Arizona: One Approach
to doing a THIRA
Session 5-5
Program Management and Sustainment
Presented by:
Lisa Hansen, Assistant Director, Planning and Preparedness,
Arizona Department of Homeland Security
Steve Davis, Project Consultant, All Hands Consulting
1
INTRODUCTIONS
Lisa Hansen - Assistant Director,
Planning and Preparedness
Arizona Department of Homeland Security
 Steve Davis – Project Manager,
Phoenix Strategic Planning Project
All Hands Consulting

2
PREPAREDNESS
 Preparedness
is based on strengthening
our collective security and resilience
through systematic preparation for the
threats that pose the greatest risk.
Adapted from the Strategic National Risk Assessment - 2011
3
ARIZONA’S PREVIOUS EFFORTS
The Arizona Department of Homeland Security
(AZDOHS) conducted a Target Capabilities
Assessment.
 Arizona Division of Emergency Management
(ADEM) conducted a Hazard Identification and
Risk Assessment (HIRA)
 AZDOHS completed the 2011 State
Preparedness Plan (SPR)

4
AZ TARGET CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT
5
STATE OF ARIZONA HIRA
Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
(Does not include Adversarial Threats)
6
(2)
(1) No Capability 0%
Not assessed
Exercises
(3)
Training
(4)
Equipment
(5) 100% Capable
Organization
ARIZONA SPR
Planning
Public Information and Warning
Operational Coordination
Forensics and Attribution
Intelligence and Information Sharing (Prevention Focus)
Interdiction and Disruption (Prevention Focus)
Screening, Search, and Detection (Prevention Focus)
Access Control and Identity Verification
Cybersecurity
Intelligence and Information Sharing (Protection Focus)
Interdiction and Disruption (Protection Focus)
Physical Protective Measures
Risk Management for Protection Programs and Activities
Screening, Search, and Detection (Protection Focus)
Supply Chain Integrity and Security
Community Resilience
Long-term Vulnerability Reduction
Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment
Threats and Hazard Identification
Critical Transportation
Environmental Response/Health and Safety
Fatality Management Services
Infrastructure Systems (Response Focus)
Mass Care Services
Mass Search and Rescue Operations
On-scene Security and Protection
Operational Communications
Public and Private Services and Resources
Public Health and Medical Services
Situational Assessment
Economic Recovery
Health and Social Services
Housing
Infrastructure Systems (Recovery Focus)
Natural and Cultural Resources
Planning
Arizona SPR
Capability Scores
Phoenix UASI Capability Scores
4
5
4
4
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
4
5
4
4
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
4
5
4
4
4
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
5
4
2
5
5
4
4
3
3
5
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
4
3
4
4
3
5
4
5
5
5
4
3
4
4
3
3
4
4
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
5
3
3
3
3
7
STATE STRATEGY

State Strategy Goals:






Enhance Arizona’s Common
Capabilities (Plans, Comms, etc.)
Prevent Terrorist Attacks
Enhance Border Security
Protect Critical Infrastructure & Key Resources
Respond to Incidents
Recover from Incidents
8
PHOENIX UASI STRATEGY PROJECT
Phoenix needed to update their Urban Area
Homeland Security Strategy.
 Phoenix asked to include a THIRA as part of
the process.
 THIRA guidance was not yet issued.
 So, working with the State, we decided to
validate the 2011 SPR as a means of doing
the THIRA.

9
UASI
Homeland
Security
Grant
Lifecycle
Capability
Assessment
Revised
Homeland
Security
Strategy
THIRA
Capabilities
Assessment
UASI Strategy
Assessment/
Review
Conduct THIRA
Planning Begins
for New Grant Cycle
New
Budget
October
September
Funding
Allocation
Final Regional
Training &
Exercise Plan
November
August
January
June
Middle Ring – Process
Outer Ring – Product
UASI Initial
Budget to SAA
Develop
Initial Budget
February
May
Training & Exercise
Plan Workshop
Inner Ring – Time
Prioritize
Core
Capabilities
December
July
Draft Regional
T&E Plan
Prioritized
Core
Capability
Targets
April
Improvement
Plan Conference
Improvement
Plan
Final UASI
Investment
Justifications
March
Review
DHS Guidance
Develop
Investment
Justifications
DHS Guidance
Guidance
Summary &
Budget Guide
Draft UASI
Investment
Justifications
10
PHOENIX STRATEGY

Phoenix Strategy:
Focused on Rapid Response
Teams
 Goals largely achieved
 Needed to be updated
Phoenix wanted a fresh start and
asked that the new Strategy be
based on an assessment of threats
and capabilities.

