The National Mitigation Framework is one of a set of national frameworks within the National Preparedness System. Together, these frameworks describe how we build, sustain, and deliver core capabilities in five mission areas—Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery.

The National Mitigation Framework establishes a common platform and forum for coordinating and addressing how the nation manages risk using mitigation capabilities and describes mitigation roles across the whole community.

The National Mitigation Framework addresses the capabilities necessary to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters.

Mitigation requires systematically anticipating and adjusting to trends that could endanger the future of the community. Appropriate choices made before an event can help to manage or reduce long-term risk and potentially reduce response requirements.

The National Mitigation Framework sets out four principles that guide the development and execution of the core capabilities for Mitigation. The first guiding principle that helps develop and support the delivery of Mitigation core capabilities is resilience and sustainability. Resilience is the ability to prepare for and adapt to changing conditions and withstand and recover rapidly from disruptions.

The second guiding principle that helps develop and support the delivery of Mitigation is leadership and locally focused implementation. Mitigation empowers formal and informal local leaders to embrace their ownership of building resilient and sustainable communities.

The third guiding principle that helps develop and support the delivery of Mitigation is engaged partnerships and inclusiveness. Mitigation is advanced through the actions of many groups to collectively reduce risk vulnerability to the whole community.

The fourth guiding principle that helps develop and support the delivery of Mitigation core capabilities is a shared risk-conscious culture. A risk-conscious culture is founded on the shared understanding that future disasters will occur and that every person has a responsibility to prepare for and respond appropriately to these risks.

The National Mitigation Framework strives to improve coordination among all response partners, and through these partnerships, we can work together to help save lives and protect America's communities.

In response to various threats to our nation, preparedness must be at the forefront of any emergency preparation initiative to ensure the safety and security of this country. Whether you are an individual citizen, a member of one of the various levels of government, or work in the private or nonprofit sector, you have a shared responsibility to become engaged in safeguarding the nation from harm using a systematic approach.

The goal of this course is to familiarize you with the National Mitigation Framework, which outlines how the nation can expand its commitment to mitigation and strengthen resilience.

Course Objective:

At the end of this course, the students will be able to describe how the National Mitigation Framework is applied to meet the challenge of building a society that is robust, adaptable and has the capacity for rapid recovery.

This lesson will provide an overview of the National Mitigation Framework.

Upon completion of this lesson, you will be able to describe the purpose, scope, organization, and underlying doctrine of the National Mitigation Framework.

The National Mitigation Framework, which is part of the National Preparedness System, establishes a common platform and forum for coordinating and addressing how the Nation manages risk using mitigation capabilities and describes mitigation roles across the whole community.

The National Mitigation Framework is one of five frameworks developed to enable achievement of the goal of a secure and resilient nation with the capabilities required to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk across the whole community.

View the National Mitigation Framework (http://www.fema.gov/national-planning-frameworks).

The National Mitigation Framework addresses the capabilities necessary to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters.

Mitigation requires systematically anticipating and adjusting to trends that could endanger the future of the community. Appropriate choices made before an event can help to manage or reduce long-term risk and potentially reduce response requirements.

Further, mitigation during recovery helps strengthen and build a more resilient community to withstand future disasters.

The National Mitigation Framework is inclusive of the whole community with meaningful roles for individuals, nonprofit entities and nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, communities, critical infrastructure owners, and governments.

Those who play a role in mitigation range from an individual making decisions about how to manage the risks in his or her life; to local and tribal jurisdictions and large metropolitan regions working to manage their community members’ risks from threats and hazards; to state, territorial, and Federal agencies administering funding for large, complex programs and projects.

By providing equal access to and use of the necessary knowledge and skills, this Framework seeks to enable the whole community to contribute to and benefit from national preparedness.

More information about whole community preparedness can be found at https://www.fema.gov/whole-community.

The National Preparedness Goal defines the core capabilities necessary to prepare for the specific types of incidents that pose the greatest risk to the security of the Nation.

The National Mitigation Framework describes coordination efforts to deliver the capabilities defined in the Goal.

Mitigation is the thread that permeates the fabric of national preparedness.

The National Mitigation Framework discusses seven core capabilities required for all entities involved in mitigation:

• Planning
• Public Information and Warning
• Operational Coordination
• Community Resilience
• Long-term Vulnerability Reduction
• Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment
• Threats and Hazards Identification

These core capabilities will be covered in Lesson 3.

To better understand how the National Mitigation Framework fits into the overall national preparedness efforts, we need to look at the National Preparedness System and the National Preparedness Goal.

The National Preparedness System (NPS) was developed to provide the approach, resources, and tools to aid the whole community in its preparedness activities to achieve the National Preparedness Goal. Part of this system includes determining what capabilities are needed, how they should be developed and sustained, and how they should be delivered.

The National Preparedness Goal lays out the nationwide preparedness vision and identifies the core capabilities necessary to achieve that vision across the following five mission areas:

• Prevention
• Protection
• Mitigation
• Response
• Recovery

Successful achievement of the National Preparedness Goal will result in a secure and resilient nation with the capabilities required across the whole community to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk.

In this course, we are focusing on the Mitigation mission area.

Both the National Preparedness System and National Preparedness Goal discuss the development of capabilities needed to ensure a secure and resilient nation. These capabilities, known as core capabilities, are the way we can measure, describe, and implement our security and resilience techniques.

The National Planning Frameworks elaborate on these capabilities by discussing how to deliver the core capabilities from each mission area, and how to support the delivery of core capabilities from the other mission areas.

Under all five mission areas (Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery) there are a combined total of 32 core capabilities. These capabilities are highly interdependent and require us to use existing preparedness networks and activities, to coordinate and unify efforts, to improve training and exercise programs, to promote innovation, and to ensure that the administrative, finance, and logistics systems are in place to build, sustain, and deliver the capabilities. There are a number of key characteristics of these capabilities that you should remember.

The core capabilities:

• Are distinct critical elements necessary to meet the National Preparedness Goal
• Are essential for the execution of each mission area: Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery
• Provide a common language for preparedness across the whole community
• Are not exclusive to any single level of government or organization and encompass the whole community

More information regarding the National Preparedness System, the National Preparedness Goal, and Core Capabilities can be found in IS-2000: National Preparedness Goal and System: Overview (https://training.fema.gov/is/courseoverview.aspx?code=IS-2000).

