disruptions. In some cases, this approach mightfind ways to achieve community goals not previously considered but would result in greater social, economic, andresilience benefits.
Community goals may already be identified or defined in a comprehensive or general plan, land-use plan, pre-disasterrecovery plan, hazard mitigation plan, and/or capital investment budget. Long-term community goals may go beyond
resilience planning but will be improved by including resilience. For example:•

To attract new business investment, a community may wish to develop more resilient physical infrastructure,such as increasing redundancy or diversity in transportation options – like an additional bridge to provide asecond access point for traffic to the downtown area or an industrial park.

•

To increase its social well-being and equity, a community may want to develop parks that also act as basins
for flood waters or it may seek to improve transportation access to underserved areas.

•

A community may need to improve the performance of its water or wastewater treatment plants to minimize
disruption of service and meet environmental requirements (e.g., reduce the risk of damage during hazard
events).

•A community may want to diversify its economy with increased sources from a range of sectors and markets
to encourage positive economic growth and development.

•

A community’s population growth and its projected demands on healthcare institutions may call for expanded
health facilities that will also be functional immediately following a hazard event.

COMMUNITY RESILIENCE GOALS
Community resilience goals should help to integrate and align existing community plans and support long-term
community goals. Each of these plans should incorporate appropriate community resilience goals, especiallymaster, comprehensive, and mitigation plans. Additionally, the resilience goals and supporting data andtemplates should be documented in a separate report to provide a reference document for all community plans,
and to help avoid inadvertent alterations to the resilience plan. Resilience goals should reflect and leverage thegoals and information from the other plans.

25

SET DESIRED PERFORMANCE GOALS FOR RESILIENCE

Action 3-2: Determine desired performance goals forbuildings and infrastructure systems. The planning teamshould determine specified times for recovery of functions orservices provided by building clusters and/or infrastructure
systems, with input from owners, operators, and other key
stakeholders.
Long-term community goals should inform specific community resilience
goals.
The desired performance goals are expressed as recovery times and should
build on the social and economic characteristics and needs of the communityfrom Step 2. For example:•

The desired performance for critical facilities, such as emergency rooms and 911 call centers, is typicallycontinuous service or minimal disruption after a hazard event.

•

Most residents should be able to shelter in their homes or in emergency housing after a hazard event, andutility services should be restored in a maximum of one or two weeks to keep residents in the community.

•

Small businesses and major employers need to resume within one-to-two weeks to maintain the economy;
schools and daycare need to have similar goals for resuming operations so all parents can work.

•

In contrast, it may be reasonable to set recovery times for non-emergency city services at weeks or months,
such as parks and recreation facilities.

The desired recovery time between a hazard event and the recovery of community functions and services is
independent of the type of hazard. For instance, the desired recovery time for a hospital or utility will be the same for arange of hazards (e.g., flood, hurricane, earthquake). This is because community needs are likely to be the same forrecovery of functions following any hazard event; the actual performance that is anticipated for a specific hazard event(defined in Action 3-3) is evaluated separately in Action 3-4.

TIME TO RECOVERY OF FUNCTION
The Guide expresses the desired performance goals for buildings and infrastructure as the time needed torecover function.
¾ Time-to-recovery goals for an individual facility should not be developed in isolation.
¾ Both the facility and its supporting infrastructure affect the desired performance goal, or specified recoverytime.
¾ Recovery of functions can be met by temporary measures until the service can be provided by the intended
facility and supporting infrastructure.

26

The planning team should address questions that get to the heart of resilience requirements and help identify thedesired performance goals (see Boulder County Resilient Design Performance Standard) for the community, such as:•

When and how much do the buildings and infrastructure systems supporting each business or institution
need to recover their intended functions and services?

•

What timeframe for recovery is needed for housing, schools, and businesses before the community’s ability toserve its members is adversely affected?

•

Where is it reasonable to use temporary measures until repairs can be completed?

These kinds of resilience questions should be a critical focus for the planning team.

BOULDER COUNTY COLLABORATIVE EXAMPLE: DESIRED PERFORMANCE GOALS AND
FUNCTIONAL LEVELS OF RECOVERY (ACTION 3-2A)
Hospitals. The performance goal for hospitals calls for county-wide capacity to provide aminimal level of service immediately after a disaster event. At least one hospital in Boulder
County must be open and servicing minimal needs to support critical relief activities.
Other hospitals in the county need to be functional within 4 to 8 weeks to provide routine
services after the event. All hospitals in the county should be operational within 4 monthsof a design hazard event such that they are able to provide both normal and peakdemand for services.
Housing. The performance goal for housing in Boulder County calls for all housing to provide a minimal level of
housing for all county residents within 1 to 4 weeks. Performance at this level allows residents to shelter in theirhomes during relief efforts so that they can contribute to their own and the overall community recovery. Within 8
to 12 weeks, all housing should be functional. Within two years of a hazard event, virtually all housing must be
operational so that it can withstand design-level hazard events.
Businesses – Manufacturing. The performance goal for manufacturing calls for a minimal level ofmanufacturing to resume within 1 to 4 weeks. Within 4 to 8 weeks most manufacturing capacity in Boulder
County should be functional and able to conduct routine operations. Virtually all manufacturing should be
operational within 8 to 12 weeks and capable of normal and peak demand operations.
Conference and Event Venues. These venues should be available at a minimal level within 8 to 12 weeks
so that community meetings can be held in safe locations during relief. Within 4 months, conference andevent venues should be functional for routine and nonexceptional operations during recovery. Within 4 to 24
months, all conference and event venues should be operational with the capacity to handle both normal andpeak demand. (It was decided that there were few alternate locations for businesses and manufacturing, so
operational levels of recovery were needed within 8 to 12 weeks. The housing stock was large, and there werealternative options available. This led to a goal of up to two years for operational levels of recovery for a more
resilient housing stock.)

Each community is different. For example, a performing arts center might not be critical in one mid-sized city; for asmaller community where the center attracts tourists and is a primary supporter of downtown businesses, a shorterrecovery time may be strongly desired. For other communities, a manufacturing plant that is crucial to the country’s
military supplies may be determined to be much more critical than another type of factory. Guide Brief 9 and Guide
Brief 11 offer additional guidance for determining desired performance goals.

