a blueprint for emergency preparedness
TRANSCRIPT
The Greater WashingtonTask Force on Nonprofit
Emergency Preparedness
September, 2003
A Blueprint forEmergencyPreparednessby Nonprofits
RepresentativesOrganization
•Greater Washington Board of Trade,Community Foundation of the Nat’lCapital Region
•American Red Cross National Chapter
•Community Foundation of the Nat’lCapital Region
•Eugene & Agnes E. Meyer Foundation
•Fannie Mae Foundation
•Greater DC Cares
•Greater Washington Board of Trade
•Hill and Knowlton
•McKinsey & Company
•Metropolitan Washington Council ofGovernments
•Nonprofit Roundtable of GreaterWashington
•Northern Virginia Family Services
•Salvation Army, National Capital andVirginia Division
•Survivors’ Fund
•United Way of the National CapitalArea
•Washington Business Journal
•Washington Post
•Washington Regional Association ofGrantmakers
Greater Washington Task Force onNonprofit Emergency Preparedness
Exhibit 1
•George Vradenburg, Task Force Chair
•Keith Berkery, Charles Blake,Linda Mathes
•Terri Lee Freeman, Gary Jonas, KathyWhelpley
•Julie Rogers
•Glen Howard
•Siobahn Canty, Stephen McMahon
•Caroline Cunningham, Bob Peck
•Ed Belkin
•Maria Blair, Les Silverman, Jim Simon,Gretchen Zucker
•Dave Robertson
•Chuck Bean
•Larry Shaw
•Molly Lew
•Terry O’Hara Lavoie
•Robert Egger, Arlene Krohmal
•Alex Orfinger
•Ted Lutz
•Kae Dakin
Greater Washington Task Force onNonprofit Emergency Preparedness
Exhibit 1
1
INTRODUCTION
Many things worked very well on the nonprofitfront in the wake of September 11. Donors gavegenerously. A host of nonprofits quickly cametogether to collect funds, manage volunteers, andprovide services to all types of victims.Nonprofits continue to provide crucial services,and they report high levels of victim and donorsatisfaction on many important measures.
But not everything worked. Donors were confusedabout giving options, how funds were used, andfunds sponsorship. Many unnecessary in-kinddonations were collected and transported. Victimsoften had to go to multiple service providers to getthe appropriate services, and they usually did nothave enough information about what was available.Perhaps most important, some providers did notimmediately recognize certain categories of victims(e.g., dislocated workers and temporarily closedbusinesses), who did not receive adequate assis-tance in a timely fashion.
LESSONS LEARNED
Greater Washington’s nonprofits believe that theyhave a responsibility to build on the lessons from9/11 and other disasters. Nonprofit sector emer-gency preparedness is crucial to a comprehensivecommunity emergency plan. The nonprofit, public,and private sectors are the three crucial players ineffective and efficient emergency response.
Against this backdrop, The Community Foundationfor the National Capital Region formed a TaskForce, composed of people from greaterWashington nonprofit and philanthropic organiza-tions, an intergovernmental coordinating body, thebusiness community, media outlets, and a commu-nications firm, to develop a “blueprint” for improvedemergency preparedness. Task Force members
with expertise in relevant fields (e.g., fundraising,volunteer coordination) provided material for initialdrafts of the blueprint; the entire group reviewedand refined these drafts. A team from McKinsey &Company provided overall coordination.
The Task Force agreed that the blueprint should setforth general principles, basic processes, and keydecisions for attracting resources (funds, volun-teers, in-kind donations) and distributing themthrough disaster response and recovery services.Task Force members also articulated five specificcriteria for the blueprint’s design. Against the over-all goal of victim relief and recovery, they agreedthat the blueprint’s proposals should:
• build on and reinforce collaboration among nonprofits,
• ensure coordination with other sectors and geographies,
• create transparency and ensure accountability throughout the nonprofit sector,
• be flexible enough to respond to changing needsand to innovations in service delivery and resource intermediation, and
• be generic enough to apply to a variety of communities.
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Thanks to the hard work, creative thinking, andopen minds of all the people involved in this proj-ect, the Task Force is putting forth a blueprint fornonprofit emergency preparedness that representsa tangible and comprehensive starting point fordetailed community planning. Communities mustbe ready to direct their own emergency responseactivities. While national organizations can provideemergency assistance to local communities, localcommunity planning and decision-making are criti-cal. Local organizations are knowledgeable about
A Blueprint for Emergency Preparedness by Nonprofits
2
and responsive to local needs, and they typicallycarry much if not most of the burden of recovery.
As the diagram below shows, the blueprint is organ-ized around refinements to two core processes. Thefirst process is intermediation of resources (funds,volunteers, and in-kind goods and services) bymarshalling them from donors and distributing themto victims and service providers. The second is serv-ice provision for both response and recovery. Theblueprint also describes three enabling mechanisms:a collaboration network, a communication plan, and akey measures report.
In some communities, local government agenciesmay provide some of the services described below,or they may serve as volunteer intermediaries. Therecommendations in this blueprint apply to localgovernment agencies acting these capacities aswell as to nonprofits.
Given its 9/11 origins, the blueprint focuses onman-made emergency situations that cause manyinjuries and/or deaths and affect a largegeographic area, but it should prove useful in anyemergency requiring the involvement of multiplenonprofit organizations.
3
Resource Intermediation
The core process of resource intermediationinvolves collecting, managing, and distributing thethree types of resources needed to support emer-gency and recovery services: funds, volunteers, andin-kind resources. The process has two goals: toprovide services to victims (which may requiresupport for nonprofits serving victims) and toprovide a giving opportunity for all types of donors.
As the diagram shows, the resource intermediationprocess has four steps: prepare, assess needs,solicit resources, and manage/distribute resources.The blueprint calls for targeted enhancements to thisprocess for each of the three types of resources.
FUNDS
The objective of funding intermediation is to quicklyand efficiently raise the money needed to supportdisaster response and recovery services to victimswhile building and maintaining trust with donors.Since most service providers are not self-funding,they need resources for providing immediate andlong-term support to victims, including the develop-ment of capabilities to provide such support.Donor trust is essential to raising substantial fundsfor the full scope of emergency needs.
Lessons learned in responding to 9/11 and fromother disasters point to the need for three enhance-ments to the basic fundraising process.
1. Establish simple giving points for donors.Simple giving points for donors are streamlined,coordinated giving mechanisms that offer a clearexplanation of the general purpose of differentfunds. These giving points can educate donors onthe purpose and use of funds, helping to builddonor trust, and on the needs of different groups ofvictims. Simple giving points improve efficiency by
limiting fundraising expense, resulting in morefunds for victims and/or service providers.Although several main donor funds evolved out ofthe 9/11 experience, it took several days for givingpoints to be established, and confusion about thepurpose, use, and sponsorship of different fundshurt relationships with donors.
These kinds of problems can be addressed throughpreparation activities that get funders to collabo-rate on fundraising standards and processes thatenable them to maintain independence or to createjoint funds. More specifically, funders shoulddiscuss fundraising plans (multiple funds, jointfunds, single fund) and prepare the logistics forsimple giving points (e.g., hotlines, websites, P.O.boxes, walk-in centers) so that those donor chan-nels can be activated immediately after a disaster.Donations for disasters are often collected throughworkplaces or places of worship. Funders shouldengage with businesses and religious institutionsin advance about ways to improve transparency andto simplify giving points for donors.
2. Increase transparency to gain trust. Transparencyis the communication of fund intent, fund use, andfund impact to donors, the funding community, victims,and service providers. Transparency helps maintaindonor trust and ensure that all service provider needsare being met.
