|
Potential strategies for improving the court’s emergency management response plan are identified below. Many of these are drawn from Emergency Management for Courts, prepared by the NCSC’s Best Practices Institute. Courts should consider these strategies in the context of their own jurisdictional culture and resources and modify procedures accordingly.
-
Use empirical information to determine courthouse security improvements.
-
Create/update an emergency management response plan.
-
Increase knowledge and acceptance of emergency plan among judges and court staff.
-
Build/reinforce partnerships with state and local emergency planning agencies.
-
Centralize communications during an emergency.
-
Identify resources while planning.
- Use empirical information to determine courthouse security improvements.
Ask an expert in court security features to conduct an audit of the courthouse to identify specific vulnerabilities. Experts from (a) the National Sheriff’s Association, (b) the United States Marshals Service, or (c) local university programs in law enforcement may be able to assist the court with the audit. The “Examples and Resources,” below, include checklists and discussions regarding the types of information that should be collected and links to organizations that may be able to provide assistance. Some courts also maintain an incident reporting system and database to identify specific problem areas. In addition, court employees are a good source of information regarding potentially vulnerable areas of the courthouse. Where do they feel safe or not safe? Reaching out to the staff also helps to raise the visibility and importance of emergency management.
Some problems may be “easy fixes,” and others may take more time, effort, and/or resources. Empirical information helps courts move forward quickly on those problems they can address, begin planning for more long-term solutions, and provide justifications when seeking additional resources. Without the “big picture,” courts will be tempted to take care of security problems as they arise and may neglect areas that are more serious and urgent.
Examples and Resources
 Return to TOP
- Create/update an emergency management response plan.
It is important to have a plan in place in anticipation of various emergency situations (e.g., breach of courthouse security, natural disaster, electrical outage, bomb threat or explosion). The court’s emergency management committee should determine the critical emergency management issues that should be addressed in the plan. Committee members can refer to the examples of plans in the “Examples and Resources,” below, as a basis for their discussions. The courthouse audit (see Solution #1, above) also may be a source for elements of the plan. One essential component is specifying who is in charge during an emergency. Identifying who will make key decisions will avoid turf battles or delayed or inconsistent responses because of blurred lines of responsibility during a crisis situation.Some courts include disaster recovery in their emergency management response plan, and others create a separate plan for recovery. In either instance, recovery resources in the community should be identified and engaged in the planning process to ensure their availability in a time of need. Self-assessments and recovery planning guides are also listed below.
Examples and Resources
- Cowan, Greg, Alan Neubauer, and Craig Waters. The Technology of Disasters: What you can learn about Court Emergency Preparedness from Hurricane Battered Florida. (click on http://www.icmeducation.org/ctc_web/ if presentations does not load and start)
- Federal Executive Branch. Contingency Planning: COOP Self-Assessment Guide & Checklist. Provides a checklist that can be used to develop a contingency plan. Includes checklists for essential functions, authorities and delegations, alternative facilities, communications, program management, and testing exercises.
- Florida Supreme Court Workgroup on Emergency Preparedness. (2002, March). Keep the Courts Open. A statewide resource for courts to plan for emergencies. See p. 62 for COOP template for local courts.
- New York State Unified Court System. (March 2003). Emergency Preparedness and Response Planning Manual with Appendices. A statewide planning guide that identifies tasks and issues courts need to address to be prepared for a broad range of emergencies.
- New York State Unified Court System. (March 2003). Facility Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan . Provides a template for each court to prepare a response plan in the event of an emergency.
- State of Minnesota Conference of Chief Judges. Court Security Manual. A statewide resource for enhancing court security. See courthouse contingency plans beginning on p. 2-4-1.
- The Wisconsin Sheriff’s and Deputy Sheriff’s Association, U.S. Marshal’s Office of the Western District of Wisconsin, Director of State Courts, Office of the Chief Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Fox Valley Technical College. (2000). Wisconsin Courthouse Security Resource Center . The Center provides training, research, and technical assistance related to security. The document includes Chapter 7 from Wisconsin "Courthouse Security Manual" that discusses creating contingency safety and security plans.