27

Design professionals are expected to follow relevant standards, codes, and best practices when designing andconstructing buildings and infrastructure systems. However, current practice is developed for individual projects, anddoes not spell out the means or the criteria by which to consider their integrated performance at the community level.
The community perspective is provided by setting desired performance goals for building clusters andinterdependencies based on community needs. This is a core value provided by community resilience planning.
MORE ON DESIRED “TIME-TO-RECOVERY” GOALS – BOULDER COUNTY COLLABORATIVE
EXAMPLE (ACTION 3-2B)
In Boulder County’s Resilient Design Performance Standard, “time-to-recovery goals are set to indicate theacceptable time allowed to restore community services after a disaster. The goal applies to all the buildings orinfrastructure elements in the cluster of similar-functioning facilities, not to the condition of any single building or
infrastructure system.
This approach helps communities to gauge how robust any individual element within a cluster must be to meet
the time-to-recovery goals. If the cluster as a whole can meet the time-to-recovery performance goal, then theneed for any one element within that cluster to meet that goal is not as crucial. Conversely, if the cluster as awhole cannot meet the time-to-recovery goal, then any specific project within that cluster is an opportunity to
improve the overall capacity of the cluster to achieve that goal.
Over time as more and more projects are built or rebuilt, the resilience of the community will improve as more
and more of each cluster increases its capacity to meet the time-to-recovery goal.”Phases of Recovery. Recovery times for building clusters and infrastructure systems are organized around
sequential recovery phases. The Guide uses the recovery phases defined in the National Disaster Recovery
Framework: short-term, intermediate, and long-term (Figure 3-1).
The first phase (short-term) usually focuses on rescue, stabilization, and preparing for recovery, and is expected tooccur over a period of days. The second phase (intermediate) focuses on restoring neighborhoods, workforce, andcaring for vulnerable populations and extends for weeks to months. The third phase (long-term) relates to restoring
the community’s economy, social institutions and physical infrastructure, and may continue for years after the event.
Activities during each recovery phase may overlap in planning and execution.

Figure 3-1: National Disaster Recovery Framework recovery continuum28Communities should consider human and social needs when assigning building clusters to the three recovery phases.
Table 3-1 gives an example of building clusters listed for functional categories and recovery phases. Infrastructure
systems that support the clusters are not listed but also should be considered.
While three recovery phases are designated, there will be considerable overlap in their initiation and completion, as
indicated in Figure 3-1.
Functional Levels for Building Clusters. The Guide recommends using three functional levels for specifying thedesired time-to-recovery performance goal for building clusters. The percentages may vary, but generally meet thefollowing levels of recovery:•

Minimal: 30% of building cluster is functional – minimum number of facilities needed to initiate the minimum
functions and services required of a building cluster•

Functional: 60% of building cluster is functional – minimum number of facilities to meet the usual operations(functions and services) of a building cluster•

Operational: 90% of building cluster is functional – minimum number of facilities needed to declare that thebuilding cluster is operating at normal capacity

Setting functional levels helps define how a building cluster will meet the desired performance goal while addressing
immediate response needs following a hazard event.
Table 3-1 provides an example of the supporting materials in Template 3-1 to specify desired performance goals
and functional levels for the phases of recovery for building clusters. Template 3-2 is used to document desired
performance goals for infrastructure systems. Anticipated performance is addressed in Action 3-4 and Table 3-3.
More examples of performance tables are found in Guide Tables 9-11 to 9-31.

29

Table 3-1. Example Building Cluster Table: Desired Performance Goals (Action 3-2)

Design Hazard Performance
Phase 1: Short-Term
Days
0
1
1-3

Building Clusters

Phase 2: Intermediate
Weeks
1-4
4-8
8-12

Phase 3: Long-Term
Months4
4-24
24+

Critical Facilities
Emergency Operation Centers
First Responder Facilities
Hospitals
Buildings with Non-ambulatory Occupants(prisons, nursing homes, etc.)
Critical Factory

90%
90%
90%
90%
90%

Emergency Housing
Temporary Emergency Shelters

30%

Single and Multi-family Housing(shelter in place)

60%

90%
90%

Housing/Neighborhoods
Critical Retail
Religious and Spiritual Centers
Single and Multi-family Housing (Full Function)
Schools
Hotels & Motels

30%

60%
30%
30%
30%
30%

90%
60%
60%

90%
60%
90%
60%

90%
90%

Community Recovery
Businesses – Non-critical Factory
Businesses - Commodity Services
Businesses - Service Professions
Conference and Event Venues

30%
30%
30%
30%
DisturbanceHazard Type
Hazard Level
Affected Area
Disruption Level

30

Flood
DesignCommunity
Moderate

60%
60%

Restoration Levels
30%
60%
90%
X

Minimal
Functional
Operational
Anticipated Performance

90%
90%
60%
60%

90%
90%

DEFINE COMMUNITY HAZARDS AND LEVELS

Action 3-3: Define community hazards and levels. The planning team should identify theprevailing hazards that will affect community functions and resilience.
A better understanding of a community’s performance in terms of hazards and levels can be found by using threelevels for each prevailing hazard:•

Routine events are more frequent but should cause minimal damage and no loss of community functions.

•

Design events are used to design the built environment; design loads are specified in building codes. For
many hazards, where the built environment meets current code requirements, there should be minimal
damage or loss of community functions.

•

Extreme events may also be defined in building codes for some hazards; they are the most likely to cause
extensive damage. Extreme events are evaluated to determine if critical functions will be available after ahazard event.

