Communication and

Public Health Emergencies:

A Guide for Law Enforcement

Corina Solé Brito

Andrea Morrozoff Luna

Elizabeth Lang Sanberg

August 2009
This project was supported by Grant No. 2006-DG-BX-K071 awarded by the Bureau of 

Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice 

Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of 

Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims 

of Crime. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the authors and do not 

represent the official position or policies of the United States Department of Justice or of 

individual Police Executive Research Forum members.

Police Executive Research Forum, Washington, D.C. 20036

Copyright 2009 by Police Executive Research Forum

All rights reserved

Cover photos courtesy of (top left) Talea Miller, Online NewsHour/Flickr, (top right) Juan 

Araujo/Flickr, and (bottom) Sarihuella/Flickr. Photo on pages when a section starts is a 

“photomicrograph of Haemophilus influenzae using immunofluorescence,” and are courtesy 

of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Edited by Craig Fischer

Cover and interior design by Dave Williams
Contents

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................i

About the Series ...................................................................................................iii

Communication and Public Health Emergencies:

A Guide for Law Enforcement Executives ............................................................ 1

section I.

Overview of Risk Communication ........................................................................ 5

section II.

Internal Communication Planning.......................................................................13

sidebar: What about Officers’ Families? .................................................................19

sidebar: Law Enforcement Communication During the 2003 SARS Outbreak .....20

section III.

Interagency Communications ............................................................................. 21

section IV.

Communicating with the Public..........................................................................24

sidebar: Preparing to Manage Residents’ Concern for Safety................................ 25

section V.

Working with the News Media............................................................................ 32

sidebar: Preparing for and Participating in Press Conferences.............................. 38

section VI.

Recovery and Incorporating Lessons Learned....................................................40

Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 43

About the Police Executive Research Forum ......................................................44

About the Bureau of Justice Assistance..............................................................46

appendix A.

WHO Phases, U.S. Government Stages, and CDC Intervals.............................47

appendix B.

Summary of the Community Mitigation Strategy by Pandemic Severity ..........48

appendix C.

Sample Public Health-Specific Interdepartmental Communication ................. 50

appendix D.

Citizen Corps Organizations and General and Pandemic-Specific Roles ..........53

appendix E.

Additional Risk Communication Resources....................................................... 54

Acknowledgements i communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the many individuals who contributed 

to this publication. Without their willingness to share their 

experiences and time with the Police Executive Research 

Forum (PERF), this guide would not exist. First, thank you to those who 

served on our law enforcement and communications advisory panel. 

In addition to reviewing the entire document (sometimes twice), they 

received many e-mails and phone calls, and were always happy to provide feedback in a timely manner. 

Special appreciation to: 

•	Inspector Alain Bernard, Ottawa Police Service (CA), for sharing his 

public health emergency planning experience and granting PERF access 

and permission to use their pandemic-specific planning materials;

•	Assistant Medical Director Craig DeAtley, PA-C, Fairfax County (VA), 

for sharing his first-hand experience working and communicating with

law enforcement personnel (among numerous other roles) and keen eye 

for detail. His presentation at PERF’s annual meeting was informative 

and very well received;

•	Captain Nancy Demme, Montgomery County (MD) Police Department, 

for working with PERF from the beginning of this project in 2006 and 

for sharing her experiences as Public Information Officer during the

Sniper Investigation;

•	Chief John Douglass, Overland Park (KS) Police Department, for his 

continuity of operations expertise;

•	Captain Stan Duncan, Sarasota (FL) Police Department, for sharing his 

knowledge and experience with all-hazards planning;

•	Dr. Gregory Dworkin, Danbury (CT) Hospital, for illustrating the 

importance of including bloggers in communication planning and for 

his medical expertise;

•	Dr. Steve Edwards, Bureau of Justice Assistance, for the freedom to 

explore this topic, for being our soundboard, and for his continued 

support of PERF;

•	Tom Imrie, Toronto Police Service (CA) (Retired), for working with us 

since the beginning of our work on law enforcement and public health, 
ii Acknowledgements

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

for his thoughtful review and significant contributions to all of our

work (including this guide), and for sharing his extensive experience 

in occupational health and the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome 

(SARS) outbreak in particular;

•	Major Larry Moser, Fairfax County Police Department, for his valuable 

assistance with the pandemic influenza scenario and his presentation at

PERF’s annual meeting;

•	Deputy Chief Kerr Putney, Charlotte-Mecklenburg (NC) Police 

Department, for his insight into law enforcement communications 

planning;

•	Dr. Monica Schoch-Spana, University of Pittsburgh, Center for 

Biosecurity, for sharing her expertise in risk communication;

•	Dr. Lori Severtson, Society for Risk Analysis, University of Madison 

(WI), for sharing her expertise in risk communication and for her 

extremely helpful editing and organizational assistance; and

•	Dr. James Sewell, Assistant Commissioner, Florida Department of Law 

Enforcement (Retired), for sharing his experience in working with the 

media from a law enforcement perspective. 

We would also like to thank Chuck Wexler, PERF’s Executive Director, for supporting our research on this topic from the start. Craig Fischer, 

PERF’s Director of Communications, did an excellent job (as usual) in 

making this guide read well and be as useful as possible to the field.

Most importantly, thank you to those of you in law enforcement who 

work so hard to make our communities safe. We hope that this guide 

provides you with useful resources and information to assist you in your 

public health emergency communication planning efforts.

The Authors 

August 2009
About the Series iii communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

About the Series

This report is one in a series of three documents created by the 

Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), with support from the 

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs’ Bureau of

Justice Assistance (BJA), on the law enforcement response to public health 

emergencies. This report identifies the considerations that law enforcement executives should address in their public health communications 

plans, regarding internal communications (those that remain within the 

law enforcement agency) as well as external communications (those that 

go to other agencies or the public).

The second document is Benchmarks for Developing a Law Enforcement 

Pandemic Flu Plan, which is an interactive guide that leads the reader 

through a planning process to help ensure continuity of law enforcement 

operations during a flu pandemic. An influenza pandemic is considered

one of the most severe types of public health emergencies that a law 

enforcement agency could be called upon to handle. The guide provides 

links to sample plans and templates for the reader to download and customize to his/her agency. 

The third document, A Guide to Occupational Health and Safety for Law 

Enforcement Executives, focuses on steps a law enforcement agency can 

take to ensure the best possible health of the agency’s workforce,1

 including educating agency staff members before a public health emergency 

occurs, so that they are better able to protect their health and the health of 

their loved ones. 

The documents in this series are intended to apply to agencies of all 

sizes and types. How the suggested strategies are implemented will no 

doubt vary according to the jurisdiction’s size and other characteristics. 

While these documents can be used as stand-alone resources, readers 

undertaking the pandemic flu planning process will find it useful to refer

to the communications and occupational health and safety guides as they 

work through the Benchmarks document.

1 The word “workforce” includes both sworn and civilian staff.
iv About the Series

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Using a Flu Pandemic as a Worst-Case Scenario

In December 2007, PERF hosted three Advisory Panel meetings, during 

which national experts from the communications, health, emergency 

planning, and law enforcement fields provided feedback on drafts of

each guide and the series as a whole. On the first day, the group agreed

that while the focus of the series was on public health emergencies of any 

nature, using a worst-case scenario such as an influenza pandemic could

help readers see just how critical it is to effectively plan and prepare for 

such an event.

Following is a fictional description of how a flu pandemic might affect

a community and its law enforcement agency:

Potential Pandemic Scenario

Officials from the World Health 

Organization (WHO) have been 

tracking an influenza virus that 

poses substantial health risk 

worldwide. Ominously, WHO 

officials have announced that they 

have assessed the threat at 4 out of 

6 on the WHO pandemic alert scale, 

meaning that there is “evidence 

of increased human-to-human 

transmission” of the flu virus.

Meanwhile, officials in a certain city have noted an immediate increase in local illness, and 

the responsible authorities have 

declared an emergency, activating 

the city’s emergency operation plan. 

The law enforcement agency has 

been asked to provide security at the 

local hospital and the local prophylactic point of distribution (POD), 

where general anti-viral medicines 

will be available. (Vaccines specifically designed to counter the virus 

will not be available for months.) 

Public concern has led the mayor 

to appear on local television, asking residents to stay away from 

shopping malls, movie theaters, 

sporting events, and other places 

where people congregate in close 

quarters. Unfortunately, that is the 

only information contained in the 

mayor’s message, and the mayor 

does not take questions from reporters or give local health experts an 

opportunity to provide more detailed 

information.

When local law enforcement 

officers arrive at the hospital, they 

find lines of people waiting to get 

into the emergency room; the lines 

stretch around the building. The officers note that some persons appear 

clearly ill; many who are not showing symptoms are, moreover, highly 

anxious and are demanding treatment. Some of the people seeking 

treatment are accompanied by their 

parents, children, and friends. The 

officers also have to deal with traffic 

gridlock because the hospital parking lot is full and people are continuing to arrive.

A similar scene is playing out at 

the POD for anti-viral medicines, a 

centrally-located elementary school. 

Residents are anxious and angry 

because they and their loved ones 

have not been seen for treatment. 

Despite the mayor’s instruction not 

to leave home, people are rushing to 

grocery stores to stock up on food, 

water, and other essential items, 

creating additional law enforcement 

challenges. Many motorists decide 
About the Series v communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

An exaggeration? Perhaps. However, in the early stages of a pandemic 

influenza, such scenes could well play out, particularly if residents and law

enforcement officers have not been informed ahead of time about the risks,

how to prepare, and how law enforcement’s role will change as a pandemic 

unfolds.

In the past, all-hazards planning mainly focused on physical damage as a 

result of man-made or naturally-occurring critical incidents. However, the 

lessons learned from Hurricane Katrina taught us that all-hazards planning should and must include preparing for the temporary or permanent 

loss of human resources. Preparing for the loss of human resources is key in 

effective planning for a public health emergency as well. While a pandemic 

influenza is considered by most public health experts to be a worst-case

scenario, law enforcement must be aware of the effects that such an incident would have on department personnel and, ultimately, the ability of 

the department to continue operating effectively.

(By the way, experts agree that the issue is not whether a flu pandemic

will occur, but when. There were three major flu pandemics in the last

century, the least of which caused 34,000 deaths in the United States alone.2

)

to top off their tanks, resulting in 

traffic jams and heightened tension at gas stations. Ambulances 

carrying sick patients are delayed 

by the gridlock, and when they 

arrive at the hospital, emergency 

technicians are mobbed by residents demanding care. Radio traffic 

makes it clear that law enforcement 

assistance is needed at each of the 

scenes, as hostility and violence 

are imminent.

•	 What should the department’s 

priorities be?

– Enforcing traffic laws to open 

traffic access?

– Facilitating pedestrian movement?

– Enforcing crowd control?

– Where? At the POD, hospitals, 

or other sites?

•	 Are there enough officers 

available to respond to all of 

these sites?

Adding to the difficulties, over 

the next few weeks it becomes clear 

that as much as 20 percent of the 

law enforcement agency’s staff is 

affected by the flu pandemic (either 

the employees are sick or must 

stay home to care for sick loved 

ones, or they have been potentially exposed to the flu virus and 

must stay home to avoid infecting 

other employees). Some of the 

officers who report for duty are 

implementing their own protective measures by donning personal 

protective equipment (e.g., goggles 

and gloves), or simply distancing 

themselves by refusing to engage 

in contact with anyone.

Overall, the situation is deteriorating rapidly, and stress among 

the workforce is escalating.

2 Influenza pandemics have occurred 

three times in the past century: in 1918–

19 (the “Spanish flu”), 1957–58 (the 

“Asian flu”), and 1968–69 (the “Hong 

Kong flu”). During the most recent 

pandemic, the “Hong Kong flu” caused 

approximately 34,000 deaths in the 

United States. The “Asian flu” resulted 

in 70,000 deaths in the United States. 

By far, the worst flu pandemic in recent 

history was the “Spanish flu,” which 

killed an estimated 50 million people 

worldwide, including 675,000 people in 

the United States. See: www.pandemic

flu.gov/general/historicaloverview.html. 
vi About the Series

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

The Effects on Law Enforcement

A pandemic flu will affect how local law enforcement agencies operate.

Most importantly, departments will lose staff members. Many predict 

that the percentage of employees affected in some way (e.g., exposed, 

infected, or taking care of sick loved ones) will range from 10 to 40 percent.3

 Agencies will need to activate their internal emergency operations 

plans, shifting resources to the duties considered most critical. Calls for 

service will likely increase (dramatically at first), yet with fewer officers

available to work, response time will suffer and services will be reduced. 

Because pandemics can circle the globe in waves, these issues will likely 

hit departments several times over the course of the pandemic.

A public health emergency may result in closure of public gathering 

places (e.g., shopping malls, places of worship), the dismissal of students 

from local schools, the creation of special mechanisms for the distribution 

of medication and vaccines, and the overcrowding of medical facilities. 

Law enforcement agencies will be expected not only to maintain public 

order, but also to assist public health officials in their efforts to seek compliance with related health orders. Most law enforcement agencies have 

pre-established communication networks that undoubtedly will be called 

upon to help broadcast public health messages.

To ease residents’ concerns, reassure them that essential law enforcement services will continue, provide them realistic expectations, and 

encourage people to prepare for and comply with public health recommendations and related orders, law enforcement officials must address

pandemic-specific issues in their department’s public health emergency

communication plans. As a part of advance communication efforts, 

department leaders should also provide employees with guidance on 

what they can do to protect themselves and their loved ones. Leaders 

must manage expectations of what the department and local government 

will be able to provide in support of employees and their families and the 

value and need for self-preparation. Further, law enforcement representatives must work with officials from other community agencies to ensure

that their pandemic communication plans complement and support each 

other.

Operational Realities

Most critical incidents typically affect a limited geographical area and do 

not last long. In such circumstances, volunteers are generally able to provide adequate support to victims and responders, and mutual aid agreements are activated, bolstering the law enforcement response.

3 www.osha.gov/Publications/influenza_

pandemic.html.
About the Series vii communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

However, an influenza pandemic will affect multiple regions simultaneously throughout the world. “Business as usual” will be nearly impossible. Following is a table of operational realities that public health and 

policing experts believe will complicate the law enforcement response to 

a flu pandemic:

Table 1: General and Law Enforcement-Specific Operational Realities

Associated with an Influenza Pandemic

General Realities Law Enforcement-Specific Realities

Communities should not rely 

on mutual aid agreements with 

neighboring jurisdictions, 

because the virus will likely spread 

regionally, so nearby communities 

will themselves be looking for help.

There will be little or no mutual aid available to local law 

enforcement agencies during a pandemic. Smaller agencies might 

be highly affected by absenteeism or the death of department 

staffers; larger agencies or private security firms may need to take 

over the law enforcement role for smaller agencies.

A pandemic could last 12 to 18 

months, and would likely have 

multiple, 6- to 8- week long waves.

The likelihood of ever-greater absenteeism calls for succession 

planning at all levels and cross-training among divisions and units.

Vaccines will not exist for several 

months; anti-virals will likely be in 

short supply.

Law enforcement officials will need to reinforce general hygiene 

messages and activate other protective and social distancing 

measures (e.g., the mandatory use of personal protective 

equipment).

At least 30% of the country’s 

population will be affected in some 

way by the virus (e.g., infected or 

caring for sick loved ones).

Absenteeism from the workforce 

could reach 50% or higher.

Law enforcement agencies will see the number of available 

personnel decline significantly. Employees will be more likely to 

report for duty in a department led by an executive who:

•	 Supports occupational health,

•	Has a solid understanding of the associated risks, and

•	 Sets clear and realistic expectations regarding the law

enforcement role in a public health emergency.

Employees will be more likely to report for duty if:

•	 They know their loved ones are safe, healthy, and cared for. Law

enforcement agencies should consider working with employees 

on family preparedness.

•	 They are healthy and feel that precautions are in place to ensure

their health while on the job. Law enforcement executives need 

to work with their jurisdictions to develop plans for anti-viral 

medications (i.e., who gets them, when, and who pays for them?) 

and vaccines (if/when they become available).

The health system will be 

overwhelmed, and there will 

be a large number of deaths.

