Tag ExPlan

Improving the HSEEP Templates

Tim Riecker, The Contrarian Emergency Manager Leave a comment

For years it has bothered me that the templates provided for the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) are lacking.  The way the documents are formatted and the lack of some important content areas simply don’t do us any favors.  These templates go back to the origination of HSEEP in the early 2000s and they have seen little change since then.  It gives me concern that the people who developed these have struggled with concepts of document structuring and don’t understand the utility of these documents. 

I firmly believe that the documents we use in exercise design, conduct, and evaluation should be standardized.  Many of the benefits of standardization that we (should) practice in the Incident Command System (ICS) certainly apply to the world of exercises, especially when we have a variety of different people involved in each of these key phases of exercises and entering at different times.  Much like an incident, some people develop documents while others are users.  Both should count on a measure of standardization so they don’t have to figure out what they are looking at and how to navigate it before actually diving into the content.  That doesn’t mean, however, that standards can’t evolve to increase utility and function. 

I’ve written in the past about the dangers of templates.  While they are great guides and reminders of certain information that is needed and give us an established, consistent format in which to organize it, I still see too many people not applying some thinking to templates.  They get lost in plugging their information into the highlighted text areas and lose all sense of practicality about why the document is being developed, who the target audience for the document is, and the information they need to convey. 

Some of my bigger gripes…

  • Larger documents, such as ExPlans, SitMans, Controller/Evaluator Handbooks, and After-Action Reports MUST have a table of contents.  These documents can get lengthy and a TOC simply saves time in finding the section you are looking for. 
  • Some exercises are complex and nuanced.  As such, key documents such as ExPlans, SitMans, and Controller/Evaluation Handbooks must have designated space for identifying and explaining those situations.  This could be matters of multiple exercise sites and site-specific information such as different scopes of play for those sites, limited scopes of participation for some agencies, statements on the flow and execution of the exercise, and others.
  • Recognize that the first section of an EEG (Objective, Core Capability, Capability Target, Critical Tasks, and sources) is the only beneficial part of that document.  The next section for ‘observation notes’ is crap.  Evaluators should be writing up observation statements, an analysis of each observation, and recommendations associated with each observation.  The information provided by evaluators should be easily moved into the AAR.  The EEG simply does not facilitate capturing this information or transmitting it to whomever is writing the AAR. 
  • The AAR template, specifically, is riddled with issues. The structure of the document and hierarchy of headings is horrible.  The template only calls for documenting observations associated with observed strengths.  That doesn’t fly with me.  There should similarly be an analysis of each observed strength, as well as recommendations.  Yes, strengths can still be improved upon, or at least sustained.  Big missed opportunity to not include recommendations for strengths.  Further, the narrative space for areas of improvement don’t include space for recommendations.  I think a narrative of corrective actions is incredibly important, especially given the very limited space in the improvement plan; plus the improvement plan is simply intended to be an implementation tool of the AAR, so if recommendations aren’t included in the body of the AAR, a lot is missing for those who want to take a deeper dive and see specifically what recommendations correlate to which observations and with an analysis to support them. 

Fortunately, strict adherence to the HSEEP templates is not required, so some people do make modifications to accommodate greater function.  So long as the intent of each document and general organization remains the same, I applaud the effort.  We can achieve better execution while also staying reasonably close to the standardization of the templates.  But why settle for sub-par templates?  I’m hopeful that FEMA’s National Exercise Division will soon take a look at these valuable documents and obtain insight from benchmark practitioners on how to improve them.  Fundamentally, these are good templates and they have helped further standardization and quality implementation of exercises across the nation.  We should never get so comfortable, though, as to let tools such as these become stagnant, as obsolesce is a regular concern. 

I’m interested in hearing what you have done to increase the value and utility of HSEEP templates.  How would you improve these?  What are your pet peeves? 

© 2020 Timothy Riecker, CEDP

Emergency Preparedness Solutions, LLC®

Managing an Exercise Program – Part 7: Develop Exercise Documentation

Tim Riecker, The Contrarian Emergency Manager Leave a comment

This post is part of a 10-part series on Managing an Exercise Program. In this series I provide some of my own lessons learned in the program and project management aspects of managing, designing, conducting, and evaluating Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) exercises. Your feedback is appreciated!

Managing an Exercise Program – Part 1

Managing an Exercise Program – Part 2: Develop a Preparedness Strategy

Managing an Exercise Program – Part 3: Identify Program Resources and Funding

Managing an Exercise Program – Part 4: Conduct an Annual Training & Exercise Planning Workshop.