The National Mitigation Framework sets out four principles that guide the development and execution of the core capabilities for Mitigation. These are:

1. Resilience and Sustainability
2. Leadership and Locally Focused Implementation
3. Engaged Partnerships and Inclusiveness and
4. Shared Risk-conscious Culture.

These principles lay the foundation for the Mitigation mission area and the execution of its core capabilities.

On the following screens, we’ll take a closer look at these guiding principles.

The first guiding principle that helps develop and support the delivery of Mitigation core capabilities is resilience and sustainability.

Resilience is the ability to prepare for and adapt to changing conditions and withstand and recover rapidly from disruptions.

The National Mitigation Framework addresses two dimensions of resilience:

1. Resilience involves all aspects of the community including social, health, economic, natural and cultural, technical, and organizational dimensions within a community.
2. Resilience is the ability to withstand and rebound from the impacts of disasters and incident.

Sustainability employs a longer-term approach through plans, policies, and actions that reflect a comprehensive understanding of the economic, social, and environmental systems within a community.

Many communities throughout the nation display best practice examples of resilience and sustainability.

Fresno, California, a city where water availability is a constant issue, developed groundwater recharge ponds to collect storm water. These recharge or retention ponds serve three functions.

• First, water that normally caused street flooding is diverted to these ponds, mitigating street flooding.
• Second, these ponds when dry for most of the year serve as parks with baseball diamonds, soccer fields, playgrounds, and picnic areas.
• Third, when the recharge/retention ponds fill with storm water the ponds act to filter and replenish the groundwater supply, which through city wells supply water to residences and businesses in the city.

Some communities are using the technique of biowales as an alternative to storm sewers. The biowales with moderately sloping sides filters storm water allowing the water to purify by way of infiltration back into the ground water supply. Superfluous water can flow either to surface water systems or to recharge ponds through the biowales.

The second guiding principle that helps develop and support the delivery of Mitigation is leadership and locally focused implementation.

Effective, ongoing mitigation efforts are led at the local level. Mitigation empowers formal and informal local leaders to embrace their ownership of building resilient and sustainable communities.

Leaders at the state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal levels support local leadership.

The third guiding principle that helps develop and support the delivery of Mitigation is engaged partnerships and inclusiveness.

Community partnerships working together reduce risk and vulnerability for the whole community.

These partnerships may include, but are not limited to:

• All levels of government
• Faith-based organizations
• Nonprofit organizations
• Private/corporate entities
• Advocacy groups
• Community associations
• Academia
• Professional groups
• Neighbors

The fourth guiding principle that helps develop and support the delivery of Mitigation core capabilities is a shared risk-conscious culture.

A shared risk-conscious culture is aware of the fact that the future is not free of risks.

Community leaders evaluate a wide variety of threats and hazards in order to assess risk.

Through a shared risk-conscious culture a community can achieve resilience.

Risk is the potential for an unwanted outcome resulting from an incident, event, or occurrence.

Risk is measured in terms of likelihood and consequences.

Mitigation is intended to minimize risks associated with threats and hazards.

No single threat or hazard exists in isolation. As an example, a hurricane can lead to flooding, dam failures, and hazardous materials spill.

To support this effort, the Strategic National Risk Assessment (SNRA) was developed to analyze risks to the nation large and small.

The SNRA analyzes the risks at a national level.

• Contributes to our shared understanding of the full range of threats, hazards, and challenges facing our nation as well as greater visibility of long-term risk trends
• Will be refined to integrate information from across the whole community
• Provides information for prioritizing preparedness activities at the national level and informing risk assessment efforts at every level of government

Strategic National Risk Assessment indicates that a wide range of threats and hazards continue to pose a significant risk to the Nation, affirming the need for an all-hazards, capability-based approach to preparedness planning.

Climate change has the potential to increase risk. Examples of increased risk include:

• Rising sea levels
• Increasingly powerful storms
• Increase in the number of droughts
• Increase in the number of wildfires

Cybersecurity poses its own unique challenges. In order to meet threats to cybersecurity, the whole community must consider integrating cyber mitigation tasks throughout the Mitigation core capabilities.

We have reached the end of this lesson. In this lesson, we described the purpose, scope, organization, and underlying doctrine of the National Mitigation Framework. We discussed:

• Whole community preparedness.
• National Preparedness System.
• National Preparedness Goal.
• Core capabilities.
• Guiding Principles for Mitigation.
• Risk basis.

In the next lesson, we will discuss the roles and responsibilities of those involved in the Mitigation effort.

This lesson provides an overview of who has a role to play in the Mitigation mission area. The whole community has a role in developing resilience, including: individuals and communities, the private and nonprofit sectors, faith-based organizations, and all levels of government (local, regional/metropolitan, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal) and nongovernmental organizations.

Upon completion of this lesson, you will be able to describe the roles and responsibilities of Mitigation partners.

Now let’s take a look at the roles and responsibilities of the different levels of government, beginning with local governments.

Local governments will often bear the responsibility for mitigation activities in order to protect the health and safety of the people they represent. These activities include the development, assessment, and implementation of Mitigation core capabilities that help the economy of the jurisdiction and contribute to the well-being of those the government represents. This includes the provision of housing, health and social services, infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources.

Local governments may also join together and take a regional approach to mitigation, such as across watersheds or nuclear emergency planning zones.

State, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments are responsible for the public safety, security, health, and welfare of the people who live in their jurisdictions.

These levels of government will often serve as a conduit between Federal agencies and local governments. In this role, they implement mitigation core capabilities through designated officials, such as State or Tribal Hazard Mitigation Officers or National Flood Insurance Program Coordinators.

These levels of government can also promote resilience by passing legislation that incorporates or facilitates mitigation activities. This may include laws governing local land use, development decisions, or building codes.

All Federal departments and agencies must cooperate with one another and with local, state, tribal, and territorial governments, community members, and the private sector to the maximum extent possible.