A community resilience plan should be anchored around the design hazard level.
The routine and extreme hazard levels are evaluated to ensure that the community is planning for a range ofpossibilities. At the routine level, buildings and infrastructure systems should not experience any significant damage
that would disrupt social functions in the community.
At the extreme level, critical facilities and infrastructure systems should remain partially functional and able to support
the response and recovery of the community as defined by the performance levels. Other buildings and infrastructure
systems should perform at a level that protects the occupants, though they may need to be rescued. Emergency
response plans should be developed for scenarios based on this hazard level. For many hazards such as flood, wind,earthquakes, and snow, design events are specified in codes and standards for the built environment.
This information helps a community to understand how the built environment will perform and recover over a range ofhazard types and levels. The Guide lists three levels for hazards addressed in building codes and standards for natural
hazards in Guide Table 4-4.
When codes don’t define design hazard levels (e.g., wildfires or tornadoes), the community can turn to available
guidance by professional organizations (e.g., the US Forest Service for wildfires, FEMA and ASCE for tornadoes).
Historical data may be useful for understanding hazards and consequences but need to be interpreted and usedcarefully for future projections. For example, many communities have experienced multiple flooding events in various
locations, but these events may not meet or exceed the 100-yr or 500-yr flood events defined by FEMA. Flooding
may also occur in other locations if stormwater systems are overwhelmed or sea level rise contributes to flood
elevations.
Many communities already have identified prevailing hazards – and their history, design-level severity, and probabilityof occurring. As part of developing a hazard mitigation plan, planners conduct a risk assessment which includes
identifying all hazards affecting the planning area. This information appears in their plans for FEMA Hazard Mitigation
requirements, emergency operations, or continuity of operations. Table 3-2 lists the types of hazards that may havea significant impact on a community. Further information on hazards is available in the Guide Section 4.1.3. Template
3-3 helps document community hazards and their event levels.

31

TABLE 3-2. POTENTIAL COMMUNITY HAZARDS (ACTION 3-3)
¾ Avalanche¾ Human-caused¾ Storm surge¾ Volcanic eruption¾ Blizzard¾ Hurricane¾ Technological¾ Wildfire¾ Drought¾ Landslide¾ Tornado¾ Windstorm¾ Earthquake¾ Liquefaction¾ Tsunami¾ Winter storm¾ Flood¾ Sea level rise

¾ Urban fire

Hazard occurrence vs impact. The occurrence of a hazard type and magnitude does not imply a level of impact,
such as damage and losses. The level of preparedness and resilience of a community can result in very different
outcomes.
Hazard impact is a result of the consequences of a given hazard event. Two measures are used in the Guide to
indicate the anticipated consequences:•

Affected area may be a portion of a community (local), most or all of the community (community), or acrossthe community and surrounding communities (regional).

•

Level of disruption to community functions may be handled within normal operations (minor), require activationof community/state emergency response assistance (moderate), or require activation of federal emergency
response assistance (severe).

Hazard impacts are identified in Table 3-1 in the sub-table labeled Disturbance which lists the hazard and anticipatedimpact levels.
DETERMINE ANTICIPATED PERFORMANCE

Action 3-4: Determine the anticipated performance of buildings and infrastructure
systems. For each hazard event of interest, the planning team should determine the time torecovery of community functions, accounting for dependencies and varying rates of recovery.
This action considers how the community’s current building clusters and infrastructure systems would fare in a
potential hazard event that occurs in the near future. The estimate of performance, based on the current condition of
the built environment as characterized in Step 2, is referred to as the anticipated performance. The question being
addressed is: how long will it take to recover community functions for a hazard event given the current state of thebuilt environment and the estimated level of damage and loss? The anticipated recovery times are then compared tothe desired performance goals, also expressed as recovery times.

Terms To Know...
• Anticipated performance: The expected time for recovery of functions orservices by an existing building and/or infrastructure system if a hazard event
occurred in the near future.

32

Most buildings and infrastructure systems in service today were designed to serve their intended functions on a daily
basis under normal environmental conditions and routine hazard events. In addition, buildings and other structures aredesigned to provide occupant safety during a design hazard event, but they may not continue to be functional.
Lack of experience with a damaging hazard event, and lack of understanding about the level of damage to be
expected when a significant hazard event occurs, can lead to misconceptions about a community‘s vulnerability.
Communities can gain better insights into their vulnerabilities based on national experience, not just local events, andcan better address those vulnerabilities by adopting and enforcing land use guidelines and national model building
codes. The cost of compliance for new construction is often minimal compared to the cost of recovery andreconstruction.
VULNERABILITY – CONSIDER INTERNAL SYSTEMS AND SERVICES (ACTION 3-4A)
After a hazard event – and when thinking about the resilience of the built environment as part of a planning
process – vulnerabilities internal to buildings or systems are often overlooked, as owners focus on the structure’s
integrity or the availability of external utilities.
For instance, following a flood, the structure may appear to be sound, but internal power and communication
systems may be damaged that are vital for reliable operations. During assessments of anticipated performance,
consider those internal systems, too.

There are multiple options for determining anticipated performance:•

Expert Judgement: Estimate anticipated performance using expert judgment of the team, stakeholders, andother experts as needed.

•

Past Hazard Experience: Estimate anticipated performance using data from past hazard events similar
to the hazard event being analyzed, taking into account changes to codes and new construction that haveoccurred in the interim.

•

System-Level Assessment: Use performance assessments previously conducted for buildings orinfrastructure systems.

•

Building or Community-Level Assessment: Commission technical experts to assess anticipatedperformance using available technical tools. The HAZUS modeling tool, for example, is commonly used toassess the impact of earthquake, flooding, hurricane (wind and storm surge), and tsunami events on buildings
at a community scale.

Current engineering practice for predicting the performance of buildings and infrastructure systems under specifichazard events often is based on expert judgment or the past experience of other communities. For more detail, Guide
Chapters 12 through 16 provide considerations for estimating the performance of existing buildings and infrastructure
systems. Guide Brief 4 and Guide Brief 4A offer additional guidance on determining anticipated performance of thebuilt environment.
Using the Guide Templates. The anticipated performance – time to operational recovery levels – needs to be
determined for buildings clusters and infrastructure systems and documented in Template 3-1 and Template 3-2
with the desired performance goals. It is important to include interdependencies between buildings and infrastructure
systems when determining anticipated, or expected, recovery levels. For example, an educational building cluster –all K-12 schools, administrative buildings, bus facilities, and maintenance facilities – requires buildings, power, water
and wastewater, and communications to be functional, and transportation routes for staff and students to reach thefacilities.
As another example, Table 3-3 has added the anticipated performance for the building clusters to the desired
performance goals in Table 3-1. Additional templates should also be filled out for the infrastructure systems and33

coordinated with other templates as appropriate. The anticipated performance tables also can be used to compare
the effects of alternative solutions for improving community resilience or to track changes in anticipated performanceover time.