The law enforcement system will be overwhelmed by calls for 

service, personnel absence, mass casualties, the lack of mutual 

aid, etc.
About the Series

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

General Realities Law Enforcement-Specific Realities

Local agencies will need to 

coordinate efforts in an 

emotionally charged atmosphere.

In many jurisdictions, emergency operations plans have been 

developed without law enforcement input, and they may reflect 

unrealistic expectations of local law enforcement. Law enforcement 

leaders must work with other entities now to define realistic law 

enforcement roles based on the severity of the pandemic.

Services and resources (e.g., food, 

medicine, banking, response time to 

calls for law enforcement service) 

will be adversely affected.

In most jurisdictions, local law enforcement agencies have rarely 

(if ever) had to enforce public health orders. During a pandemic, 

local law enforcement agencies and public health departments 

might find themselves working side-by-side enforcing these orders. 

Officers will need to be informed of the orders as well as penalties 

for violating them and the respective enforcement roles of law 

enforcement and public health officers.

The related economic and 

psychological impacts will be 

significant.

The psychological effect of a pandemic influenza will be significant 

for all community members; law enforcement is no exception. Law 

enforcement will likely be dealing with mass casualties, distressed 

family members, and social unrest.

Local agencies must plan for 

recovery.

Because some law enforcement duties will have been curtailed or 

eliminated over weeks or perhaps months as a pandemic runs its 

course, law enforcement will operate very differently during and 

immediately after a pandemic. Because of the loss of employees 

and other factors, recovery will not happen quickly or automatically.

viii

Readers should keep these operational realities in mind as they make 

their way through this series of guides to planning for a pandemic flu

outbreak, for public health communications, and for occupational safety 

and health in policing. Imagining the worst-case scenario can help officials prepare their departments to effectively respond to a public health 

emergency.
1

Communication and Public Health Emergencies:

A Guide for Law Enforcement Executives communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

These headlines illustrate the emotional impact of public health 

emergencies as well as the increased sense of fear or panic that 

headlines can incite. Fear and dread may be entirely appropriate 

responses to critical incidents, given the scale of human suffering and 

economic upheaval they can cause. However, fear, uncertainty, and the 

potential chaos of a large-scale public health emergency can result in less 

than rational responses among law enforcement and public health officials as well as the public. Well-laid plans for effective communications, 

on the other hand, can help reduce the chaos and minimize the damage 

caused by a public health disaster. 

While public health representatives will develop and deliver public 

health messages during disease outbreaks, community members look 

to their local law enforcement executives to be the voice of authority 

and calm during any type of emergency. In the wake of incidents such 

as the September 11th terrorist attacks, the anthrax letters, Severe Acute 

Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), and Hurricane Katrina, planning for “all 

hazard”10 events is now becoming the status quo for law enforcement. 

Law enforcement officials are now being tasked with understanding and

communicating public health risks—both internally to agency employees 

and externally to the public. 

Communication and Public 

Health Emergencies: A Guide for 

Law Enforcement Executives

“Anthrax ‘Panic’ Cripples the Capitol”4

“When Anthrax Hit, U.S. Saw Communication Breakdown”5

“Hospitals Fear Influx of the ‘Worried Well’”6

“New Orleans Collapses into Chaos as Katrina’s Destruction Spreads”7

“Fear Grows Around Washington as Police Continue Sniper Hunt”8

“Chaos Continues on Last Day of Flu Shot Clinics”9

4 D. Boyer and A. Hudson, The Washington Times, October 18, 2001.

5 K. Branch-Brioso, St. Louis PostDispatch, October 21, 2001.

6 Kathy Robertson, Sacramento Business 

Journal. October 26, 2001.

7 D. Ovalle and C. Adams, Knight 

Ridder Washington Bureau, 

September 1, 2005. Abstract available 

at: www.accessmylibrary.com/

premium/0286/0286-9583239.html.

8 Shira Kantor, Knight Ridder/Tribune 

News Service, October 8, 2001. Abstract 

available at http://www.encyclopedia.

com/doc/1G1-92607348.html.

9 Fox 11 News, October 16, 2004. www.

foxreno.com/news/3826870/detail.html

10 “Any emergency event including terrorist attacks and natural or accidental 

disasters.” See “HOMELAND SECURITY: DHS’ Efforts to Enhance First 

Responders’ All-Hazards Capabilities 

Continue to Evolve,” U.S. Government 

Accountability Office, Report GAO-05-

652, July 2005. www.gao.gov/new.items/

d05652.pdf. 
2

Communication and Public Health Emergencies: 

A Guide for Law Enforcement Executives communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

How, then, can law enforcement disseminate important messages 

about potential public health risks in a way that captures attention and 

encourages preventive and preparatory action, but does not foster unnecessary fear? 

How should law enforcement executives prepare agency personnel11

for the consequences that a public health hazard such as a pandemic 

flu may have on them, their families, their jobs, their law enforcement 

agency, and the community they are sworn to protect? 

The answers to these questions are contained in this guide, which was 

written to help law enforcement executives develop public health emergency communication plans now to ensure community resilience during 

such an event. 

About the Guide

This guide provides a summary of the goals, principles and strategies 

for developing a communication plan, with a specific emphasis on the

importance of risk communications (i.e., communications aimed at conveying information about a threat and risk for the purpose of impacting 

individual behavior), including a discussion of the factors that influence

an individual’s perception of risk, and how officials can manage fear and

provide useful, non-inflammatory information to understandably concerned residents during a public health emergency. 

This guide also outlines anticipated community expectations of law 

enforcement during a public health emergency, highlights the value of 

communicating about threats prior to an emergency, and how this communications role fits with existing community policing practices. While

this guide was written to apply to any type of public health emergency, 

the authors chose to use an influenza pandemic to illustrate a “worst case

scenario” throughout the document. 

11 The term “agency personnel” includes 

sworn and administrative agency staff.

12 “Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication: by Leaders for Leaders,” Centers 

for Disease Control and Prevention, 

2006; p.5. www.bt.cdc.gov/erc/

leaders.pdf.

13 www.pandemicflu.gov/general/

historicaloverview.html

“A well-prepared 

leader will have 

communication plans and 

resources in place 

to help minimize 

the number of 

decisions about 

communication that must 

be made in the 

moment.”12

Many people may not realize that flu pandemics are not a merely theoretical threat.

As recently as 1968–69, the “Hong Kong flu” 

caused 34,000 deaths in the United States. 

The worst flu pandemic in recent history was 

the ‘Spanish flu’ of 1918–19, which killed as 

many as 50 million people worldwide, and 

675,000 in the United States.13

Left: Military hospital in Camp Funston, Kansas during 

1918–19 influenza epidemic. Photo courtesy of the 

National Museum of Health and Medicine.
3

Communication and Public Health Emergencies:

A Guide for Law Enforcement Executives communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

The next six sections of the document present factors for law enforcement executives to take into consideration now—in advance of a public health emergency—

and how to activate these plans once one has been declared. Section I presents an 

overview of risk communication in the United States. Section II discusses using 

communication planning to prepare the agency for a public health emergency, 

from an organizational and human resources perspective. Section III presents 

considerations for communicating with other agencies. In Section IV, strategies for 

communicating with the public before and during a public health emergency are 

discussed. Working with the news media in advance of and during a public health 

emergency is covered in Section V, and the recovery period and incorporating lessons learned is discussed in Section VI.

These topics are captured below and are expanded upon throughout the guide. 
4

Communication and Public Health Emergencies: 

A Guide for Law Enforcement Executives communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Ten Tips for Effective Communications About

Law Enforcement/Public Health Issues14

Understand that regardless of the type of emergency, residents will look to law 

enforcement for reassurance and guidance. 

Establish trust-based, two-way communication within the agency, between the agency 

and the community, and between the law enforcement and other local agencies before 

an emergency strikes to ensure a calmer, engaged, more cooperative response during an 

emergency. 

Plans for internal communications (within the agency) should address who will be in 

charge of developing the public health emergency plan, how the plan will be triggered, 

how the agency will educate personnel on basic disease prevention, and how personnel 

can protect themselves and their loved ones during a public health emergency. 

Understand other agencies’ expectations of the law enforcement role in communicating during a public health emergency, and correct any unrealistic expectations prior to a 

public health emergency.

Prepare residents for potential changes in the law enforcement role prior to a public 

health emergency to help alleviate concern when a public health emergency strikes.

Be cognizant of the different demographic groups served by the agency. Community 

stakeholder groups can help determine the communication tools that will reach residents 

in the most effective, efficient manner. Have materials translated as necessary.

When a public health emergency occurs, local law enforcement should keep the public 

apprised of the changing status of the emergency and how the agency is modifying its 

roles accordingly.

Know who will represent the agency during press conferences and interviews. Have a 

media plan in place regarding when and how briefings will take place, and be sure to have 

a succession plan in case the law enforcement agency’s media representative becomes ill 

or is otherwise affected by the crisis.

Engage the media before a public health emergency occurs, and when a crisis happens, 

prepare as much as possible for press conferences, anticipating questions. 

As soon as possible after a public health emergency is concluded, incorporate “lessons 

learned” into the communications plan. Share this information throughout the agency 

and with the community at large. 

1

2

3

4

5

6

9

10

7

8

14 Tips summarized by PERF staff 

through an extensive review of 

existing literature (see Appendix 

E: Additional Risk Communication 

Resources) and in working with 

subject matter experts on this issue.
Section I. Overview of Risk Communication 5 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

The Importance of Effective Communication 

Risk communication is an essential component of effective risk management. Risk communication is defined as “an interactive process of

exchange of information and opinion among individuals, groups, and 

institutions; often involves multiple messages about the nature of risk

or expressing concerns, opinion, or reactions to risk messages or to legal 

and institutional arrangements for risk management”16 This definition

highlights the importance of ensuring that risk communication is a twoway process. If communications are disseminated only one way, from a 

law enforcement agency to the public, for example, the law enforcement 

agency may have no way of knowing whether the intended audience is 

really receiving and understanding the message. Accordingly, Sections II 

through V of this guide highlight the need to work with people inside the 

law enforcement agency, in other agencies, in the community, and in the 

media when devising messages about public health risks. There must be 

mechanisms for the intended audience to respond and constantly let officials know if they are “getting through” and communicating effectively. 

Two-way communication also builds trust. Trust is essential for effective communication, especially when people are faced with uncertainty. 

When people lack knowledge about a risk, they will look to trusted 

sources of information for guidance.17 The importance of assessing audience concerns and how recipients understand risk messages is another 

theme that is emphasized throughout this document.

How Risk Communication Fits Within an

Overall Communication Plan for Law Enforcement

An important facet of law enforcement communication is conveying 

information about a specific risk to achieve a desired result, typically

behavioral change. The content and format of messages and how and 

Section I.

Overview of Risk Communication

15 Henry L. Davis, “Hepatitis Scare Gives 

County a Preview of How to Handle a 

Pandemic,” The Buffalo News, February 

27, 2008.

16 “Improving Risk Communication,” 

Committee on Risk Perception and 

Communication, National Research 

Council, National Academies Press, 

Washington, DC, 1989; p. 2. www.nap.

edu/catalog.php?record_id=1189

17 T.C. Earle and G.T. Cvetkovich. “Social 

Trust: Towards a Cosmopolitan Society,” 

Praeger, Westport, CT, 1995.

“If I were to list 

the three top 

problems we 

experienced, 

they are communication, communication, and 

communication...

the challenge is 

coordinating the 

message.”

Dr. Anthony 

Billittier, Erie 

County Health 

Commissioner, in 

response to a recent 

Hepatitis A scare 

and associated 

mass inoculation 

effort, (2008).15
6 Section I. Overview of Risk Communication

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

when they are presented should depend on the type of threat and the 

audience that will be receiving the message. Effective presentation of 

information—before, during, and after a public health emergency—is 

essential to maintaining public order and helping residents protect themselves and support their neighbors as much as possible. It is important, 

therefore, for law enforcement and other local officials to understand their

role in producing and effectively delivering risk information when planning for public health emergencies. 

Communicating risk to the public is something that law enforcement 

officials have been doing since law enforcement agencies came into being.

Most recently: 

•	The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks found law enforcement 

executives in New York City; Arlington, VA; and Shanksville, PA

standing next to local politicians, explaining the nature of the attacks 

and providing information to the public. 

•	During the “Beltway Sniper” attacks in the Washington, D.C. area in 

2002, law enforcement executives from many neighboring jurisdictions 

held joint press conferences, addressing rumors and providing 

residents with current information to the best of their ability. 

Recent public health emergencies have called for law enforcement and public health officials to come together to deliver information to concerned community members: 

•	Shortly after September 11, 2001, the nation watched law 

enforcement officers work closely with public health

authorities to communicate risk and provide guidance to 

residents regarding the anthrax attacks in Washington, D.C., 

New York City, and Boca Raton, FL. 

•	During the 2003 SARS outbreak in Toronto, police worked 

side by side with public health officials, communicating risk

both internally to agency personnel and externally to the 

community. 

Additionally, police regularly communicate about crimerelated and other risks to the community, other agencies, and 

internally within their agencies. At community meetings, officers

help residents understand their role in crime prevention and 

regularly exchange information about community problems and public 

safety strategies. In meetings with other local agencies, personnel explain 

“The center of gravity of the 

pandemic response...will be 

in communities. The distributed nature of a pandemic, 

as well as the sheer burden 

of disease across the Nation 

over a period of months or 

longer, means that the Federal Government’s support 

to any particular State, Tribal 

Nation, or community will 

be limited in comparison to 

the aid it mobilizes for disasters such as earthquakes or 

hurricanes, which strike a 

more confined geographic 

area over a shorter period of 

time.”18

18 www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/nspi_

implementation_chap01.pdf.
Section I. Overview of Risk Communication 7 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

how their policing roles might change in the event of an emergency. In 

roll calls, police supervisors keep personnel up to date on crime statistics, 

officer safety and wellness issues, and other relevant topics.

Public health emergencies require a coordinated, multi-disciplinary 

response between public health, public safety, hospital, and other medical 

leaders (to name a few). People will be looking to local authorities to help 

them make sense of events and decide what to do. 

What does this mean for law enforcement? Law enforcement leaders need to capitalize on the time available before an emergency strikes 

to learn more about pandemic influenza and other public health threats.

They also need to work with other local leaders (public and private) to 

develop a coordinated and consistent communication process that can 

adapt to unfolding events. Creating a communication plan before an incident occurs can help law enforcement officials:

•	Define and clarify roles and responsibilities;

•	Ensure that community members are informed on the topic, that 

they know what to expect from the law enforcement agency, and that 

they remain as calm, safe, and mutually supportive as possible and 

comply with reasonable restrictions on their movements. For example, 

leaders can introduce the public to officials overseeing a public health

emergency, explain the likely changes in law enforcement roles, define

terms, and encourage residents to expect and comply with restrictions 

on their movements during a crisis. Residents will be more likely to 

comply with such restrictions if they understand how and why the 

restrictions will help reduce the severity of the crisis;

•	Prepare the agency (e.g., identify and train key spokespersons, 

develop message templates for press events, and ensure all personnel 

have a clear understanding of emergency plans and their roles and 

responsibilities before and during the emergency);

•	Protect agency staff (e.g., communicate regularly about the proper use 

and importance of personal protective equipment), and help them to 

educate and prepare their loved ones (to ensure the workforce is as 

healthy and complete as possible);

•	Work with the news media to ensure that consistent, vetted, timely, and 

effective messages are disseminated to the greatest number of residents 

possible; and

•	Integrate law enforcement agency messages with the messages of other 

response agencies. 
8 Section I. Overview of Risk Communication

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Overview of General and Pandemic-Specific 

National Risk Communication Systems

While there is no single federal agency or national warning system that collects and 

disseminates risk information about critical incidents, at least a dozen federal agencies have 

responsibility for issuing warning information for various types of hazards.19 In the case of 

naturally occurring critical incidents, Americans are most familiar with weather- and earthquakerelated warnings issued via radio and television by the National Weather Service and the U.S. 

Geological Survey (e.g., the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale).20 Also well-known are the tests 

conducted by the Emergency Alert System (formerly known as the Emergency Broadcast 

System), which was created to provide a way for the President to address Americans through 

radio and television broadcasts in the event of a national emergency.21 After the September 11, 

2001 terrorist attacks, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) created the Color-Coded 

Threat Level System “to communicate with public safety officials and the public at-large” about 

the specific steps target audiences should take in response to a change in threat level.22 This 

information is communicated through radio, television, electronic billboards, and the Internet.