Transparency can be achieved through plannedregular meetings within the funding community andbetween funders and service providers andthrough media and direct communication to donorsand victims. Agreeing to standards, including poli-cies about types of assistance, victims served, useof funds for services vs. cash benefits, time framefor assistance, and administrative expenses, is acritical activity. In particular, it is important thatservice providers be transparent about the admin-istrative costs needed to receive and distributefunds effectively.
4
3. Work directly with service providers to defineneeds on an ongoing basis. Funders and serviceproviders need to work together to identify resourceneeds and determine how those needs change ormight change over time. In greater Washington,funding intermediaries met on a weekly basis after9/11 to discuss recovery needs and work with serv-ice providers to help meet those needs. This prac-tice, unusual for a funding intermediation process,greatly improved the distribution of funds.
Efforts like this must be inclusive, recognizing thevariety of victims, and flexible, to accommodatechange in both needs and organizations. Fundersshould communicate with the business and govern-ment sectors to ensure adequate and non-duplica-tive coverage of victims’ needs, especially whenthere are needs that exceed nonprofit resources(e.g., assistance to large numbers of unemployedor to small businesses). Funders should alsocommunicate with service providers and otherorganizations familiar with different socioeconomic,cultural, linguistic, and regional populationsaffected by the disaster.
VOLUNTEERS
The objectives of volunteer recruitment and assign-ment are to maximize the number of trained, affili-ated volunteers before a disaster and to activelymanage unaffiliated volunteers. Increased affilia-tion ensures that service providers train andmanage volunteers. Active management of unaffil-iated volunteers by volunteer intermediaries helpsvolunteers provide needed disaster services, keepsafe, and enable emergency responders to performtheir jobs. Volunteer intermediaries can alsosupport nonprofits in using unaffiliated volunteerseffectively. Not incidentally, volunteering providesopportunities for individuals to express sympathyfor and provide tangible support to members of
their community victimized by disaster.
The Task Force’s work has led it to recommendthree enhancements to the basic volunteer inter-mediary process.
1. Educate potential volunteers and nonprofits onthe benefits and processes of affiliation. Affiliatedvolunteers were crucial to emergency response andrecovery during 9/11. They provided valuable,skilled assistance without distracting from the over-all effort.
Community education about affiliation shouldincrease the number of affiliated volunteers.Potential volunteers and nonprofits need to under-stand how affiliation increases and improves volun-teer training, assignment accuracy, and ongoingvolunteer management. In addition to providing thevolunteers needed to respond quickly after a disas-ter, promoting affiliation also helps nonprofits intheir efforts to assess needs and search for skilledvolunteers.
Promoting affiliation is most important during thepreparation phase of resource intermediation, whenvolunteers go through the affiliation process andreceive the necessary training. Volunteer interme-diaries should work with response service agenciesto develop a plan for affiliating volunteers. Thisplan should include the preparation of educationalmessages to the public, an explicit volunteer refer-ral role for volunteer intermediaries, and training fornonprofits in using affiliated volunteers.
2. Create a management system for unaffiliatedvolunteers. A management system for unaffiliatedvolunteers is crucial to assessing, assigning, andmanaging solicited and unsolicited volunteers aftera disaster. Military security at the Pentagonprevented a large number of people from showingup to volunteer, and lines of potential blood donorsstretched for blocks in New York. Active manage-ment of unaffiliated volunteers ensures that volun-
5
teers are matched to service provider needs, whilekeeping volunteers out of danger and out of the wayof emergency responders.
Creating a volunteer management system is apreparation phase task, involving both technologi-cal support and logistical mechanisms for handlinglarge numbers of volunteers. Volunteer intermedi-aries will need to develop profiles of needs for unaf-filiated volunteers during a disaster, coordinatetraining for nonprofits in the effective use of unaf-filiated volunteers, coordinate training for unaffili-ated volunteers, and develop plans for keepingvolunteers safe and out of the way of other respon-ders (including public messages asking volunteersto stay away from disaster sites and safe stagingareas for volunteers who show up anyway).
3. Conduct proactive, ongoing need assessmentwith service providers. In most cases, volunteerintermediaries will need to reach out to serviceproviders to determine the need for volunteers.They should also be prepared to determine needsindependently in case that proves necessary.
A process for continually updating resource needs,led by volunteer intermediaries, will help serviceproviders quickly and effectively meet emergencyneeds. Experience from other disasters showsthat service providers are generally too occupiedwith service provision to regularly assess theirvolunteer needs and communicate with volunteerintermediaries.
Needs assessment occurs immediately after thedisaster and becomes increasingly important asthe recovery continues and victim needs change. Itrequires attention to four key activities: establish-ing a hot-line that nonprofits can use to reportvolunteer needs; establishing a proactive commu-nication system, including escalating contacts(e.g., informal contacts, e-mail and phone survey,deployment of outreach teams to conduct sitevisits); coordinating with other resource and victim
needs assessments; and monitoring emerging andchanging needs.
IN-KIND
The objective of in-kind resource intermediation isto provide goods, services, and products to victimsand service providers while minimizing waste. In-kind resource intermediation must be carefullyprepared and managed to limit the donation ofunneeded resources and to deliver needed dona-tions efficiently. Without appropriate management,in-kind donations can be costly and hamper disas-ter response.
The Task Force believes that two enhancements tothe basic process will lead to more effective andefficient in-kind resource intermediation.
1. Plan for and solicit donations in advance.Service providers routinely say that in-kind dona-tions are the most difficult resource to manage andemploy effectively. From Hurricane Hugo to 9/11,there are many stories of needs going unmet anddonated resources being wasted. In-kind interme-diaries can prevent these kinds of problems byidentifying potential goods, services, and productneeds for a variety of potential emergencies andthen proactively soliciting donations against thoseneeds from public and private sector sources.Services can include direct assistance to victims(e.g., mortgage forbearance, tuition assistance) aswell as participation in response actions (e.g.,logistics in handling donated goods). The stockpil-ing that results from these efforts may be virtual,i.e., in the form of memorandums of understandingand/or contracts.
Planning and solicitation activities are conducted inthe preparation phase to ensure that the neededsupplies are identified and available. Those activi-ties include developing profiles of needs for in-kind
6
goods and services in disasters; if necessary, solic-iting agreements from businesses to donate in-kindgoods and services; coordinating stockpiling of keyin-kind resources with state/local governments,FEMA, and service providers, and working with retailstores on programs to enable victims to use vouch-ers to obtain goods.
2. Educate the public. Like volunteer intermedi-aries, in-kind intermediaries must educate thepublic about needed and unneeded resources.Education will help prevent the waste of both dona-tions and processing resources. There are numer-ous examples of 9/11 media stories, such asthose about rescue dogs, that led to excessive,unsolicited donations, such as cases of dog foodand dog booties.
Education about in-kind resources, which should bedone in the preparation phase and in the solicitationphase, involves preparing public messages aboutdonated goods, including identifying needed goodsand discouraging the donation of unnecessarygoods, and communicating with the public (contin-ued throughout the recovery phase if necessary).
7
Service Provision
The core process of service provision involvesdeveloping response and recovery services anddelivering them to all victims of a disaster. Theprocess’s specific goal is to meet immediate basicand longer term recovery needs for all victims.Service providers must be able to “scale up” theircapabilities to address the needs caused by asubstantial disaster.
As the diagram on page 2 shows, the basic serviceprovision process has four steps: prepare, assessneeds, develop service plans, and deliver services.The blueprint calls for targeted enhancements tothe basic process for both response and recoveryservices.
RESPONSE
The objective of response services is to provideimmediate help to all people affected by a disaster.These services typically cover basics such as food,water, and shelter and, by definition, are limited tothe period immediately following a disaster.Despite this focus, response service providers willoften provide immediate assistance with long-termservices and lay the groundwork for the provision ofrecovery services.
