Police Major Incident Command and Response Structure & Multi-Agency Planning in Practice Peter Metcalfe Inspector Cl

1. PoliceMajor Incident Command and Response Structure&Multi-Agency Planning in PracticePeter MetcalfeInspector Cleveland Police Emergency Planning Unit

2. Presentation Aims • Developing the structure • The Police Major Incident Response Structure • Considered advantages • Multi-agency working in practice

3. Police Major Incident Command and Response Structure

4. Government Guidance • Civil Contingencies Act: - • Emergency Response & Recovery • Emergency Preparedness

5. ACPO Guidance

6. Force Guidance?

7. What was already in Place? • Emergency Planning Unit • Generic Response Plan • Other plans – wordy, electronic / paper • Major Incident Training BUT NO STRUCTURE

8. Existing Structure • Initial incident response – send a First Officer • Bronze / Silver / Gold – Operational / Tactical / Strategic Command • Police role responsibilities and considerations • Co-ordination role • Key specialist roles

9. PROBLEM No clear Force ownership of Major Incident response No in-force structure to deliver national guidance Advice and Guidance too wordy SOLUTION Get ACPO support Write a policy / force strategic agreement Produce a 1 pager What to do?

10. First Officer Response S urvey A sses D isseminate C asualties H azards A cess L ocation Emergency Services T ype of incident Start a log & Safety Establish a Forward Command Post &

11. Initial Incident Commander and Silver Command Response

12. Key Specialist Roles • Major Incident Control Room(s) Co-ordinator • Logistics • Evacuation / re-occupation • Media Co-ordinator • Senior Identification Manager (i) Casualty Bureau (ii) Scene Evidence Recovery Manager • Senior Investigation Officer • Initial Reception Centres • Community Safety / Liaison

13. Next Steps • Policy produced • Process Maps Produced • Force Disaster Resilience Group • Training • Exercising • EPU role

18. Results of Structure for Cleveland Police • Generic response structure for any incident – 1 page process map • Identified specialist roles – Gold Cadre • Acceptance of responsibility • Focus for planning • Disaster Resilience Group - audit role • DRG - a forum for key MI issues

19. Results of Structure for Cleveland Police • Clear Force MI response capability • Training linked to the structure • Succession planning linked to structure • EPU role now focussed as: - • Ensuring MI procedures are in place • Links to other agencies • Provide advice to Gold / Silver • A lot of work for PM

20. Next Steps • Sharing the work • Acceptance of structure credibility • Gaining a forum for the work • Doing the work

21. Cleveland to National • Invited to join the ACPO Emergency procedures Manual re-write team • Cleveland Policy expanded for national purpose • Generic approach – Policy & Process Maps • ACPO Training Forum Membership – Link training packages to structure

23. Results of Structure Nationally? • Meets & includes national guidance • Multi-agency links • Scalability • National structure for local implementation • National Training linked to key roles • Can be amended and updated as required • HMI audit capability

24. Multi-Agency Working in Practice

25. Cleveland

26. Background • 1989 Home Office Review for Handling Major Civil Disasters concluded that the response would not be helped by the creation of anything in the nature of a National Disaster Squad. • Prime responsibility for handling disasters therefore remains at local level on local responders

27. Background • Concentrated risks within Cleveland Area: Chemical Industry, Nuclear Site, Teesport, Durham Tees Valley Airport, Transport of Dangerous Goods, Dense Population and Social Deprivation • Joint Control Room / Fall Back position • Partnership Working (Pre Civil Contingencies Act) • Efficiency

28. Some of the Risks

29. Background • 1995 – Cleveland Police operated a dedicated Emergency Planning Unit • 1998 - Feasibility study set up for a joint EPU by the Senior Co-ordinating Group • Membership included – Local Authority, all Emergency Services • Consultation included – Home Office EP Dept, Teesside Chemical Initiative, ETOL and Regional HSE

30. Background • General Support for Joint EPU (i) Local Authority – Yes but reporting issues (ii) Police -Yes (iii) Fire Service –minimal involvement (iv) Ambulance –minimal involvement (v) HSE & Industry –Yes but all must support

31. Cleveland Joint Emergency Planning Unit POLICE AMBULANCE JOINT E.P.U. LOCAL AUTHORITY x 4 FIRE MULTI-AGENCY GROUPS

32. Benefits • Practical Ease:- (i) Same building (ii) Ease of contact - Face to face / Daily (iii) Who to contact – Agency links – ‘One stop shop’ (iv) Information sharing – Formal & informal (v) Sounding Board – Capability study (vi) Cost recovery (vii) National developments - COMAH

33. Benefits • Support: - (i) Similar agendas - planners (ii) Same meetings (iii) Co-located helps develop relationships (iv) Joint Planning – e.g. Temporary Mortuary (v) Joint exercising & training (vi) Efficiency savings (£’s?) (vii) Multi-Agency delivery of the statutory duties under the Civil Contingencies Act

34. Cleveland Meeting Structure Local Resilience Forum Regional Resilience Forum Joint Multi-Agency Cleveland Emergency Planning Unit Cleveland Media Emergency Forum Local Resilience Working Group Warn & Inform Sub-group Exercise PlanningGroup Temporary MortuaryGroup Voluntary Agencies Group Risk Group Local Search & RescueGroup Flood Risk Group Joint EPU User Group

35. Problems? • Agency Styles and working practices • Personalities / Individuality • Different agendas • Internal conflicts Though none of the above have been an issue of concern

36. Support Issues • Civil Contingencies Bill(now Act) • Dealing With Disaster(now Emergency Response & Recovery) • ACPO Emergency Procedures Manual • Integrated Emergency Management • Major Incident Response Capability • Risk Management • Joint Working / Partnerships

37. Actual Issues • Close working relationships • Actual ‘joint’ working - Exercise Guidance Document, Emergency Procedures Manual, Debrief document, plans etc • 2001 Police HMI visit citing Cleveland joint EPU as National Best Practice • National Lead on EP issues i.e. COMAH • Progression & Resolution of issues simplified • Conscious decision for joint working • Beacon Status in Emergency Planning 2007 / 8

38. Civil Contingencies Act 2004 • Risk assessment; • Emergency planning • Co-operation; and • Information sharing • Maintaining public awareness and arrangements to warn, inform & advise the public. • Business continuity management (BCM); • Promotion of BCM to the commercial sector and to voluntary organisations. “The Act supports the Cleveland model or does the model support the Act?”

39. Thank you Any Questions?