Global and National Pandemic-Specific Risk Communication Systems

Information about threats to public health is typically disseminated by the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC), which works with international and state public health officials 

to ensure those at risk are notified of public health threats. There are two major systems 

for describing the current level of risk from an influenza pandemic. First, the World Health 

Organization’s (WHO) system of six “phases” focuses on the worldwide risk of a pandemic. 

Many emergency managers in the United States and abroad base pandemic plan activation on 

these phases. 

The second system, the U.S. government’s recently published framework of pandemic risk 

“stages” from 0 to 6, is designed to characterize the threat of a pandemic outbreak in the United 

States, rather than the entire world. For example, Stage 5 is defined as “Spread throughout 

United States,” and Stage 6 is “Recovery and Preparation for Subsequent Waves.”23 Based on 

these stages, the CDC recently suggested that using a system of discrete “intervals” within these 

stages might be more practical for deciding when to implement various strategies; for example, 

social distancing measures would be implemented as a pandemic is “accelerating” and discontinued after the pandemic appears to be “decelerating.”24 Appendix A illustrates the WHO 

“phases,” the U.S. government “stages,” the CDC “intervals,” and how the systems relate to 

each other.

It is important to note that all of these systems are simply guidelines; influenza pandemics 

do not take place in an orderly fashion. Further, they tend to spread rapidly (it took the Spanish 

flu just eight months to kill 675,000 people in the United States in 1918–1919).25

19 Ruxandra Floroiu and Richard T. 

Sylves, “Alerting America: Effective 

Risk Communication—Summary of a 

Forum, October 31, 2002,” National 

Academies Press, Washington, DC, 

2003; p. 5. 

20 “A 1–5 rating based on the hurricane’s present intensity.” See: www.

nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshs.shtml.

21 www.fcc.gov/pshs/services/eas/.

22 www.dhs.gov/xinfoshare/programs/

Copy_of_press_release_0046.shtm.

23 www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/

nspi_implementation_chap03.pdf.

24 www.pandemicflu.gov/news/

guidance031108.pdf.

25 www.pandemicflu.gov/general/

historicaloverview.html.
Section I. Overview of Risk Communication 9 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

To date, how the public would be notified of a pandemic influenza would likely vary by situation. Theoretically, the message 

would come from local public health officials, who would have 

received it from state and federal public health officials. Today’s 

up-to-the-minute news media coverage, however, lessens the likelihood of a linear, chain-of-command communication flow.27

In 2007, CDC released Interim Pre-pandemic Planning Guidance: 

Community Strategy for Pandemic Influenza Mitigation in the United 

States.28 This guide presents readers with a “Pandemic Severity 

Index” that matches recommended local “non-pharmaceutical” 

policy decisions (such as voluntary isolation and closing schools) 

to the severity of the flu pandemic (Appendix B). For example, a 

Category 1 Pandemic projects less than 90,000 U.S. fatalities, while 

an estimated 1.8 million (or more) Americans would die during a Category 5 Pandemic.29 While 

the guide does not provide a system for communicating this information to the public (that is 

left to local officials), it does stress the importance of creating risk communication messages 

that can help residents prepare for a pandemic. The benefit of having this index and list of associated policy considerations now is that law enforcement executives can use them to develop 

a communication strategy to prepare the agency and the community for a pandemic before it 

occurs.

“What is important to 

remember is that these 

are conceptual frameworks for thinking about 

an event that, in reality, is 

not likely to unfold neatly, 

one step at a time, allowing people to adjust along 

the way.”

Dr. Monica Schoch-Spana, 

(2007)26

26 PERF Project Advisory Panel 

Meeting, December 2007.

27 PERF Project Advisory Panel 

Meeting, December 2007.

28 “Interim Pre-Pandemic Planning 

Guidance: Community Strategy for 

Pandemic Influenza Mitigation in 

the United States—Early, Targeted, 

Layered Use of Nonpharmaceutical Interventions,” Centers for 

Disease Control (CDC), 2007. www.

pandemicflu.gov/plan/community/

commitigation.html.

29 The CDC based these numbers on 

the assumption of “a 30% illness 

rate and unmitigated pandemic 

without interventions.” See www.

pandemicflu.gov/plan/community/

commitigation.html. 
10 Section I. Overview of Risk Communication

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Factors that Shape Public Perceptions of Risk 

Before and During a Public Health Emergency 

At a forum titled “Alerting America: Effective Risk Communication,” 

David Ropeik (formerly the director of risk communications at the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis) listed seven factors that affect an individual’s perception of risk.31 Table 1 illustrates how these factors might be 

applied to analyzing how people think about the risk of a flu pandemic. It

is important for law enforcement officials to keep these factors in mind as

they develop their communication plans. 

Table 1. Factors that May Affect Risk Perception

Factor Explanation General Example Pandemic-Specific Example

Familiarity People are likely 

to become “used 

to” the risks that 

occur repeatedly, 

especially if they have 

not suffered losses 

because of them.

Tornado or other 

severe weather 

warnings that 

do not come to 

fruition.

No U.S. or local human 

casualties as a result of the 

virus. 

Trust Messages are more 

likely to be believed 

and acted upon if 

they come from a 

recognized, trusted 

expert.

The local law 

enforcement 

chief, sheriff, or a 

well-known public 

health authority.

The local law enforcement 

executive and director of 

public health attending 

community meetings to 

discuss what residents can 

do to protect themselves 

and how policing roles 

might change in response 

to staff reductions.

Choice People are more 

likely to fear a risk if 

it is imposed (i.e., 

not within their 

control) rather than 

voluntarily assumed.

An imposed risk: 

terrorism. 

A voluntarily 

assumed risk: living 

in an earthquakeprone area.

Imposed risk: pandemic 

flu.

Assumed risk: traveling 

to an area experiencing 

an outbreak of the H5N1 

strain of the Avian Flu 

virus.

Control Having perceived 

control of a situation 

leads people to be 

less afraid of a risk. 

Driving a car 

versus air travel.

Working with the 

community and other local 

agencies to plan together 

for all types of hazards 

versus not planning. 

“When individuals think that they 

could be disaster 

victims, they may 

take protective 

actions even if the 

risk is statistically 

low.”30

30 Floroiu and Sylves, 2003; p.2. 

31 Floroiu and Sylves, 2003.
Section I. Overview of Risk Communication 11 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Factor Explanation General Example Pandemic-Specific Example

Acuteness Persistent situations 

that kill many people 

over long periods of 

time garner less fear 

and attention than an 

incident that claims 

many lives in a short 

period of time. 

Annual lung cancer 

deaths versus SARS 

deaths. 

Number of national deaths 

from seasonal influenza 

versus local fatalities from 

a pandemic influenza. 

Personalization When people think 

they could actually be 

victimized, they are 

more likely to take 

protective actions, 

even if the risk of 

victimization is low. 

The 2002 “D.C. 

Sniper” attacks. 

Cases of pandemic 

influenza in other 

communities versus cases 

in the community in which 

the individual resides. 

Risk versus 

benefit

If the benefit of taking 

action outweighs 

the risk of inaction, 

people will be more 

likely to take that 

action.

Getting vaccinated 

versus becoming 

infected with a 

deadly virus.

Keeping a supply of overthe-counter medicines 

versus assuming local 

stores would stay open 

and stocked during a 

pandemic. 
12 Section I. Overview of Risk Communication

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

The Value of Advance Communications 

The value of establishing two-way, trust-based communication with the public (as well as other local agencies and 

the media) before an incident occurs cannot be stressed 

enough. Some of the general national risk communication systems referred to earlier in this document (e.g., the 

Emergency Alert System) may be employed just prior to 

or once a public health emergency occurs in the United 

States. But what about preparing well in advance of a 

public health emergency? Doing so can ensure a calmer, 

engaged, more cooperative community. It can encourage 

partnership and help with planning when the environment is peaceful, not chaotic. It can help law enforcement 

become more aware of community resources that could be 

activated in the event of an emergency. 

Preparing for a public health emergency also enables 

law enforcement officials to become familiar with other

local officials who would be involved in the response

effort. Ideally, both the law enforcement and public health 

agencies will gain a better understanding of each other’s strengths and 

weaknesses. The communication that takes place before a public health 

emergency is at least as important as that which takes place once an emergency is declared. Advance communications about risk should occur formally (at community meetings, during press conferences) and informally 

(during casual officer-resident encounters). Because so many Americans

rely upon the news media for information, working with local reporters 

ahead of time can also help a law enforcement agency disseminate appropriate messages.33 Because so many Americans rely upon electronic media 

for information, it is important to include blogs and Internet news sources 

in this dissemination effort. 

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Mayor Ray Nagin 

testified that quelling rumors was “the thing that we spent 

way too much time doing.”34

“It has been said that many sidewalks 

are constructed only after seeing 

pathways where the grass has been 

beaten down. Similarly, we often don’t 

know what we need to until after the 

incident. Anytime we can increase our 

experience level, we are more likely to 

be better prepared under trying conditions. Public health officials have great 

experience in their world, and police 

have equal experience in the law 

enforcement arena. These experiences 

working independently will never be 

as strong as a joint partnership with 

enhanced understanding of each 

other’s roles.”

Major Larry Moser, Fairfax County (VA) 

Police Department, (2007)32

32 PERF Project Advisory Panel Meeting, 

December 2007.

33 See “Working with the News Media” in 

Section V for more information.

34 “A Failure of Initiative: Final Report 

of the Select Bipartisan Committee 

to Investigate the Preparation for and 

Response to Hurricane Katrina,”2006, 

p. 248. www.katrina.house.gov/full_

katrina_report.htm.
Section II: Internal Communication Planning 13 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Prior to a Public Health Emergency 

Once a law enforcement chief or sheriff approves the development of a 

communication plan specifically addressing public health emergencies,

those in charge of writing the plan must gain a thorough understanding 

of the goals and principles of risk communication (presented in Section I). 

Then, the following agency-specific questions should be considered:

Section II:

Internal Communication Planning

35 Unified command (UC) is defined as 

“An application of ICS used when there 

is more than one agency with incident 

jurisdiction or when incidents cross 

political jurisdictions. Agencies work 

together through the designated members of the UC, often the senior person 

from agencies and/or disciplines participating in the UC, to establish a common set of objectives and strategies 

and a single (incident action plan)”. 

See: www.nimsonline.com/nims_3_04/

glossary_of_key_terms.htm.

Questions for Executive Consideration:

Developing an Internal Communications Plan

•	 Where does communication planning fit with the agency’s current emergency operations 

plan?

•	 How does the agency’s plan fit within other jurisdictional agency plans (e.g., will it work under 

a “unified command” incident command structure?)35

•	 When/how will the communication plan for responding to an emergency be activated? Will it 

be triggered when WHO or the U.S. government announces that a certain phase or stage has 

been reached? Should the plan itself take effect in stages?

•	 How can the agency use messages to prepare personnel for the changes in their roles that 

would accompany a public health emergency?

•	 Should the agency develop a mission for the communication plan that stresses the public 

safety aspect of the plan? 

•	 How will the communications process be documented during drills or an actual event?
14 Section II: Internal Communication Planning

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Protecting and Educating Agency Personnel

Providing agency staff members with basic knowledge on disease transmission and prevention can ensure a healthier, better-staffed workforce 

should a public health emergency strike. One way to help ensure successful risk communication with the agency staff is to make it part of 

the agency’s daily routine. In Toronto, for example, all law enforcement 

and court officers are issued officer safety kits (containing antimicrobial

gloves, antiseptic towelettes, saline solution, and a one-way CPR air 

mask) that are stored in pouches on the officers’ duty belts. All officers

and some civilian staff members receive training on communicable disease risk management and the correct use of personal protective equipment (PPE).36 In Leesburg, VA, command staff members from the police 

department meet throughout the year with representatives from the local 

public health department and disseminate information through the ranks. 

In other agencies, this process may occur on a more informal basis (e.g., 

during roll call discussions of recent stories in the news or via the agency’s Intranet system).

Law enforcement leaders must also consider that agency personnel may be kept away from their homes and their loved ones over an 

extended period, causing additional stress for personnel and their families. During the 2002 Washington, D.C. sniper investigation, for example, 

officers across the Washington region spent countless hours on stakeouts

or patrol or staffing hotlines. “The lack of contact and communication

exacerbated family members’ concerns about both officers’ physical

and emotional well-being.”38 Some agencies may end up housing staff 

members separately from their families to reduce their risk of exposure 

and infection. Other agencies may need officers and civilians to work

extended shifts because of high levels of absenteeism. It is important to 

communicate these types of plans in advance (and have a family support 

plan in place if possible) so that all agency personnel can create their own 

plans for their households. 

Some decisions law enforcement executives should make when developing an advance communication plan for agency personnel include the 

following:

“Leaders could 

communicate via 

annual discussions before the 

regular flu season 

begins. Educate 

personnel on the 

need to daily wipe 

down door knobs, 

keyboards, and 

telephones with 

antibacterial gel. 

Consider installing hand sanitizing units at the 

entrances of all 

buildings.” 

Commander 

Nancy Demme, 

Montgomery 

County (MD) 

Police Department, 

(2007).37

36 Edward Richards, Kathryn Rathbun, 

Corina Solé Brito, and Andrea Luna. 

“The Role of Law Enforcement in Public 

Health Emergencies: Special Considerations for an All-Hazards Approach,” 

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of 

Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice 

Assistance, Washington, DC, 2006. 

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/pdf/role_law_

enforce.pdf.

37 PERF Project Advisory Panel Meeting, 

December 2007.

38 Gerard Murphy, Chuck Wexler, Heather 

Davies, and Martha Plotkin. “Managing 

a Multijurisdictional Case: Identifying the Lessons Learned from the 

Sniper Investigation,” Police Executive 

Research Forum, Washington DC, 2004; 

p87. www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/pubs/

SniperRpt.pdf. 
Section II: Internal Communication Planning 15 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Questions for Executive Consideration: 

Developing the Agency’s Communications Plan

•	 Who are the key local public health communication partners who can help educate agency 

personnel?

•	 Who from the law enforcement agency will be responsible for collecting and disseminating 

the information?

– In some agencies, this duty falls under the unit responsible for occupational health. Many agencies do not have such a unit; this duty is often carried out through the training academy or human 

resources.

– For example, recent outbreaks of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA), a type of 

drug-resistant staph infection, led medical experts who work closely with the Fairfax County, VA Police 

Department to create a pamphlet that was disseminated throughout the agency (Appendix C).

•	 Are personnel represented by a union or similar organization? This could impact the type of 

changes an executive would be able to consider regarding sick leave and other policies. 

•	 What type of information should be shared on a regular basis?

•	 What type of information would be shared in the event of an emergency? 

– For example, some agencies plan to vary the type of information released based on WHO’s 

pandemic phases.39

•	 What type of pandemic influenza-specific information should be shared with staff members 

now?

•	 When/how can risk information be communicated to agency personnel?

– Weave information into roll call or other personnel meetings if possible/practical.

– Invite local public health representatives to make presentations at roll call or other personnel 

meetings.

– Have command staff meet with public health officials and then communicate the information they 

obtain to law enforcement personnel through various communication mechanisms established 

within the agency.

– Send automated voice mail to personnel/families.

– Disseminate information via text messaging, agency wide Intranet, memoranda, policy statements.

– Institute awareness campaigns and refresh plans annually, just prior to “regular” flu season.

– Refer staff members to public health websites (e.g., the local and/or state agencies of public health, 

BJA’s “Preparing the Justice System for a Pandemic Influenza” page [www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/

pandemic/resources.html], www.pandemicflu.gov).40

– Provide information at academy and in-service training and other agency education and training 

opportunities on:

– Basic public health (e.g., disease transmission, basic hygiene tips)

– The law enforcement role in a public health emergency

•	 How will the agency ensure that the communication was received?

– Create sign-off sheets or online logs to track whether officers have read messages. 

– Create online training with built-in tracking capacity.

39 PERF Project Advisory Panel 

Meeting, December 2007.

40 See Appendix E of this document 

for a list of resources. Also see the 

forthcoming guide in this series, 

Benchmarks for Developing a Law 

Enforcement Pandemic Flu Plan.
16 Section II: Internal Communication Planning

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

•	 Should the agency provide guidance and resources on officer family plans?