The Task Force’s review of lessons from 9/11 andother disasters points to the need for one enhance-ment to the basic response service provision process:having emergency providers adopt a standard victimintake procedure, including sharing of victim datawith appropriate confidentiality protections.
A standard victim intake procedure specifies infor-mation requirements and a common confidentialityagreement with victims and among serviceproviders. Standard procedures make it easy to
compile databases of needed victim information,quickly identify needs, and quickly link victims toservices. After 9/11, New York service agencieshad difficulty coordinating recovery servicesbecause each emergency response agency hadcreated a unique database and was governed bydifferent confidentiality policies. This meant thatsome victims were contacted multiple times aboutthe same services, while others were not contactedquickly. The New York United Services Groupaddressed these problems by improving servicecoordination through training, meetings and elec-tronic communications among service providers,and development of a shared database. TheAmerican Red Cross and other groups are takingthis experience, as well as experiences from otherdisasters, to develop a nationally deployableshared database for disasters.
Service providers should develop and gain agree-ment to standard intake procedures during thepreparation phase. Specific activities involve gain-ing agreement on common confidentiality forms,building a joint database for victim information, andtraining service providers on database use.
RECOVERY
The objective of recovery services is to providelonger term rehabilitative services such as mentalhealth and employment assistance to all peopleaffected by the disaster. Longer term can oftenmean several years.
The Task Force’s work has led it to recommend twoenhancements to the basic recovery service provi-sion process.
1. Gain agreement on standards of operation. Inan emergency, service providers need to be able toscale up their capabilities quickly through improved
8
cooperation. Such cooperation should includeadopting minimum criteria for record keeping, confi-dentiality, personnel qualifications, training, andfinancial controls. These standards will helpimprove average service quality, and they willenable service providers to share responsibilityamong organizations. Ultimately they will help serv-ice providers earn greater public trust since estab-lished standards can be made transparent todonors. While there are many examples of serviceproviders working together in the 9/11 response,pre-agreed disaster service standards would havemade this cooperation smoother and easier toimplement.
Standards of operation should be set during thepreparation phase, with key potential serviceproviders working together to agree to operationalstandards in critical areas, including record-keep-ing, data-sharing (including protection of confiden-tiality), financial systems, personnel systems, andapproach to supporting recovery workers, and totrain service providers to maintain those standards.
In responding to the 9/11 Pentagon attack,nonprofit service providers in greater Washingtonlearned the importance of case managers in help-ing victims find appropriate services, leverage avail-able resources, and think through and implementrecovery plans for themselves and their families. Asurvey of 9/11 Pentagon victims who had casemanagers revealed that many considered theircase managers as important as the financial assis-tance they received. Communities should considerhow to scale up their capabilities to provide casemanagement to the most-affected disaster victims.
2. Preplan for capacity needs. Preplanning ensuresthat recovery service providers are able to meetvictims’ service needs for an extended time periodand that they can identify and obtain additionalresources where necessary. While the case manager
approach was used effectively after 9/11, a differenttype or scale of disaster may require differentapproaches. Even the case manager approach hadto be quickly scaled up to handle 9/11 capacityrequirements.
This enhancement is made in the preparationphase, so that nonprofits have time to plan forand build additional capacity. Specific activitiesare to identify appropriate recovery servicemodels for various types and sizes of disasters,size the required resources for each model, iden-tify capacity gaps, and create plans to fund andbuild the required capacity for each model.Preplanning should include capacity to addressspecific cultural and linguistic needs of affectedpopulations, who may be better served by emerg-ing and grassroots nonprofits.
9
Enabling Mechanisms
To one degree or another the proposed enhance-ments to resource intermediation and service provi-sion call for collaboration and communicationwithin, across, and beyond those two coreprocesses. This cooperation is especially impor-tant before an event occurs, when nonprofits arebuilding a strong disaster response network.Meaningful improvements in disaster response andrecovery will only occur if nonprofits work togetherand involve representatives from the public andprivate sectors.
The blueprint’s three enabling mechanisms, acollaboration network, a communication plan, and akey measures report, are a direct response to thisoverarching need. The key measures report alsoserves as an important management tool.
1. Collaboration network. Leading nonprofitorganizations or a nonprofit association need toorganize a collaboration task force whose role willbe to link overall disaster preparation efforts bynonprofits. The task force will be responsible forfacilitating and ensuring the completion of key activ-ities; leading efforts that involve the majority of thearea’s resource intermediaries and serviceproviders (e.g., creating single entry point(s) forvictims seeking services); providing forums fordiscussion, information sharing, and collaboration;and deciding on the decision-making structure andprocess for implementing the emergency plan. Thetask force can also connect the nonprofit sectorwith the business and government sectors, linklocal nonprofit activities to those of nationalnonprofits, and share insights and best practiceswith nonprofits in other cities.
The blueprint Task Force’s own work has demon-strated the value of collaboration within and beyondthe community. While some of the formal and
informal networks essential to rapidly resolvingpotential issues and to cooperative preparationplanning already existed, the blueprint processitself led to new networks, strengthened existingrelationships, and facilitated proactive planning ofnetwork objectives and interactions – all of whichwere invaluable in the Task Force’s work.
The proposed collaboration task force should becomposed of representatives from area resourceintermediaries and service providers and fromother networks and sectors, e.g., local businessgroups, local government. Obviously the nonprofitorganizations or nonprofit association organizingthis task force will need to strike a balancebetween broad inclusion (including the perspec-tives of populations with diverse cultural andlinguistic needs) and manageable size in selectingits members.
The collaboration task force should review the waysin which victims’ views are adequately taken intoaccount in the disaster response. The key meas-ures report is one way to obtain feedback fromvictims. In addition, in some disasters it has beenfound useful to include victim representatives indeliberations about disaster response through rela-tively informal means (e.g., by including victims inadvisory groups) and more formal mechanisms(e.g., by including victims on organizational boardsof directors).
2. Communication plan. The greater Washingtonnonprofits had no 9/11-related media communica-tions plan, which resulted in the public receivingmixed messages about volunteer needs, donations,fund use, and the provision of recovery services. Toavoid this unnecessary and unproductive confusionin the future, the collaboration network shoulddevelop a plan for communication with the publicduring response and recovery. People need toknow how they can help and what nonprofits and
10
philanthropies are doing to address victims’ needs.(This communication plan is for communicatingwith the public at large, not with victims about serv-ices; that communication is covered in the serviceprovision process.)
Significant steps can be taken before a crisis toenhance communication with the public if and whena crisis occurs. This planning includes preparingkey messages; drafting written background materi-als; identifying and training potential spokesper-sons; setting up a “dark” web site; planning logis-tics for press briefings; identifying media represen-tatives to contact before, during, and after a disas-ter; and meeting with some or all of those mediarepresentatives to discuss the nonprofits’ plansand address media questions and concerns.
Key messages before a disaster include informingthe public about nonprofit preparation activities andabout opportunities to make donations or to affili-ate as volunteers with nonprofits. During and aftera disaster, key messages include efforts by thenonprofit community to assist victims and informa-tion on the effectiveness of those efforts (using thekey measures noted earlier and discussed next).To convey these messages across diverse socioe-conomic and linguistic populations, considerationshould be given to a diversity of channels ofcommunication.
3. Key measures report. Resource intermediariesand service providers need to publish periodicpublic reports on their emergency response andrecovery activities. These reports should be builtaround key measures such as indicators ofoutcomes for victims, resources donated, use ofresources, effectiveness in meeting victims’ needsand donors’ expectations, and unmet needs.
