Agenda of HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group

HB CDEM Group Joint Committee

Monday 14 May 2018

Subject: Recovery: Proposed changes to the Group Plan

Reason for Report

1. The purpose of this report is to propose changes to the Group Plan to incorporate strategic planning for recovery as required under the amendments to the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 which will come into force on 1 June 2018.

2. The Committee is asked to approve the proposed changes as minor changes to the Group Plan.

Discussion

3. The Civil Defence Emergency Management Amendment Act 2016 requires that from 1 June 2018 any Proposed Plan sent to the Minister incorporate strategic planning for recovery.

4. In December 2017 MCDEM released the Strategic Planning for Recovery: Director's Guideline for Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups [DGL 20/17] to guide Groups in the definition and process of strategic recovery planning. A review of these Guidelines found that in general the Group had already been carrying out strategic planning for recovery consistent with the new Guidelines.

5. This included:

5.1. Incorporating Recovery planning into the Group Plan across the other 3Rs in accordance with the principle of comprehensive emergency management.

5.2. The development and maintenance of a Hawke’s Bay wide risk-scape which considers the built, economic, social, environmental and cultural environments in an integrated way and across communities.

5.3. Collaboration between Group members in hazard research and in the councils response to the results of this research (e.g. liquefaction research and response).

5.4. Inclusion of the consideration of recovery as part of specific community resilience planning processes with communities.

5.5. The collaborative development of the Group Recovery Strategy in 2015 which included outlining recovery structures and governance for Hawke’s Bay post an event and operational tools and checklists. (This can be found at http://www.hbemergency.govt.nz/assets/Documents/hbcdemrecoverystrategyv14extprint.compressed.pdf )

5.6. The appointment of Group and local recovery managers and alternates.

5.7. The inclusion of Transitional Notices into the delegations contained in the Group Plan.

5.8. The development of a recovery work programme including training and exercising.

6. The Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group Plan is due for a full review to commence early 2019. At that time a comprehensive review will be completed (including recovery as one of the 4Rs) and the proposed Plan sent to the Minister for comment.

7. In the interim, the Group Manager and Recovery Manager have consulted with MCDEM staff as to where the Group Plan is considered lacking with regards to the new Guidelines. This included consideration of the Group Recovery Strategy which was adopted in July 2015. This review found some minor changes that could be made. Most of these were a result of the Group having completed the development of the Group Recovery Strategy and as a collective having moved on with its thinking on recovery since the Group Plan was last reviewed in 2014.

8. After reviewing both the Group Plan and Recovery Strategy; and the new Recovery Guidelines, some changes to the Group Plan have been recommended as red tracked changes in Attachment 1 to this report.

9. The most significant changes recommended are as follows:

9.1. Insertion of an additional Outcome under Recovery which reinforces the desire for all agencies with responsibilities in recovery to be aware and prepared for their role in recovery. (p9)

9.2. Stating that ongoing risk reduction is incorporated into recovery both in terms of strategic planning and actual recovery operations. (p26)

9.3. Clarification that recovery does not necessarily involve returning to a “normal” way of life, but does require re-establishing an acceptable quality of life. (p38)

9.4. Aligning the definition of Recovery in the Plan with the amended Act. (p66)

9.5. Updating the Plan to reflect the work done and programmed, for recovery planning completed since the Group Plan was adopted (various locations).

Process

10. In deciding how to progress these recommended changes the Committee will need to consider whether the public consultation requirements of the Act are triggered, or if the changes can be considered as minor under section 57 of the CDEM Act 2002 which reads as follows:

57 Minor changes to plan

(1) Subject to subsection (2), a civil defence emergency management group plan

may be amended by the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group concerned

without a review of the plan under section 56.

(2) A plan may be amended under this section only if the Group is satisfied that

the amendment will have no effect or no likely effect on the rights of any person

and no effect or no more than a minor effect on the obligations of any person

11. An assessment of section 57(2) is as follows:

11.1. The changes are to further strategic recovery planning by the Group and as such there is no change to the rights of individuals. The only time an individual’s rights might be effected is in a recovery operation itself and this is guided by separate processes under the Act (e.g. Transition Notices). The proposed amendments to the Group Plan will therefore have no, or no likely effect on the rights of any person.