– Share sample plans from reputable Internet sources. To ensure that the plans are comprehensive, 

vet the samples through the planning team to determine if they provide the advice needed in various 

concrete scenarios. If needed, add to the plans as the planning team deems necessary.41

– Use the agency’s occupational health program (if available) as a vehicle for communicating with 

family members.

– Send information home with pay stubs.

•	 How can the law enforcement agency prepare all officers to deliver risk-reduction and 

planning information to residents?

– Should/could officers share parts of their personal plans with community members to serve as 

models?

continued | Questions for Executive Consideration: Developing the Agency’s Communications Plan

41 See Appendix E and the forthcoming Benchmarks for Developing a Law 

Enforcement Pandemic Flu Plan for 

links to sample family plans.
Section II: Internal Communication Planning 17 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Planning for Effective Internal Communications

Once a Public Health Emergency Has Been Declared

Once a pandemic or other public health emergency has been confirmed,

and the law enforcement agency has fully activated its emergency operations plan, the “response” side of the communication plan should be activated. Addressing the previously mentioned considerations and adhering 

to the rules and principles of risk communication will ensure that wellprepared agency spokespersons are able to effectively deliver messages 

and guidance internally to officers (and externally to other local agencies

and community members, as discussed later in this document). 

Communications Within the Law Enforcement Agency

Internally within the agency, there must be a plan for two-way, agencywide communication to produce daily reports on the number of employees who are available for duty and the number who are out sick.42 This 

can help the agency make any necessary changes in staffing and/or

prioritization of calls for service.43 Frequent, regular, and accurate updates 

concerning the emergency should be shared with the agency’s entire staff, 

and officers should have a communication mechanism they can use to

submit questions or topics of concern with command staff.

When creating an internal communication plan (if not already 

addressed in the agency’s existing plan) during the response phase of a 

public health emergency, law enforcement executives should consider:

Questions for Executive Consideration: 

Providing Useful Information to Employees

•	 Who will be responsible for reporting numbers on staff member absentee levels?

•	 How will updates be provided to employees?

•	 How can employees submit questions/concerns to command staff?

•	 Who will be responsible for responding to these queries?

42 Communicating this information to 

the local public health department 

can also help track the disease in the 

community.

43 See the forthcoming guide in this 

series, Benchmarks for Developing a 

Law Enforcement Pandemic Flu Plan,

for a more in-depth discussion of 

reprioritizing calls for service and continuity of operations planning.
18 Section II: Internal Communication Planning

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Questions for Executive Consideration: 

What to Tell Employees, and How to Tell It 

•	 How can the frequency of interagency risk communications and updates be increased? 

How can the messages be made specific to the disease?

•	 How will the messages be disseminated?

– Agency memoranda (e.g., a policy reminder)

– Via pager

– Via e-mail

– At roll calls and/or pre-scheduled briefings

– Agency Intranet

– On bulletin boards

– With pay stubs

– On patrol car electronic display terminals

– Two-way pager informational notices

– “Just in time” education (e.g., short videos, online education)

•	 What types of information should be included in these messages? 

– Reminders to practice proper hygiene (e.g., use anti-bacterial gel) and don personal protective 

equipment (PPE) when appropriate

– Updates on public health orders and associated enforcement powers

– Descriptions of symptoms and modes of transmission associated with the pathogen causing the 

emergency

– Lists of prevention strategies and rationales

– Reminders to share information with their loved ones

– Sick leave, bereavement leave, and other policy reminders or changes

– Messages that quell rumors about the disease

Communications with Agency Staff 

Most law enforcement agencies have standard operating procedures 

(SOPs) regarding responding to calls involving people who obviously are 

ill or are suspected of being infected with a communicable disease. Such 

SOPs mandate that officers maintain a certain distance between themselves and members of the public44 and that they wear personal protective 

equipment if it is impossible to avoid coming in contact with ill people. 

But the pathogen causing a pandemic flu can be transmitted just as easily from one employee to another as it can from responding to a call for 

service. Moreover, someone infected with the flu can be contagious prior

to exhibiting any symptoms. Once a public health emergency has been 

declared, the agency should consider the following:

44 See, for example: www.osha.gov/

Publications/influenza_pandemic.

html#high_exposure_risk.
Section II: Internal Communication Planning 19 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

What about Officers’ Families?

Efforts to ensure adequate advance communications to educate and prepare law enforcement 

personnel may help an agency maintain critical operations. These efforts may also help the 

agency reduce crime and avoid negative publicity and potential damage to law enforcementcommunity relations during a pandemic or other emergency 

situation. Officers will be more likely to report for duty if they possess 

the information necessary to prepare themselves and their loved ones 

for such an event. 

As law enforcement officials add planning for public health threats 

to their ever-evolving list of planning responsibilities, they are realizing the benefits of advance planning to ensure the safety and wellbeing of agency personnel and their families. This is a critical part of 

planning that will help ensure that agencies have the staff available to 

actually carry out response activities and core agency functions when 

an emergency occurs. But comprehensive searches of academic journals and other media have 

produced the conclusion that little exists in the way of research findings, model policies, or other 

written guidance to help officials develop family preparedness programs or policies specifically 

geared to law enforcement agencies. 

The good news, however, is that there is ample information on general family planning for 

emergencies available on the Internet provided by local, state and other entities,46,47 and law 

enforcement agencies do not have to “reinvent the wheel.” Communicating public health risk 

(and how to mitigate it) to officers’ families can be as easy as identifying those materials that are 

most relevant to the agency and downloading, copying, and disseminating basic family plans to 

all agency employees. It can be as involved as creating an agency-specific dedicated phone line 

and/or messaging system for all employees and their loved ones. 

During the Washington, 

D.C. sniper investigation, 

“We had to guard against 

low spirits in those who 

were away from home.”

SAC Michael Bouchard, 

ATF.

45

45 Murphy et. al., 2004; p. 87. 

46 See, for example: www.ready.gov; 

www.redcross.org; www.ready.gov/

kids/home.html; www.ready.virginia.

gov/makeaplan/index.cfm; 

www.ready.illinois.gov/before/

familyplan.htm; www.ready.

gov/america/makeaplan/; 

www.redcross.org/services/

prepare/0,1082,0_239_,00.html.

47 Also see the forthcoming guide, 

Benchmarks for Developing a Law 

Enforcement Pandemic Flu Plan, for 

more on the importance of family 

preparedness.
20 Section II: Internal Communication Planning

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Law Enforcement Communication

During the 2003 SARS Outbreak

In response to an outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in Toronto in 2003, 

the Toronto Police Service (TPS) activated the Police Command Centre (PCC), which operated 

24/7, under the Incident Management System. The PCC was responsible for (among other 

things):

•	 Dealing with health threats to the TPS and its staff (the biggest of which was the threat of 

contamination of police employees);

•	 Acquiring and disseminating information about the crisis and developing appropriate 

responses to it based on available resources; and

•	 Capturing and recording all information relevant to the TPS for the duration of the event, 

both to respond to the crisis and to use in debriefing exercises after its conclusion. 

The staff at the Police Command Centre included an incident manager, a public information 

officer, and communication operators. Throughout the emergency, the PCC maintained continuous communication and regular briefings with TPS units and the command staff, and spoke 

with other local law enforcement agencies daily. They also recorded and disseminated pertinent, 

accurate information to the TPS staff. 

Source: Andrea Luna, Corina Solé Brito and Elizabeth Sanberg, “Police Planning for an Influenza 

Pandemic: Case Studies and Recommendations from the Field,” Washington, DC: Police Executive 

Research Forum, 2007.
Section III: Interagency Communications 21 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Prior to a Public Health Emergency 

The overall expectation across the country is that public health representatives will develop and deliver public health messages during a public 

health crisis. Law enforcement executives would not be expected to be 

sources of medical information, just as doctors would not be expected to 

explain recent increases in violent crime. But by working together before 

an emergency, law enforcement and other public officials can meet each

other in a calm environment, rather than during a crisis. It is important 

that local officials become familiar with each other and work to coordinate plans and roles during a public health emergency and, if necessary, 

to correct each other’s unrealistic expectations. Furthermore, by working 

jointly with public health officials, law enforcement officials can build

their credibility with the public, so that residents will trust the public 

health messages that law enforcement disseminate during a crisis. 

Lessons learned from recent critical incidents lend credence to this 

statement. Working together before an emergency occurs can help all agencies anticipate and prepare to manage the challenges associated with a 

public health emergency. The important thing is to get the responsible 

officials working together in advance so that when an emergency happens, they will already know each other and will have already discussed 

the issues, and will not need to spend precious time doing the groundwork that could have been done earlier.

Collaborating on communications strategies before a crisis can also 

prevent the following communication failures as identified by CDC:

•	Mixed messages from multiple sources;

•	Delays in the release of information;

•	Delays in anticipating and countering rumors and myths, 

allowing misinformation to spread; and

•	Public power struggles and confusion.50

Section III:

Interagency Communications

48 www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/

pandemic-influenza.html.

49 “Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication: by Leaders for Leaders,” Centers 

for Disease Control and Prevention, 

2006; p. 24. www.bt.cdc.gov/erc/

leaders.pdf

50 Ibid.

“No single entity 

alone can prevent or mitigate 

the impact of a 

pandemic.”48

“What makes a 

crisis communication plan a good 

one? Simple, it’s 

the process used 

to develop the 

plan that determines the value 

of the plan, not 

what ends up on 

paper.”49
22 Section III: Interagency Communications

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

To prevent these failures and to better ensure effective communication, law enforcement must consider working with local public health 

departments to develop and deliver complementary educational messages. Law enforcement should also work closely with local fire and

emergency service providers and hospital representatives when creating 

their messages to demonstrate a “united front” and to increase public 

trust and confidence in the agencies and the messages before and immediately after an emergency strikes. A coordinated response (i.e., one 

that is developed and carried out in conjunction with other local agencies) can be nearly guaranteed with enough preparation by an individual law enforcement agency and its collaborations with other local 

agencies.

Law enforcement executives should consider several issues when 

working with other agencies to create messages:

Questions for Executive Consideration: 

Working with Other Agencies

•	 What are other agency representatives’ expectations of the overall law enforcement role 

in a public health emergency?

•	 Are these expectations reflected in their messages?

•	 What messages about preparing for and reducing risks are already being delivered 

to the public by other agencies?

•	 What are other agency representatives’ expectations of the law enforcement message?

•	 How can the agency complement public health-specific messages to residents?

•	 How can the health department complement law enforcement messages to promote 

law and order? 

•	 What types of information should law enforcement-specific messages contain?

•	 When are the messages to be given?

•	 What are the best media to use?

•	 What are the best times to communicate? 
Section III: Interagency Communications 23 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Once a Public Health Emergency Has Been Declared

Many jurisdictions have plans to activate an Emergency Operations 

Center (EOC) once a critical incident has occurred. As part of this activation, local agencies will typically assign communications staffers to these 

centers or to nearby sites, often referred to as Joint Information Centers, 

or “JICs.”51,52 In some cases, communications representatives from smaller 

agencies might report to a regional JIC, while a larger agency might be 

the only law enforcement agency represented in other centers. FEMA 

writes, “The Joint Information System (or JIS), provides the mechanism to 

organize, integrate, and coordinate information to ensure timely, accurate, 

accessible, and consistent messaging across multiple jurisdictions and/

or disciplines.... Established JICs are critical supporting elements of the 

JIS.”53 In other words, a JIC would be activated as part of an entire JIS 

system in a jurisdiction or region.

At these information centers, public information officers (PIOs) from

law enforcement, fire, and public health departments, local hospitals, and

other local agencies can work to ensure that agency representatives are 

delivering consistent and complementary messages about the emergency. 

Messages should be vetted by the various agency representatives at the 

JIC before they are released. Ideally, the same overall message would be 

released by all agencies, followed by field- or agency-specific information.

Some considerations for communicating with other agencies during a 

public health emergency are listed in the box below:

Questions for Executive Consideration:

Coordinating Communications With Other Agencies

•	 Have personnel been trained in the use and function of a JIC?

•	 If a JIC is activated, who from the law enforcement agency will staff it? Have others been 

trained to replace communications staff if necessary? 

•	 How will what is happening at the JIC be communicated to appropriate agency personnel?

•	 If a JIC is not activated, who will be responsible for working with other agencies? Where should 

this work take place? (While agencies may be hesitant to send their PIOs to JICs that are out of 

their jurisdiction, local JICs must plan to maintain consistent communication throughout the 

event.) Is there a protocol in place?

•	 How can the law enforcement agency facilitate interagency communication? 

•	 How can the agency representative work with others to facilitate media access to the JIC?

Is this issue addressed in the agency’s plan? 

51 A JIC is defined as “a physical location 

where public information professionals 

from organizations involved in incident 

management activities can co-locate to 

perform critical emergency information, crisis communications, and public 

affairs functions.” www.fema.gov/pdf/

emergency/nims/imp_hos.pdf. 

52 See Section V, Working with the News 

Media, for more information on JICs.

53 www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.

do?id=3096.
24 Section IV: Communicating with the Public

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Prior to a Public Health Emergency: 

Community Expectations of Law Enforcement

During any type of emergency, community members look to their local 

law enforcement executive to be the voice of authority, calm and reason, 

and to provide information that will help protect them and enable them 

to make the best decisions possible. 

Because residents are likely to recognize their local law enforcement 

chief or sheriff and are likely to trust messages from these public figures,

law enforcement officials need to be prepared to participate in press

conferences and other media events (both alone and with health officials)

to communicate with the public about flu pandemics and other public

health emergencies—both before and after they happen. 

Section IV: 

Communicating with the Public

54 Murphy et. al., 2004; p. 79.

“The community 

expects the same 

services to be 

provided, crisis or 

no crisis.” 

Captain T.S. 

McInteer, Prince 

William County (VA) 

Police Department.54

Questions for Executive Consideration:

Communicating with the Public About a Public Health Crisis

•	 How can the agency use messages to prepare the community for the changes in law 

enforcement roles that would accompany a public health emergency?

•	 How can the agency prepare personnel to deliver risk reduction and planning information 

to residents?

The principles and rules of risk communication (and communication 

science in general) fit well with those of community policing. Community policing and collaborative problem-solving require regular, two-way 

communication and cooperation among community stakeholders, law 

enforcement, and other government agencies about public safety topics, and a public health emergency almost certainly would impact public 

safety. Many police and sheriffs’ agencies have practices or procedures 

for keeping the public apprised of local crime trends, and they use the 
Section IV: Communicating with the Public 25 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Preparing to Manage Residents’ Concern for Safety

In writing an article on the psychological consequences of terrorism, Dr. Robyn Pangi focused 

on the sarin gas attacks that occurred on Tokyo’s transit system in 1995.55 Pangi explained that 

intense emotions and the desire to forge human contact “are actually rational responses to a 

disaster”—as are fear and anger (p. 3). During the sarin gas attacks, for example, psychological 

effects were more common than were physical effects. In fact, those who were “worried sick” 

about their safety (but not actually affected 

by the gas) “outnumbered physically 

affected victims by a margin of four to 

one” and had a significant negative effect 

on Tokyo’s already stressed medical 

system. Pangi also wrote that during 

the 2001 anthrax attacks in the United 

States, “Psychological casualties easily 

outnumbered physical casualties in the 

anthrax attacks...which resulted in 23 

illnesses and five fatalities, but affected 

millions.”56 While some level of concern 

is good (as it can encourage individuals 

to keep apprised of the emergency), it 

is important that this concern be driven 

by the evidence provided in sound, 

coordinated messages. 

The scenario presented at the beginning of this document (see “About the 

Series”) illustrates two things: the harmful 

effects that fearful residents could have 

on a community and its local law enforcement agency, and the impact that a law 

enforcement agency’s failure to plan could 

have on residents’ fear. Law enforcement 

executives and other public officials must 

be able to understand residents’ heightened emotions and operate effectively in a 

crisis. Effective risk communication messages can help. While residents “may be able to handle the trauma of the actual disaster,” they 

could “be adversely affected by... [an] uncoordinated or unsympathetic response to the disaster.”57 Adequate preventive and preparatory work that results from collaboration between a law 

enforcement agency and other local agencies can facilitate a coordinated response. 