The President leads the Federal Government mitigation efforts to prepare the Nation for all hazards, including natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other manmade disasters. As part of this effort, Executive Branch departments and agencies coordinate programs that address the effects of deliberate efforts by criminals and terrorists to destroy or exploit elements of the Nation’s infrastructure.

The Secretary of Homeland Security has the broad responsibility of coordinating preparedness activities, including mitigation activities, to respond to and recover from terrorist attacks, natural disasters, and other emergencies. As part of the Department of Homeland Security, FEMA plays a role in coordinating Federal mitigation policy. In this role, FEMA reviews the effectiveness of mitigation capabilities as they are developed and deployed across the Nation.

Many of the activities within the Mitigation mission area require a cross section of stakeholders in order to achieve success.

The link below provides a table that illustrates and demonstrates the various roles that need to be involved. Please note that this table is not intended to be exhaustive, as there are often multiple stakeholders involved in these efforts.

Fargo, North Dakota is no stranger to flooding. The Red River of the North, which runs north to Lake Winnipeg in Canada, freezes every winter. When the spring thaw begins, the southern portions of the river melt first, which causes the river to flow north toward the frozen portion of the river in Canada. Here, an ice dam stops the river flow, which causes the river to rise and back up toward the south, resulting in floods in the southern land.

Because the geography of Fargo and the surrounding area is very flat, every foot of flood water above the banks results in one mile of flooding on each side of the river.

In an effort to mitigate the resultant flooding, Fargo has instituted a number of measures to combat the floods. For example, Fargo was the first city in North Dakota to join the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Other measures included:

• Permanent flood control structures in the form of floodwalls, earthen dikes, and homeowner incentive program to raise backyards to the level of city dikes
• The acquisition of residential property along the river through buy-outs and right-of-first-refusal of property in the more flood prone areas, in which the land is converted to permanent open space, saving the homeowners emotional and financial costs, and the city repeated flood-fighting costs
• An upgraded and enhanced infrastructure that improves the storm sewer system
• Protective flood gates prevent the river from backing up into the sewer system
• Additional lift stations lift storm water to higher outlets that empty into the river
• Backup generators at critical sanitary lift stations ensure the continued pumping of sewage to the city’s treatment facility
• Storm water retention basins augment the storm sewer capacity, while living snow fences help protect key areas during blizzards and winter storms

Additionally, Fargo has upgraded building codes and enhanced the city’s flood-fighting capabilities with the use of digitalorthoimagery, a specialized system that takes aerial photography of the city’s topography.

We have reached the end of this lesson. In this lesson, we described the roles and responsibilities of Mitigation partners. Specifically, we discussed:

• Individuals, families and households.
• Communities.
• Nongovernmental organizations.
• Private sector entities.
• Local governments.
• State, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments.
• Federal government.

In the next lesson, we will take a closer look at the core capabilities that are delivered under the Mitigation mission area.

This lesson provides an examination of the Mitigation core capabilities.

Upon completion of this lesson, you will be able to describe core capabilities for Mitigation and actions required to deliver those capabilities.

As discussed in the first lesson, resilience requires the entire nation. The way we can measure, describe, and implement our security and resilience techniques is through core capabilities. These core capabilities are listed in the National Preparedness Goal and are classified under the five mission areas. They are highly interdependent and require us to use existing preparedness networks and activities, coordinate and unify efforts, improve training and exercise programs, promote innovation, and ensure that the administrative, finance, and logistics systems are in place to support these capabilities.

Before we take a closer look at the Mitigation core capabilities, let’s review the key characteristics of these capabilities.

The core capabilities:

• Are distinct critical elements necessary to meet the National Preparedness Goal.
• Are essential for the execution of each mission area: Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery.
• Provide a common language for preparedness across the whole community.
• Are not exclusive to any single level of government or organization and encompass the whole community.

Select this link to view the complete list of Core Capabilities.

As we begin to look at the core capabilities, it is important to understand that the National Preparedness Goal specifically defines each of the core capabilities. These definitions are used to determine the critical tasks for each capability.

As we examine each core capability, we will discuss those critical tasks that must be implemented to successfully deliver that core capability.

It should be noted that these critical tasks are not for any single jurisdiction or agency. Accomplishment of these critical tasks at all levels within whole community creates unity of effort and achieves national preparedness.

Three mitigation core capabilities span across all five mission areas:

• Planning
• Public Information and Warning
• Operational Coordination

Within each mission area, there are specific capabilities that are unique but not unrelated. Remember, each core capability under the specified mission area is intended to meet the National Preparedness Goal.

Let’s take a closer look at the three cross-cutting core capabilities, starting with Planning.

The Planning capability is described as conducting a systematic process engaging the whole community as appropriate in the development of executable strategic, operational, and/or tactical-level approaches to meet defined objectives.

Planning is vital to mitigation, whether it happens at the individual level; in neighborhoods, cities, regions, tribal communities or states; at the national level; or in groups that do not share the same geographic area. Within mitigation, planning is a systematic process that translates risk assessment data and information into prioritized goals and actions for the whole community.

Click this link to view the Mitigation Critical Tasks for Planning

• Embed risk-based decision making into the planning processes.
• Collaborate, cooperate, and build consensus across other disciplines that impact plans.
• Understand the demographics and systems that make up the community and their vulnerabilities and interdependencies with each other.
• Include disability and other access and functional needs subject matter experts in mitigation planning to address considerations, such as architectural accessibility through compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act architectural standards; disability and other access and functional needs advocacy organizations, such as independent living centers; and providers of disability and other access and functional needs-related assistance/functional needs support services. Also, understand the civil rights of service animal users, such as being able to use all parts of facilities the public uses without being separated from their service animals.
• Assess the full range of animal populations and potential issues they pose in the community; this will ensure that the jurisdiction is equipped to comprehensively address human and animal issues and take steps to mitigate vulnerabilities in this area before, during, or after a disaster.
• Incorporate the findings from the assessment of risk and disaster resilience into planning processes.
• Seek out and incorporate the whole community in planning efforts.
• Build on the expertise, knowledge, and systems in place within the community.
• Coordinate the planning and development of interconnected initiatives that may have geographic, functional, or funding connections.
• Share success stories where resilience-based planning has demonstrated measureable effectiveness in creating economic vitality within communities.
• Engage in a peer-to-peer and regional partnership (coalitions) mentoring structure that promotes best practices, particularly when the planning capability is not present in a community.
• Foster public-private partnerships to promote resilience and maximize the use of available resources.
• Promote planning initiatives through multiple media sources.

