First Responder Action(Session III)

Sharing Knowledge on Disaster Warning: Community-basedLast-Mile Warning System

Bangladesh University of Engineering TechnologyDhaka, Bangladesh

25 October 2007

Nuwan Waidyanatha12 Balcombe Place,Colombo 08, Sri Lanka

Tel: +94 773710394, +86 13888446352Email: waidyanatha@lirne.net

LM-HWS Components and their functions

ERP-C(n,m)

ERP-C(n,2)

ERP-C(n,1)

National Early

Warning

Center

Hazard

Information

HubDomestic &

International

Sources

ICT

-G(n

)

CO

MM

UN

ITY

(n)

Networks

Staff at the HIH monitor hazard events around-the-clock

When an “Event of Interest” is detected, HIH follows a protocol that may resultin the issuance of a message to ICT Guardians over multiple modes

ICT-Gs receive messages and acknowledge receipt

If urgent or high-priority alerts, ICT-Gs notify local ERP-Coordinators in thecommunity using locally agreed on methods

In real cases, ICT-Gs and ERP-Cs will await official warnings

In live tests, ERP-Cs activated local ERP and were timed

Stage 1: HIH Monitors

Alert and Notification Stages

Stage 2: ICT Guardians

Stage 3: ERP Coordinators

Hazard

Information

Hub

ICT-G( n)

Networks

ERP-C(n,m)

ERP-C(n,2)

ERP-C(n,1)

HIH-Monitor

ICT Guardian

Relay Alert

ERP Coordinators

Dissemminate

Report Status

Acknowledge

Resolve CAP Alert ()

Activate ICTG ERP ()

Activate Community ERP ()

Relay Results

Activate HIH ERP ()

Download Alert ()

T0

T1

T2

t0

t1

t2

Hazard Information Hub

Stage 1: Monitoring Staff

Hazard Information Hub Monitor Functions and Workflows

HIH-Monitor

Relay Alert

Get Acknowledgement

Send Acknowledgement()

Download Messages()

T0

t0

Create EOI()

Request Approval

Recieve Approval

t`0

Monitor

verifies

incoming

data

Monitor

consults with

Executive

Event of

Interest?

No

Yes

Decision to

send Alert

No

Yes

Monitor composes

message using

predefined

process

Monitor issues

Alert message

and notifies HIH

Coordinator

Stage 2: ICT Guardians Receive, Verify, and Acknowledge Message

ICT Guardian Functions and Workflows

ICT Guardians

Recieve Alert()

Determine Priority ()

Notify ERP Coordinators

Get Feedback

Acknowledge Receipt()

t1

t`1

T1

ICT Guardian

verifies CAP

message and

sends

acknowledgement

Message Priority

Medium or Low

No

Yes

ICT Guardian is vigilant

and is on standby for

further instructions

Message priority

Urgent or High

No

Yes

ICT Guardian notifies

local ERP Coordinators

Local Dissemination Methods

STAGE 3: ICT ERP Coordinators Functions and Workflows

ERP

Coordinators

accept

message

Activate Pre

Dissemination ERPs

ERP Coordinators notify

Community and activate

Evacuation Plans

ERP Coordinator

Gets Notification ()

Prepare ERP Coorinators ()

Execute Evacuations()

Reports ERP Status()

t2

t`2

T2

ERP-C(n,m)

ERP-C(n,2)

ERP-C(n,1)

CO

MM

UN

IT

Y (

n)

ICT-G( n)

Networks

Hazard

Information

Hub

Average Reliability and Effectiveness of Independent Components

0.76 0.78

0.64

0.83

0.36

0.10

HIH ICT Network Community

Component Name

Reliabiity Effectiveness

Reliability and Effectiveness of First Responders

Hazard

Information

Hub

Recommendations•Need to setup better system to force HIH Monitor to acknowledge receipt of alert• Develop a single input multiple output software application to speedup relaying of alert via multipleICTs to the communities; i.e. P2P Multilanguage CAP Broker

Benchmark• 95% Reliability and Effectiveness

Current Performance• Reliability = 78%• Effectiveness = 83%

Average Reliability of HIH Monitor's Functions

1.00

0.41

0.860.97

0.69

Dow

nload

Ack

nowle

dgemen

tEOI

Appro

val

Rel

ay

Name of Function

Re

lia

bil

ity

• Given the complexities in communities 65% reliability is tolerable but bench mark should be 85%• Effectiveness can be improved if and only if entire community participates in training andsimulations as well be prepared for “all-hazards”; effectiveness is low because very few participated intraining and drill and also were prepared only for tsunami evacuations

Average Reliability of Community Perfromance

by District

0.48

0.00

0.54

0.77

0.53 0.57

0.680.61

0.89

Am

para

Bat

tical

oa

Colo

mbo

Galle

Ham

banto

ta

Kal

munai

Kal

utara

Mat

ara

Trinco

mal

ee

Distrcit Name

Reliab

ilit

y

ERP-C(n,m)

ERP-C(n,2)

ERP-C(n,1)

CO

MM

UN

ITY

(n)

Current Performance• Reliability = 64%• Effectiveness = 10%