1.1.3 Participation and Level of participation and 5 Effective participation of all Effectiveness of participation and – coordination of all relevant coordination achieved (see right) relevant agencies, private and coordination can be measured by: organizations in the structure(s) public, in pre-event and event defined. response activities. Attendance at meetings as required with of the right level for the decisions 4 Effective participation but being made; – with some minor exceptions Timely and complete provision of agreed 3 Participation but with physical contributions (see below) – significant gaps in participation, or failing to resolve some Absence of disagreement on roles, overlap, duplication etc. strategy, methods etc; 2 Some participation, perhaps Achievement of planned timelines and – between pairs of agencies but milestones; – not universal. Subject is receiving significant attention, Extent to which proven either in practice however. or by simulation exercises (see essential 9). 1 Intent exists to improve – coordination but so far no Documented agreements to collaborate. impact. 0 Collaboration is poor and no – intent to improve it. 1.1.4 Co-option of physical Identification of physical 5 All key contributions Physical contributions refer to plant and – contributions by both public and contributions for each major defined for pre and post-event, equipment, people, premises and private sectors. organization. underwritten by MOUs. accommodation, supplies, data, computer systems, and so on. These will supplement those provided by the city and may come from 4 Most key contributions – defined some minor gaps in other agencies or from private sector – organizations such as those defined above. coverage. MOUs may not exist. The key is to have a clear view of what will be 3 Some contributions formally – defined but full leverage of needed to supplement the city’s own resources (defined in essential 9); and then to enter into private sector yet to be achieved.
1.1.3 Participation and coordination of all relevant organizations in the structure(s) defined. Level of participation and coordination achieved (see right) 5 – Effective participation of all relevant agencies, private and public, in pre-event and event response activities. 4 – Effective participation but with some minor exceptions 3 – Participation but with significant gaps in participation, or failing to resolve some overlap, duplication etc. 2 – Some participation, perhaps between pairs of agencies – but not universal. Subject is receiving significant attention, however. 1 – Intent exists to improve coordination but so far no impact. 0 – Collaboration is poor and no intent to improve it. Effectiveness of participation and coordination can be measured by: Attendance at meetings as required with of the right level for the decisions being made; Timely and complete provision of agreed physical contributions (see below) Absence of disagreement on roles, strategy, methods etc; Achievement of planned timelines and milestones; Extent to which proven either in practice or by simulation exercises (see essential 9). Documented agreements to collaborate. 1.1.4 Co-option of physical contributions by both public and private sectors. Identification of physical contributions for each major organization. 5 – All key contributions defined for pre and post-event, underwritten by MOUs. 4 – Most key contributions defined – some minor gaps in coverage. MOUs may not exist. 3 – Some contributions formally defined but full leverage of private sector yet to be achieved. Physical contributions refer to plant and equipment, people, premises and accommodation, supplies, data, computer systems, and so on. These will supplement those provided by the city and may come from other agencies or from private sector organizations such as those defined above. The key is to have a clear view of what will be needed to supplement the city’s own resources (defined in essential 9); and then to enter into
Resilience%20Scorecard%20Updated%20V2%20-%20April%2030th%202015.docx