11
PROJECT APPROACH
Research
 Stakeholders
 THIRA

 Threat
Assessment
 Capabilities Assessment (Estimation)
 Gap Analysis

Update Strategy
12
THIRA GUIDE – IT’S SIMPLE
1. Assesses your threats and hazards
2. Assesses the vulnerability to those hazards
3. Estimate the consequences of those threats and
hazards impacting the community
4. Establish capability targets
5. Estimate current capability vs. target
6. Captures the results of the THIRA and use it to
update your Strategy
13
OUR THIRA PROCESS
Objective: Conduct a State Preparedness Report
(SPR) Validation Exercise to:
 Conduct a Threat and Hazard Identification
and Risk Assessment
 Conduct a Capabilities Estimation
 Perform a Gap Analysis
 Prioritize Select Capabilities to Sustain and
Enhance
 Build and Resource Implementation Steps Allocate Resources Based on Results
14
THIS IS NOTHING NEW
We all have been doing threat assessments,
capability assessments, analyzing gaps, and
updating Strategies for almost 10 years now.
 Now we do THIRA, capability estimation, and
gap analysis to update the Strategy.
 This should be part of the grant lifecycle.
 The difference is: How will the THIRA data be
used?

15
THE 800 POUND GORILLA
16
WHY THE CONCERN ABOUT THIRA?
 What
are they going to do with the data?
 Will it impact funding allocation?
 Inquiring minds want to know!
17
HOW WILL THIRA IMPACT US?
“There are no details yet as to whether states
would be required to provide local governments
with any role in the THIRA examination. FEMA
would then choose which projects to fund from
each state’s THIRA based on national priorities."
National League of Cities
18
NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS SYSTEM
19
NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS SYSTEM

Identify and assess risk (THIRA)

Estimate capabilities needed to address risks

Build or sustain required levels of capability

Develop and implement plans to deliver those
capabilities

Validate and monitor progress

Review continuous improvement efforts
20
THE STATE PREPAREDNESS REPORT TOOL
TRACKS CLOSELY TO THE THIRA PROCESS:





Identify the Threats and Hazards of Concern. (Select a
target for each threat/hazard selected.)
Give Threats and Hazards Context. (Determine which
threat/hazard will require the maximum capacity.)
Examine the Capabilities using the Threats and
Hazards. (Assess capabilities based on threat.)
Set Capability Targets. (What level do you need to
achieve based on the threats.)
Apply the Results. (Use the results to drive Strategy.)
21
VALIDATING THE SPR
Highest Risk Hazard/Threats (Rated 5)
• Flood
• Drought
• Nuclear Accident
• Dam Failure
• Armed Assault
22
VALIDATING THE SPR
• Each threat/hazard is used to put the
capabilities into context.
• For each threat/hazard, we need to
explain the different conditions under
which a threat or hazard might occur.
• The Crosswalk Worksheet lists core
capabilities vertically and threats/hazards
are listed horizontally.
23
STEP 1: SELECT A TARGET FOR EACH
APPLICABLE THREAT/HAZARD
Choose the most appropriate incident
descriptions for each threat/hazard.
 These escalate in severity - minor to very
severe.
 Select the highest severity incident that you
aim to manage using local capabilities only.
 This is your target operational level, not your
current capability.
 Outside mutual aid should not be considered.