11.2. The obligations of any person (or for that matter organisations) are not assessed to be affected by the proposed changes to the Plan. The obligations on organisations in recovery are already set out in the National Plan and other Legislation/Guidelines. There was also significant consultation and collaboration with partner agencies during the development of the Group Recovery Strategy which included defining roles and responsibilities. The proposed changes do seek to codify that responsible organisations are aware and prepared for their stated role in recovery, however this in itself does not a change their existing obligations.

11.3. For the above reasons it is considered that the proposed changes meet the requirements of Section 57(1) of the Act and can be considered without a formal review of the plan.

12. While not a specific consideration under section 57 of the Act, it should also be noted that the Group will commence a full review of the Group Plan in 2019. It is considered more appropriate that recovery be systematically considered at part of the consideration of the 4Rs in a comprehensive emergency management context.

Options Assessment

13. Three broad options can be identified including:

13.1 The status quo or do nothing.

13.2 Propose to change the Group Plan as outlined using the consultation provisions of the CDEM Act.

13.3 Propose to change the Group Plan as outlined as a minor change.

14. Option 1 does not fully provide for consistency with the amended Act or the new Recovery Guidelines. This could be problematic for the Group in the recovery from a significant event.

15. Option 2 achieves consistency with the new national instruments, however this would be detrimental to the existing Group Work Programme which would need to be reprioritised. Furthermore, with the Group being required to completely review the Plan in 2019, this would seem inefficient especially considering the assessment that the proposed changes meet the requirements of section 57 in that they are minor in nature.

16. Option 3 is the recommended option as it achieves the desired effect in the recovery area while not impacting on existing work programs (including actual recovery work) or being done in isolation of a comprehensive review across the 4Rs.

Strategic Fit

17. The proposed changes are consistent with the Civil Defence Emergency Management Amendment Act 2016, the Group Plan and the Group Recovery Strategy.

Financial and Resource Implications

18. There are no significant resource or financial issues with this recommendation unless the Committee resolved to progress under Option 2.

Decision Making Process

19. The Committee is required to make every decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded:

19.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

19.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

19.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of the Administrating Authority’s (HBRC) policy on significance.

19.4. No person has been identified who will be directly affected by this proposal.

19.5. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

19.6. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, the Committee can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.

Recommendations

That the Joint Committee:

1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Administrating Authority’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that the Committee can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision.

2. Resolves to change the Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group Plan as outlined in Attachment 1 to this report.

3. Resolves that the changes as outlined in Attachment 1 to this report, be considered as minor under section 57 of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 in that there is no effect or likely effect on the rights or obligations of any person.

Authored and Approved by:

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager/Controller

Attachment/s

⇨1

HB CDEM Group Plan 2014 to 2019

Under Separate Cover

HB CDEM Group Joint Committee

Monday 14 May 2018

Subject: Amendments to Group Plan: Controller Delegations

Reason for Report

1. Under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (CDEM Act) the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Joint Committee makes appointments to the positions of Controller. These appointments and delegations are contained in the Group Plan and as such represent a minor change to this Plan.

2. This paper seeks confirmation of proposed changes to Controller appointments and resulting changes to the HB CDEM Group Plan.

Confirmation of the Appointments of Group Alternate and Local Hawke’s Bay Controllers

3. Early last year the Committee agreed to appoint Group Controllers and two Hawke’s Bay Local Controllers per Council. This allowed for the rationalisation of controllers while at the same time focusing on developing the selected individuals.

4. At the time it was also discussed that an additional alternate Group Controller should be appointed as the current four identified did not provide sufficient coverage for a sustained response.

5. As part of the just completed Group Office restructure process it was identified that the new position of Operational Readiness Team Leader should have the skills and if appropriate be appointed as an alternate Group Controller. This would provide for an experienced and full time Group staff member to be available to cover the CDEM primary Group Controller when they were unavailable.

6. Subsequently Jim Tetlow was appointed to this position and his bio is attached for consideration for appointment to the role of alternate Group Controller. It is intended Jim be placed on the next available Controllers Development Programme.

7. The Territorial Local Authorities have also confirmed resignations or changes to their local controller appointments. The following changes are therefore recommended and the bios of proposed appointees is attached as Attachment 1:

7.1. Jim Tetlow appointed as Alternative Group Controller.

7.2. The following are recommended to be appointed as Hawke’s Bay Local Controllers:

7.2.1. Kitea Tipuna (Wairoa District Council)

7.2.2. Doug Tait (Central Hawke’s Bay District Council)

7.2.3. Josh Lloyd (Central Hawke’s Bay District Council)

7.2.4. Jon Kingsford (Napier City Council)

8. As a consequence the following would be removed from the Hawke’s Bay Local Controllers list in the Group Plan:

8.1. Te Arohanui Cook

8.2. Steve Thrush

8.3. Glenn Lucas

8.4. James Baty

9. To formally complete this process the Joint Committee must agree to an amendment to the Hawke’s Bay Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan as proposed in sections 7 and 8 above. The proposed amendment is shown as Attachment 2.