Table 3-3. Example Building Cluster Table: Desired Performance Goals and Anticipated Performance (Action 3-4)

Design Hazard Performance
Phase 1: Short-Term
Days
0
1
1-3

Building Clusters

Phase 2: Intermediate
Weeks
1-4
4-8
8-12

Phase 3: Long-Term
Months4
4-24
24+

Critical Facilities
Emergency Operation Centers
First Responder Facilities
Memorial Hospital
Non-ambulatory Occupants (prisons, nursing
homes, etc.)
Critical Factory

90%
90%
90%

X
X
X

90%

X

90%

X

Emergency Housing
Temporary Emergency Shelters

30%

Single and Multi-family Housing (shelter inplace)

60%

90%

X
90%

X

90%
60%

X
X
X
X
X

Housing/Neighborhoods
Critical Retail
Religious and Spiritual Centers
Single and Multi-family Housing (full Function)
Schools
Hotels & Motels

30%

60%
30%
30%
30%
30%

60%

90%
60%
90%
60%

90%
90%

Community Recovery
Businesses – Non-critical Factories
Businesses - Commodity Services
Businesses - Professional Services
Conference & Event Venues

30%
30%
30%
30%
DisturbanceHazard Type
Hazard Level
Affected Area
Disruption Level

34

Flood
DesignCommunity
Moderate

60%
60%

90%
90%
60%
60%

Cluster Recovery Levels
30%
60%
90%
X

Minimal
Functional
Operational
Anticipated Performance

90%
90%

X
X
X
X

THE HIP BONE IS CONNECTED TO THE…
OR CONSIDER INTERDEPENDENCIES (ACTION 3-4B)
The functionality of structures from which key services – like healthcare, education, and housing – are delivered
depends heavily on support from physical infrastructure systems. Such interdependencies needs to beconsidered as the team sets priorities.
For example, a hospital building is of limited value if the energy or water infrastructure is out of service. A hospitalthat needs to operate continuously through and after a hazard event should have temporary measures in place,such as standby generators, fuel, and water supplies for at least 96 hours. The need for temporary measures
should be informed by when the power supply and potable water system are expected to be restored.
SUMMARIZE THE RESULTS

Action 3-5: Summarize the results. The planning team should document the desired
performance goals and anticipated performance of existing buildings and infrastructure
systems by integrating the results from individual performance tables for building clusters andinfrastructure systems. This is accomplished by filling out the summary table for high-levelcomparisons of buildings and infrastructure system gaps in performance (Table 3-4).
The differences between the desired performance goals and anticipated performance provides a basis for evaluating
and prioritizing performance gaps. Significant gaps between desired and anticipated performance can guide thedevelopment of solutions and strategies to meet long-term community goals and to improve community resilience in
Step 4. Table 3-4 illustrates the summary table of gaps between desired performance goals (in yellow, orange, andgreen) and anticipated performance (in blue) for a design flood hazard event. Template 3-4 is a blank version of Table
3-4 that can be used by the Planning Team to complete this action.
The planning team can use the performance tables to improve communication among stakeholders and to support
a comprehensive, high-level summary of the integrated performance of a community‘s buildings and infrastructure
systems. The largest gaps between desired and anticipated performance can be used to help prioritize resiliencestrategies to improve the overall performance of the built environment and supported social functions.
The Guide (Chapter 9) has an example based on a fictitious community that demonstrates the six-step process andhow to complete the resilience tables. Example tables are also included in Guide Chapters 12 to 16.

Useful NIST Resources

Guide Brief 4 - Determining Anticipated Performance:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-4.pdf
Guide Brief 4A - Example for Determining Anticipated Performance:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-4A.pdf
Guide Brief 9 - Summarizing Resilience Goals using Performance Goals Tables:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-9.pdf
Guide Brief 11 - Determining Building Cluster Performance Goals:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-11.pdf
Playbook tables and templates:
https://www.nist.gov/el/communityresilience/community-resilience-planning-guide-playbook-templates-additional-resources35

Table 3-4: Example Summary of Goals and Anticipated Performance (Action 3-5)

Design Hazard Performance
Phase 1: Short-Term
Days
0
1
1-3

Summary Resilience Table

Phase 2: Intermediate
Weeks
1-4
4-8
8-12

Phase 3: Long-Term
Months4
4-24
24+

Critical Facilities
Buildings
Transportation
EnergyWater
WastewaterCommunication

90%

X
90%
90%

X
X
90%

X
90%
X

90%

X

Emergency Housing
Buildings

90%

Transportation
EnergyWater
WastewaterCommunication

90%
90%
90%

X

X
X
X
90%
90%

X
X

Housing/Neighborhoods
Buildings
Transportation
EnergyWater
WastewaterCommunication

90%
90%
90%

X

X
X
90%

X
X

90%
90%

X

Community Recovery
Buildings
Transportation
EnergyWater
WastewaterCommunication

90%
90%

X

90%
DisturbanceHazard Type
Hazard Level
Affected Area
Disruption Level

36

90%
X
90%

Flood
DesignCommunity
Moderate

Cluster Recovery Levels
30%
60%
90%
X

Minimal
Functional
Operational
Anticipated Performance

90%
X

X
X

X

STEP
4:
PLAN
DEVELOPMENTPRIORITIZE GAPS. . . AND FIND SOLUTIONSObjective
Evaluate the gaps in desired and anticipated performance of the built
environment, identify administrative and construction solutions, andset priorities for addressing critical gaps based on the community’s
resilience goals.

Key Take-Aways• Gaps between desired and anticipated performance of the built
environment should be prioritized according to the community’s
resilience goals.
• Performance gaps can be addressed by administrative and construction
solutions.
• Resilience solutions and strategies should identify opportunities torapidly restore functionality and to improve community resilience.

Actions to Accomplish□ 4-1: Evaluate the gaps between the desired and anticipated performanceof the built environment and summarize the gap evaluation.

□ 4-2: Identify solutions to address gaps including both administrative andconstruction options.