The Public Information and Warning capability is described as the delivery of coordinated, prompt, reliable, and actionable information to the whole community through the use of clear, consistent, accessible, and culturally and linguistically appropriate methods to effectively relay information regarding any threat or hazard, as well as the actions being taken and the assistance being made available, as appropriate.

The Public Information and Warning capability includes all information related to creating resilient communities. This capability provides a continuous flow of risk and hazard information to the whole community.

Providing information to the whole community builds consensus.

Click this link to view the Mitigation Critical Tasks for Public Information and Warning

Steady-state/Ongoing Operations

• Persuade the public that it is worthwhile to build a resilient community. Encourage private and public sector partners to work together to communicate the benefits of mitigation action and arrive at solutions.
• Increase awareness of the risks and the actions they can take to mitigate those risks through mechanisms like preparedness campaigns.
• Communicate priorities and actions identified through risk analysis and plans to stakeholders and those expected to take action to reduce risk.
• Refine and consider options to publicly release potentially sensitive risk information.
• Use social media, Web sites (e.g., Ready.gov), and smartphone applications, as well as more traditional mechanisms, such as community meetings, social networks, or diverse media outlets, to inform the public of actions to take to connect preparedness to resilience. Information and messaging should ensure effective communication with people who have disabilities or access and functional needs, including those who are deaf, hard-of-hearing, blind, or have low vision, through the use of appropriate auxiliary aids and services, such as sign language and other interpreters and the captioning of audio and video materials. Target messages to reach organizations representing children, people with disabilities or access and functional needs, diverse communities, and people with limited English proficiency to ensure that the information is accessible and effective, so that people are able to understand and act on the information.
• Support and increase the number of communities that develop and share risk reduction products (e.g., building codes, design standards, floodplain management principles and practices, and architectural accessibility standards).

Incident-driven Operations

• Provide the tools necessary to make decisions quickly, such as a synchronization matrix that allows multiple leaders to make independent decisions.
• Share information obtained through coordinating activities to inform prevention, protection, response, and recovery decision making by effectively communicating threat and hazard risk analysis. Conduct outreach with atypical partners. Coordinate common messaging and verified source communications through local community leaders.
• Capitalize on the critical post-disaster window of opportunity and the media information cycle to influence public opinion to take steps toward future mitigation.

Change Management

• Address evolving risk perception and risk communication within a community.
• Practice science-based methods, such as community-based social marketing, to create behavior change.

The Operational Coordination capability is described as the establishment and maintenance of a unified and coordinated operational structure and process that appropriately integrates all critical stakeholders and supports the execution of core capabilities.

Incorporating mitigation efforts into everyday activities, as well as response and recovery efforts following disasters, requires operational coordination.

The Operational Coordination capability is fundamental to all the other mitigation capabilities and is necessary to build whole community resilience.

Click this link to view the Mitigation Critical Tasks for Operational Coordination

Steady-state/Ongoing Operations

• Establish procedures and build partnerships and coalitions across the whole community that emphasizes a coordinated delivery of mitigation capabilities.
• Identify mitigation roles and responsibilities and engage stakeholders across the whole community to support the information-sharing process.
• Recognize the complexity of various interest groups and integrate organizations across communities, including public-private partnerships.

Incident-driven Operations

• Emphasize mitigation technique integration into Incident Command System (ICS) planning cycles by command and general staff representatives and educate whole community partners.
• Use and leverage mitigation products and capabilities, such as the identification of threats and the assessment of risk, to support incident operations.
• Contribute to the situational awareness and a common operating picture for the entire Federal Government and for local, state, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments, as appropriate, in the event of a natural disaster, act of terrorism, or other manmade disaster.
• Capitalize on opportunities for mitigation actions following disasters and incidents.

Change Management

• Adapt to evolving risks and changing conditions including those as a result of climate change.
• Look for ways to include new stakeholders in mitigation capabilities.

Mitigation actions to reduce long-term vulnerability include local plans and regulations (building codes).

Brunswick County, North Carolina ensured critical facilities protection at two feet above the 500-year flood elevation as opposed to the 100-year flood elevation.

New Hanover, North Carolina instituted clear guidelines for reducing development using land use regulations and development management tools limiting density to 2.5 units per acre or less in areas classified as conservation and placed a moratorium on the acceptance of rezoning requests in flood prone areas other than rezoning requests for less intense use.

Shoshone County, Idaho strongly links mitigation actions to existing community plans, such as the continued creation of defensible space around homes and neighborhoods to increase the success of fire fighters in the case of wildfire as per their 2002 Wildfire Mitigation Plan.

Mitigation actions to reduce long-term vulnerability include structural projects.

Louisville, Kentucky mandates development standards for buildings and assets in buildings targeting public earthquake-prone buildings for retrofit and the development of standards for structural sound and asset tie-down along with the promotion of earthquake insurance purchase.

Puyallap, Washington identified rationale for replacing concrete sidewalks with absorbent materials and consulted with other jurisdictions that already use absorbent materials. The city is assessing the long-term cost benefit of standard use of absorbent materials in place of concrete used in sidewalks, parking lots, etc., to reduce storm water runoff with the reduction in impervious areas.

Mitigation actions to reduce long-term vulnerability include natural systems protection.

Roseville, California mandates the updating of regulations to ensure the protection of natural resources within identified goals and objectives, such as the designation of 100-year floodplain as open space within the city’s general plan.

Additionally, the city instituted a goat-grazing program in the city’s open space and preserve areas for fire and invasive plant species management and native plant restoration.

Mitigation actions to reduce long-term vulnerability include education programs.

Seaside, California provides disaster preparedness and mitigation material to residents and business in both English and Spanish and in other languages as necessary.

Mitigation actions to reduce long-term vulnerability include preparedness and response actions.

Communities are encouraged to develop mutual aid agreements with adjacent and nearby communities and with the community’s county government to meet the community’s emergency response needs.