- U.S. General Services Administration Public Buildings Service, Federal Protective Service. (2002, March) Occupant Emergency Program Guide. Discusses essential components of an occupant emergency plan.
Return to TOP
- Increase knowledge and acceptance of emergency plan among judges and court staff.
Regular communications with judges and staff about the emergency management plan are critical to its effective implementation. If time and resources are a problem, consider training staff a little at a time. In addition to an overall emergency plan, some courts create mini-documents customized for specific departments and/or specific crises (e.g., fire, flood, electrical outage). These smaller documents include the basic information each employee needs to know in the event of an emergency and are more user-friendly than the entire plan. One court developed materials specific to the needs of the custodian staff and reviewed and discussed the information with these individuals. This only took approximately fifteen minutes, and the staff was very appreciative of, and later used, the information.
Courts also conduct mock disaster drills to promote understanding of and interest in emergency procedures. Moreover, by practicing these procedures, courts can identify and address problems with the plan while engaging court staff.
Examples and Resources
- Federal Executive Branch. Contingency Planning: COOP Self-Assessment Guide & Checklist. See pp. 11-14 for list of considerations regarding training and testing exercises to ensure the effectiveness of the emergency plan.
- National Sheriff’s Association. (1991). Court security training guidelines and curricula. Washington, DC: National Sheriff’s Association. 1991. (NA4471 P48)
- New York State Unified Court System. (March 2003). Emergency Preparedness and Response Planning Manual with Appendices. See Employee Evacuation Checklist in Appendix C and Evacuation Drill Report in Appendix F.
- State of Minnesota Conference of Chief Judges. Court Security Manual. A statewide resource for enhancing court security. See training outlines beginning on p. 12-1-1.
- The Wisconsin Sheriff’s and Deputy Sheriff’s Association, U.S. Marshal’s Office of the Western District of Wisconsin, Director of State Courts, Office of the Chief Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Fox Valley Technical College. (2000). Wisconsin Courthouse Security Resource Center. The document includes training goals and objectives.
Return to TOP
- Build/reinforce partnerships with state and local emergency planning agencies.
Court emergency planning should involve state and local agencies and emergency management officials. A court system representative should always attend any emergency management meeting (e.g., at the district, regional, or state level). For regions without regular communications between emergency management officials, the court can facilitate these efforts by advocating an ad hoc committee to coordinate them. By networking with emergency management authorities in the community, emergency awareness and planning efforts can be more efficiently coordinated and reinforced.
Examples and Resources
- FEMA. Emergency Management Guide for Business & Industry. Pages 39-40 discuss emergency planning with other community agencies.
- Florida Supreme Court Workgroup on Emergency Preparedness. (2002, March). Keep the Courts Open. Discusses the importance of communication and cooperation in planning for responses to threats and emergencies. State officials in Florida made contacts with state emergency planning agencies to facilitate contacts at the local level. In addition, the state office named an emergency coordinating officer in each circuit and appellate court district whose primary responsibility is to connect with the existing emergency management network in the community.
- Homeland Security Contact List. White House web site: http://www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/contactmap.html
- Murer, A. (2002). Communication is key in court security. In Report on Trends in the State Courts. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts, 2002. Notes the importance of communication with others in community when making a security plan.
- State Offices and Agencies of Emergency Management. Includes state emergency manager’s email address.
Return to TOP
- Centralize communications during an emergency.
Because different communication systems may fail depending on the emergency (e.g., phone lines down, satellite connections blocked, internet unavailable), the court should develop alternative plans for communicating with staff in the event of an emergency. A list of employees and their home address, phone number, beeper, cell phone number, and email address should be accessible to managers in the event of an emergency. “Phone trees” are an example of a low-cost method to keep court staff informed during the initial period following an emergency if the regular communication system is unavailable. Having a designated meeting place during a crisis also helps court officials determine who is missing.