□ 4-3: Prioritize solutions and develop an implementation strategy.

37

EVALUATE GAPS BETWEEN DESIRED AND ANTICIPATED PERFORMANCE

Action 4-1: Evaluate the gaps between the desired performance goals and anticipatedperformance of the built environment and summarize the gap evaluation. The planningteam should identify and prioritize performance gaps for the built environment and its impact oncommunity functions and services.
Based on the information gathered and developed in Steps 1 to 3, the gaps between desired and anticipatedperformance can be identified, including contributing factors and impacts or consequences for the community. The
gaps should be prioritized in terms of their importance in advancing the community’s resilience goals.
The planning team should also determine if performance gaps are addressed by ongoing or planned projects. For
example, plans to improve the stormwater system may not be as important to a community’s overall resilience as aneed for a second road or bridge to provide redundancy for emergency access or community evacuation during floodor fire events. Consideration of the impacts and consequences of these projects toward community resilience goals –while taking available resources into account – will help inform the decision process.
Community resilience priorities need to be considered alongside many competing needs and interests. If all key
stakeholders and current community plans are engaged in the resilience planning process, the range of interests
should be part of the evaluation. Additional considerations for prioritizing performance gaps and solutions are found in
Guide Brief 13.
IDENTIFY POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS

Action 4-2: Identify solutions to address gaps including both administrative andconstruction options. The planning team should identify potential solutions to address gaps
using both administrative and construction solutions.
As the planning team has been specifying performance goals and estimating anticipated performance, the team likely
has been identifying possible solutions to maintain or quickly restore community functions and services. Community
resilience strategies often rely on a combination of administrative and construction solutions that are implemented
over the short, intermediate, and long term. In addition to solutions generated during the planning process, othercandidate solutions should be solicited from stakeholders. The community focus of the Guide can provide needed
context to individual project solutions proposed to community decision makers.
Administrative Solutions
A community may begin to address performance gaps by considering administrative solutions. Administrative policies
and actions can be employed to improve the quality of new construction, provide incentives for retrofit and mitigation
projects, and improve permitting and other administrative factors that impact recovery time after a hazard event.
Administrative actions tend to carry lower implementation costs compared to construction solutions and can yieldsignificant long-term benefit, though they may require policy or legislative approval. All communities, large andsmall, can identify and consider implementing these kinds of solutions to support their needs. Alternative land use
and redevelopment strategies, for example, may be a key part of improving resilience for many communities. As
an example, they often are relied upon in flood-prone hazard areas. Administrative solutions can be temporary or
permanent. Mutual aid agreements established in advance can speed up the recovery process so that key parts of
the infrastructure can be restored more readily.

38

Communities can also adopt and enforce codes and standards with local amendments that strengthen resilience ordevelop mutual aid agreements that support streamlines recovery processes.
The potential administrative solutions (see the textbox for Action 4-2a) are not intended to be comprehensive,
nor prescriptive, and are not listed in any particular order. Communities may have other administrative solutions
that support their resilience goals and strategies. Some solutions may improve the efficiency and effectiveness ofdeveloping a plan, for example, rather than addressing specific resilience needs or options.
Construction Solutions
Targeted construction projects can greatly enhance the built environment’s contribution to overall community
resilience and add redundancy or robustness to buildings and infrastructure systems. Construction solutions may be
the only option for addressing some of the resilience challenges the planning team identifies and prioritizes. That may
include new projects and mitigation projects (e.g., barriers, relocation, improvements, renovations).
New projects can be tailored to meet the community resilience goals for immediate and long-term needs. Mitigation
projects can help reduce damage from hazard events and support long-term resilience strategies. Both new andmitigation projects can also reduce demands during recovery and speed the overall recovery process.
Construction solutions usually require capital improvement budget authority and may take considerable time tocomplete the approval process. However, planned construction projects with resilience benefits often produce a listof “shovel ready” projects that better position the community for funding opportunities by private sources or federal
agencies. This can include short-term or temporary solutions, such as modular or manufactured housing, to meet
immediate needs as well as longer-term projects, such as new or relocated developments, to improve community
resilience.
Importantly, after a hazard event, construction solutions should be informed by the community resilience plan andits goals for performance of buildings and infrastructure systems. This may include reducing or removing the hazard(e.g., increasing elevation, relocation for flood events) and supporting infrastructure requirements (e.g., new utilities
for relocated development). Regardless of the approach taken, the key is to be thoughtful, innovative, inclusive, andopen-minded about creating the right mix of affordable solutions that will match community priorities and available
resources.
The potential construction solutions (see the textbox for Action 4-2b) may require long-term planning and capital
investment. Each community has differing capacities for capital investment. Furthermore, each community will need toconsider the costs and benefits to the public and private sectors as discussed in Action 4-3.

39

POTENTIAL ADMINISTRATIVE SOLUTIONS (ACTION 4-2A)
1.

Organize and maintain a resilience office with designated leadership. Whether full- or parttime, this office is typically assigned responsibility for leading development, implementation, and evaluationof community resilience strategies, including integration with other community plans, public outreach,collaboration with private stakeholders, and updating the plan on a regular basis.

2.

Align and integrate the resilience plan with other community plans (e.g., General orComprehensive, Pre-Disaster Recovery, Hazard Mitigation, Business Continuity Management, Land Use,
Infrastructure and Transportation, Housing, Economic Development, Energy, Environmental, Climate
Adaptation, and Sustainability plans). This can be a lengthy collaborative process with the responsible
agencies or partners and may require community engagement – but it may determine success or failure of
a community resilience plan.

3.

Align the resilience plan with the community’s Hazard Mitigation Plan and applications for
mitigation grants.

4.

Utilize land use planning tools to manage the green infrastructure (natural capital) that supports
community goals and to inform design standards for construction in high hazard zones, such as
floodplains, coastal areas, areas susceptible to liquefaction, etc.

5.

Develop processes and guidelines for post-event assessments and repairs that will
accelerate the evaluation process and the designation of buildings that can be used during repair.

6.

Collaborate with adjacent communities to promote common understanding and opportunities
for mutual aid during response and recovery phases. Develop mutual aid agreements as directed by the
resilience plan.

