| Summary: | CHDS State/Local === The homeland security community has struggled with a unifying system to support national preparedness even though states and local jurisdictions have gone to great lengths to enhance their capability. State preparedness reports, with inconsistent ranking systems and measurement tools that are self-assessments of individual capabilities, lack a holistic connection. The literature suggests that a one-size-fits-all assessment system has limited comparative value and has not proven to answer to the unique risks each state faces. By looking at the risk posture in each state and the unique capability needs, a model emerges that includes existing quantitative information and combines it with qualitative efforts sustained in emergency management. This research will introduce a predictive model that balances value-added inputs with intended results enhanced by leadership, with the organizational processes and performance outputs enhanced by management, into a system that delivers the outcomes intended with preparedness and further comparing it with current policy on national preparedness. With the demand by Congress to reconcile the treasury spent on homeland security, emergency management must find a system that balances both the measureable outputs and anecdotal impacts of preparedness that will guide each state toward improvement of its effort and secure strategies for future investments.
|
|---|