Financial and Resource Implications

10. There are no significant financial or resource implications that may result from this decision.

Decision Making Process

11. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

11.1. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

11.2. The decision does not fall within the definition of the Administrating Authority’s (HBRC) policy on significance.

11.3. No person has been identified who will be directly affected by this proposal.

11.4. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

11.5. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, the Committee can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.

Recommendations

That the Joint Committee:

1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision.

2. Resolves to make appointments and changes to the roles of Group and Local Controller as shown in section 7 and 8 of this Report.

3. Resolves to amend the Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group Plan as shown in Attachment 2 of this Report.

Authored and Approved by:

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager/Controller

Attachment/s

⇩1	Biographies of Local Controllers
⇩2	Amendment to the Hawke’s Bay Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan - Controller Appointments

HB CDEM Group Joint Committee

Monday 14 May 2018

Subject: Community Resilience Planning: Update

Reason for Report

1. In line with the CDEM Work Programme and Community Resilience Strategy, Community Resilience Plan (CRP) projects have begun in 10 communities.

2. The purpose of this report is to update and inform the CEG of the outcomes that have occurred as a result of these projects

Background

3. Following the pilot CRP at Tangitu (Bay View – Tangoio) CRPs are underway in Marewa-Napier South, Napier CBD, Mahia Peninsula, Nuhaka, Whakai, Iwitea, Porangahau, Maraekakho and Ocean Beach.

4. Community resilience planning is a process where communities come together to discuss their hazards and risks, what impacts these may have on their community, and what knowledge, skills and resources they have to respond to an emergency. They are also encouraged to identify what community assets would want to retain or build following a major emergency event, as well as identifying projects that could be undertaken now which would increase resilience. The role of CDEM staff is to guide and advise the community in this process. Where appropriate this may include assisting with implementation projects.

5. Organisations and businesses in the community are approached to see if they would be willing to be involved in planning a community meeting. This planning group organises and helps facilitate the community meetings, and becomes a ‘go to group’ for CDEM in that community.

6. The CRP process provides a chance for people in the community to connect and spend time together; in this way the CRP process itself is resilience building as increasing the connectedness and networks within communities makes them more likely to come together to look after each other and share resources in an emergency.

7. Community meetings are run like a workshop, with residents contributing knowledge and ideas on different topics. This information is recorded in a Community Resilience Plan document.

8. There has been very positive feedback from communities about this process. Turnout at community meetings has been really encouraging, and the atmosphere at the meetings has been very positive.

9. Community champions have emerged either from the planning group- or from projects that have come out of the process (such as identifying tsunami routes).

10. In the Esk floods, where a CRP had been completed, the community activated with regular Facebook posts, checking and supporting each other and liaising with ECC logistics staff to help identify and organise local resources. CDEM staff who had been involved in the CRP had a greater familiarity and understanding of the local community, which enhanced the CDEM response. Post the Esk flood, community members feel they need to have a more focused element to the plan on providing shelter for flood and tsunami evacuees, and are planning on convening and running another community meeting process later this year to better address as a community this element of their risk-scape.

Recommendation

That the Civil Defence Emergency Management Coordinating Executives Group receives the “Community Resilience Planning Update” report.

Authored by:

Jae Sutherland

Emergency Management Advisor (Community Engagement)

Approved by:

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager/Controller

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HB CDEM Group Joint Committee

Monday 14 May 2018

Subject: Group Manager’s General Update

Reason for Report

1. The purpose of this report is to inform or update the Joint Committee on a number of matters not specifically addressed in other items on this agenda and to give the Committee an opportunity to ask questions and give feedback if desired.