Examples of Concerned Behavior Regarding the

1918 Spanish Flu Pandemic

“We were afraid to kiss each other, to eat with 

each other, to have contact of any kind. We had 

no family life, no church life, no community life. 

Fear tore people apart.” Bill Sardo, whose family 

owned a funeral home in Washington, D.C., during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic.

Quoted in www.pandemicflu.gov/general/

greatpandemic.html#dc

In Detroit, Michigan, an 18-year-old boy said 

that his father “...certainly is scared of the Spanish influenza. I never saw anyone so scared 

as he is. If fright will make you sick, well I do 

believe he will catch the ‘flu’ as sure as anything.” His father was not infected with the flu.

www.pandemicflu.gov/general/

greatpandemic2.html#mi

In Alabama, “the existing hospitals were greatly 

overcrowded with patients; and patients were 

waiting in line several hours for dispensary 

treatment, and were greatly delayed in obtaining 

prescriptions at the pharmacy.”

www.pandemicflu.gov/general/greatpandemic.

html

55 Robyn Pangi, “After the Attack: 

The Psychological Consequences 

of Terrorism.” Perspectives on 

Preparedness, 7, 2002. www.usd.edu/

dmhi/gaj/psyc656/dojguide.pdf. 

56 Ibid. 

57 Ibid.
26 Section IV: Communicating with the Public

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

media to help disseminate messages about crime prevention. Despite the 

fact that public health issues are not a topic commonly addressed by law 

enforcement, law enforcement officials can use their existing community

policing systems, expansive networks with other agencies, and their communication mechanisms to increase public awareness, emphasize public 

health messages, garner support for countermeasures, and, ultimately, 

ensure a calmer, safer response should an emergency occur. 

Inviting local public health, hospital, fire/Emergency Medical Services (EMS), and medical experts along with political leaders to participate in a community meeting can help prepare residents for what 

to expect. The health officials could explain what is being done in the

medical field to prepare for and respond to an emergency and keep

residents safe. The law enforcement representative could share what the 

law enforcement agency is doing along the same lines. Just as important, 

these meetings could also be a forum for law enforcement officials to

explain the potential changes in their roles and the benefits of voluntarily

complying with any public health orders that might be imposed during a 

public health emergency. Law enforcement also should communicate and 

collaborate with the faith community, school officials, and local business

owners. For example, the faith community already often plays a significant role in the handling of casualties, so developing a plan with them (or 

other groups such as the American Red Cross or Salvation Army) ahead 

of time might facilitate the law enforcement agency’s management of 

mass casualties. Local business owners might be able to donate resources 

(e.g., food, water, shelter) to officers and other community members during an emergency. Creating a mechanism by which the law enforcement 

agency can request these services from community groups can help facilitate a more effective response.

Community Volunteer Groups

In many neighborhoods, groups such as Community Emergency 

Response Teams (CERT), Volunteers in Police Service (VIPS), the Medical 

Reserve Corps, and Neighborhood Watch have already been established 

under the umbrella of “Citizen Corps,” a national association of volunteers. These groups meet regularly and bolster the efforts of local police 

and sheriffs’ agencies and other community agencies on crime prevention and critical incident preparedness and response strategies. Members 

of these groups volunteer to help their neighborhoods prepare for and 

respond to emergencies. “The goal,” according to Citizen Corps: A Guide 

for Local Officials, “is to have all citizens participate in making their communities safer, stronger, and better prepared for preventing and handling 

threats of terrorism, crime, and disasters of all kinds.”59

“The critical role 

of individuals 

and families in 

controlling a pandemic cannot be 

overstated.... An 

infection carried 

by one person can 

be transmitted to 

tens or hundreds 

of others. For this 

reason, individual 

action is perhaps 

the most important element of 

pandemic preparedness and 

response.”58

58 www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/

pandemic-influenza.html

59 www.citizencorps.gov/pdf/council.pdf 

(p. 6).
Section IV: Communicating with the Public 27 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Each group established under the Citizen Corps program is preparing its volunteers to deal with man-made and naturally occurring critical incidents, including an influenza pandemic. Local law enforcement

could collaborate with existing groups of this kind or consider creating 

such groups to help communicate information regarding risks to the rest 

of the community before and during the initial stages of a public health 

emergency. (See Appendix D for a general overview of each group and 

descriptions of their roles in preparing for and responding to public 

health emergencies.)

When preparing risk communication messages aimed toward the 

communities they serve, law enforcement leaders should consider the 

following questions: 

Questions for Executive Consideration:

Getting Community Groups Involved

•	 What groups already exist that can help disseminate public health 

messages and/or help with the response? Have these groups 

already developed pandemic flu-related messages that can be 

endorsed or refined by the law enforcement agency for use?61

•	 What roles can schools, churches, and other community 

institutions play in advance communication?

•	 In what languages should messages be written? Are local 

translators already readily available to the agency and willing to 

assist during an emergency? 

•	 Can any community members help neighboring law enforcement 

families plan for the extended absence of a family member in law 

enforcement?

•	 Who will represent the law enforcement agency at community 

meetings? Command staff? Patrol sergeants? 

In Los Angeles, Las Vegas, 

and Florida, for example, 

a device called the “Phraselator” allows officers 

to pre-record and store 

standard law enforcement 

commands in multiple 

languages. Such devices 

could assist officers during 

a public health emergency, 

but they can only communicate one way, so it 

would still be important to 

have a translator on hand 

if possible.62

60 www.dstep.org

61 For example, the National Crime 

Prevention Council has been funded 

by the Bureau of Justice Assistance to develop messages to be 

disseminated by McGruff the Crime 

Dog®, the well-known cartoon figure 

who has been used in campaigns for 

over 25 years (www.ncpc.org).

62 Richard Winton, “LAPD Finds a 

Way to Connect,” Los Angeles Times,

January 16, 2008. www.latimes.

com/news/local/la-me-translate16jan16,0,6435263.story

The Downtown St. Louis Emergency Preparedness Organization (DSTEP) is a 

group composed of local law enforcement and public utilities agencies and owners, 

managers and tenants of the largest buildings in downtown St. Louis. One of their first 

accomplishments was creating a radio communication system that can be activated 

during emergency situations and that allows public safety agencies to send “early and 

authoritative instructions.”60
28 Section IV: Communicating with the Public

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

•	 Who is responsible for working with the mayor’s office 

to determine who will speak and when? What if these 

representatives are not able to report for duty?

•	 How can the law enforcement agency pre-test messages?

– Is the public health department already doing this? If so, can the 

department coordinate efforts with public health? 

– Consider cultural differences that may affect compliance with 

messages (e.g., lack of trust, fear of law enforcement, issues 

associated with immigrants).

•	 What are the best venues for communicating this information to 

residents? 

– It is just as important for law enforcement leaders to communicate 

via “new media” (e.g., text messaging, blogs, Internet forums, social 

networks such as MySpace and Facebook) as it is for them to communicate using more traditional tools (e.g., written materials, television, 

radio, newspapers, flyers posted throughout the community).

•	 Where should print messages for non-English speaking or other 

special populations be posted and/or aired?

63 Murphy et. al., 2004; p. 95.

64 Brandie Jefferson, “Text Messaging Offers Police Another Tool,” The 

Providence Journal, January 12, 2008. 

www.projo.com/news/content/WEB_

CRIME_01-12-08_I48J79Q_v11.2514f49.

html 

65 PERF Project Advisory Panel Meeting, 

December 2007.

66 “Dr. Sandman Addresses Minnesota’s 

Annual Community Health Conference,” found on The Peter M. Sandman 

Risk Communication Website at 

www.psandman.com/articles/

sandman091202.pdf

continued | Questions for Executive Consideration: Getting Community Groups Involved

“When the chief is briefing the media, the PIO 

should always remain 

close by so the chief can 

defer to him or her for 

follow-up, to facilitate a 

clean end to the conference, and the PIO can 

answer the many questions that will be asked 

once the conference has 

ended.”63

“Many cities, including 

Providence, Cincinnati, 

and Fort Worth are using 

text messaging programs 

that can communicate 

and receive messages in 

English and Spanish.”64

What Types of Information Should Messages Include? 

How Should Messages be Sent? 

Experts suggest that messages should answer three questions that the 

person receiving the message will have: Why me? Why now? And what 

can I do?65 Along those lines, Dr. Peter Sandman, an expert in risk communication, explains that those communicating about risks also have to 

give people a range of guidance, from mandatory to optional actions.66

Sandman’s “continuum of advice and recommendations” includes providing community members with information on: 

•	What they have to do;

•	Things they can do that are “desirable but optional;” and

•	Actions they can take that are “completely optional.”
Section IV: Communicating with the Public 29 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Dr. Kathleen Tierney (a professor and director of the Natural Hazards 

Research and Applications Information Center at the University of Colorado) explained that while “television provides dramatic visuals and is 

attention-grabbing,” the images are temporary. People might forget radio 

messages unless they are repeated frequently. Because they can be stored, 

print messages permit readers to have more time to take in the information.67 Experts agree that e-mail, blogs, and podcasts were also excellent 

sources for communicating messages to large groups of people.68 In fact, 

results from a national poll conducted by the Harvard School of Public 

Health showed that 79 percent of respondents would consult a website 

for information about how to protect themselves against avian flu.69 Law 

enforcement leaders could work with medical experts to determine which 

websites are most credible and relevant to their jurisdiction and should 

consider providing links to these sites on their agency website.

Getting the Message to Special Populations

Communicating with special populations (e.g., hearing or visionimpaired residents, older persons, those who speak limited English, the 

homeless) or those who do not have access to certain types of media is 

important. One promising practice can be found in Kentucky. The Kentucky Outreach and Information Network (KOIN), developed by the 

Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services, is a network of 400 

members from the Kentucky State Police, community groups, the faith 

community, health and social service agencies, and the news media.70

Annual workshops help members exchange ideas about raising awareness of disaster preparedness and how best to reach different audiences. 

Together, the group has worked to overcome several communications 

barriers. For instance, one of the organizations that belong to KOIN has 

members who can reach residents on horseback, if necessary. Translating 

messages into Braille has reportedly been a challenge for the group. For 

populations with lower literacy rates, KOIN is developing pictograms 

that depict how to make it through a flu clinic. Law enforcement leaders from more rural areas might consider teaming up with public health 

agencies to identify and determine the best ways to reach out to similar 

populations.

67 Floroiu and Sylves, 2003; p. 4. 

68 E.g., PERF Project Advisory Panel 

Members

69 www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/

press-releases/2006-releases/

press02232006.html.

70 Ayisha Yahya, “Promising Practices for 

Pandemic Planning: Kentucky’s Grassroots Network Helps At-Risk Populations Prepare,” Center for Infectious 

Disease Research and Policy, University 

of Minnesota, January 30, 2008. 

www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/

influenza/panflu/news/jan3008koinpp.

html.
30 Section IV: Communicating with the Public

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Communicating with the Community Once a

Public Health Emergency Has Been Declared

If a law enforcement agency has thoroughly planned for a flu pandemic

or other public health emergency, the response to a crisis will go more 

smoothly. The chief executive will likely appear on television with other 

local officials, speak at press conferences, do radio interviews, and be

quoted in the local newspaper, providing useful information that will 

help the public and other government officials understand the nature of

the crisis and what law enforcement is doing to ensure public safety. The 

executive (and possibly other agency representatives) will project a calm 

demeanor, and will explain what they know, what they don’t know, and 

what the agency is doing to address what they do not know. 

The chief executive will promise to “look into that” (and then follow up) when he or she does not have an answer to a question, and will 

explain such matters as the reasons behind the agency’s reprioritization 

of calls for service. The chief executive and top law enforcement agency 

staff will communicate regularly with representatives from public health, 

medical, and other local public safety agencies to ensure they are sending 

consistent, complementary messages to the public. Following are some of 

the questions underlying effective law enforcement communications with 

the community during a public health emergency: 

Questions for Executive Consideration:

What Law Enforcement Leaders Should Tell the Public During a Crisis

•	 What kind of information should a local law enforcement agency share during the initial stages 

of a public health emergency? 

– Public health orders and their role in enforcing them

– The value of complying with voluntary quarantine and/or isolation or other civil orders

– Reasons behind reprioritization of calls for service

– Reassuring messages (e.g., that the agency is still responding to crime, but that they will be 

focusing their efforts on the most serious incidents while they are short-staffed)

•	 How can a local law enforcement agency continue to keep the community apprised of the 

emergency situation?

– Community listservs, podcasts, website, links with public health department

– Law enforcement leaders could consider offering the public health department use of variable 

message sign boards directing residents to view web sites and/or use information lines 

– Distribute flyers (remember those who do not speak English, the homeless population, and others)

– Local hotline

– Reverse 911

– Non-emergency information line
Section IV: Communicating with the Public 31 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Working with Community Groups

During a Public Health Emergency

In the event of a public health emergency, law enforcement should work 

with community groups to: 1) assess how messages are being received 

and understood by the intended audience, 2) determine which messages 

need to be “tweaked” or updated, and 3) include community leaders in 

the response effort. Many members of Citizen Corps have professional 

training (e.g., in medicine, crowd management, and traffic control) and

can bolster the law enforcement response, particularly when the agency is 

short-staffed.
32 Section V: Working with the News Media

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

The news media can play a significant role in disseminating messages about risk reduction and planning. The Pew Research Center 

for the People and the Press reports that “the average American 

dedicates more than an hour a day to the news.”71 A national study commissioned by the Newspaper Association of America (NAA) on daily 

newspaper readership trends found that about half of adults reported 

reading the newspaper daily in 2007, and more than half reported reading the Sunday newspaper.72 While newspaper readership has declined 

over the past 10 years, online news readership has increased. A 2008 Pew 

study found that the proportion of Americans who say they get news 

online at least three days a week has increased from 31 percent to 37 

percent since 2006, and daily online news use increased by about a third, 

from 18 percent to 25 percent. The Pew study reports that “about as many 

people now say they go online for news regularly (at least three days a 

week) as say they regularly watch cable news (39%); substantially more

people regularly get news online than regularly watch one of the nightly 

network news broadcasts (37% vs. 29%).”73 As one example, each month, 

more than 16 million readers view The Washington Post (and its affiliates)

online, and more than five million of these newspapers are delivered to

“homes, businesses and news racks” each week.74

CDC recently convened 45 focus groups across the country to determine where residents would seek information in the event of a plague 

(the effects of which would be similar to those of an influenza pandemic).

Overall, participants cited mass media first, followed by emergency

responders, local authorities, and medical personnel as critical sources of 

information. Participants in urban areas were more likely to list the media 

first, and those from rural areas named local authorities as their first

source of information.75

The relationship between law enforcement and the news media 

is not always ideal. In the course manual Effective Media Skills for Law 

Section V:

Working with the News Media

71 www.people-press.org/reports/

display.php3?PageID=567.

72 www.naa.org/docs/Research/Daily_

National_Top50_1998-2007.pdf

73 www.people-press.org/report/444/

news-media

74 www.washpost.com/circulation/

index.shtml

75 Ricardo Wray and Keri Jupka, “What 

Does the Public Want to Know in 

the Event of a Terrorist Attack Using 

Plague?” Biosecurity and Bioterrorism

(2):3, July 2004. www.liebertonline.com/

doi/abs/10.1089/bsp.2004.2.208
Section V: Working with the News Media 33 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Enforcement, William Doniel wrote that sometimes the media seem willing 

to go to extremes to guarantee “the public’s right to know.”76 Conversely, 

he says, law enforcement needs to keep the media from compromising 

investigations.77 The truth of the matter, he continues, is that the news 

media depend on the law enforcement for information that is not available to the general public, and law enforcement depends on the media to 

responsibly report that information in the spirit of public service. Furthermore, he states, local reporters know their audiences and can help law 

enforcement officials identify tactics to reach as many viewers as possible.

They could even use this knowledge to help local law enforcement agencies develop risk communication messages. 

Working with the Media Prior to a 

Public Health Emergency

There are several steps law enforcement leaders can take to engage the 

media in communicating about risk reduction and planning. For example, 

they can “encourage the media...to become familiar with the community’s [emergency operations plan], report on training and exercises, and 

participate in awareness and education programs.”78 Reporters can disseminate information about local emergency operations plans with viewers and readers via print and television broadcasts. This can help assure 

the public that local officials are preparing for emergencies and familiarize residents with those plans. 