This performance transparency increases publictrust in the nonprofit sector by letting people know
how their money was used and demonstratingaccountability across the sector. It also helpsnonprofits and other interested parties evaluatedisaster responses and determine how to improvefuture responses.
Major activities in developing and using the keymeasures report include gaining agreement on theexact measures to be tracked; getting feedback ineach area from victims and donors, which can bedone in a variety of ways, e.g., informal contacts,comment/ complaint logs, press accounts, formalsurveys; analyzing that feedback to identify bothunmet needs and lessons for the future; andmaking periodic performance reports to relevantparties and to the public at large.
* * *
The Task Force hopes that this blueprint will proveuseful to nonprofits in many communities toprepare for potential disasters. In the greaterWashington region, Task Force members havebegun to implement these recommendations inpartnership with other nonprofits, the businesssector, and local and federal government agencies.
Support for this project was provided by the Annie E.Casey Foundation, AOL Time Warner Foundation andMcKinsey & Company.
0
AP
PEN
DIX
ES
Topi
cP
age
Prop
osed
enh
ance
men
ts t
o fu
ndin
gin
term
edia
tion
A –
1 t
o A
– 5
Prop
osed
enh
ance
men
ts t
o vo
lunt
eer
inte
rmed
iatio
nB
– 1
to
B –
4
Prop
osed
enh
ance
men
ts t
o in
-kin
din
term
edia
tion
C –
1 t
o C
– 4
Prop
osed
enh
ance
men
t to
res
pons
ese
rvic
e pr
ovis
ion
D –
1 t
o D
– 4
Prop
osed
enh
ance
men
ts t
o re
cove
ryse
rvic
e pr
ovis
ion
E –
1 t
o E
– 4
1
PR
OP
OS
ED E
NH
AN
CEM
ENTS
TO
FU
ND
ING
IN
TER
MED
IATI
ON
Man
age/
Man
age/
dist
ribu
tedi
stri
bute
reso
urce
sre
sour
ces
Pre
pare
Pre
pare
Ass
ess
need
sA
sses
s ne
eds
Sol
icit
res
ourc
esS
olic
it r
esou
rces
•Pr
epar
e si
mpl
egi
ving
poi
nt(s
)•
Con
vene
disc
ussi
ons
amon
gfu
ndin
gin
term
edia
ries
(and
with
ser
vice
prov
ider
s) f
oras
sess
ing
vict
imne
eds
•Ac
tivat
e si
mpl
egi
ving
poi
nt(s
)•
Con
vene
disc
ussi
ons
amon
gfu
ndin
gin
term
edia
ries
toen
sure
eff
ectiv
e,ef
ficie
nt,
and
tran
spar
ent
dist
ribut
ion
of f
unds
•C
reat
e in
form
alne
twor
k of
fun
ding
inte
rmed
iarie
s
•Ag
ree
on c
omm
onst
anda
rds
for
tran
spar
ency
Appe
ndix
A
2
DET
AIL
ON
PR
EPA
RIN
G –
FU
ND
ING
IN
TER
MED
IATI
ON
•Pr
epar
e si
mpl
e gi
ving
poi
nt(s
)•
Asso
ciat
ion
of f
undi
ngor
gani
zation
s/co
mm
unit
y-w
ide
fund
ing
orga
niza
tion
•O
ther
fun
ding
orga
niza
tion
s
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
•Is
sues
add
ress
ed s
houl
din
clud
e
–W
hich
fun
ds s
houl
d be
invo
lved
, in
clud
ing
whe
ther
they
are
joi
nt a
nd w
heth
erge
nera
l or
spe
cific
to
the
disa
ster
–K
ey m
essa
ges
abou
t fu
ndus
es a
nd p
urpo
ses
–C
hann
els
for
solic
itatio
n(e
.g.,
thr
ough
Int
erne
t,m
edia
, w
orkp
lace
s)
Key
con
side
rati
ons
A - 2
•C
reat
e in
form
al n
etw
ork
offu
ndin
g in
term
edia
ries
•As
soci
atio
n of
fun
ding
orga
niza
tion
s/co
mm
unit
y-w
ide
fund
ing
orga
niza
tion
•O
ther
fun
ding
orga
niza
tion
s
•Ag
ree
on s
tand
ards
for
tran
spar
ency
•As
soci
atio
n of
fun
ding
orga
niza
tion
s/co
mm
unit
y-w
ide
fund
ing
orga
niza
tion
•S
tand
ards
sho
uld
help
eac
hor
gani
zatio
n se
t ou
t an
dex
plai
n po
licie
s on
iss
ues
ofco
ncer
n to
pot
entia
l do
nors
,in
clud
ing
polic
ies
on t
ypes
of
assi
stan
ce,
vict
ims
serv
ed,
use
of f
unds
for
ser
vice
s vs
.ca
sh b
enef
its,
time
fram
e fo
ras
sist
ance
, an
dad
min
istr
ativ
e ex
pens
es
•O
ther
fun
ding
orga
niza
tion
s
3
DET
AIL
ON
AS
SES
SIN
G N
EED
S –
FU
ND
ING
IN
TER
MED
IATI
ON
•C
onve
ne d
iscu
ssio
ns a
mon
gfu
ndin
g in
term
edia
ries
(and
with
ser
vice
pro
vide
rs)
for
asse
ssin
g vi
ctim
nee
ds
•As
soci
atio
n of
fun
ding
orga
niza
tion
s/co
mm
unit
y-w
ide
fund
ing
orga
niza
tion
•O
ther
fun
ding
orga
niza
tion
s
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
•Th
ese
disc
ussi
ons
shou
ldse
ek c
ompr
ehen
sive
part
icip
atio
n by
–In
clud
ing
orga
niza
tion
sfa
mili
ar w
ith d
iffer
ent
soci
oeco
nom
ic,
ethn
ic,
lingu
istic
, an
d re
gion
alpo
pula
tions
aff
ecte
d by
am
ajor
dis
aste
r
–C
oord
inat
ing
with
oth
erse
ctor
s to
ens
ure
need
sar
e w
idel
y un
ders
tood
,es
peci
ally
whe
n ne
eds
are
beyo
nd t
he r
esou
rces
of
fund
ing
orga
niza
tions
(e.