Baltimore, Maryland developed an excellent Hazard Mitigation Plan with comprehensive goals and actions. Baltimore also prioritized mitigation actions with respect to vulnerable populations the likelihood that many of the vulnerable populations would be in physically vulnerable places and ensured their access to flood insurance and appropriated warning information.

As shown on the table below, there are four capabilities that belong solely to Mitigation: Community Resilience, Long-term Vulnerability Reduction, Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment, and Threats and Hazards Identification.

We'll take a closer look at these capabilities on the following screens.

Community Resilience requires leadership, collaboration, partnership building, education, and skill building. These four aspects of Community Resilience Capability are the skills that are required to build the capacity. Communities have to prepare for the risks that are most relevant to them by including the most relevant mitigation activities in plans.

Leadership: The ability to bring together a group that collaborates to make well-informed, timely decisions. Leaders need to demonstrate to community members the benefits of implementing change and then inspire community members to adopt a more resilient outlook.

Collaboration: A broad engagement and ongoing dialogue about threats and vulnerabilities and meaningful, sustained participation in community preparedness activities, planning, and decision making. Meaningful risk reduction measures will frequently include collaboration among private sector interests in community development, public sector or law enforcement interests in community safety, and various other interest groups, such as those representing children, seniors, and those with disabilities and others with access and functional needs.

Partnership Building: The establishment of long-term relationships—well before, during, and after incidents—that support ongoing communication and awareness building, decision making, and the implementation of plans and decisions. Mitigation capabilities are coordinated through partnerships at all levels of government with the private sector and nongovernmental organizations.

Education and Skill Building: Resilient communities utilize education and outreach tools to create opportunities that advance mitigation. By empowering individuals and communities with knowledge and skills, we build a collective understanding of our roles and responsibilities in crisis.

The definition of the Community Resilience core capability is to enable the recognition, understanding, communication of, and planning for risk and empower individuals and communities to make informed risk management decisions necessary to adapt to, withstand, and quickly recover from future incidents.

Community Resilience provides the initiative and energy to increase resilience in all the areas that make up a community including:

• Economic
• Health and social sciences
• Housing
• Infrastructure
• Natural and cultural resources

Click this link to view the Mitigation Critical Tasks for Community Resilience

Here are the critical community resilience tasks:

• Know the systems which make up the community and how to build constructive partnerships between those systems.
• Assess and understand the risks facing a community, including physical, social, cultural, economic, and environmental vulnerabilities to all threats and hazards and foster risk adaptive behaviors.
• Recognize and communicate the reinforcing relationships between environmental stewardship and natural hazard risk reduction (e.g., enhancement of flood storage through wetland protection/restoration and holistic floodplain management).
• Communicate and utilize the best available localized climate projections, so that the public and private sectors can make informed decisions about adaptation.
• Know the community’s permanent and transient population demographics and use that information to plan ahead to address resilience for the whole community, including people with disabilities and others with access and functional needs.
• Foster sustained communication, civic engagement, and the development and implementation of proactive planning, response, and long-term risk reduction actions in the whole community.
• Conduct community preparedness activities that empower individuals and communities with information and resources that facilitate actions to enhance their resilience and consider accessibility and cultural sensitivities based upon the community makeup.
• Promote mitigation and resilience to the public through preparedness campaigns to increase public awareness and motivate individuals to build societal resilience prior to an event.
• Promote neighborhood activities and encourage volunteerism that advances preparedness.
• Convince community members of the value of mitigation for reducing the impact of disasters and the scale of response and recovery efforts.
• Identify and promote sound choices and discourage choices that increase vulnerabilities and risks.
• Promote transparency in risk management decision making, so that individuals, communities, private organizations, and all levels of government demonstrate how resilience is considered.
• Recognize the interdependent nature of the economy, health and social services, housing infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources within a community.
• Acknowledge and seek out naturally occurring relationships within communities and build partnerships and coalitions before disasters or incidents occur.
• Educate the next generation of community leaders and resilience professionals; learn from the past and from what is working in the present.

Long-term vulnerability reduction involves building and sustaining resilient systems, communities, and critical infrastructure and key resources lifelines so as to reduce their vulnerability to natural, technological, and human-caused threats and hazards by lessening the likelihood, severity, and duration of the adverse consequences.

Click this link to view the Mitigation critical tasks for long-term vulnerability reduction.

Individual and Local Community

• Broaden the use of natural hazards and catastrophic insurance.
• Develop plans and recognize that a prepared individual or family is the foundation of a resilient community.
• Promote neighborhood activities and encourage volunteerism that advances preparedness awareness campaigns
• Incorporate mitigation measures into construction and development projects that take into account future conditions based on physical changes as well as climate change.
• Capitalize on opportunities during the recovery building process to further reduce vulnerability.

Private Sector

• Determine the level of appropriate risk reduction to incorporate in operational and capital improvement projects.
• Advance projects and activities that do not increase the residual risk in nearby neighborhoods and communities.
• Coordinate with government and community organizations to reduce duplication of effort and encourage complementary efforts.

Government

• Put community plans that include mitigation and resilience to work.
• Execute identified risk management actions and projects resulting from analysis and planning processes in the community.
• Make risk avoidance and reduction a priority in capital improvement projects.
• Adopt and enforce a suitable building code to ensure resilient construction.
• Adopt appropriate land use measures to limit development in hazardous areas commensurate with identified risk.
• Employ a variety of incentives, statutory and regulatory requirements, and voluntary initiatives to implement successful practices throughout communities.
• Be transparent and explicit about mitigation efforts in order to increase and sustain whole community investment, reduce duplication of effort, and encourage complementary efforts by partners.
• Establish standards and practices to reduce long-term vulnerability.
• Capitalize on opportunities during the recovery building process to further reduce vulnerability, including pausing to evaluate and update current codes, policies, and approaches to redevelopment.

The Kaweah River and its downstream branch the St. John’s River frequently flooded the community of Visalia, California over the years. Officials reached a decision to build a dam across the Kaweah River as it exits the foothills of the Sierra Nevada. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers built the Terminus Dam on the Kaweah River creating the Kaweah Reservoir.