Dr. James Sewell and other experts suggest some additional ways law 

enforcement can engage the media:

•	Invite reporters on off-the-record “ride alongs” with patrol staff or to 

community meetings where pandemic plans will be discussed;

•	Law enforcement agency representatives can in turn participate in a 

“reverse ride along” with local “crime beat” reporters;

•	Invite reporters to participate in training tabletop exercises;

•	Hold “media round table luncheons” every year to talk about “any 

issues that hinder a good working relationship.” For example, all 

officers from St. Petersburg, Fla. who have regular contact with the

media participate in such an event; and

76 http://cop.spcollege.edu/COP/

training/MediaSkills/Effective%20

Media%20Skills%20-%20Instructor%20

Manual%20%20July%202002.pdf

77 Ibid.

78 Mark Morgan and Paul Camper, “Fear 

Management,” Disaster Recovery Journal

(11):4, Fall 1998. www.drj.com/articles/

fall98/morgan.htm
34 Section V: Working with the News Media

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

•	Consider “lunch and learn” and/or table top exercises with local 

bloggers who write about law enforcement and public health 

emergency issues.79, 80, 81, 82

To ensure a more supportive and collaborative relationship (and accurate message dissemination), law enforcement agencies could take this 

effort one step further: they could provide technical assistance to local 

media outlets developing their own emergency operations plans (including internal and external risk communications plans).

In 2005, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a field guide

titled “Effective Media Communication During Public Health Emergencies.” In it, WHO lists several steps that local agencies should take when 

preparing to work with the media during a public health emergency, 

including: 

•	Assess needs of the media (e.g., understand what they are likely to 

ask, understand the legal and professional constraints that affect their 

ability to cover stories);

•	Develop a written media communications plan;

•	Identify local media outlets (e.g., local television news programs, cable 

TV channels dedicated to local programming, radio news and “talk” 

programs, newspapers, locally-based Web pages); and

•	Plan specifically for the first 24 to 72 hours after a critical event begins.

79 James Sewell, “Working with the Media 

in Times of Crisis: Key Principles for 

Law Enforcement,” FBI Law Enforcement 

Bulletin 76(3): March 2007, pp. 1-7. 

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/

leb/2007/march07leb.pdf 

80 PERF Advisory Panel Meeting, 

December 2007. 

81 See http://archive.hhs.gov/secretarys

blog/my_weblog/2008/03/index.html 

for Secretary of Health and Human 

Services Mike Leavitt’s article Pandemic 

Exercise with Bloggers.

82 See, for example, www.fluwikie.com/ 

and http://birdflujourney.typepad.

com/a_journey_through_the_

wor/2008/07/law-enforcement.html.

CDC (2006) writes, “No matter what the crisis, the following are the questions that will always be asked and should be anticipated [by the law enforcement 

spokesperson]:

•	 What happened?

•	 Are my family and I safe?

•	 What have you found that may 

affect me?

•	 What can I do to protect myself 

and my family?

•	 Who caused this?

•	 Can you fix it?

•	 Who is in charge?

•	 Has this been contained?

•	 Are victims being helped?

•	 What can we expect, right now 

and later?

•	 What should we do?

•	 Why did this happen?

•	 Did you have forewarning?”
Section V: Working with the News Media 35 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

A partnership between law enforcement and the media can benefit

both sides—helping the law enforcement to get their message out, and 

giving the media access to the emergency operations side of the law 

enforcement agency. Most importantly, collaborating with the media to 

disseminate preventive risk communication messages to the public can 

help ensure a more informed, and hopefully calmer, response in the event 

of an emergency. 

As previously mentioned, many police and sheriffs’ agencies have 

PIOs who interact with the media on a regular basis and who may be 

closely involved in developing the agency’s risk communication plan 

and crafting agency messages. While PIOs play an important role in 

an agency’s risk communication plan, it will be important that the law 

enforcement agency’s chief executive be prepared to deliver important 

news briefings during a public health emergency, particularly during crucial moments. Equally important is succession planning in case the chief 

executive becomes ill or is otherwise unable to participate in briefings.

Many jurisdictions plan to activate a JIC in the event of a critical 

incident, in which PIOs from various local agencies can work together to 

keep apprised of the situation and prepare a collaborative media strategy. 

Many law enforcement agencies also have plans to send a representative (typically the PIO) to the JIC. In some areas, the JIC would be located 

within the Emergency Operations Centers, while in others, it may be 

housed in a different location.

The authors of Managing a Multijurisdictional Case: Identifying the Lessons Learned from the Sniper Investigation found that having a JIC located 

in one jurisdiction’s headquarters (versus the Joint Operations Command 

Center) “eased preparations for press briefings that occurred in front of

police headquarters, but it created problems when PIOs wanted to be in 

the JIC” (p. 97). The authors suggest that during a “protracted” event, 

“the agency should identify one permanent site for press conferences, 

briefings and distributing materials” (p. 93). They also emphasize that the

location should allow the agency to maintain control over access and, if 

necessary, establish a security perimeter. It is important to keep members 

of the media close enough to do their work, but “far enough away from 

investigators and other law enforcement personnel so reporters cannot 

interfere with their work” (p. 94). Some leaders may even consider giving 

the media a separate phone number to the JIC. Many reporters will use 

this number sparingly (they will not want to hear a busy signal during a 

crisis), and this would allow the JIC to be as up-to-date as possible. 

Keeping in mind that local public health departments will have a lead 

role in media matters prior to a public health emergency, law enforcement 

leaders should be able to answer the following questions regarding working with the media and developing specific risk communication plans:

83 Murphy et. al., 2004; p. 97.

In one site during 

the sniper investigation, the JIC 

was established in 

police headquarters, and not in the 

Emergency Operations Center. “This 

eased preparations 

for press briefings that occurred 

in front of police 

headquarters, but 

it created problems with the PIOs 

who wanted to be 

in the [EOC].”83
36 Section V: Working with the News Media

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Questions for Executive Consideration:

Working with the News Media

•	 Will there be joint press conferences with other local officials? 

If so, when?

•	 Who will represent the law enforcement agency to the media? 

When will the chief executive personally deliver news briefings? 

Which ones?

– How can the agency prepare/train the agency spokesperson and 

chief executive for delivering key messages during a public health 

emergency?

•	 Who is responsible for working with the mayor’s or governor’s 

office to determine who will speak when? 

•	 If the identified spokesperson is not available because he or she 

has been infected by the flu virus or otherwise taken off duty, who 

will take his/her place?

– The importance of succession planning and preparing others to speak 

on-topic

– It is important to stagger spokespeople whenever possible; “fatigue 

creates mistakes.”85

– Agencies should consider using lower-level law enforcement officials 

(e.g., PIOs) for more routine media requests, and reserve executives 

for “the greatest possible reach and for pivotal moments.”86

•	 Who will update the agency’s communications staff on current 

medical situations and local public health orders?

Law enforcement agencies should consider choosing one person to serve as a liaison to public health agencies. This person will 

be responsible for retrieving the most up-to-date information from 

public health agencies helping to coordinate messages, and delivering law enforcement agency status updates to the public health 

agencies. 

“When finished interacting with the media over 

a several-day period, as 

when we responded to the 

attack on the Pentagon, 

I am emotionally spent. 

The continuous preparation and performance is 

draining.”

Former Chief Edward Flynn, 

Arlington County Police 

Department.87

84 Murphy et. al., 2004; p. 94.

85 “Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication: by Leaders for Leaders,” 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention, 2006. www.bt.cdc.gov/

erc/leaders.pdf

86 Ibid; p. 47.

87 Murphy et. al., 2004; p. 95.

In Montgomery County 

(MD), prior to the sniper 

case, then-Chief Charles 

Moose told the department’s PIO (Captain 

Nancy Demme) that she 

would be handling 90 

percent of routine media 

briefings. “On the morning 

of Day 2, Captain Demme 

said, ‘Chief, I think your 

10 percent is about to 

start.’”84
Section V: Working with the News Media 37 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Once a Public Health Emergency Has Been Declared

Once a public health emergency has been declared, it can be expected that 

the news media will immediately seek information from the law enforcement agency. It is vital that all who are responsible for representing the 

agency to the media are kept apprised of the situation and are prepared 

to speak at the outset of the public health emergency. During the sniper 

investigation, for example, PIOs read newspaper articles to assess community and media feelings about the situation and worked with the 

media before each news conference to identify questions and rumors so 

that the agency’s spokesperson could address them. 

As previously mentioned, while the agency’s public information officers will serve an important role in issuing communications about health 

risks, residents will look to their chief law enforcement executive during 

critical incidents to give the most important briefings. The PIO should

work closely with the executive to prepare him/her for press conferences 

and interviews. PIOs from public health, emergency management, and 

other agencies can support one another during these briefings. If the law

enforcement executive or spokesperson does not answer a critical question, the public might create its own answers (not necessarily based on 

correct information). 

The authors of Managing a Multijurisdictional Case: Identifying the Lessons Learned from the Sniper Investigation write that the media should be 

staged away from the emergency operations center (to prevent them from 

gaining inappropriate access to facilities and to minimize interference 

with investigators). Agencies will need to decide for themselves how to 

solve the challenge between having PIOs stay close to the Joint Operations Center (JOC) (and able to obtain current investigative information 

needed to communicate with the media) and having PIOs stay near the 

media (which may make things more efficient and accessible for the

media), “and maintains a needed buffer between the press” and officers.90

CDC listed two “guaranteed credibility-crushers during a press 

event.”91 The first is having employees other than communications and

command staff participating in the event in the room. While reporters 

will pay attention to the person behind the microphone, they also will 

watch the agency employees standing in the back of the room. Quizzical 

looks, gestures, and whispered comments could very easily be captured 

on videotape and broadcast, weakening the credibility of the message. 

The second “crusher” listed by CDC is assuming that the press conference 

does not start until the executive speaks into the microphone. Again, the 

88 Sewell, 2007; p. 2.

89 Sewell, 2007; p. 3. 

90 Murphy et. al., 2004; p. 97.

91 “Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication: by Leaders for Leaders,” Centers 

for Disease Control and Prevention, 

2006, p. 30. http://www.bt.cdc.gov/erc/

leaders.pdf

“The agency’s chief 

executive and 

spokesperson 

must recognize 

that if they cannot 

promptly provide 

information, the 

media will look 

elsewhere.”88

“If they cannot 

discuss an 

issue (and valid 

reasons not 

to do so will 

occur), they 

should advise 

the media that 

the organization 

cannot release 

the information 

and then give an 

explanation.”89
38 Section V: Working with the News Media

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Preparing for and Participating in Press Conferences

In preparing for press conferences, law enforcement executives should:

•	 Make sure notes, visuals, and other materials are in order;

•	 Anticipate questions and prepare responses;

•	 Prepare a specific message;

•	 Involve the agency’s legal representative, if necessary; and

•	 Practice delivering the message.

Sewell and Demme suggest that a law enforcement executive (and any other agency 

personnel) participating in a press conference should:

•	 Project authenticity and reliability;

•	 Be responsive, yet cautious when answering questions;

•	 Be ready to think on the spur of the moment, and make sure you understand the question 

before answering;

•	 Keep responses and statements simple and to the point;

•	 Be aware of appearance and body language;

•	 Avoid law enforcement jargon and speak clearly;

•	 Avoid using the word “I” when discussing acts performed by other personnel;

•	 Leave the media with a quote that will summarize the agency’s position and serve as a 

“sound bite;”

•	 Tell press contacts where to find additional information (e.g., the agency’s web page, 

e-mailed or faxed press releases);

•	 Date- and time-stamp messages so there is a “trail” of what was said and what the 

spokesperson promised to follow up on;

•	 Provide information in print as often as possible;

•	 Keep copies of all notes used, statements made, and questions answered to ensure 

consistent messages are delivered;

•	 Give copies to other local agency media representatives, allowing them to answer residents’ 

questions exactly as answered by the law enforcement executives during the press conference; 

•	 Send copies of all notes to the PIOs at JICs in other jurisdictions; and

•	 Provide copies to patrol officers, who will be asked the same questions by community 

members. If officers say “I don’t know” or give an answer different from that given at the 

press conference, the result will be doubt and fear.
Section V: Working with the News Media 39 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

media will be watching every move and will gauge the situation by every 

action the chief executive and others take. 

The First Message 

What the law enforcement executive says in the first message to the community during a public health emergency is critical to how the audience 

will feel about the agency’s handling of the situation as a whole. CDC 

lists six essential components of the first official message in a crisis:

1. An empathetic expression (e.g., “I know this situation is alarming and 

you are looking for answers.”);

2. The facts and action steps that have been confirmed;

3. What the agency representative does not know about the situation;

4. The process the police executive is using to address unanswered 

questions (e.g., working closely with public health officials to get

answers);

5. A “statement of commitment” that indicates the agency is going to 

be working with the community for the duration of the event; and

6. How to get more information, and when the executive will be 

delivering the next message.93

It is important to remember that regardless of the type of emergency, 

residents will look to law enforcement executives for reassurance and 

guidance. Keeping all of these suggestions in mind can help law enforcement executives work with other local leaders to present a united front to 

a community during a public health emergency, which can in turn help to 

ensure a resilient community. 

“In a catastrophic 

event, your every 

word, every eye 

twitch and every 

passing emotion resonates 

with heightened 

importance to a 

public desperate 

for information to 

help them be safe 

and recover from 

the crisis.”92

92 Ibid, p. 4. 93 Ibid. 
40 Section VI: Recovery and Incorporating Lessons Learned

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Law enforcement agencies have more experience with “ramping up” 

operations in response to a threat to public safety than perhaps any 

other local agency. Reassigning staff, increasing patrols, and providing guidance to the public during a critical incident or a local increase 

in violent crime is almost second nature to most law enforcement executives. What is not often practiced or written about is the recovery period 

after such an incident. Returning to pre-incident operations takes time 

and energy. And after a pandemic influenza, things may never return to

“normal.” 

Post-Emergency Recovery

The community —let alone the entire world—will look very different in 

the aftermath of a pandemic. One need only recall the changes in society 

after the Columbine school massacre, the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Hurricane Katrina, and other recent critical incidents to understand this. While 

there will be brief “recovery periods” between waves of the pandemic 

(referred to by CDC as “deceleration intervals”), once the virus has finished circling the globe, law enforcement might not look anything like it 

did before. While there may not be much physical damage to an agency’s 

headquarters building, there will not be as many officers available to staff

it. In addition, law enforcement employees may have lost family members or may have witnessed a large number of casualties in their communities, possibly necessitating mental health assistance. There may be 

a delay in obtaining essential and non-essential supplies, and personnel 

might have to “make do” or improvise. 

The composition of a law enforcement agency may be altered, but 

law enforcement communication after an emergency should not change. 

Messages should still be disseminated frequently and honestly to personnel, other agencies, and the community. Rumors must be quelled, and 

Section VI:

Recovery and Incorporating

Lessons Learned

70 www.people-press.org/reports/display.

php3?PageID=567.

71 www.naa.org/docs/Research/Daily_

National_Top50_1998-2007.pdf

72 www.people-press.org/report/444/

news-media

73 www.washpost.com/circulation/index.

shtml

74 Ricardo Wray and Keri Jupka, “What 

Does the Public Want to Know in 

the Event of a Terrorist Attack Using 

Plague?” Biosecurity and Bioterrorism

(2):3, July 2004. www.liebertonline.com/

doi/abs/10.1089/bsp.2004.2.208
Section VI: Recovery and Incorporating Lessons Learned 41 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

messages should be adjusted as necessary. Lessons learned during the 

emergency should be incorporated into news messages as well as communication strategies.

Incorporating Lessons Learned

Law enforcement executives and communications staff should try to identify challenges and successes between waves of a pandemic (if applicable) 

and at the conclusion of the emergency. These “lessons learned” can be 

documented in the agency’s after-action report and incorporated into the 

next draft of the communication plan. Examining how communication 

took place internally, among agencies, with the community, and with the 

media can help ensure a more prepared agency. Following are some questions staff members can consider when documenting lessons learned:

Internal Communication

•	 Was the plan activated at the right time?

•	 Were officers prepared to deliver messages to the community?

•	 Was the communication process documented during the event?

•	 Were there any challenges associated with collecting and disseminating information from 

medical and public health sources?

•	 Did all employees receive messages throughout the event?