g.,
assi
stan
ce t
o la
rge
num
bers
of
unem
ploy
ed o
rto
sm
all
busi
ness
es)
•Th
e di
scus
sion
s sh
ould
be
on-g
oing
to
mon
itor
and
re-
asse
ss n
eeds
tha
t m
ayem
erge
or
chan
ge o
ver
time
Key
con
side
rati
ons
A - 3
4
DET
AIL
ON
SO
LIC
ITIN
G R
ESO
UR
CES
– F
UN
DIN
G I
NTE
RM
EDIA
TIO
N
•Ac
tivat
e si
mpl
e gi
ving
poi
nt(s
)•
Asso
ciat
ion
of f
undi
ngor
gani
zation
s/co
mm
unit
y-w
ide
fund
ing
orga
niza
tion
•O
ther
fun
ding
orga
niza
tion
s
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
Key
con
side
rati
ons
•Pu
blic
izin
g th
e gi
ving
poi
nt(s
)sh
ould
be
a ke
y m
essa
gein
clud
ed i
n th
e ov
eral
lco
mm
unic
atio
n pl
an
A - 4
5
DET
AIL
ON
MA
NA
GIN
G/
DIS
TRIB
UTI
NG
RES
OU
RC
ES –
FU
ND
ING
INTE
RM
ED
IATI
ON
•C
onve
ne d
iscu
ssio
ns a
mon
gfu
ndin
g in
term
edia
ries
toen
sure
eff
ectiv
e, e
ffic
ient
, an
dtr
ansp
aren
t di
strib
utio
n of
fund
s
•As
soci
atio
n of
fun
ding
orga
niza
tion
s/co
mm
unit
y-w
ide
fund
ing
orga
niza
tion
•O
ther
fun
ding
orga
niza
tion
s
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
•Th
ese
disc
ussi
ons
can
impr
ove
effe
ctiv
enes
s in
achi
evin
g co
mpl
ete,
non
-du
plic
ativ
e co
vera
ge o
fvi
ctim
s’ n
eeds
by
enab
ling
each
fun
ding
org
aniz
atio
n to
know
wha
t ot
hers
are
doi
ng t
oad
dres
s th
ose
need
s
•Th
ese
disc
ussi
ons
can
impr
ove
effi
cien
cy b
y sh
arin
gbe
st p
ract
ices
for
gra
nt-
mak
ing
proc
esse
s an
dsy
stem
s
•Th
ese
disc
ussi
ons
can
impr
ove
tran
spar
ency
by
–R
eass
essi
ng s
tand
ards
for
tran
spar
ency
as
need
ed
–D
evel
opin
g cl
ear
unde
rsta
ndin
gson
iss
ues
rela
ted
to f
und
dist
ribut
ion
(e.g
., a
chie
ving
equ
ityof
ass
ista
nce
amon
g vi
ctim
s)
–Id
entif
ying
and
exp
lain
ing
diff
eren
ces
in f
und
polic
ies
–D
esig
ning
key
mes
sage
s an
dpr
ovid
ing
back
grou
nd i
nfor
mat
ion
to b
e in
clud
ed in
the
over
all
com
mun
icat
ion
plan
Key
con
side
rati
ons
A - 5
6
PR
OP
OS
ED E
NH
AN
CEM
ENTS
TO
VO
LUN
TEER
IN
TER
MED
IATI
ON
Man
age/
Man
age/
dist
ribu
tedi
stri
bute
reso
urce
sre
sour
ces
Pre
pare
Pre
pare
Ass
ess
need
sA
sses
s ne
eds
Sol
icit
res
ourc
esS
olic
it r
esou
rces
•D
evel
op p
lan
toaf
filia
te p
re-e
vent
volu
ntee
rs w
ithse
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers
•As
sess
non
prof
itne
eds
for
volu
ntee
rsaf
ter
a di
sast
er•
Impl
emen
t pl
ans
to k
eep
unaf
filia
ted
volu
ntee
rs s
afe
and
out
of w
ay o
f ot
her
resp
onde
rs•
Dev
elop
pro
files
of
need
s fo
run
affil
iate
dvo
lunt
eers
dur
ing
adi
sast
er
•C
oord
inat
e tr
aini
ngfo
r un
affil
iate
dvo
lunt
eers
•C
oord
inat
e tr
aini
ngfo
r no
npro
fits
inef
fect
ive
use
ofun
affil
iate
dvo
lunt
eers
•Ac
tivat
e/sc
ale
up v
olun
teer
int
ake
and
mat
chin
g sy
stem
•C
oord
inat
e tr
aini
ng o
f m
ore
volu
ntee
rs a
sne
cess
ary
•C
ontin
ue t
o tr
ain
nonp
rofit
s on
how
to
use
unaf
filia
ted
volu
ntee
rs e
ffec
tivel
y
•C
oord
inat
ede
velo
pmen
t of
avo
lunt
eer
inta
ke a
ndm
atch
ing
syst
em
•D
evel
op p
lan
toke
ep v
olun
teer
ssa
fe a
nd o
ut o
f w
ayof
oth
er r
espo
nder
sAp
pend
ix B
7
DET
AIL
ON
PR
EPA
RIN
G –
VO
LUN
TEER
IN
TER
MED
IATI
ON
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
Key
con
side
rati
ons
•Le
ad v
olun
teer
inte
rmed
iary
and
asso
ciat
ion
of s
ervi
cepr
ovid
ers
•Vo
lunt
eer
inte
rmed
iarie
s,VO
ADs,
res
pons
ese
rvic
e ag
enci
es
•Pl
an m
ay i
nclu
de p
ublic
mes
sage
s, r
efer
rals
of
volu
ntee
rs t
o no
npro
fits,
and
requ
est
for
staf
f de
tails
fro
mot
her
nonp
rofit
s an
dbu
sine
sses
•D
evel
op p
lan
to a
ffili
ate
pre-
even
t vo
lunt
eers
with
ser
vice
prov
ider
s
•Le
ad v
olun
teer
inte
rmed
iary
and
asso
ciat
ion
of s
ervi
cepr
ovid
ers
•Vo
lunt
eer
inte
rmed
iarie
s,VO
ADs,
res
pons
ese
rvic
e ag
enci
es
•As
par
t of
ove
rall
prog
ram
,so
me
volu
ntee
rs m
ay b
etr
aine
d to
hel
p m
anag
e/as
sist
othe
r vo
lunt
eers
•C
oord
inat
e tr
aini
ng f
orun
affil
iate
d vo
lunt
eers
•C
oord
inat
e tr
aini
ng f
orno
npro
fits
in e
ffec
tive
use
ofun
affil
iate
d vo
lunt
eers
•D
evel
op p
rofil
es o
f ne
eds
for
unaf
filia
ted
volu
ntee
rs d
urin
ga
disa
ster
•Le
ad v
olun
teer
inte
rmed
iary
and
asso
ciat
ion
of s
ervi
cepr
ovid
ers
•Vo
lunt
eer
inte
rmed
iarie
s,VO
ADs,
res
pons
ese
rvic
e ag
enci
es
•Pr
ofile
s sh
ould
inc
lude
bas
icop
erat
ing
need
s an
d ro
utin
ese
rvic
e ne
eds
for
non-
prof
its
•Le
ad v
olun
teer
inte
rmed
iary
and
asso
ciat
ion
of s
ervi
cepr
ovid
ers
•Vo
lunt
eer
inte
rmed
iarie
s,VO
ADs,
res
pons
ese
rvic
e ag
enci
es
•C
oord
inat
e de
velo
pmen
t of
avo
lunt
eer
inta
ke a
ndm
atch
ing
syst
em
•Le
ad v
olun
teer
inte
rmed
iary
and
asso
ciat
ion
of s
ervi
cepr
ovid
ers
•Vo
lunt
eer
inte
rmed
iarie
s•
Mat
chin
g sy
stem
sho
uld
incl
ude
a da
ta b
ase
ofvo
lunt
eers
and
the
ir sk
ills
•Le
ad v
olun
teer
inte
rmed
iary
•G
over
nmen
tem
erge
ncy
man
agem
ent
agen
cies
•D
evel
op p
lan
to k
eep
volu
ntee
rs s
afe
and
out
ofw
ay o
f ot
her
resp
onde
rs
•Pl
an m
ay i
nclu
de p
ublic
mes
sage
s as
king
vol
unte
ers
to s
tay
away
fro
m d
isas
ter
site
s an
d sa
fe s
tagi
ng a
reas
for
volu
ntee
rs w
ho s
how
up
anyw
ayB
- 2
8
DET
AIL
ON
AS
SES
SIN
G N
EED
S –
VO
LUN
TEER
IN
TER
MED
IATI
ON