2. The matters covered in this report include:

2.1. Training and exercising

2.2. New method of operations implementation

2.3. Hastings emergency management facility alterations

2.4. Group Initial Response Planning

2.5. Group Office Restructure and Implementation

2.6. Group Funding Review

2.7. Lifelines update

2.8. Recovery update

2.9. Welfare update

2.10. Group Volunteer Strategy update

2.11. Group Work Programme update and review

Discussion

Training and Exercising

3. In late 2016 the Coordinating Executives Group (CEG) adopted a centralised online Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) induction course for all new council staff across the region. The Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group online induction was consequently adopted by HBRC as part of their staff induction process and all new staff who have joined HBRC since February 2017 have completed this training. Overall the course has been rated well by staff who have completed it and has provided them with a basic understanding of CDEM.

4. A letter was sent to the HR departments of other Group council members asking that this training to be incorporated into all council induction processes as per the decision of the CEG. However, currently only HBRC have been using the course. Napier City and Hastings District Councils have investigated using it recently, and we are working with these councils to achieve this. The Group office will continue to work will all of the Councils to implement this initiative.

5. The CDEM Integrated Training Framework (ITF) Foundation course is the basic introduction to working in a coordination facility and has previously been presented as a face-to-face course. Recently this course became available as an online course, which can be completed in stages, so staff are now being given this option to complete the course. This eliminates the need for staff to attend a half day training and allows better use of the face-to-face training time we have with them.

6. Six of the two day ITF Intermediate Coordination Centres course have been held between December 2017 and April 2018. Approximately 90 staff from across the councils have attended. This course has been well received by those who have attended and ensures that staff identified to work within a coordination centre have a basic understanding of the key processes that take place during a response. This course is the pre-requisite to the ITF Advanced (role/function specific) course which are beginning to come available and will be rolled out in Hawke’s Bay during the next 18 months.

7. Two of the newly developed Civil Defence Centre (CDC) Course (Developed by the Group office for the Group) have been delivered. This training is aimed at both staff and volunteers who may potentially establish and work in a CDC during a response. These courses were delivered in facilities that have been identified as potential CDC’s in Hastings and Napier and were attended by 30 staff and volunteers from across the region. A third course is planned for later this year.

8. The Group has not run an exercise since mid-2017 and will not undertake any exercising until late 2018 when the new Hastings facility upgrade has been completed. This will enable us to test our activation and perform staff inductions to the new facility at the same time. A larger all or Group exercise will be planned for early 2019 to test the method of operations and basic procedures, including action planning, status reporting and public information management.

9. The Group office has just reviewed the training management software for managing training paths, staff and course nominations and has decided to move to Integrated Training Management (ITM) which is a web based New Zealand product used by a number of other Groups. This software will allow us to track training attendance, contacts, development pathways and qualifications.

New Method of Operations Implementation

10. Work has continued on the implementation of the new method of operations structure, however progress has been slowed though a key staff member being on parental leave and a need to await the commissioning of the renovated Hastings GECC before developing the systems and processes that will support this.

11. The implementation has also been informed by recent events such as the Eskdale floods. Attached is a draft table which defines levels of response with associated roles and responsibilities in the response (Attachment 1). This will be incorporated into initial response plans and SOPs to be developed.

12. Progress is being made with Hastings, Napier and the Hawke’s Bay Regional Councils on identifying the 45 staff from each, who will be trained and utilised both in a council incident management team and in a Group activation at the GECC.

13. The ongoing support of all councils in implementing this change including the identification of appropriate staff to fill CIMS function role is needed.

Hastings Emergency Management Facility Alterations

14. As discussed at the last Committee meeting, the Hastings Emergency Coordination Centre (GECC) will undergo an upgrade to its building resilience to Importance Level (IL) Four. This will involve the complete retrofit and strengthening of the building’s foundations, structural, and internal components. The project is being funded and managed by the Hastings District Council.

15. The building consent application, physical works procurement, and contractor appointment is scheduled to occur throughout April and May. The physical work is scheduled to begin in the latter part of June 2018, and should be completed prior to the end of the calendar year.

16. Whilst the work is being conducted, the Hawkes’ Bay Civil CDEM Group ECC and Group Office will be temporarily located in Heretaunga House (across the road) in Hastings. This temporary ECC will allow the Group to retain the capability of responding to a small-medium sized event. The physical constraints of the temporary facility will dictate a full response to likely have less than 30 staff activated.

17. The move of radio capability into the temporary facility is still being investigated by HDC IT but will likely be scaled to support a small-medium sized event. Other communication tools (internet and telephony) will be maintained at a high level of resilience. Exact location and access information will be provided to each TLA and Partner agency so that operational level staff know what to do if the facility is activated.

18. The new facility has undergone consultation with Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group office and will allow the group to effectively meet mandated obligations in response. The most up-to-date layout is attached as Attachment 2.