– If not, why? How else should messages have been disseminated? Where were the gaps? 

•	 Did the agency choose to provide information to employees’ family members?

– How was it received? Were there any suggestions for improvement?

•	 Were staff absentee numbers adequately communicated?

•	 Was the process of emergency messaging evaluated during the response and were needed 

changes instituted?

•	 Were off-duty and officers ill at home included in the messaging?

Interagency Communication

•	 Were messages coordinated well with those from public health and other local agencies?

•	 Did other agencies understand and support the role of the agency? 

•	 Did law enforcement understand and support the role of public health?

•	 If a JIC was activated, were there any challenges associated with communicating between staff 

detailed to the JIC and others?

•	 What other local institutions (e.g., schools, places of worship) helped with communications?

– What were their impressions of the effectiveness of the law enforcement response?
42 Section VI: Recovery and Incorporating Lessons Learned

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Community Communication

•	 Did messages reach intended audiences? Were messages understood? 

– If not, what can be done to address this challenge?

– Were there particular populations that were harder to reach than others? Why?

– Did the public comply with public health orders?

– Did they use the tools the community provided (e.g., a hotline)? 

•	 Was the agency well represented at community meetings? 

•	 Were the messages disseminated using the best venues possible (e.g., text messaging, television, 

posters)?

•	 Did residents feel they were kept up-to-date by the agency?

Media Communication

•	 Was media coverage of the agency’s activities accurate? Fair?

•	 Did agency spokespersons feel well prepared for press conferences and interviews?

•	 Was the JIC (or other location chosen for press conferences) convenient for personnel?

•	 Did personnel have any trouble going from the JIC to the emergency operations center?

Once these questions are addressed, someone from the agency should 

be in charge of internal briefings and disseminating results to the community. It is important to incorporate all feedback, provide updates to 

residents, and share updated plans with all agency personnel and other 

relevant jurisdictional agencies.
Conclusion 43 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

During any type of emergency, community members look to local 

law enforcement executives for guidance and reassurance; a

public health emergency is no exception. The importance of 

understanding the principles of risk communications and helpful steps 

for developing a law enforcement-specific communication plan are provided in this guide. Having a plan in place before an incident occurs can 

ensure a coordinated response (i.e., one that is developed and carried out 

in conjunction with other local agencies) as well as an effective recovery 

period.

Conclusion
44 About the Police Executive Research Forum

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

About the

Police Executive Research Forum

The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) is a professional organization of progressive chief executives of city, county and state 

law enforcement agencies who collectively serve more than 50 

percent of the U.S. population. In addition, PERF has established formal 

relationships with international police executives and law enforcement 

organizations from around the globe. Membership includes police chiefs, 

superintendents, sheriffs, state police directors, university police chiefs, 

public safety directors, and other law enforcement professionals. Established in 1976 as a nonprofit organization, PERF is unique in its commitment to the application of research in policing and the importance of 

higher education for police executives. Besides a commitment to police 

innovation and professionalism, PERF members must hold a four-year 

college degree.

PERF continues to conduct some of the most innovative police and 

criminal justice research and provides a wide variety of management and 

technical assistance programs to police agencies throughout the world. 

PERF’s groundbreaking work on community and problem-oriented 

policing, racial profiling, use of force, less-lethal weapons, and crime

reduction strategies has earned it a prominent position in the police community. PERF continues to work toward increased professionalism and 

excellence in the field through its publications and training programs.

PERF sponsors and conducts the Senior Management Institute for Police 

(SMIP). This program provides comprehensive professional management 

and executive development training to police chiefs and law enforcement executives. Convened annually in Boston, SMIP instructors include 

professors from leading universities, with the core faculty from Harvard 

University’s Kennedy School of Government. 

PERF’s success is built on the active involvement of its members. The 

organization also has types of membership that allow it to benefit from

the diverse views of criminal justice researchers, law enforcement professionals of all ranks, and others committed to advancing policing services 

to all communities. PERF is committed to the application of research in 

policing and to promoting innovation that will enhance the quality of life 

in our communities. PERF’s objective is to improve the delivery of police 

services and the effectiveness of crime control through the exercise of 

strong national leadership, the public debate of criminal justice issues, the 

development of a body of research about policing, and the provision of 

vital management services to all police agencies. 
About the Police Executive Research Forum 45 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

PERF has developed and published some of the leading literature 

in the law enforcement field. Recently, PERF’s work on the increase in

violent crime during the past two years has received national attention. 

A series of reports in the “Critical Issues in Policing” series—A Gathering 

Storm—Violent Crime in America; 24 Months of Alarming Trends; and Violent 

Crime in America: A Tale of Two Cities—provides in-depth analysis of the 

extent and nature of violent crime and countermeasures that have been 

undertaken by police. PERF also explored police management issues in 

“Good to Great” Policing: Application of Business Management Principles in the 

Public Sector. And PERF produced a landmark study of the controversial 

immigration issue in Police Chiefs and Sheriffs Speak Out on Local Immigration Enforcement. PERF also released two books—entitled Exploring the 

Challenges of Police Use of Force and Police Management of Mass Demonstrations: Identifying Issues and Successful Approaches—that serve as practical 

guides to help police leaders make more informed decisions. In addition, 

PERF has released a series of white papers on terrorism in the local law 

enforcement context, Protecting Your Community from Terrorism: Strategies 

for Local Law Enforcement, which examined such issues as local-federal 

partnerships, working with diverse communities, bioterrorism, and 

intelligence sharing. Other recent publications include Managing a Multijurisdictional Case: Identifying Lessons Learned from the Sniper Investigation

(2004) and Community Policing: The Past, Present and Future (2004). Other 

PERF titles include the only authoritative work on racial profiling, Racial 

Profiling: A Principled Response (2001); Recognizing Value in Policing (2002);

The Police Response to Mental Illness (2002); Citizen Review Resource Manual

(1995); Managing Innovation in Policing (1995); Crime Analysis Through 

Computer Mapping (1995); And Justice For All: Understanding and Controlling 

Police Use of Deadly Force (1995); Why Police Organizations Change: A Study 

of Community-Oriented Policing (1996); and Police Antidrug Tactics: New 

Approaches and Applications (1996). PERF publications are used for training 

and promotion exams and to inform police professionals about innovative approaches to community problems. The hallmark of the program is 

translating the latest research and thinking about a topic into police practices that can be tailored to the unique needs of a jurisdiction. 

To learn more about PERF, visit www.policeforum.org.
46 About the Bureau of Justice Assistance

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

About the

Bureau of Justice Assistance

The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) supports law enforcement, 

courts, corrections, treatment, victim services, technology, and 

prevention initiatives that strengthen the nation’s criminal justice system. BJA provides leadership, services, and funding to America’s 

communities by emphasizing local control; building relationships in the

field; providing training and technical assistance in support of efforts to

prevent crime, drug abuse, and violence at the national, state, and local 

levels; developing collaborations and partnerships; promoting capacity

building through planning; streamlining the administration of grants;

increasing training and technical assistance; creating accountability of

projects; encouraging innovation; and ultimately communicating the

value of justice efforts to decision makers at every level.

To learn more about BJA, visit www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA.
47

Appendix A: WHO Phases, U.S. Government Stages,

and CDC Intervals communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Source: Federal Guidance to Assist States in Improving State-Level Pandemic Influenza 

Operating Plans. Presented to the American States, Territories and District of Columbia 

by the U.S. Government, including: Department of Agriculture; Department of 

Commerce; Department of Defense; Department of Education; Department of Health 

and Human Services; Department of Homeland Security; Department of Interior; 

Department of Justice; Department of Labor; Department of State; Department of 

Transportation; Department of Treasury; Department of Veterans Affairs; Homeland 

Security Council; Office of Personnel Management. On March 11, 2008, available at 

www.pandemicflu.gov/news/guidance031108.pdf.

Appendix A: WHO Phases, U.S. 

Government Stages, and CDC Intervals

WHO Phase

USG Stage

New Domestic

Animal

Outbreak in 

At-Risk Country

0

Suspected

Human

Outbreak

Overseas

1

Confirmed

Human

Outbreak

Overseas

2

Widespread

Outbreak

Overseas

3

First

Human

Case in

N.A.

4

Recovery

6

Spread Throughout United States

5

1 2 3 4 5 6

Inter Pandemic Alert Period Pandemic Period

Figure 2: Periods, Phases, Stages, and Intervals

For planning, intervals provide additional specificity

for implementing state and community level interventions

during stages 4, 5, and 6

CDC Intervals Investigation Recognition Initiation Accel Peak Decel Resolution

Pre-Pandemic Intervals

• Investigation

• Recognition

Pandemic Intervals

• Initiation

• Acceleration

• Peak Transmission

• Deceleration

• Resolution
48

Appendix B. Summary of the Community

Mitigation Strategy by Pandemic Severity communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Interventions* by Setting

Pandemic Severity Index

1 2 and 3 4 and 5

Home

Voluntary isolation of ill at home (adults 

and children); combine with use of antiviral 

treatment as available and indicated.

Recommend†§ Recommend†§ Recommend†§

Voluntary quarantine of household members in 

homes with ill persons¶ (adults and children); 

consider combining with antiviral prophylaxis if 

effective, feasible, and quantities sufficient

Generally not 

Recommended

Consider** Recommend**

School

Child social distancing

•	 dismissal of students from schools and school

based activities, and closure of child care 

programs

Generally not 

Recommended

Consider:

≤4 weeks††

Recommend:

≤12 weeks§§

•	 reduce out-of-school social contacts and

community mixing

Generally not 

Recommended

Consider:

≤4 weeks††

Recommend:

≤12 weeks§§

Workplace/Community

Adult social distancing

•	 decrease number of social contacts (e.g.,

encourage teleconferences, alternatives to 

face-to-face meetings)

Generally not 

Recommended

Consider Recommend

•	increase distance between persons (e.g.,

reduce density in public transit, workplace)

Generally not 

Recommended

Consider Recommend

•	modify, postpone, or cancel selected public

gatherings to promote social distance (e.g., 

stadium events, theater performances)

Generally not 

Recommended

Consider Recommend

•	modify work place schedules and practices

(e.g., telework, staggered shifts)

Generally not 

Recommended

Consider Recommend

Appendix B. Summary of the

Community Mitigation Strategy by 

Pandemic Severity94

94 www.pandemicflu.gov/plan/

community/commitigation.html#XV.
49

Appendix B. Summary of the Community

 Mitigation Strategy by Pandemic Severity communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Generally Not Recommended = Unless there is a compelling rationale for specific 

populations or jurisdictions, measures are generally not recommended for entire 

populations as the consequences may outweigh the benefits.

Consider = Important to consider these alternatives as part of a prudent planning 

strategy, considering characteristics of the pandemic, such as age-specific illness rate, 

geographic distribution, and the magnitude of adverse consequences. These factors 

may vary globally, nationally, and locally.

Recommended = Generally recommended as an important component of the planning 

strategy.

* All these interventions should be used in combination with other infection 

control measures, including hand hygiene, cough etiquette, and personal protective 

equipment such as face masks. Additional information on infection control measures 

is available at www.pandemicflu.gov.

† This intervention may be combined with the treatment of sick individuals using 

antiviral medications and with vaccine campaigns, if supplies are available.

§ Many sick individuals who are not critically ill may be managed safely at home.

¶ The contribution made by contact with asymptomatically infected individuals to 

disease transmission is unclear. Household members in homes with ill persons may 

be at increased risk of contracting pandemic disease from an ill household member.

These household members may have asymptomatic illness and may be able to shed 

the influenza virus that promotes community disease transmission. Therefore, 

household members of homes with sick individuals would be advised to stay home.

** To facilitate compliance and decrease risk of household transmission, this 

intervention may be combined with provision of antiviral medications to household 

contacts, depending on drug availability, feasibility of distribution, and effectiveness; 

policy recommendations for antiviral prophylaxis are addressed in a separate guidance 

document.

†† Consider short-term implementation of this measure—that is, less than 4 weeks.

§§ Plan for prolonged implementation of this measure—that is, 1 to 3 months; actual 

duration may vary depending on transmission in the community as the pandemic 

wave is expected to last 6–8 weeks.
50

Appendix C: Sample Public Health-Specific 

Interdepartmental Communication communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Appendix C: Sample Public 

Health-Specific Interdepartmental 

Communication

Office of the Medical Director

William Hauda II, MD

Craig DeAtley, PA-C

Fairfax CountyPolice Department

Medical Update on:

Staphylococcus Infections

Methicillin Sensitive Staphylococcus Aureus (MSSA)

Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA)

The Centers for Disease Control recently released information

about outbreaks of MRSA infections.

Tuesday October 16, 2007, CDC Press Release: A study published in the 

October 17, 2007, Journal of the American Medical Association established 

the first national baseline for the frequency of MRSA infections in the

United States. Some important details from this study include:

•	Over 94,000 life threatening infections occur each year from MRSA.

•	Nearly 19,000 deaths each year are due to MRSA.

•	 85% of MRSA cases are associated with health care settings.

Also in the news: Ashton Bonds, a senior in Bedford County, Virginia, died 

from an MRSA infection.

What do police department employees and their families 

need to know about these infections?

What are MSSA and MRSA?

Staphylococcus aureus is a bacterium that has always been causing infections in 

humans.

1. Up to half of the population carries staphylococcus aureus on their body, 

particularly in the nose and groin.

2. Transmission occurs by direct skin-to-skin contact or from contaminated 

items or surfaces.
51

Appendix C: Sample Public Health-Specific 

Interdepartmental Communication communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

3. Staphylococcus aureus causes infections commonly referred to as a “staph” 

infection.

4. Staphylococcus aureus has changed its resistance to antibiotics over the 

years. In the 1940’s staphylococcus aureus became resistant to penicillin 

(MSSA). In the 1960’s staphylococcus aureus became resistant to methicillin 

(MRSA).

MRSA is a challenge because the usual antibiotics do not work.

1. Infections from MSSA and MRSA appear identical to the treating physician. 

There may be no clue that the infection is due to a resistant bacterium.

2. Most patients with skin infections can be put on beta-lactam antibiotics 

(such as methicillin) which are effective against MSSA and streptococcus, 

another common cause of skin infections. The increasing prevalence of 

MRSA means that an increasing proportion of those infections will not get 

better and may worsen despite antibiotics.

3.	 Cultures can be difficult to obtain and take a few days to give results,

during which time the patient may get sicker before the correct antibiotics 

are given.

There are myths about MRSA.

1. MRSA is a serious infection. Actually, most MRSA infections are minor. In 

fact, most skin infections from staphylococcus aureus, whether MSSA or 

MRSA, are minor. The concern about MRSA is that the standard antibiotics 

used for skin infections do not work. Most MRSA in the community 

are sensitive to other common antibiotics. Infections from MRSA in the 

hospital, however, are more serious, because those strains are commonly 

resistant to multiple antibiotics and the patients acquiring MRSA in the 

hospital are already sick from other illnesses. An increasing number of 

patients are dying each year from MRSA because staphylococcal infections 

are more commonly MRSA rather than MSSA. When staphylococcus 

aureus enters the bloodstream, it can cause widespread complications such 

as kidney failure, coma, and death.

2.	 MRSA is a super bug, flesh eating bacteria. While MRSA can cause serious

infections, it is not the only one, and it is not (yet) the most common. Other 

“flesh eating” bacteria include streptococcus and clostridium. While MRSA

in the hospital setting can be resistant to most antibiotics, community 

acquired MRSA is generally susceptible to antibiotics, but the correct 

antibiotic must be used to eradicate the infection.

3. MRSA requires special precautions. Actually, only in the hospital should 

special precautions be taken with someone who has MRSA. Anyone in the 

community with a possible staphylococcal infection should be treated the 

same, whether known to be MRSA or not. Any staphylococcal infection can 

be easily spread, but certain precautions can help limit the spread of both 

MSSA and MRSA (as well as herpes, cold viruses, influenza, etc).
52

Appendix C: Sample Public Health-Specific 

Interdepartmental Communication communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Prevention is the key.