•As
sess
non
prof
it ne
eds
for
volu
ntee
rs a
fter
a d
isas
ter
•Le
ad v
olun
teer
inte
rmed
iary
and
asso
ciat
ion
of s
ervi
cepr
ovid
ers
•Vo
lunt
eer
inte
rmed
iarie
s,VO
ADs,
res
pons
ese
rvic
e ag
enci
es
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
•A
hot-
line
shou
ld b
e av
aila
ble
for
nonp
rofit
s to
rep
ort
volu
ntee
r ne
eds
•N
eeds
ass
essm
ent
mus
t al
soin
clud
e pr
oact
ive
effo
rts
beca
use
man
y no
npro
fits
may
be t
oo b
usy
to a
sk f
or h
elp
orev
en p
ossi
bly
to r
espo
nd t
oe-
mai
l or
pho
ne c
alls
;pr
oact
ive
syst
em c
ould
incl
ude
esca
latin
g co
ntac
ts,
such
as
–In
form
al c
onta
cts
–E-
mai
l an
d ph
one
surv
ey
–D
eplo
ymen
t of
out
reac
hte
ams
to c
ondu
ct s
ite v
isits
•Vo
lunt
eer
need
s as
sess
men
tsh
ould
don
e in
coo
rdin
atio
nw
ith o
ther
res
ourc
e an
d vi
ctim
need
s as
sess
men
ts
•O
n-go
ing
mon
itor
ing
shou
ldbe
est
ablis
hed
to t
rack
emer
ging
and
cha
ngin
gno
npro
fit n
eeds
for
vol
unte
ers
Key
con
side
rati
ons
B -
3
9
DET
AIL
ON
SO
LIC
ITIN
G A
ND
MA
NA
GIN
G/
DIS
TRIB
UTI
NG
RES
OU
RC
ES –
VO
LUN
TEER
IN
TER
MED
IATI
ON
•Im
plem
ent
plan
s to
kee
pun
affil
iate
d vo
lunt
eers
saf
ean
d ou
t of
way
of
othe
rre
spon
ders
•Le
ad v
olun
teer
inte
rmed
iary
and
asso
ciat
ion
of s
ervi
cepr
ovid
ers
•Vo
lunt
eer
inte
rmed
iarie
s,VO
ADs,
res
pons
ese
rvic
e ag
enci
es
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
Key
con
side
rati
ons
•Ac
tivat
e/sc
ale
up v
olun
teer
inta
ke a
nd m
atch
ing
syst
em•
Lead
vol
unte
erin
term
edia
ry a
ndas
soci
atio
n of
ser
vice
prov
ider
s
•Vo
lunt
eer
inte
rmed
iarie
s,VO
ADs,
res
pons
ese
rvic
e ag
enci
es
•In
take
sys
tem
sho
uld
acco
mm
odat
e w
alk-
ins,
e-
mai
ls,
and
phon
e in
quiri
es
•In
take
/mat
chin
g sy
stem
shou
ld i
nclu
de r
egul
arco
mm
unic
atio
ns w
ith
volu
ntee
rs,
who
app
reci
ate
–O
ppor
tuni
ties
to
expr
ess
sym
path
y an
d gr
ief
–B
eing
kep
t in
form
ed o
fov
eral
l si
tuat
ion,
vol
unte
erne
eds
and
role
s, a
ndim
pact
of
thei
r ef
fort
s•
Coo
rdin
ate
trai
ning
of
mor
evo
lunt
eers
as
nece
ssar
y•
Lead
vol
unte
erin
term
edia
ry a
ndas
soci
atio
n of
ser
vice
prov
ider
s
•Vo
lunt
eer
inte
rmed
iarie
s,VO
ADs,
res
pons
ese
rvic
e ag
enci
es
•C
ontin
ue t
o tr
ain
nonp
rofit
son
how
to
use
unaf
filia
ted
volu
ntee
rs e
ffec
tivel
y
•Le
ad v
olun
teer
inte
rmed
iary
and
asso
ciat
ion
of s
ervi
cepr
ovid
ers
•Vo
lunt
eer
inte
rmed
iarie
s,VO
ADs,
res
pons
ese
rvic
e ag
enci
esB
- 4
10
PR
OP
OS
ED E
NH
AN
CEM
ENTS
TO
IN
-KIN
D I
NTE
RM
EDIA
TIO
N Man
age/
Man
age/
dist
ribu
tedi
stri
bute
reso
urce
sre
sour
ces
Pre
pare
Pre
pare
Ass
ess
need
sA
sses
s ne
eds
Sol
icit
res
ourc
esS
olic
it r
esou
rces
•As
sess
non
prof
itne
eds
for
in-k
ind
good
s an
d se
rvic
esaf
ter
a di
sast
er•
Activ
ate
syst
em f
or d
onat
ed-g
oods
int
ake,
logi
stic
s, a
nd m
atch
ing
good
s to
nee
ds
•D
evel
op p
rofil
es o
fne
eds
for
in-k
ind
good
s an
d se
rvic
esin
dis
aste
rs
•S
olic
it ag
reem
ents
from
bus
ines
ses
todo
nate
in-
kind
goo
dsan
d se
rvic
es if
nece
ssar
y
•Im
plem
ent
com
mun
icat
ion
plan
abo
utdo
nate
d go
ods
•C
oord
inat
eno
npro
fits
with
capa
city
to
hand
lelo
gist
ics
of i
n-ki
ndgo
ods
•C
oord
inat
e m
atch
ing
of i
n-ki
nd s
ervi
ces
tone
eds
•C
oord
inat
ede
velo
pmen
t of
ado
nate
d-go
ods
inta
ke,
logi
stic
s, a
ndm
atch
ing
syst
em
•C
oord
inat
est
ockp
iling
of
key
good
s
•Pr
epar
e pu
blic
mes
sage
s ab
out
dona
ted
good
sAp
pend
ix C
11
DET
AIL
ON
PR
EPA
RIN
G –
IN
-KIN
D I
NTE
RM
EDIA
TIO
N
•D
evel
op p
rofil
es o
f ne
eds
for
in-k
ind
good
s an
d se
rvic
es i
ndi
sast
ers
•Le
advo
lunt
eer/
fund
ing/
in-
kind
int
erm
edia
ry
•Fu
ndin
gin
term
edia
ries,
food
/clo
thin
g/ho
usin
g se
rvic
eor
gani
zatio
ns,
FEM
A
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
•Pr
epar
e pu
blic
mes
sage
sab
out
dona
ted
good
s•
Lead
volu
ntee
r/fu
ndin
g/ i
n-ki
nd i
nter
med
iary
•O
ther
res
ourc
ein
term
edia
ries
•A
key
serv
ice
may
inc
lude
who
lesa
le a
ppro
ach
topa
ymen
t pr
oble
ms
due
tolo
st p
erso
nal
and
busi
ness
inco
me
caus
ed b
y di
sast
er
Key
con
side
rati
ons
•C
oord
inat
e no
npro
fits
with
capa
city
to
hand
le l
ogis
tics
ofin
-kin
d go
ods
•Le
advo
lunt
eer/
fund
ing/
in-
kind
int
erm
edia
ry
•Fo
od/c
loth
ing/
hous
ing
serv
ice
orga
niza
tion
s,re
ligio
usor
gani
zation
s
•M
essa
ges
shou
ld i
dent
ifyne
eded
goo
ds a
nd d
isco
urag
edo
natio
n of
unn
eces
sary
good
s
•S
olic
it ag
reem
ents
fro
mbu
sine
sses
to
dona
te i
n-ki
ndgo
ods
and
serv
ices
if
nece
ssar
y
•Le
advo
lunt
eer/
fund
ing/
in-
kind
int
erm
edia
ry•
Bus
ines
sas
soci
atio
ns
•In
-kin
d se
rvic
es m
ay i
nclu
de
–Lo
gist
ics
for
dona
ted
good
s
–In
form
atio
n/co
mm
unic
atio
nsy
stem
s
–D
ebt
forg
iven
ess/
mor
ator
ium
s fo
r di
sast
ervi
ctim
s•
Coo
rdin
ate
deve
lopm
ent
of a
dona
ted-
good
s in
take
,lo
gist
ics,
and
mat
chin
gsy
stem
•Le
advo
lunt
eer/
fund
ing/
in-
kind
int
erm
edia
ry
•R
espo
nse
and
reco
very
ser
vice
agen
cies
•C
oord
inat
e st
ockp
iling
of
key
good
s•
Lead
volu
ntee
r/fu
ndin
g/ i
n-ki
nd i
nter
med
iary
•FE
MA,
sta
te/
loca
lgo
vern
men
t, s
ervi
cepr
ovid
ers
C -
2
12
DET
AIL
ON
AS
SES
SIN
