NIMS vs Agency Command

BY MICHAEL J. BARAKEY

Following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-5 requiring the development and implementation of the National Incident Management System (NIMS) was issued. This framework mandated that public safety response agencies improve coordination and cooperation and prepare the groundwork for efficient and effective responses. Moreover, this framework was to enable all levels of government-local, state, federal, and tribal agencies and responders-to speak the same language in a unified approach to preparing for, preventing, responding to, and mitigating incidents. Consequently, the agencies and responders that would mitigate the complex, multiagency, or multijurisdictional natural disaster or act of terrorism would be more effective and efficient through the auspices of NIMS. These expectations were not just for major incidents but also for any responses necessitating multiple agencies to work together to mitigate the problem.

In addition to having NIMS enable public safety agencies to speak a common language, become interoperable, and manage incidents through unification, NIMS was also to standardize damage assessments and facilitate a seamless transition into recovery and restoration. In the years following 9/11, millions of dollars in federal grants and training budgets were earmarked and injected to train, equip, and educate public safety responders on the value of communicating with each other, developing and implementing one incident action plan, and providing for a coordinated response based on the incident objectives and strategies developed by a unified command.