Depending on the emergency, courts may have to contact numerous other individuals who are or could be affected by the crisis (e.g., attorneys, litigants, witnesses, jurors, other justice system and human service agency staff who work with the court, the general public). Courts should prepare a list of individuals who might be affected by a court emergency and determine the best way to communicate with them (e.g., work through the local bar to send a message to attorneys; use the court’s Web site to provide information to the public).
During an emergency, some type of central command communication system is critical. Conflicting messages from different sources will increase anxiety and slow efforts to address an emergency. This is the case for internal and external communications. It is critical that all court communications be consistent and accurate. The court’s leadership should inform the communications point person what information is communicated, when, and to whom. Messages should be operationally simple (e.g., how to contact the court, whether cases will be heard, alternative locations for conducting business) and provide a number or Web site to obtain more specific information. Frequent updates as information is obtained will lessen the public’s anxiety and facilitate the recovery process during an emergency.
Examples and Resources
- Identify resources while planning.
Courts can begin with low-cost planning activities and explore opportunities for additional resources as the planning process unfolds. 9-11 Summit participants reported that costs associated with planning were minimal. In addition, they noted that some improvements, such as developing or modifying outdated policies and procedures and compiling emergency contact information for each employee, can be accomplished with limited resources. As courts reach out to other community and government entities to create an effective plan, they may learn of expertise that resides in the community and funding sources they do not normally access. The Wisconsin Courthouse Security Training Program was accomplished through the joint efforts of the Office of the Chief Justice, Director of State Courts Office, Wisconsin Sheriff’s and Deputy Sheriff’s Association, the U.S. Marshal’s Office for the Western District of Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Office of Justice Assistance, and the Fox Valley Technical College. With the help of their law enforcement partners, the Wisconsin Supreme Court obtained grant funds from the Office of Justice Assistance, and the Technical College helped develop, deliver, and evaluate a “train the trainers” curriculum for 400 county-level leaders across the state. Prior to this effort, the court had not participated in such a comprehensive partnership. New skills and resources were developed using this cooperative model. In addition, training and technical assistance in emergency management may be available from local, state or federal sources outside of the judicial branch. For example, one or more community agencies may offer emergency management training and would be willing to have court representatives participate. Expertise in emergency management also may be available through local law enforcement or local colleges that offer programs in law enforcement and emergency management. These local agencies also may have access to additional resources through their wider emergency management networks. For example, the Office for Domestic Preparedness (ODP), Department of Justice, provides funds to each state to address specific equipment, training, and technical assistance needs to help state and local jurisdictions better respond to incidents of domestic terrorism. ODP and the Naval Postgraduate School also offer a master's degree program in Homeland Defense and Security for government employees. Individuals can determine if they are eligible for the program by visiting the Homeland Security Leadership Development Web site at www.hsld.org. Courts also should include stakeholders and members of the public on emergency planning committees. This not only insures that the public’s voice is included in the plan but also creates community advocates for the plan. The court’s request for funding to implement the plan is likely to be more effective coming from a member of the public. Members of the public arguing for funding to safeguard the courthouse reinforces the idea that the funds are needed for the protection of the public as well as for judges and court staff.
Examples and Resources
- Office for Domestic Preparedness, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2003, March). Homeland security exercise and evaluation program, Volume I: Overview and doctrine. Chapter 1 provides a description of the State Homeland Security Grant Program.
- The Wisconsin Sheriff’s and Deputy Sheriff’s Association, U.S. Marshal’s Office of the Western District of Wisconsin, Director of State Courts, Office of the Chief Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Fox Valley Technical College. (2000). Wisconsin Courthouse Security Resource Center. This is an example of a partnership that provides training, research, and technical assistance related to court security.
Return to TOP
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Previous Step: Step 2: Determine Changes << >> Next Step: Step 4: Prepare Plan
|