The dam serves three main purposes in order of priority – flood control, irrigation storage, and recreation. The primary purpose is flood control to mitigate flooding downstream along the Kaweah and St. John’s Rivers.

The building of the dam was the first step in developing long-term flood vulnerability reduction. The next step in accomplishing reduced flood vulnerability came when the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) had a freeway built through Visalia.

Keeping the flood vulnerability reduction in mind Caltrans had the freeway built below grade. The purpose of the below grade build was to act as a floodwater diversion and retention basin. The storm sewer system would divert storm water to the freeway away from the areas in Visalia more prone to flood. Traffic could continue to transit Visalia along the two one-way at grade frontage roads that parallel the freeway. Eventually, the below grade portion of the freeway was expanded west to create greater capacity in the long-term flood vulnerability reduction. The most recent step in further vulnerability reduction was the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers installation of giant fusegates on the Terminus Dam that raised the retention capacity of the Kaweah Reservoir.

This example illustrates the critical task of incorporating mitigation measures into construction and development projects that take into account future conditions based on physical changes as well as climate change.

Risk and disaster resilience assessment involves assessing risk and disaster resilience so that decision makers, responders, and community members can take informed action to reduce their entity’s risk and increase their resilience.

Click this link to view the Mitigation critical tasks for long-term vulnerability reduction.

Data

• Share risk assessment data, both new and existing, to establish common operations across mission areas and standardized data requirements and guidance. Secure sensitive data as appropriate. Establish standard data formats to enable sharing of vulnerability data and risk assessment outputs.
• Provide the right data to the right people at the right time.
• Incorporate vulnerability data sets, such as population, demographic, infrastructure inventory and condition assessment information; climatological, geological, and environmental factors; critical infrastructure, lifelines, and key resources; building stock; and economic data to calculate the risk from the threats and hazards identified.
• Incorporate data from lessons learned and statistical information to target consideration of populations (such as for people with disabilities or access and functional needs, limited English proficiency populations, and racially, culturally, and ethnically diverse communities).
• Update risk assessments to include changes to the risks and the physical environment. This includes aging infrastructure, new development, new mitigation projects and initiatives, post-event verification/validation, new technologies or improved methodologies, and better or more current data.
• Create and maintain redundant systems for storing and protecting information and essential records.

Analysis

• Perform credible risk assessments using scientifically valid and widely used risk assessment techniques.
• Understand social and structural vulnerabilities.
• Incorporate knowledge gained by those who have experienced incidents to help understand all the interdependencies, cascading impacts, and vulnerabilities associated with threats and hazards.
• Validate, calibrate, and enhance risk assessments by relying on experience and knowledge beyond raw data or models.
• Develop analysis tools to provide information more quickly to those who need it and make use of tools and technologies, such as geographic information systems.
• Consolidate analysis efforts to remove useless duplication and provide a more uniform picture of the risks.

Education and Training

• Build the capability within communities to assess, analyze, and apply the knowledge of risk and resilience.
• Ensure that data users and assessment stakeholders get the best available data and understand the assumptions/estimations made in the methodology
• Train stakeholders to develop risk assessments and have the same accurate and comprehensive standards of assessment outputs.
• Use risk assessments to design exercises for response activities and to determine the feasibility of mitigation projects and initiatives.

The State of Oregon through a contract with Ecology and Environment, Inc., created a risk and disaster resilience assessment tool for decision makers, responders, and community members to use in the mitigation and reduction of their respective risks and increase their respective resiliencies to disaster.

The state used the FEMA Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Guide, Comprehensive Preparedness Guidance 201 (http://www.fema.gov/plan), in developing their assessment tool. This assessment tool is broken down into the following sections:

• Planning
• Organization
• Equipment
• Training
• Exercises
• Global

The assessment tool asks a series of questions in each section that ask in a drop-down menu:

• Yes
• In-progress
• No

Decision makers, responders and community members can assess their respective risks and resiliencies based on the responses. This allows the decision makers, responders, and community members to determine the areas that need more focus in reducing their respective risks and increasing their respective resiliencies.

This best practice illustrates the critical task of performing credible risk assessments using scientifically valid and widely used risk assessment techniques.

This Mitigation core capability involves identifying the threats and hazards that occur in the geographic area; determine the frequency and magnitude; and incorporate this into analysis and planning processes so as to clearly understand the needs of a community or entity.

Click this link to view the Mitigation critical tasks for threats and hazards identification.

• Identify data requirements across stakeholders.
• Develop and/or gather required data in a timely and accurate manner in order to effectively identify threats and hazards.
• Deploy and maintain continuous, long-term hazards data collection systems.
• Ensure that the right data are received by the right people at the right time.
• Share appropriate data on natural, technological, and human-caused threats and hazards in a transparent and usable manner.
• Strike a proper balance between dissemination and classification of national security and intelligence information.
• Build cooperation among private and public sectors by protecting internal interests, but sharing threats and hazards identification resources and benefits.
• Leverage available third-party data, tools, and information; social media; and open-source technology.
• Translate data into meaningful and actionable information through appropriate analysis and collection tools to aid in preparing the public.

One best practice of the Threats and Hazards Identification capability is the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) guidance for incorporating Sea-level Change (SLC) consideration into all USACE water resources management projects.

It is likely that one of the biggest impacts of Sea-level Change (SLC) will be on storm surge. As sea levels increase, the starting point for storm surge will change, and could cause the impacts to be felt further inland and more frequently. There are several tools available including maps, models, and analysis that can be used to assess vulnerability and risk associated with SLC and storm surge. At the state and local level, especially in Florida, officials are considering SLC when it comes to planning for the future. This project will highlight the latest USACE guidance on SLC and describe some of the tools currently available to assess SLC and storm surge. Curves representing three potential future SLC scenarios will be developed for the St. Marys, St. Johns, and Suwannee Rivers and maps will be produced that show potential combined impacts of SLC and storm surge. The maps and information presented in this report are intended to be used for general planning purposes. More detailed modeling and mapping should be used for specific projects and detailed design work.

For more information, review the Sea-Level Change and Storm Surge Implications for Selected Inland Areas of Florida (http://silverjackets.nfrmp.us/State-Teams/Florida/Sea-Level-Change).

This best practice illustrates the critical task of developing and gathering required data in a timely and accurate manner in order to effectively identify threats and hazards.