7.

Inform all stakeholders in transparent and publicly available methods, including announcements ofresilience planning progress and results.

8.

Collaborate with managers of state and federally owned and leased properties to meet regulations orcodes, and to determine if the building system will function after an event.

9.

Conduct education and awareness programs for all stakeholders in the community to increase
understanding, preparedness, and opportunities for improving community resilience. Be mindful of theneed to offer information in all languages used by community members and to be sure to reach out tounderserved populations.

10. Form a service provider council of public and private infrastructure owners and provide aquarterly forum for them to discuss current activities and issues, dependencies, and future plans.
11. Provide preparedness training to the community, especially for those at higher risk of being
impacted. Use social media and preparedness events and conduct awareness and training campaigns,
such as the National Weather Service’s Weather-Ready Nation activities.

40

POTENTIAL CONSTRUCTION SOLUTIONS(ACTION 4-2B)
EXISTING CONSTRUCTION
1.

Identify opportunities for natural resource
protection and preservation. This may include
sediment and erosion control, stream corridor
restoration, forest management, conservation
easements, and wetland restoration and preservation.

2.

Retrofit public buildings to initiate the resilience
process in the community. This, along with relocating,or reconstructing public facilities may immediately
improve the community‘s ability to recover from ahazard event and spur private building owners to do
the same.

3.

Develop incentives and financial support
to encourage critical buildings to be retrofitted or
relocated to meet community codes and regulations,and to achieve desired performance and community
resilience goals.

4.

Implement or augment inspection programs toidentify buildings and infrastructure systems that need
improvements to adequately protect life safety for theprevalent hazards.

5.

Consider the appropriateness of limited
mandatory relocation or retrofitting programsfor critical facilities through local ordinances. Identify
and communicate viable funding opportunities.

NEW CONSTRUCTION
1.

Adopt and enforce the latest national modelbuilding codes, standards, and regulations forthe built environment, and add requirements as needed
to support specific community resilience goals.

2.

Ensure enforcement of current codes andstandards during permit evaluation and construction
inspections.

3.

Enhance codes and standards with local
ordinances to support resilience plans, stating
performance goals in a transparent manner.

PRIORITIZE SOLUTIONS, CRAFT A
STRATEGY

Action 4-3: Prioritize solutions anddevelop an implementation strategy.
The planning team should prioritize
solutions and develop a comprehensive
implementation strategy that addresses
the response phases and community
resilience goals.
The implementation strategy developed inthis action should align with community goals,
address prioritized gaps and needs, andcomplement other community plans. Ideally,
resilience solutions and strategies should identify
opportunities to rapidly restore community
functions and services, and to improve theresilience of the built environment.
The best time for implementing strategies isprior to hazard events, but implementation
opportunities may occur after hazard events.
When the community is recovering from hazard
impacts, there is significant pressure to quickly
restore the built environment. Without preestablished strategies and solutions, communities
often default to targeting recovery to pre-event
conditions, potentially setting the community up
for the same performance and wasted resources.
With advance planning, construction andadministrative approaches can promote a
culture that seeks community resilience. Then,if a major hazard event occurs, the groundworkis laid for community support for approved
resilience strategies, such as updating codesand standards, land use changes, or retrofits toachieve desired performance goals.

41

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS CAN ASSIST IN MAKING CHOICES (ACTION 4-3)
Community planners can use a benefit-cost analysis (BCA) to determine whether a project makes economic
sense in terms of costs and benefits. BCA can also help frame the economic decision process by identifying andcomparing resilience-related benefits and costs of competing alternatives relative to the status quo (do-nothing
option).
Specifically, a community needs to determine whether investing in a project will ultimately deliver a positive returnon that investment. For resilience, benefits can include direct and indirect benefits; costs can include the costof building, operating, maintaining and retiring the project. Direct and indirect benefits, co-benefits, and losses
avoided include:¾ Direct benefits: Conventional mitigation project benefits, such as reduction in potential losses should ahazard event occur.
¾ Indirect benefits: Improved functionality of an infrastructure project not directly associated with its hazard
performance (e.g., non-disaster related benefits).
¾ Direct loss: Damage and associated repair costs to restore community functions (e.g. health care) andaddress environmental impacts (e.g., contamination).
¾ Indirect losses: Interruption to community business operations.
¾ NIST’s “Economic Decision Guide Software” (EDGe$) Online Tool offers an economic decision support tool
for selecting cost-effective community resilience projects. The EDGe$ Tool can be applied across a wide
range of community and project types. It helps identify and compare the present and future resilience costs
and benefits associated with new capital investment versus maintaining a community’s status-quo. Benefits
include cost savings and damage loss avoidance because enhancing resilience on a community scalecreates value, including co-benefits, even if a hazard event does not strike.
¾ FEMA’s Benefit-Cost Analysis method and toolkit determine future risk reduction benefits of a hazard
mitigation project and compares those benefits to its costs. This results in a Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR). A
project is considered cost-effective when the BCR is 1.0 or greater. FEMA applicants must use agencyapproved methodologies and tools—such as the BCA Toolkit—to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of
their projects.

Useful NIST Resources

Guide Brief 3 - Existing Community Resilience Activities Identifying Solutions to Address Resilience Gaps:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-3.pdf
Guide Brief 8 - Overcoming Myths about Community Resilience Planning:https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-8.pdf
Guide Brief 13 - Resilience Gaps - Identifying and Prioritizing Closure of Resilience Gaps:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-13.pdf
Economic Decision Guide Software (EDGe$) Tool :https://www.nist.gov/services-resources/software/edge-economic-decision-guide-software-tool
Playbook tables and templates: https://www.nist.gov/el/communityresilience/community-resilience-planning-guideplaybook-templates-additional-resources

42

STEP 5: PLAN PREPARATION,
REVIEW,AND
APPROVALSPELL OUT THE PLAN
Objective
Document community resilience goals, plans, and implementation
strategies with supporting information from Steps 1 through 4.

Key Take-Aways• The adequacy, feasibility, and clarity of the plan should be key criteria
for determining the level of detail needed for sharing the plan withstakeholders and the community.
• An engagement and outreach strategy should build on previous efforts
to ensure that the community is aware of and understands the resilienceplan and strategies, and to increase appreciation of and support for theapproach.

