"Specialty" Teams and Resources - Are we ready?

[helicopper 1,050]

This article was written this spring by someone but never published because it is a very local problem. Given the discussion about the Hastings technical rescue call, I was asked to post it here to start a discussion, not about a single call or single resource but rather the problems we face here in the Hudson Valley.

Part-time specialty teams and resources come in many forms and exist for many purposes but have widely disparate capabilities. Recent observations of some “teams” in action have caused me to question the efficacy of “specialty teams” that only meet and/or train once a month – or even less frequently. Isn’t the definition of specialist someone with advanced, technical training and experience in a particular area? Shouldn’t they be the experts in the field?

Spring training is six weeks long (full-time) for professional baseball players who (hopefully) are conditioned and already knowledgeable in the game. Why? Because you can’t function as a team and win if you don’t practice and perform as one. For example, how many marine units are already training and drilling for the demands of the upcoming season? Or are we just going to pull the covers off the boat, push it back into the water, and hope that everyone remembers their job? US Airways flight 1549 caused many spirited discussions about the response to a major incident on the water yet there haven’t been any large drills or mobilization exercises to prepare for one. We’ll just hope that they will turn left instead of right next time too. Would the outcome have been the same if the pilot was part-time and flew just when needed?

Marine units are just a convenient and timely example. The same can be said of any team or resource that is expected to function flawlessly in a time of great stress and under adverse conditions. Before you say “but training once a month is enough” ask yourself these questions. Would you put your family on an airplane to go on vacation if the pilot only flew one day a month? Would you entrust a loved one to a surgeon who only operated one day a month? Would you go to your family doctor for cardiac surgery? Even these are questionable examples because doctors and pilots have comprehensive training prior to even being afforded the opportunity to serve you.

When a US citizen was being held captive by pirates, did the Navy turn to a part-time sniper to protect him? Of course not! The Navy turned to the SEALS, a highly specialized team of experts who train full-time for every imaginable situation in the hopes that they won’t be needed but with the knowledge that they eventually will.

Administrators turn to part-time specialties as the way of being everything to everyone while at the same time being fiscally conservative. The reality is that the liability is greater than the savings! If you turn to a canine and handler who only train once a month and expect that they can find the lost child or explosive device or contraband, is that a realistic expectation? What are the consequences if they fail? Injury, death, property damage, lawsuits, negative media attention? Will the administrator be held accountable?

The same analogy can be used for any specialized resource in any emergency discipline; aviation, marine, SCUBA, ice rescue, high angle rescue, confined space, swift-water rescue, K-9, SWAT, marksman, trauma surgeon, explosives and hazardous materials, the list goes on.

Of course minimum standards exist to ensure that when we ask for a specialized asset we receive what we expect, right? You can only hope! Resource typing was created (and it was created long before NIMS) to make it possible for incident managers to request and receive a round peg for a round hole but the typing standards for everything but wildfire resources have been contested and debated until they were so watered down that almost every administrator can claim to have a Type 1 something. Being a typed resource has to mean something. Whether typed by self-assessment or an outside review, it has to be honest and realistic. When you’re requested as a Type 2 resource, the expectation is that you have the knowledge, skills, and experience to perform at that level. If you don’t you’re misleading yourself and the people you’re coming to aid. We can’t all be Type 1 or Type 2 anything. We, thankfully, don’t have the responses to gain that level of experience and there’s no shame in that. When an incident exceeds our capabilities, call in those with more experience to assist.

We can be the Navy and have our SEALS ready to respond but only if we’re united. Every town, village, and city can not afford to have, nor should they have, their own full-time specialized resources for every possible scenario. It is simply not feasible for most jurisdictions to sustain even part-time teams. With a united approach, however, each municipality can contribute a component to a team with a regional focus. For decades there have been “task forces” to combat narcotics, auto crimes, and gangs or to investigate arsons or suspicious fires yet there is resistance to this approach for other specialties. It may be that grant programs forced participation in these task forces but they do work. The “special operations task force” developed by the career chief’s (fire) of Westchester County is another example of such collaboration. None of the participating departments can alone mobilize the numbers of personnel and equipment that the task force collectively brings to bear.

Territorialism and insular thinking has no place in the world of emergency services today especially given the economy we’re suffering through. It is time to be creative and use models and solutions that have been successful elsewhere right here.

[firefighter36 52]

That is not a local problem in Westchester. It exists in a lot of places. All too often it becomes an issue just as was discussed in the other post. I'd even go so far as to say we can't handle the job as our departments/districts/agencies currently operate. Many politicians and maybe even some higher-ups within our local and county-level commands would probably shrug off the costs of such equipment, teams, etc. because it "won't happen in their jurisdiction."

What it comes down to is how do we make the most effective use of our staffing, resources, and funding to make sure that when and if an incident of some magnitude happens, that the special resources we may require respond with trained personnel, in a prompt and professional manner?

I don't think we'll be ready for any such venture until we can convince those who fund our operations (taxpayers, politicians, etc.) that these needs are truly needed and are important enough. Hell, in most places, we can't even have adequate police, fire, or EMS staffing for our daily duties! How can we expect to be taken seriously if we request special equipment and training?

Edited August 30, 2009 by mbendel36