G N
EED
S –
IN
-KIN
D I
NTE
RM
EDIA
TIO
N
•As
sess
non
prof
it ne
eds
for
in-
kind
goo
ds a
nd s
ervi
ces
afte
ra
disa
ster
•Le
advo
lunt
eer/
fund
ing/
in-
kind
int
erm
edia
ry
•O
ther
res
ourc
ein
term
edia
ries
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
•As
for
vol
unte
er n
eeds
asse
ssm
ent,
in-
kind
nee
dsas
sess
men
t sh
ould
inc
lude
–A
hot-
line
for
nonp
rofit
s to
repo
rt in-
kind
nee
ds
–P
roac
tive
eff
orts
to
reac
hou
t to
non
prof
its
–C
oord
inat
ion
with
oth
er o
n-go
ing
effo
rts
to a
sses
sne
eds
of v
ictim
s an
dno
npro
fits
seek
ing
to a
ssis
tth
em
–O
ngoi
ng m
onit
orin
g
Key
con
side
rati
ons
C -
3
13
DET
AIL
ON
SO
LIC
ITIN
G A
ND
MA
NA
GIN
G/
DIS
TRIB
UTI
NG
RES
OU
RC
ES –
IN
-K
IND
IN
TER
MED
IATI
ON
•Ac
tivat
e sy
stem
for
don
ated
-go
ods
inta
ke,
logi
stic
s, a
ndm
atch
ing
good
s to
nee
ds
•Le
advo
lunt
eer/
fund
ing/
in-
kind
int
erm
edia
ry
•B
usin
ess
asso
ciat
ions
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
Key
con
side
rati
ons
•C
oord
inat
e m
atch
ing
of i
n-ki
ndse
rvic
es t
o ne
eds
•Le
advo
lunt
eer/
fund
ing/
in-
kind
int
erm
edia
ry
•R
espo
nse
and
reco
very
ser
vice
agen
cies
•Im
plem
ent
com
mun
icat
ion
plan
abo
ut d
onat
ed g
oods
•Le
advo
lunt
eer/
fund
ing/
in-
kind
int
erm
edia
ry
•O
ther
res
ourc
ein
term
edia
ries
C -
4
14
PR
OP
OS
ED E
NH
AN
CEM
ENT
TO R
ESP
ON
SE
SER
VIC
E P
RO
VIS
ION
Del
iver
Del
iver
serv
ices
serv
ices
Pre
pare
Pre
pare
Ass
ess
need
sA
sses
s ne
eds
Dev
elop
ser
vice
pla
nsD
evel
op s
ervi
ce p
lans
•S
uppl
emen
tas
sess
men
t of
resp
onse
nee
ds w
ithor
gani
zation
sle
adin
g th
ere
spon
se (
e.g.
,em
erge
ncy
man
agem
ent
agen
cies
and
VO
ADs)
as n
eces
sary
•S
uppo
rt r
espo
nse
orga
niza
tions
and
supp
lem
ent
thei
r se
rvic
e pr
ovis
ion
asne
cess
ary
•B
uild
and
mai
ntai
nin
form
al n
etw
ork
amon
gno
npro
fits
•Im
plem
ent
com
mun
icat
ion
plan
to
expl
ain
serv
ices
to
vict
ims
•C
oord
inat
e tr
ansi
tion
of v
ictim
s fr
omre
spon
se t
o re
cove
ry s
ervi
ces
•Es
tabl
ish
or p
artic
ipat
ein
com
mun
icat
ion
netw
ork
to a
lert
ser
vice
prov
ider
s of
dis
aste
r
•D
evel
op p
rofil
es o
fdi
sast
er r
espo
nse
need
s
•D
evel
op p
lans
to
impr
ove
tran
sitio
n of
vict
ims
from
res
pons
eto
rec
over
y se
rvic
es
•As
sist
non
prof
its a
ndph
ilant
hrop
ies
inde
velo
ping
bus
ines
sco
ntin
uity
pla
ns
•D
evel
op a
pla
n fo
rsi
mpl
e en
try
poin
t(s)
for
vict
ims
seek
ing
serv
ices
and
assi
stan
ce
•D
evel
op a
pla
n fo
rco
llect
ing
and
shar
ing
info
rmat
ion
on v
ictim
san
d se
rvic
esAp
pend
ix D
15
DET
AIL
ON
PR
EPA
RIN
G –
RES
PO
NS
E S
ERV
ICE
PR
OV
ISIO
N
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
•As
sist
non
prof
its a
ndph
ilant
hrop
ies
in d
evel
opin
gbu
sine
ss c
ontin
uity
pla
ns
•As
soci
atio
n of
non
prof
itse
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers/
maj
orse
rvic
e pr
ovid
er
•N
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s
•B
uild
and
mai
ntai
n in
form
alne
twor
k am
ong
nonp
rofit
s•
Asso
ciat
ion
of n
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s/ m
ajor
serv
ice
prov
ider
•N
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s•
Net
wor
king
sho
uld
exte
ndac
ross
div
erse
com
mun
itie
san
d ac
ross
jur
isdi
ctio
nal
lines
in a
reg
ion
Key
con
side
rati
ons
•Es
tabl
ish
or p
artic
ipat
e in
com
mun
icat
ions
net
wor
k to
aler
t se
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers
ofdi
sast
er
•As
soci
atio
n of
non
prof
itse
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers/
maj
orse
rvic
e pr
ovid
er
•N
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s
•D
evel
op p
rofil
es o
f di
sast
erre
spon
se n
eeds
•As
soci
atio
n of
non
prof
itse
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers/
maj
orse
rvic
e pr
ovid
er
•N
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s
•D
evel
op p
lans
to
impr
ove
tran
sitio
n of
vic
tims
from
resp
onse
to
reco
very
ser
vice
s
•As
soci
atio
n of
non
prof
itse
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers/
maj
orse
rvic
e pr
ovid
er
• N
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s
•D
evel
op a
pla
n fo
r si
mpl
een
try
poin
t(s)
for
vic
tims
seek
ing
serv
ices
and
assi
stan
ce
•As
soci
atio
n of
non
prof
itse
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers/
maj
orse
rvic
e pr
ovid
er
•N
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s•
Key
iss
ues
incl
ude
prov
idin
gco
mpl
ete
info
rmat
ion;
man
agin
gre
ferr
als,
tec
hnol
ogie
s, a
ndco
nfid
entia
lity;
and
acco
mm
odat
ing
mul
tipl
ela
ngua
ges
•D
evel
op a
pla
n fo
r co
llect
ing
and
shar
ing
info
rmat
ion
onvi
ctim
s an
d se
rvic
es
•As
soci
atio
n of
non
prof
itse
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers/
maj
orse
rvic
e pr
ovid
er
•N
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s•
Key
iss
ues
incl
ude
com
mon
data
ele
men
ts,
data
base
arch
itect
ure,
tec
hnol
ogy
plat
form
,tr
aini
ng u
sers
, an
d co
nfid
entia
lity D
- 2
16
DET
AIL
ON
AS
SES
SIN
G N
EED
S –
RES
PO
NS
E S
ERV
ICE
PR
OV
ISIO
N
•S
uppl
emen
t as
sess
men
t of
resp
onse
nee
ds w
ithor
gani
zatio
ns l
eadi
ng t
here
spon
se (
e.g.