We have reached the end of this lesson. In this lesson, we described the core capabilities for mitigation and actions required to deliver those capabilities. Specifically, we discussed:

• Cross-Cutting Core Capabilities
• Planning
• Public Information and Warning
• Operational Coordination
• Mitigation Core Capabilities
• Community Resilience
• Long-term vulnerability reduction
• Risk and disaster resilience assessment
• Threats and hazards identification

In the next lesson, we will take a closer look at the coordinating structures and operational planning used to support the Mitigation mission area.

This lesson provides an examination of the Mitigation coordinating structures and operational planning.

Upon completion of this lesson, you will be able to describe coordinating structures used to support mitigation.

Coordinating structures help to facilitate preparedness and delivery of capabilities, and they provide guidance, support, and integration to aid in the preparedness of the whole community and building resilience at the local, regional, and national levels.

Coordinating structures are composed of representatives from multiple departments or agencies, public and/or private sector organizations, or a combination of these.

They ensure ongoing communication and coordination among all parties involved in preparing and delivering capabilities before and after disasters.

The coordinating structures for mitigation should focus on creating a national culture shift that embeds risk management and mitigation in all planning, decision making, and development.

Regardless of the level of the coordinating structure, consideration of risk management and mitigation will reduce the Nation’s risk and associated consequences.

Local communities have specific cultures, values, norms, and laws that reflect their history, residents, and geography.

The Mitigation Framework seeks to use the local organizations and entities within a community that can build resilience and community vitality.

These include, but are not limited to:

• Local and regional economic development organizations
• Public works agencies
• Private development enterprises
• Planning commissions
• Community emergency response teams
• Faith-based organizations
• Citizen Corps Councils
• Service groups
• Voluntary organizations
• Public and private schools
• Resources and referral/advocacy agencies for children, families, and those with disabilities and others with access and functional needs
• Local mitigation committees.

Through the National Mitigation Framework, the existing structures to implement mitigation capabilities are being expanded.

Structures that advance mitigation include:

• State hazard mitigation planning committees
• Long-term recovery groups
• State Disaster Recovery Coordinators and related coordination structures associated with the National Disaster Recovery Framework Water conservation boards
• Coastal commissions
• Regional/Metropolitan planning organizations
• Region healthcare coalitions
• Mutual aid compacts.

Each of the Nation’s critical infrastructure sectors has a Coordinating Council. Leveraging the efforts of the state, local, tribal, and territorial Coordinating Council; can encourage multi-jurisdictional decision making.

Even with the value these existing structures offer, additional integrating structures may be necessary.

For example, the Silver Jackets Program developed through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers brings together multiple state, Federal, and sometimes tribal and local agencies to learn from one another and apply their knowledge to reduce risk at the state level.

The State of California is using FEMA’s Integrating Disaster Data into Hazard Mitigation Planning: A State and Local Mitigation Planning How-to-Guide as the state works with state agencies; local officials, planners, and emergency manager; tribal governments; and the state’s large urban areas in developing disaster mitigation projects and long-term vulnerability reduction.

Through lessons learn; stakeholder development; and in-state and extra-state partnership development the state is better able to provide planning and mitigation assistance to the state’s in-state stakeholder.

For more information, view the Integrating Disaster Data into Hazard Mitigation Planning: A State and Local Mitigation Planning How-to-Guide

Federal agencies play a critical role in supporting local actions through the use of Federal resources.

The President leads the Federal government mitigation efforts to prepare the Nation for all hazards.

The Secretary of Homeland Security is the principal Federal official responsible for domestic incident consequence management and the coordination of preparedness activities.

Federal unity of effort ensures that Federal response and recovery operations and preparedness activities, such as mitigation, are complete, synchronized, and mutually supportive.

Now let’s turn our attention to the policy-level coordination that occurs at the Federal level.

1. National Security Council
2. Sector-Specific Agencies (SSA)
3. Mitigation Framework Leadership Group

Review each item before proceeding to the next screen.

Select this link to access all coordinating structures.

The SSAs were created to leverage expertise and institutional knowledge to enhance the protection and resilience of the Nation’s critical infrastructure.

In accordance with the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, the SSAs are tasked with building a safer, more secure, and resilient nation.

Science and technology (S&T) is essential for continuous improvement of National Preparedness.

The whole community should design, conduct and improve operations based on the best, most rigorous scientific data, methods and science-based understandings available.

Effective mitigation relies upon the whole community’s ability to establish science-based understanding of their threats and hazards and make well-informed decisions to reduce risks as a result.

The continued development and advancement in science and technology is allowing an increase in the nation’s overall ability to mitigate the effects of disasters.

The National Weather Service and many television stations have advanced Doppler radars to give advanced indications of major storms and embedded tornadoes. This allows for an increase in warning times that mitigate the number of injuries and deaths associated with tornadoes. Advancements in meteorological satellites allows more accurate predictions of hurricane landfalls, wind speeds and moisture content of hurricanes allowing communities more time to evacuate and officials more time to prepare for the onset of the hurricane. NASA has developed better sensor technology for satellite observation of the solar activity, allowing better intensity warnings of solar flares. The U.S. Geology Survey built a series of geomagnetic observatories throughout the United States that monitors the geomagnetic field. NASA’s satellites and the U.S.G.S. geomagnetic observatories provide a warning mechanism that allows the electric power generation industry the time to take critical equipment off-line to mitigate the effects of space weather on the nation’s electric power grids.

As we discussed in the first lesson, the National Preparedness Goal sets the vision for preparedness nationwide and identifies the core capabilities necessary to achieve that vision across the five mission areas.

Mitigation supports prevention, protection, response and recovery activities by reducing the impact of disasters and creating better prepared, more resilient communities. Let’s take a look at how mitigation relates to the other mission areas.

1. Prevention
2. Protection
3. Response
4. Recovery

You will need to review each item before proceeding to the next screen.

Select this link to access all mission areas.

Protection places particular attention on security and deterrence of threats, while mitigation emphasizes achieving resilience by reducing vulnerabilities. Both seek to minimize consequences and have a shared focus on critical infrastructure.