Actions to Accomplish□ 5-1: Document the community plans and implementation strategy.
□ 5-2: Obtain feedback and approval from stakeholders and the community.
□ 5-3: Finalize and approve the plan.

43

DOCUMENT THE COMMUNITY PLAN AND STRATEGY

Action 5-1: Document the community plans and implementation strategy. The document
should include enough supporting information based on work done during Planning Steps 1
through 4 to explain and justify the proposed measures. Additional back-up materials can bemade available upon request to keep the plan readable.
With solutions identified and prioritized, the planning team should prepare a document to address community
resilience plans, including background on how the planning process was conducted, and proposed strategies andmeasures to strengthen the community’s resilience.

WHERE AND HOW SHOULD COMMUNITY RESILIENCE GOALS AND PRIORITIES BE
DOCUMENTED? (ACTION 5-1)
A stand-alone reference document can help to unify, integrate and connect all community plans, policies, andpriorities. By having community resilience goals and priorities in a separate document, they are still easily cited
and any subsequent (unintended) modification that may occur if they are located in other plans is eliminated. The
Guide uses community goals related to timely recovery of the community’s functions to help evaluate alternative
proposals and projects across all community plans.
It should include:¾ Community assessment of social dimensions and the built environment.
¾ Community resilience goals and gaps in performance – setting a benchmark about where the community is
and where it wants to be.
¾ Potential and final solutions and implementation strategies.
This document can serve as an aid to track and evaluate progress and help answer: “Is the community moving
closer to its resilience goals?”
To be effective, the resilience plan should inform and complement other community planning documents. By
maintaining a separate resilience plan document, key elements of the community resilience plan are retained for
future reference and don’t get lost as embedded information in other documents.
The “holy grail” for resilience planning is integration and alignment of community plans. This approach helps
eliminate planning conflicts, increasing the likelihood that community goals can be advanced. For example, theinclusion of resilience goals within comprehensive or master plans may carry greater weight for a community
than solely within a resilience or hazard mitigation plan. Integration and alignment of plans helps eliminate
planning conflicts, increasing the likelihood that community goals can be advanced.

Basic guidance for preparing plans includes:

44•

Keep the language simple and clear.

•

Summarize important information with checklists and visual aids, such as maps, flowcharts, anduncomplicated graphics.

•

Avoid using jargon and minimize the use of acronyms.

•

Provide enough detail to convey an easily understood plan that is actionable.

The team should estimate the resources needed to execute the plan and indicate the likely accuracy of thoseestimates based on current knowledge – including an explanation of assumptions. Some solutions may require further
analysis before accurate estimates can be developed, and those should be indicated. Although it is not the team’s
responsibility to identify funding sources for implementation at early stages, possible funding mechanisms can be
identified, including proposed redirection of funding for other planned projects and increased federal funding support
for mitigation efforts rather than just for post-disaster recovery.
ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY TO OBTAIN FEEDBACK AND APPROVAL

Action 5-2: Obtain feedback and approval from stakeholders and the community. Outreachshould be an integral part of the team’s operation from the effort’s launch and should include avariety of engagement efforts.
The planning team should develop and carry out an engagement and outreach strategy to be certain that thecommunity at large is aware of and understands the plan and to increase community-wide support.
When the plan nears readiness, team leaders should consider:•Asking community government officials and other area governments to review the plan before
it is released to the public. Involving these officials in planning and keeping them abreast of efforts along
the way will improve the plan’s accuracy and relevance and reduce the time required for final review. Be surethat employees of all government agencies with responsibilities under the plan are aware of and informed
about the draft plan.

•

Making the draft plan available for public review in electronic and print formats in readily
accessible locations. Posting on public websites is highly recommended, as is leaving hard copies at the
local library, government offices, etc. Accommodation may be required for special populations; for example,
language or sight issues may need to be addressed so that all interested members of the community are able
to review the draft and participate in the public comment process. Make the plan available in alternate formats
to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Engagement and outreach options for releasing the draft plan include:•

Use social media, community online forums, and news outlets to announce the draft to the community.
Support of engaged stakeholders and community influencers can help with community awareness andmessaging.

•

Hold one or more public meetings to present and discuss the draft plan with the community; encourageand prepare for media attendance at all public meetings. Be sure to reach all groups and members of thecommunity. This may mean holding multiple sessions across the community, not only in government buildings.

•

Special outreach activities should raise awareness and seek input from traditionally underrepresented
populations.

•

Arrange meetings with individual stakeholder groups whose cooperation will be vital for successful
implementation of the plan. Some of these meetings may take place before the public review process begins
to ensure the accuracy and relevance of the draft report.

•

Ensure that employees of all government agencies with responsibilities under the plan are aware of andinformed about the draft plan.

•

Collect public comments, make them available to the community, and retain them as part of the project’s
records.

45

PRESENTING COMMUNITY RESILIENCE PLANS (ACTION 5-2)
There are many ways to present the team’s plans and proposed solutions and strategies. Nashua, NH,organized resilience recommendations by hazard to address:¾ Local Plans and Regulations¾ Structure and Infrastructure Projects¾ Natural Systems Protection¾ Education and Awareness Programs
Initiatives based on the Hazard Mitigation Plan were extended to address resilience goals through:¾ Preparedness programs¾ Planning efforts¾ Training exercises¾ Social programs¾ Community investments¾ Long-term goals
Regardless of the format selected for presenting recommendations, the key is to have an easy-to-understandformat and presentation. The information should address important factors, such as interdependencies and how
they affect the social and economic functions of the community at the community scale.

