One of the common questions I get asked is, “What is an emergency operations center (EOC)?” It’s usually a variation on one of two themes:
- Is it the facility or the people?
- Is its main function command or coordination?
While the questions seem simple, the answers are not. Like so many things in emergency management, the EOC is a moving target that is constantly evolving based on operational experience and shifting policies and strategies. Redefining terms also contributes to the confusion. Finally, the ultimate defining factor of the EOC is operational context, the environment in which it operates. To understand how these three factors influence the EOC, let’s consider the evolution of the EOC.
The earliest document I have on hand relating to EOCs is Civil Preparedness Guide 1-20 Emergency Operating Center (EOC) Handbook dated May 29, 1984. Here is how it defines the EOC:
A central facility--from which all local emergency efforts can be coordinated and directed--is essential for emergency response and recovery. This means that government must prepare for the possibility of an emergency that will significantly change operating procedures. Government must be ready to direct and control emergency operations. This facility is referred to as an Emergency Operating Center (EOC).
Notice the emphasis here on direction and control. Also note that it specifically refers to the EOC as the facility. This document is an artifact from the Cold War and based on the mistaken belief that strong central control was essential in relief operations as people could not be expected to respond appropriately and in their own best interest. The organization was extremely simple with only three groups – Disaster Analysis and Coordination, Operations and Operational Response, and Rescue – overseen by the emergency management director supported by a small group of liaison officers. The chief executive was in overall charge, of course, supported by a policy group consisting of department heads and other executives.
Starting in the late 1980’s we begin to see a shift away from this simple structure to reflect emerging doctrine based on two concepts. The first was the adoption of the Incident Command System developed in the early 1970’s to address the need for interagency coordination during California wildfires. ICS was adopted as a major component of the National Incident Management System in 2004. The other was the Emergency Support Function concept developed by FEMA Region IX to support interagency coordination during major earthquakes and incorporated into the National Plan for Federal Response To a Catastrophic Earthquake in the mid-1980s. There had been several largely unsuccessful attempts to merge the two systems, such as the National Response Plan in 2004. The interim version of Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 Producing Emergency Plans: A Guide for All-Hazard Emergency Operations Planning for State, Territorial, Local, and Tribal Governments in July 2008 included the ESF system as an emergency operations plan format while including a full discussion on ICS with little specific guidance on how to integrate the two. However, this has always been a bit of a forced marriage.
Note that these concepts were originally intended to support either federal needs or on-site event management and were not specifically intended for use in EOCs. However, there has always been a tendency for state and local plans to mirror federal level plans and both concepts were adapted for local use. The result of this is that there is no standard EOC organization and jurisdictions are free to use whichever system works best. I see this as a good thing as I think we are in danger of becoming overly standardized with the push for resource typing. I mentioned earlier that operational context is the deciding factor and that includes corporate culture. Corporate culture is the basis on which people within an organization interact with each other and how decisions. While the hierarchical approach inherent in ICS might work well for some, the ESF concept or some other format may work better for others.
There is another important shift that has taken place over time. The National Incident Management System Emergency Operations Center How-To Quick Reference Guide published August 2021 slightly modifies the definition of the EOC:
An EOC is a physical or virtual location from which leaders of a jurisdiction or organization coordinate information and resources to support incident management activities (on-scene operations).
This definition is echoed in the current version of CPG 101, published in 2021.
Note the shift from direction and control to coordination of information and the provision of support to on-scene operations. This reflects our better understanding of how people will react in disaster situations and our emphasis on community involvement. It clearly delineates the difference between the tactical and operational levels in response and clearly defines the relationship between the EOC and field ICS structures. Is the EOC confined to coordination only? Definitely not. Again, operational context drives response. I have seen EOC used as area commands and even as incident command posts. Generally, these have been smaller jurisdictions or very specific events. Generally, the larger the incident, the more the EOC will need to focus on resource coordination and information analysis.
Another key point in the definition is the acknowledgement that we are becoming more technologically dependent. Emergency management software, mapping programs, drone surveillance - all of these are increasing our ability to respond effectively. Virtual EOCs that allow for participation from multiple locations can solve a lot of issues that we currently have with physical EOCs. However, they do have their own set of problems and we need to be cognizant about them.
To answer the questions I posed earlier, “the EOC” refers to the physical location. How that location is used and how it staffed is hasn’t really been defined and the guidance we do have also for tremendous flexibility. Keep that in mind and keep your focus on the operational context.
Comments