Addressing the security of that infrastructure falls within the Protection mission area, and addressing the resilience of the infrastructure falls within the Mitigation mission area.

The Response mission area includes the capabilities necessary to save lives, protect property and the environment, and meet basic human needs after an incident. Effective community mitigation efforts directly limit the impact of an emergency or disaster, thereby reducing the required scale of response operations and associated costs of response.

Threat and hazard information and risk assessment data can trigger crucial lifesaving and life-sustaining operations, particularly during natural disasters. Tools, such as inundation mapping for flood events, can be used to plan and determine appropriate lifesaving actions.

The National Planning Frameworks explain the role of each mission area in national preparedness. The concepts included in the frameworks are used to guide operational planning, which provides further information regarding roles and responsibilities, identifies the critical tasks in executing the core capabilities, and identifies resourcing, personnel, and sourcing requirements across the whole community.

The Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 provides guidance for developing emergency operations plans at the local, state, tribal, and territorial levels. It promotes a common understanding of the fundamentals of risk-informed planning and decision making to help planners produce integrated, coordinated, and synchronized plans. Even though CPG 101 was designed for emergency management planners, certain elements of CPG 101—the basics of planning, format and function of planning, and planning processes—also apply to mitigation planning at the local, state, tribal, and territorial levels.

For more information, review the Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 (https://www.fema.gov/plan).

At the Federal level, each framework is supported by a mission-area-specific Federal Interagency Operational Plan (FIOP). The FIOPs describe the concept of operations for integrating and synchronizing existing national-level Federal capabilities to support local, state, tribal, territorial, insular-area, and Federal plans. These FIOPs are based on the idea that success relies upon a whole community approach and is dependent upon Federal interagency collaboration and integration.

Departments, agencies, Federal coordinating structures, and interagency partnerships should use the FIOPs as a guide for operations and to build a resilient nation. In using the FIOPs, it is important to recognize that success relies upon a whole community approach and is dependent upon Federal interagency collaboration and integration.

The FIOP begins with a list and brief description of planning assumptions that establish context for the Concept of Operations, Authorities and References, and Annexes sections. Next, the Concept of Operations section describes how Federal capabilities that support mitigation activities throughout the whole community are integrated, synchronized, managed, and delivered.

A concept of operations is a written or graphic statement that clearly and concisely explains what the decision maker/leader intends to accomplish in an operation using the available resources.

For more information, you can view all available FIOPs (http://www.fema.gov/federal-interagency-operational-plans).

The FIOP describes a review cycle with a clear frequency and timeline, monitoring process, and assigned roles and responsibilities.

It identifies a responsible entity and process for recording and documenting lessons learned from exercises, disasters, and other incidents that have made a significant impact on the Mitigation mission area.

The section describing the review cycle will assign roles and responsibilities to all Federal departments and agencies that will review, adjudicate policy level issues, and approve the Mitigation FIOP.

Each Federal executive department and agency develops department-level operations plans.

Department-level operations plans describe how the organization will deliver mitigation core capabilities to fulfill their responsibilities as described in the Framework and FIOP. They identify the specific critical tasks, responsibilities, and resources required to fulfill the department’s mission area.

Operational plans are used to determine priorities, objectives, and strategies that help protect against potential threats.

There are several resources in place to support the Mitigation mission.

To assist National Mitigation Framework users, FEMA maintains an online repository that contains electronic versions of the National Mitigation Framework documents, as well as information, training materials, and other tools to assist mitigation partners in understanding and executing their roles under the National Mitigation Framework.

National Mitigation Framework (http://www.fema.gov/national-mitigation-framework)

We have reached the end of this lesson. In the lesson, we described the coordinating structures used to support mitigation. Specifically, we discussed:

• Local coordinating structures
• Multi-jurisdictional, state, tribal, territorial and sector coordinating structures
• Federal coordinating structures
• National coordinating structures
• Science and technology
• The relationship of Mitigation to the other mission areas
• Operational Planning
• Supporting Resources

Let’s take a look at some the key points that were discussed throughout the course.

The goal of this course was to familiarize you with the National Mitigation Framework, which outlines how the nation can expand its commitment to mitigation and strengthen resilience.

The National Mitigation Framework, which is part of the National Preparedness System, establishes a common platform and forum for coordinating and addressing how the Nation manages risk using mitigation capabilities and describes mitigation roles across the whole community.

The National Mitigation Framework addresses the capabilities necessary to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters.

The National Mitigation Framework sets out four principles that guide the development and execution of the core capabilities for Mitigation. These are:

1. Resilience and Sustainability
2. Leadership and Locally Focused Implementation
3. Engaged Partnerships and Inclusiveness and
4. Shared Risk-conscious Culture.

Several partners have a role in mitigation, including:

• Community members and the private sector
• Individuals, families, and households
• Communities and community organizations
• Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)
• Private-sector entities
• Local governments
• State, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments
• Federal government

The way we can measure, describe, and implement our security and resilience techniques is through core capabilities. Mitigation core capabilities including the following:

• Cross-cutting Core Capabilities
• Planning
• Public Information and Warning
• Operational Coordination
• Mitigation Core Capabilities
• Community Resilience
• Long-term Vulnerability Reduction
• Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment
• Threats and Hazards Identification

Several coordinating structures are used to support mitigation. These include:

• Local coordinating structures
• Multi-Jurisdictional, State, Tribal, Territorial and Sector Coordinating Structures
• Federal coordinating structures
• National Security Council
• Sector-Specific Agencies
• Mitigation Framework Leadership Group

Science and technology (S&T) is essential for continuous improvement of National Preparedness. Effective mitigation relies upon the whole community’s ability to establish science-based understanding of their threats and hazards and make well-informed decisions to reduce risks as a result.

Operational planning provides further information regarding roles and responsibilities, identifies the critical tasks in executing the core capabilities, and identifies resourcing, personnel, and sourcing requirements across the whole community.

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 provides guidance for developing emergency operations plans at the local, state, tribal, and territorial levels.

At the Federal level, each framework is supported by a mission-area-specific Federal Interagency Operational Plan (FIOP). The Mitigation FIOP includes a list and brief description of planning assumptions that establish context for the Concept of Operations, Authorities and References, and Annexes sections.