Managing an Exercise Program – Part 5: Securing Project Funding

Managing an Exercise Program – Part 6: Conducting Exercise Planning Conferences

Managing an Exercise Program – Part 7: Develop Exercise Documentation

Managing an Exercise Program – Part 8: Preparing Support, Personnel, & Logistical Requirements

Managing an Exercise Program – Part 9: Conducting an Exercise

Managing an Exercise Program – Part 10: Evaluation and Improvement Planning

 

First I’d like to say that this series of exercise articles has gotten a fair amount of traffic, which I’m quite grateful for.  I’m hopeful that my thoughts and ideas have been able to help those who are looking for experienced insight into emergency management and homeland security exercises.  Certainly if you have anything that you’d like to contribute or have any questions, please post a comment.

We can’t avoid paperwork – ever.  Documentation in exercises, just like in the incident command system (ICS), is a necessity.  Don’t see it as a burden, though, instead view these documents as outcomes of the planning and decision-making process of exercise design.  Just like an incident action plan (IAP) is the result of the planning process in ICS, the primary documents used in exercises (Exercise Plans, Control and Evaluation Plans, Exercise Evaluation Guides, Situation Manual, and Master Scenario Events List) are outcomes of the processes of exercise design.  The graphic below is from HSEEP Volume 2 and provides a quick reference of each document I just listed.  As you will see, each document meets a specific need and is intended for a specific audience.  I will outline some of my tips on each document (except the presentation) below.

Primary HSEEP Documents

Primary HSEEP Documents

Exercise Evaluation Guides (EEGs)  The National Exercise Program provides a variety of EEG templates on their website.  These are an excellent start for your exercise.  Remember that these can and should be customized for your exercise!  While we use capabilities-based exercise planning concepts, and the capabilities are standardized, both the capacity available to anyone in each capability and the means by which a capability is implemented is going to very broadly across the country.  Bottom line: we don’t all do things the same way and we may not be evaluating an entire capability as it’s commonly defined.  EEGs need to be focused on evaluating objectives within given capabilities.  This means that exercise objectives need to be very well-developed to ensure that we are 1) designing an exercise effectively, and 2) evaluating that exercise appropriately.  If we fail in any of these steps (objective development, exercise design, exercise evaluation) we are simply wasting our time.  If need be, draw in your subject matter experts (likely the folks who will be evaluating these areas of the exercise) and get their input on the development of the EEG.  Also consider what the purpose of the EEG is: it helps guide the evaluator in providing constructive commentary on each exercise objective, which will ultimately contribute toward the After Action Report (AAR).

Situation Manual (SitMan)  A SitMan, as stated in the chart above, is used only in discussion-based exercises and is available to all participants.  It should include all information participants need to know to effectively play their role in the exercise.   The most important aspect of this is context and background of the scenario.  Without a well-developed scenario, players have a difficult time getting their ‘head in the game’.  The SitMan will also outline the exercise structure and rules of play, which can vary widely between exercise types (i.e. seminar, workshop, or table top).  Having a good understanding of this information will help players to know what is expected of them.  Be sure to have this (and all) documents reviewed for readability – your focus should be on the audience!  Under most circumstances, the SitMan can be distributed to participants ahead of time.

Controller/Evaluator Plan/Handbook  This document is very audience-focused and as such should very clearly outline the expectations you have of the controllers and evaluators.  It should fully describe their positions, schedules, locations, and scope, as well as expectations.

Exercise Plan (ExPlan)  The ExPlan is often times the core document that everyone wants a copy of – and largely everyone should have access to.  Consider the ExPlan just like the IAP of an incident.  It fully describes what is taking place, where, when, how, and who is involved.  This document will be as complex as your exercise.  For exercises involving multiple venues, each venue should have its own sub-section in the ExPlan describing all the details of what is happening there.

Master Scenario Events List (MSEL)  The MSEL is the script of the exercise.  It should capture everything that is scheduled to occur – from StartEx to EndEx and everything in between.  The bulk of the document is injects, which should be written in detail and carefully reviewed and edited for content and accuracy.  Contingency or back-up injects should also be included but specially indicated as such.  Simulators should keep track of the actual time an inject was performed and what the response was, if any.  This data can be important for both in-exercise follow-up as well as post-exercise evaluation.

Other Documents  Don’t get stuck within the confines of what’s defined by HSEEP.  If you find that you need something else, create it and use it.  I’ve found on several exercises that a very detailed scenario, perhaps even including simulated situation reports and incident action plans is needed.  We’ve come to regard this document as a Ground Truth.  The information in a ground truth doesn’t necessarily need to go to everyone (thus not including it in the ExPlan), especially if the exercise will cover multiple operational periods/shift changes, as the ground truth information is largely only relevant to the starting players.

What tips or experiences do you have with exercise documents?  What other documents have you formulated to meet needs?

Thanks for reading, and be on the look out for Managing an Exercise Program – Part 8: Prepare Support Personnel and Logistical Requirements