1. Certain steps can help prevent you from getting a staphylococcal infection 

as well as other infections such as herpes, influenza, and the cold and

gastrointestinal viruses.

a. Wash your hands often with soap and water or use an alcohol based 

sanitizer.

b. Clean your cuts and scrapes daily with soap and water and place an 

antibacterial ointment on the wound(s) before covering with a bandage 

if the size or location warrants covering.

c. Do not touch other people’s cuts or bandages – if you must touch a 

wound, then wear gloves and wash your hands afterwards.

d. Do not share personal items such as towels or razors.

e. Use an antiseptic wipe or cleaning agent to wipe down any surfaces that 

you touch regularly which are shared among co-workers or the public 

including:

•	 Desk and countertops

•	 Telephones

•	 Food preparation areas

•	 Exercise equipment

•	 Computer keyboards (use wipes designed for this purpose)

•	 Door handles

If you have any concerns about a wound, contact a healthcare professional 

for evaluation.

Especially for:

• Wounds that are red, weeping or draining pus, or associated with a 

fever

• Wounds not healing within your normal healing time

The following websites can provide you with additional information about 

this topic.

1. Centers for Disease Control,

a. Community Acquired MRSA: www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/

ar_mrsa_ca.html

b. Healthcare Associated MRSA: www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/

ar_mrsa.html

2. Mayo Clinic: www.mayoclinic.com/health/mrsa/DS00735

3. Johns Hopkins Medicine: www.hopkinsmedicine.org/heic/patient/

mrsa/index.html
53

Appendix D. Citizen Corps Organizations

and General and Pandemic-Specific Roles communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Organization General Role Pandemic-Specific Role

The Neighborhood Watch 

Program

Created by the National Sheriffs’ 

Association; funded in part by the 

U.S. Department of Justice

www.usaonwatch.org

Charged with starting and 

revitalizing Neighborhood Watch 

programs, which bring together 

law enforcement, private agencies 

and organizations, and community 

members. 

Has a resource link on its webpage 

for watch groups (“USAonWatch 

Pandemic Resource Center”)

Medical Reserve Corps (MRC)

Sponsored by the Office of the 

U.S. Surgeon General

www.medicalreservecorps.gov/

HomePage

Consists of currently practicing and 

retired volunteers trained in health 

care, who will help during critical 

incidents and will be able to help 

with emergency medical response.

Published “Pandemic Influenza 

Planning Guidance for MRC Units”

Community Emergency 

Response Teams (CERT)

Developed by the Los Angeles City 

Fire Department in 1985; currently 

sponsored in part by FEMA

www.citizencorps.gov/cert/ 

Teaches residents about disaster 

preparedness and trains them in 

basic disaster response skills such 

as disaster medical operations.

The Mid-Peninsula Citizen’s 

Preparedness Committee, for 

example, published Pandemic 

Influenza Preparation and 

Response: A Citizen’s Guide See: 

www.newfluwiki2.com/upload/

InSTEDD%20Influenza%20

Manual%20v1-5%20Master-EDR.

pdf. 

Volunteers in Police Service 

(VIPS) 

Sponsored by the International 

Association of Chiefs of Police; 

funded in part by the U.S. 

Department of Justice

www.policevolunteers.org

Provides support and resources for 

agencies interested in developing 

volunteer programs for citizens 

who wish to volunteer their time 

and skills with a community law 

enforcement agency.

Presents case studies of volunteer 

groups that have prepared to 

handle public health emergencies 

such as pandemics 

Appendix D. Citizen Corps Organizations 

and General and Pandemic-Specific Roles
54 Appendix E: Additional Risk Communication Resources

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Baruch Fischhoff, “Gaps in the National Flu Preparedness Plan: 

Social Science Planning and Response,” Remarks on Scientifically 

Sound Pandemic Risk Communication: Briefing for the House 

Committee on Science, 2005. Available at www.healthsystem.virginia.

edu/internet/ciag/conference/articles/s2006/fischhoff_pandemic_

risk_communication.pdf. 

The author discusses the results of previous behavioral research and how 

they provide insights on what can be expected during a pandemic and 

the implications for risk communication. The author also discusses the 

importance of involving subject matter experts, risk and decision analysts, psychologists and communication systems specialists in the process 

of designing and evaluating messages to ensure the research on this topic 

is put to effective use.

Baruch Fischhoff, “The Psychological Perception of Risk.” In Kamien, 

D. The McGraw-Hill Homeland Security Handbook, McGraw-Hill, 

New York, NY, 2006.

In this chapter, Fischhoff writes that effective risk communication requires 

that the communicator: 1) manage risk well, 2) create appropriate communication channels, and 3) deliver information consistently. He applies 

this model to terror-based, health, safety, and environmental risks. 

C. Munsey, “Life-saving Communication,” Monitor on Psychology

(37):3, 2006.

This article is a summary of a Congressional Hearing that addressed 

social science’s role in risk communication. This summary examines key 

points of effective communication, and how to communicate without 

causing unnecessary fear. 

“Communicating in a Crisis: Risk Communication Guidelines for 

Public Officials,” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 

Rockville, MD, 2002. Available at www.riskcommunication.samhsa.

gov/RiskComm.pdf. 

This document is a general resource for public officials on the basic tenets

of effective communications and how to work with the news media. It 

provides public officials with an understanding of the media’s perspective and informational needs for communicating with the public.

Appendix E: Additional Risk 

Communication Resources
Appendix E: Additional Risk Communication Resources 55 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Strategies and techniques for responding to media inquiries to convey 

information and deliver effective messages, before, during and after a 

public health crisis are included. 

“Crisis Emergency Risk Communication By Leaders for Leaders.” 

Atlanta, GA, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006. 

Available at http://emergency.cdc.gov/erc/leaders.pdf. 

This is a document that is based on the experiences of leaders who have 

dealt with various recent crises including the anthrax attacks, the Oklahoma City bombing, SARS, and forest fires. It presents the leader’s role

as a spokesperson in an emergency situation and how the leader should 

communicate with residents, other stakeholders, and the media, while 

stressing that the leader should consult local experts and laws if there are 

questions about message content. The document provides a list of things 

that should be included in the first message after a crisis and a checklist

and worksheets that can help leaders prepare to communicate during a 

crisis. 

E. Gursky, T. Inglesby, and T. O’Toole, “Anthrax 2001: Observations 

on the Medical and Public Health Response,” Biosecurity, and 

Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice and Science (1):2, 2003.

This article describes the medical and public health system’s response 

to the 2001 anthrax attacks. The public health system’s organizational 

successes and failures as well as their internal (i.e., with each other) and 

external communicative abilities (i.e., with the media) were discussed. 

James D. Sewell, “Working with the Media in Times of Crisis: Key 

Principles for Law Enforcement,” FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin

(76):3, 2007. Available at www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/2007/

march07leb.pdf. 

Sewell highlights key principles of working with the media in times 

of crisis and provides tips for law enforcement executives and agency 

media spokespersons. He also provides helpful “Tips for Success with the 

Media.” 

Michael Baker, Fear Management, Disaster Recovery Journal,

11(4),1998.

This article provides a theoretical explanation of fear management and 

recommendations for managing fear in three stages: pre-event (which 

includes mitigation and preparedness), trans-event (includes assessment 

and activation), and post-event (includes response and recovery). The 

author also stresses the importance of assessing the psychological impacts 

of an emergency. 
56 Appendix E: Additional Risk Communication Resources

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

“Model Emergency Response Communications Plan for Infectious 

Disease Outbreaks and Bio-Terrorist Events,” Association of State 

and Territorial Directors of Health Promotion and Public Health 

Education, 2000. Available at: www.astdhpphe.org/bioterr/

bioterror.pdf.

This plan, developed by a group of state and national public health and 

emergency response experts, is designed to assist state and local officials

in coordinating communications efforts on short notice to respond to a 

deliberately planned or naturally occurring infectious disease outbreak. 

The responsibilities of state and local officials are broken down into three

categories: outbreak, consequence, and crisis management. The plan further defines the role of first responders in each category.

Monica Schoch-Spana, “Realistic Expectations about Public 

Responses to Pandemic Flu: Briefing for the House Committee on 

Science,” Gaps in the National Flu Preparedness Plan: Social Science 

Planning and Response, 2005. Available at www.upmc-biosecurity.

org/website/resources/hearings/content/Hearings_2005/20051214-

realisticexpectations.html. 

In response to the release of the National Strategy and the Department 

of Health and Human Services’ pandemic influenza plan, Schoch-Spana

presents three issues which warrant further consideration: 1) the inaccurate anticipation of panicked behavior, 2) the importance of communication, and 3) assuming that residents will comply with all public health 

orders. 

Monica Schoch-Spana, “Biodefense: If Risk Communication is the 

Answer, what is the Question?” Natural Hazards Observer (29)1, 2004. 

This article highlights the unique challenges and goals of communicating 

with residents after events such as biohazard attacks and epidemics. 

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, 

“Volume Two: Homeland Security: A Governors Guide to Emergency 

Management,” National Governor’s Association, Washington, DC, 

2002. Available at www.nga.org/cda/files/GOVSGUIDEHS2.pdf.

This guide provides governors and their staff members with information 

on emergency management. It covers the major homeland security issues, 

including crisis communications; interoperability and disaster communications; and critical infrastructure protection. Specific threats such as

bioterrorism and cyberterrorism are addressed, and federal resources are 

also included. 

“Outbreak Communication Guidelines,” World Health Organization, 

Geneva, Switzerland, 2005. Available at www.who.int/infectiousdisease-news/IDdocs/whocds200528/whocds200528en.pdf. 

This World Health Organization publication is a short guidebook on the 

best practices in outbreak communication. It highlights eight practices 
Appendix E: Additional Risk Communication Resources 57 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

on how to communicate effectively through an outbreak. This guidebook 

helps public health officials promote the goal of rapid outbreak control

with the least amount of disruption to society as possible. 

“Pandemic Influenza. Past, Present, Future. Communication Today 

Based on the Lessons from the 1918-1919 Influenza Pandemic. 

Workshop Proceedings,” Atlanta, GA, Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention, 2006. Available at: www.pandemicflu.gov/general/

workshopproceedings.html. 

These proceedings identify issues and questions that may arise in a 

pandemic and provide information on how to deal with those issues. 

Workshop participants were provided with historical background on the 

1918-1919 influenza pandemic. Next, they listed contemporary issues and

questions that might arise in the event of a pandemic. The article further 

presents guidance for the development of communication materials and 

messages that can be used in the event of an influenza pandemic.

Peter Sandman, “Beyond Panic Prevention: Addressing Emotion in 

Emergency Communication,” 2003. Available at www.psandman.com/

articles/beyond.pdf. 

This article discusses the potential emotional impacts of terrorism and 

other critical incidents and how to best help the public cope with those 

emotions. The focus of the article is on the most common emotions (e.g., 

apathy, concern, denial) and stresses that reactions may be mishandled if 

the communicators are too worried about preventing panicked behavior 

instead, since it is actually relatively uncommon. 

Peter Sandman, “Obvious or Suspected, Here or Elsewhere, Now 

or Then: Paradigms of Emergency Events,” 2003. Available at 

www.psandman.com/articles/obvious.pdf. 

This article, written for the Center for Disease Control’s CD-ROM on 

emergency risk communication, describes how leaders can communicate 

in the midst of a crisis. The author encourages advance communications 

and provides post-event communication recommendations, too.

Peter Sandman, “Anthrax, Bioterrorism, and Risk Communication: 

Guidelines for Action,” 2001. Available at: www.psandman.com/col/

part1.htm. 

The author explains general risk communication theories and how to 

select risk communication strategies based on the type of situation and 

audience. He also explains how the 2001 anthrax attacks and other bioterrorist threats challenge typical risk communication principles. Based on 

the unique challenges associated with these types of threats, the author 

offers 26 recommendations (e.g., don’t over reassure, err on the alarming side, be willing to answer what-if questions, give people a choice of 

actions to match their level of concern, etc.) specific to this type of event.
58 Appendix E: Additional Risk Communication Resources

communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Peter Sandman, “Risk Communications and the War against 

Terrorism: High Hazard, High Outrage,” 2001. Available at: 

www.psandman.com/col/9-11.htm.

In previous work, Sandman identified two paradigms of risk communication: communication for dealing with public relations and communication 

for dealing with stakeholder relations. In this article, he explains how the 

war against terrorism blurs the distinction between the two paradigms. 

This article explores the key characteristics the author believes are associated with the public response to terrorism as it relates to risk communication and provides recommendations for communications. 

Randall N Hyer and Vincent T. Covell, “Effective Media 

Communication during Public Health Emergencies: A WHO Field 

Guide.” World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2005. 

Available at www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/WHO%20

MEDIA%20FIELD%20GUIDE.pdf. 

This guide presents a seven-step process for effectively communicating 

with the media in a public health emergency. The steps are presented in a 

“work book” format and the authors encourage the user to consider local 

and cultural information needs when developing a communications plan. 

This guide is user-friendly and can be used in drafting specific communication plans or setting up guidelines for agency communications with the 

media. 

Ricardo Wray and Keri Jupka, “What Does the Public Want to Know 

in the Event of a Terrorist Attack Using Plague?” Biosecurity 

and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice and Science (2):3, 

July 2004. Available at www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/

bsp.2004.2.208. 

The authors conducted a study using focus groups to identify what the 

public would want to know if there was a terrorist attack that involved 

the purposeful use of the plague. The focus groups revealed that they 

would want to know information about the nature of the threat, how 

to protect themselves, how to detect symptoms, how to treat it and the 

progress in apprehending the terrorists. The findings also showed that the

public would likely look to the news and local authorities for guidance. 

“Risk Communication: Working with Individuals and Communities 

to Weigh the Odds,” Prevention Report. U.S. Public Health Service, 

1995. Available at http://odphp.osophs.dhhs.gov/pubs/prevrpt/

Archives/95fm1.htm. 

This document presents an overview of the principles and history of risk 

communication. The factors influencing risk perception are also listed.
Appendix E: Additional Risk Communication Resources 59 communication and public health emergencies:

a guide for law enforcement

Robyn Pangi, “After the Attack: The Psychological Consequences of 

Terrorism.” Perspectives on Preparedness, 7, (2002).

The author analyzes the psychological effects of the sarin nerve gas attack 

on the Tokyo subway in 1995. This article discusses the psychological 

impact of terrorism and gives recommendations for establishing a mental health plan for Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) terrorism. It 

describes how to manage fear and addresses consequence management 

which describes all of the operations that occur after a disaster to mitigate 

the disaster’s effects and facilitate community recovery. It also makes recommendations on communication before, during, and after the disaster 

and on different training exercises to prepare for such a disaster. 

Ruxandra Floroiu and Richard T. Sylves, “Alerting America: Effective 

Risk Communication—Summary of a Forum, October 31, 2002,” 

National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2003. Available at 

www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10652.

This document provides a summary of the sixth Natural Disasters 

Roundtable Forum. Speakers from the scientific community, media organizations, and local and federal agencies discussed the role of technology, social norms, and risk perception in the dissemination and receipt of 

messages. 
This report is one in a series of three documents created by the Police 

Executive Research Forum (PERF), with support from the U.S. Department 

of Justice, Office of Justice Programs’ Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), 

on the law enforcement response to public health emergencies. 

Communication and Public Health Emergencies: A Guide for Law 

Enforcement identifies the considerations that law enforcement executives 

should address in their public health communications plans, regarding 

internal communications (those that remain within the law enforcement 

agency) as well as external communications (those that go to other 

agencies or the public).

Benchmarks for Developing a Law Enforcement Pandemic Flu Plan is an 

interactive guide that leads the reader through a planning process to help 

ensure continuity of law enforcement operations during a flu pandemic. 

An influenza pandemic is considered one of the most severe types of 

public health emergencies that a law enforcement agency could be called 

upon to handle. The guide provides links to sample plans and templates 

for the reader to download and customize to his/her agency. 

A Guide to Occupational Health and Safety for Law Enforcement 

Executives focuses on steps a law enforcement agency can take to ensure 

the best possible health of the agency’s workforce, including educating 

agency staff members before a public health emergency occurs, so that 

they are better able to protect their health and the health of their loved 

ones. 

The documents in this series are intended to apply to agencies of all sizes 

and types. How the suggested strategies are implemented will no doubt 

vary according to the jurisdiction’s size and other characteristics. 

While these documents can be used as stand-alone resources, readers 

undertaking the pandemic flu planning process will find it useful to refer 

to the communications and occupational health and safety guides as they 

work through the Benchmarks document.