Community meetings, forums, focus groups, facilitated online dialogues, and other forms of outreach can help toidentify and promote understanding about the community goals, social needs, existing buildings and infrastructure
systems, prevailing hazards, and short- and long-term benefits of the proposed solutions and actions. For short- andlong-term success, transparent public collaboration and support processes are a necessity.
Expect to make changes in the plan as the larger community provides feedback. Compromises likely will be needed
to reflect stakeholders’ varying points of views. Vigorous discussion is often a prerequisite for, and a good indicatorof, a plan that reflects a diverse community. Healthy engagement during the plan’s review is more likely to lead to aplan of action that garners broad support and the level of commitment that will be needed for long-term success in
improving community resilience.
PLAN APPROVAL

Action 5-3: Finalize and approve the plan. Once the community resilience plan is finalizedwith stakeholder and community input, the plan should be adopted formally by the community‘sgoverning body.
Formal adoption of the community resilience goals and plan helps ensure that it will influence local government
activities, encourage and lay out a foundation for collaborative agreements with private owners and stakeholders, andprovide a basis for implementation through local statutes or ordinances. It also establishes the authority required forchanges and modifications to the plan and provides a document that can be referenced for budget-related actions
that may be required in order to gain access to the necessary resources.

46

STEP 6: PLAN IMPLEMENTATIONAND
MAINTENANCE
USE THE PLAN
Objective
Track and document the implementation of adopted strategies and solutions
across community and private organizations.

Key Take-Aways• The community needs a designated leader who is responsible for tracking,coordinating, and communicating resilience-related efforts.
• Implementation requires continued active outreach and engagementwith stakeholders and with the broader community through a variety ofmechanisms.
• The adopted community plan needs to be reviewed on a regular basis,consistent with the community‘s planning cycles.
• The resilience plan, including the implementation strategy or specificsolutions, may need to be updated.

Actions to Accomplish□ 6-1. Execute approved administrative and construction solutions.
□ 6-2. Evaluate and update on a periodic basis.
□ 6-3. Modify short or long-term implementation strategy to achieve
performance goals as needed.

47

PUT THE PLAN IN MOTION

Action 6-1: Execute approved administrative and construction solutions. Community
resilience leadership should have a process and schedule for tracking implementation of
adopted strategies and solutions.
A plan is only as good as its implementation. Now the heavy lifting shifts from the planning team to the government
offices and private sector organizations responsible for execution. The plan should be incorporated into theseorganizations’ priorities and related policies, plans, and programs. Continued active outreach and engagement withstakeholders, especially those involved in the plan‘s development and adoption, are key.
To maintain momentum and assure the plan receives the sustained attention that it will need, it is critical to designatea leader responsible for tracking, coordinating, and communicating resilience-related efforts. This can be thecommunity resilience planning team lead, or responsibility can shift to another official. This is an important decision,and resilience must not become solely the province of an existing government function (e.g., emergency
management, sustainability) to the exclusion of other functions. Nevertheless, the organizational structure selected isless important than the continuous and visible commitment to the community resilience plan. That can bedemonstrated in part by the involvement of the most senior leaders of the community. However, that leadership canchange, making broad community involvement even more vital.

RESILIENCE LEADERSHIP THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE (ACTION 6-1)
To maintain momentum and continuity and to assure that the plan receives the persistent attention that
it will need, it is critical that the community designate a leader responsible for tracking, coordinating, andcommunicating resilience-related efforts. This can be the community resilience leader for the planning team, or
the responsibility can shift to another office or official.
This demonstrates continuous and visible commitment to the community resilience plan by the senior leaders of
the community.

If the six-step planning process has been followed, the plan will point to prioritized actions to be taken. Even so,
additional work may be needed to organize implementation strategies in terms of responsibilities, and to coordinate
the flow and timing of actions so that there is a clear road map and schedule for those charged with implementation.
In some cases, a community may decide to tackle the easier or less costly recommendations first, including
administrative solutions. In another community, leaders may decide to undertake or modify at least one or more major
construction project. The resources available and the timing of budgets will help to determine which actions are taken
first and which will be scheduled for a later date.

Action 6-2: Evaluate and update on a periodic basis. Once adopted and implementation isunderway, the community resilience plan needs to be reviewed on a regular basis, consistent
with the community‘s planning cycles.
The planning team should recommend a process for reviewing, evaluating, and revising theplan on a recurring basis. It is also important to report regularly on sources of funding andother support, as well as challenges encountered, changing conditions, and benefits accrued
over time.

48

KEEP THE PLAN CURRENT

Action 6-3: Modify short or long-term implementation strategy to achieve performancegoals as needed. The planning team should monitor and communicate progress and challenges
in following the implementation strategy by the community and private stakeholders.
The resilience plan, including the implementation strategy or specific solutions, may need to be modified. Triggers
could be changes in the social or physical characteristics of the community, new or unexpected events, or improved
understanding of the built environment and the impact of prevailing hazards. These include:•

Lessons learned while implementing the plan.

•

Experience with one or more hazard events.

•

Changes in operational resources (e.g., policy, personnel, organizational structures, management processes,
facilities, equipment).

•

Changes in federal or state government policies or programs which may offer new incentives or impose newrequirements.

•

Formal updating of planning guidance or standards (e.g., changes in national design standards and model
codes that are beginning to incorporate the concept of “immediate occupancy” and ‘functional recovery” after
hazard events).

•

New technology or approaches that affect resilience solutions and strategies.

•

Changes in elected officials.

•

Major hazard-related exercises which may highlight new vulnerabilities or problems with current approaches.

•

Changes in demographics, vulnerabilities, or hazard or threat profile.

•

Changes in the acceptability of various risks.

•

Enactment of new or amended laws or ordinances.

Improving community resilience is an ongoing process in a constantly shifting social, political, and physicalenvironment. It truly is a marathon rather than a sprint. Others say it is a way of thinking, a way of life. Developing andcarrying out a comprehensive resilience plan that takes into account the community’s goals – and the way in which its
people and institutions rely on the interdependent built environment – will go a long way toward improving the qualityof life in the community.

Useful NIST Resources

Guide Brief 12 - Short-Term Implementation Tasks:
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1190GB-12.pdf
Playbook tables and templates:
https://www.nist.gov/el/communityresilience/community-resilience-planning-guide-playbook-templates-additionalresources

49

Disclaimer: Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in thisdocument in order to describe an experimental procedure or concept adequately. Such
identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the entities, materials,
or equipment are necessarily the best available for the purpose.

See NIST Community Resilience website for Templates:
https://www.nist.gov/el/communityresilience/community-resilience-planning-guide-playbook-templates-additional-resources