24
TRANSPORTATION
What is a “Transportation System Failure” and should it be considered
a hazard?
1. Failure in single-use transportation system; Impact limited to
immediate geographical area.
2. Failure in single-use transportation system; Highly localized effects
on other transportation systems or other services.
3. Failure in multi-use transportation system; Localized effects,
potentially impacting other services.
4. Failure in multi-use transportation system; Multi-state/regional
effects impacting other services and sectors.
5. Failure in multi-use transportation system; National effects
impacting other services.
25
STEP 1: SELECT A TARGET FOR EACH
APPLICABLE THREAT/HAZARD
We worked
in the SPR
spreadsheet
tool to
validate the
entries in
the SPR.
26
STEP 2: PROVIDE ONE THREAT/HAZARD
CONTEXT FOR EACH CAPABILITY
"Which
threat or
hazard will
require the
maximum
capacity?"
27
VALIDATING THE THIRA
• For each capability, select the single
threat/hazard that most stresses it.
• Base your selection the threats/hazards
that are relevant to your jurisdiction.
• Which threat/hazard requires the
maximum capacity for this capability?
28
STEP 3: CONDUCT AN ASSESSMENT
OF EACH CORE CAPABILITY
"How close to the target is the jurisdiction?"
 Current capability levels are assessed in terms of
how close you are to meeting the target hazard level.
 Assessments are made for each of six POETE
capability elements.
 Consider organic assets only. (More later)
 If mutual aid improves your overall assessment, you
indicate the extent of the improvement separately.
 If a capability gap exists, provide a description of the
specific nature of the gap.
29
ASSESSING CAPABILITIES
• Scores indicate the estimated
level of preparedness for each
POETE element.
• The assessment uses a 1‐5 scale,
where level 1 indicates
little‐to‐no capability and level 5
indicates 100% of the capability
desired.
• Each POETE capability element is
rated on the 1‐5 scale.
(5) 100% Capable
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1) No Capability 0%
Not assessed
30
31
GAP ANALYSIS

Each POETE category has a place to capture a
description of gaps, advances and notes.
Gap Description
Enter text here
What specific organizational changes would allow your jurisdiction
to attain a rating of (5) for this capability?
Recent Advances
Describe any recent improvements in organization for this
capability.
Enter text here
Journal Notes
Enter text here
This space is provided exclusively for your use. This content is not
considered as part of your submission. It is intended to provide
you with organizational notes that help establish consistency in
approach form year to year. Sample content could include:
Rationale for choosing the assessment rating
Subject matter experts consulted and points of contact
32
SPR AS THIRA ISSUES
 Organic
Capability and Mutual Aid.
 Impact on Investments
 Understanding Risks
 Using a State Preparedness for a UASI
 Capabilities Issues
 The new NPGP “Vision”
33
ORGANIC CAPABILITY
New term, needs to be understood. - The term
was only used in DoD from what we saw.
 Organic does not mean having a capability
without chemicals.
 It means having a standing capability - the
POETE to do the job.
 We included automatic mutual aid but not
resources that required the state or feds.
 However the State had plans and resources
that could not be ignored.

34
IMPACT ON INVESTMENTS
The THIRA will be used to support Investment
Justifications.
 If an Investment Justification is not linked to
THIRA results, projects may not be funded.
 The Federal Preparedness Coordinator (FPC) in
each FEMA Region is to review State and UASI
THIRAs.

35
USING THE SPR FOR A UASI
The SPR is done at a State-level, UASIs need to
adjust if for their own perspective on threats
and capabilities.
 Threats/Hazards need to be looked at locally
based on what is in other plans and
stakeholder experience.
 While hazards are addressed in HIRA, threats
are not well known in terms of likelihood – it is
more about what you want to prepare for.