, em
erge
ncy
man
agem
ent
agen
cies
and
VOAD
s) a
s ne
cess
ary
•As
soci
atio
n of
nonp
rofit
ser
vice
prov
ider
s/ m
ajor
serv
ice
prov
ider
•N
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
•Le
ad r
espo
nse
agen
cies
hav
eex
perie
nce
in a
nd s
yste
ms
for
asse
ssin
g vi
ctim
nee
ds;
how
ever
, an
ext
rem
e di
sast
erm
ay e
xcee
d pa
st e
xper
ienc
ean
d st
retc
h ex
istin
g sy
stem
s
Key
con
side
rati
ons
D -
3
17
DET
AIL
ON
DEV
ELO
PIN
G R
ESP
ON
SE
SER
VIC
E P
LAN
S A
ND
DEL
IVER
ING
RES
PO
NS
E S
ERV
ICES
•S
uppo
rt r
espo
nse
orga
niza
tions
and
sup
plem
ent
thei
r im
med
iate
res
pons
ese
rvic
e pr
ovis
ion
asne
cess
ary
•As
soci
atio
n of
nonp
rofit
ser
vice
prov
ider
s/ m
ajor
serv
ice
prov
ider
•N
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
Key
con
side
rati
ons
•C
oord
inat
e tr
ansi
tion
ofvi
ctim
s fr
om r
espo
nse
tore
cove
ry s
ervi
ces
•As
soci
atio
n of
nonp
rofit
ser
vice
prov
ider
s/ m
ajor
serv
ice
prov
ider
•N
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s
•Im
plem
ent
com
mun
icat
ion
plan
to
expl
ain
serv
ices
to
vict
ims
•As
soci
atio
n of
nonp
rofit
ser
vice
prov
ider
s/ m
ajor
serv
ice
prov
ider
•N
onpr
ofit
serv
ice
prov
ider
s•
Key
mes
sage
s in
clud
e
–H
ow i
mm
edia
te v
ictim
need
s w
ill b
e m
et
–An
ticip
ated
tra
nsiti
on t
ore
cove
ry
D -
4
18
PR
OP
OS
ED E
NH
AN
CEM
ENTS
TO
REC
OV
ERY
SER
VIC
E P
RO
VIS
ION
Del
iver
Del
iver
serv
ices
serv
ices
Pre
pare
Pre
pare
Ass
ess
need
sA
sses
s ne
eds
Dev
elop
ser
vice
pla
nsD
evel
op s
ervi
ce p
lans
•Pa
rtic
ipat
e in
disc
ussi
ons
with
fund
ing
inte
rmed
iarie
s fo
ras
sess
ing
vict
imne
eds
•C
onve
ne d
iscu
ssio
ns a
mon
g se
rvic
epr
ovid
ers
to c
oord
inat
e re
cove
ry
•Im
plem
ent
com
mun
icat
ion
plan
to
expl
ain
serv
ices
to
vict
ims
•D
evel
op p
rofil
es o
fan
ticip
ated
dis
aste
rre
cove
ry n
eeds
•Id
entif
y po
tent
ial
capa
city
sho
rtfa
llsfo
r d
isas
ter
reco
very
and
deve
lop
plan
for
addr
essi
ng t
hem
•Ag
ree
on s
tand
ards
of o
pera
tion
and
trai
n se
rvic
epr
ovid
ers
inac
hiev
ing
thos
est
anda
rds
•C
reat
e ad
viso
ry/
gove
rnan
cest
ruct
ure
to l
ead
reco
very
pro
cess
Appe
ndix
E
19
DET
AIL
ON
PR
EPA
RIN
G –
REC
OV
ERY
SER
VIC
E P
RO
VIS
ION
•D
evel
op p
rofil
es o
fan
ticip
ated
dis
aste
r re
cove
ryne
eds
•As
soci
atio
n of
nonp
rofit
ser
vice
prov
ider
s/ m
ajor
serv
ice
prov
ider
•S
ervi
ce p
rovi
ders
,go
vern
men
tem
erge
ncy
man
agem
ent
agen
cies
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
•C
reat
e ad
viso
ry/g
over
nanc
est
ruct
ure
to l
ead
reco
very
proc
ess
•As
soci
atio
n of
nonp
rofit
ser
vice
prov
ider
s/ m
ajor
serv
ice
prov
ider
•S
ervi
ce p
rovi
ders
Key
con
side
rati
ons
•Ag
ree
on s
tand
ards
of
oper
atio
n an
d tr
ain
serv
ice
prov
ider
s in
ach
ievi
ngst
anda
rds
•As
soci
atio
n of
nonp
rofit
ser
vice
prov
ider
s/ m
ajor
serv
ice
prov
ider
•S
ervi
ce p
rovi
ders
•K
ey a
reas
for
ope
ratio
nal
stan
dard
s in
clud
e
–R
ecor
d-ke
epin
g
–D
ata
conf
iden
tialit
y
–Fi
nanc
ial
syst
ems
–Pe
rson
nel
syst
ems
–S
uppo
rtin
g re
cove
ryw
orke
rs
•Id
entif
y po
tent
ial
capa
city
shor
tfal
ls f
or d
isas
ter
reco
very
and
dev
elop
pla
n fo
rad
dres
sing
the
m
•As
soci
atio
n of
nonp
rofit
ser
vice
prov
ider
s/ m
ajor
serv
ice
prov
ider
•S
ervi
ce p
rovi
ders
,go
vern
men
tem
erge
ncy
man
agem
ent
agen
cies
•S
taff
is
likel
y to
be
a ke
yco
nstr
aint
on
capa
city
; as
are
sult,
pla
ns f
or f
illin
gca
paci
ty g
aps
may
foc
us o
nw
ays
to b
orro
w s
taff
, so
licit
in-k
ind
serv
ices
, an
d ar
rang
est
affin
g de
tails
E - 2
20
DET
AIL
ON
AS
SES
SIN
G N
EED
S –
REC
OV
ERY
SER
VIC
E P
RO
VIS
ION
•Pa
rtic
ipat
e in
dis
cuss
ions
with
fun
ding
int
erm
edia
ries
for
asse
ssin
g vi
ctim
nee
ds
•Ad
viso
ry/g
over
nanc
egr
oup
•S
ervi
ce p
rovi
ders
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
Key
con
side
rati
ons
E - 3
21
DET
AIL
ON
DEV
ELO
PIN
G R
ECO
VER
Y S
ERV
ICE
PLA
NS
AN
D D
ELIV
ERIN
GR
EC
OV
ER
Y S
ER
VIC
ES
•C
onve
ne d
iscu
ssio
ns a
mon
gse
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers
toco
ordi
nate
rec
over
y
•Ad
viso
ry/g
over
nanc
egr
oup
•S
ervi
ce p
rovi
ders
Act
ivit
yLe
adO
ther
s
Res
pons
ibili
ty
Key
con
side
rati
ons
•K
ey c
oord
inat
ion
issu
esin
clud
e
–R
eass
essi
ng s
tand
ards
of
oper
atio
n an
d m
odify
ing
them
as
nece
ssar
y
–Id
entif
ying
unm
et r
esou
rce
need
s an
d co
ordi
natin
g w
ithre
sour
ce i
nter
med
iarie
s
•Im
plem
ent
com
mun
icat
ion
plan
to
expl
ain
serv
ices
to
vict
ims
•Ad
viso
ry/g
over
nanc
egr
oup
•S
ervi
ce p
rovi
ders
E - 4
The taskforce was convened by:
1201 15th Street, NW, Suite 420Washington, DC 20005