36
CAPABILITIES ISSUES




Capabilities may be driven by events outside of your
region. New Madrid, upheaval in Mexico, or a Northridge
scenario may send evacuees to your area for mass care.
Need to think about that and how resources such as ARC
may be depleted.
The SPR tool has the same core capability showing up in
different mission areas. This was confusing.
Cross cutting capabilities looked at by each mission group
but then need to be combined, they have different
perspectives on most stressing hazard and gaps.
37
TRANSLATING THIS TO A STRATEGY
 We
updated the Strategy to:
 Align
with the new Core Capabilities
 Address the gaps for priority Core Capabilities
 Align with the AZDOHS Strategy
 Base implementation steps on resourcing the
prioritized Core Capabilities.
38
RESOURCING THE STRATEGY
 Once
gaps have been identified you need to
work to close the gaps.
 Capabilities (objectives) prioritized based on
gaps.
 Implementation Steps designed close gaps for
priority capabilities.
 Implementation Steps need to be funded to
close the gaps.
39
Equipment
Training
Exercises
4
5
4
4
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
4
5
4
4
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
4
5
4
4
4
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
5
4
2
5
5
4
4
3
3
5
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
4
3
4
4
3
5
4
5
5
5
4
3
4
3
3
3
3
4
3
3
4
4
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
5
Phoenix
UASI 2012
SPR
Current
Capability
Estimations
Planning
Public Information and Warning
Operational Coordination
Forensics and Attribution
Intelligence and Information Sharing (Prevention Focus)
Interdiction and Disruption (Prevention Focus)
Screening, Search, and Detection (Prevention Focus)
Access Control and Identity Verification
Cybersecurity
Intelligence and Information Sharing (Protection Focus)
Interdiction and Disruption (Protection Focus)
Physical Protective Measures
Risk Management for Protection Programs and Activities
Screening, Search, and Detection (Protection Focus)
Supply Chain Integrity and Security
Community Resilience
Long-term Vulnerability Reduction
Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment
Threats and Hazard Identification
Critical Transportation
Environmental Response/Health and Safety
Fatality Management Services
Infrastructure Systems (Response Focus)
Mass Care Services
Mass Search and Rescue Operations
On-scene Security and Protection
Operational Communications
Public and Private Services and Resources
Public Health and Medical Services
Situational Assessment
Economic Recovery
Health and Social Services
Housing
Infrastructure Systems (Recovery Focus)
Natural and Cultural Resources
Planning
Organization
Equipment
Training
Exercises
Organization
Planning
Public Information and Warning
Operational Coordination
Forensics and Attribution
Intelligence and Information Sharing (Prevention Focus)
Interdiction and Disruption (Prevention Focus)
Screening, Search, and Detection (Prevention Focus)
Access Control and Identity Verification
Cybersecurity
Intelligence and Information Sharing (Protection Focus)
Interdiction and Disruption (Protection Focus)
Physical Protective Measures
Risk Management for Protection Programs and Activities
Screening, Search, and Detection (Protection Focus)
Supply Chain Integrity and Security
Community Resilience
Long-term Vulnerability Reduction
Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment
Threats and Hazard Identification
Critical Transportation
Environmental Response/Health and Safety
Fatality Management Services
Infrastructure Systems (Response Focus)
Mass Care Services
Mass Search and Rescue Operations
On-scene Security and Protection
Operational Communications
Public and Private Services and Resources
Public Health and Medical Services
Situational Assessment
Economic Recovery
Health and Social Services
Housing
Infrastructure Systems (Recovery Focus)
Natural and Cultural Resources
Planning
AZ State
2011 SPRScores
Phoenix
UASI Capability
4
4
3
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
5
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
2
6
5
5
4
3
4
4
3
3
403
3
3
3
5
4
3
4
5
3
5
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
3
5
5
2
4
3
3
5
5
5
4
4
4
2
3
3
3
3
4
3
5
3
5
5
5
4
3
4
4
3
5
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
4
4
3
5
3
4
5
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
3
4
4
3
5
4
4
4
3
3
4
3
3
5
5
4
2
5
5
5
4
6
3
6
4
3
3
2
6
5
5
5
3
5
5
3
3
3
4
3
3
5
4
4
4
3
4
4
3 5
3
3 3
4
2
GAP ANALYSIS

The Gap Analysis is to be based on the difference
between the consequences of the threats and
current levels of capabilities
 A capability of 5 has no gap
 A capability of 4 has a small gap
 A capability of 3 a bigger gap, etc…
41
NEW UASI STRATEGY

New goals aligned with the NPG Mission
Areas and Core Capabilities.






Improve Prevention Capabilities
Improve Protection Capabilities
Improve Mitigation Capabilities
Improve Response Capabilities
Improve Recovery Capabilities
Improve Programmatic Capabilities
42
THE END
Questions?
Contact:
Lisa Hansen: LHansen@azdohs.gov
Steve Davis: Steve@AllHands.us
43