Group Initial Response Planning

19. The second draft of the Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group Initial Action Plan has been sent out to all partner agencies for comment, with a view to the final plan being completed in early June. This plan includes a set of emergency levels designed to assist in determining the response required and facilitate the implementation of the Group method of operations.

20. Fire and Emergency New Zealand have completed a rapid reconnaissance plan as the organisation who will lead this process in an emergency. This plan includes how the process will be coordinated, the agencies that will be involved and the tool that will be used. A web based form has been created in ARC Geographic Information System (GIS) online to enable this process and reconnaissance data can be collected in real time and displayed live in the GECC.

21. Work has begun on developing a sub-response plan for earthquakes as part of the Group initial response plan. A workshop will be held later in the year with all interested parties to ensure that the plan contains all the information required to respond effectively to an earthquake event within the region.

Group Office Restructure and Implementation

22. As discussed at the last Committee meeting, the Group office commenced a review of its structure late last year. The process was completed in March 2018 with the agreement of the local government CEs and approval of the HBRC CE as the employer of the Group office staff.

23. The most up to date structure is attached as Attachment 3. This confirms the development of a function based structure with staff also allocated to individual local authorities and the creation of an Operational Readiness and Community Engagement Team.

24. Two vacancies being the Team Leader Community Resilience and Emergency Management Advisor (Processes and Technology) have been advertised. The new position of Emergency Management Advisor (Public Information Management & Education) will be advertised in late June upon confirmation of the funding as part of the HBRC Long Term Plan (LTP) process.

25. The implementation of this structure will take a couple of months as vacancies are filled, existing projects are re-allocated as appropriate and staff work programmes under the new job descriptions are confirmed.

26. Overall this has been a positive process with staff having significant input and supporting the changes made.

Group Funding Review

27. As part of the local authorities LTP processes, the Councils have proposed to effectively bring together CDEM funding from individual councils into one rate targeted to individual properties and administered by the HBRC.

28. This has been discussed and agreed to, at previous Committee meetings. By way of an update the proposal was included in the five LTPs as proposed. The proposed new target rate will be at $33.04 per property across about 70,000 properties.

29. From comments made at LTP meetings and submissions, most people can identify with the rationale and the fact that as a community they are not paying any more for civil defence than they are at the moment.

30. As part of the funding review some savings were found and these are being used to increase the capability of the Group in event public information management and public education as mentioned in paragraph 24 above.

Lifelines update

31. The Hawke’s Bay Lifelines Group held an annual general meeting in April. At this meeting the Chair (Oliver Postings – NZTA) briefed on a number of projects being undertaken by Lifelines.

32. The Hawke’s Bay Fuel Plan has largely been completed, however there needs to be some work done on operationalising this. In particular there are concerns there are only a few service stations in Hawke’s Bay who have the ability to be connected to a generator to pump fuel if power was out. The Lifelines Group will work with local fuel operators to try and address this.

33. The other significant project is developing a Regional Vulnerability Study for Hawkes Bay. This project will assess the potential impacts of natural hazards on infrastructure servicing the region and identify potential mitigation strategies to reduce that risk where appropriate. The project will follow a similar methodology to projects undertaken by lifelines groups in other regions. Lisa Roberts from the National Lifelines Forum will provide peer review and guidance to the project manager. It is envisaged that once completed this will dovetail neatly into the National Vulnerability Study that is currently being developed.

34. The first step in this project is to take the existing spatial data of the Lifelines networks and feed it into a common web based GIS platform where it could be interrogated and analysed. There would be significant advantages if this could be achieved as it would greatly assist a post-disaster response and recovery process, by enabling data for a range of networks to be displayed on a single platform. This could result in improved response and recovery coordination, and the easy provision of public information on response and recovery progress and priorities.

Recovery update

35. The work programme for the Group Recovery Manager (Mike Adye) has been agreed and is focused Goal 4 of the National CDEM Strategy – “To enhance New Zealand’s capability to recover from civil defence emergencies.”

36. Initial work has been undertaken to meet with a range of organisations and groups with post disaster recovery roles and responsibilities.

37. The key tasks and projects to be completed over the next 18 months include:

37.1. Undertaking recovery desk top exercises with the various organisations with roles and responsibilities in recovery.

37.2. Developing an annual workshop with each of the task groups (Social/welfare, Economic, Natural environment, built environment). Learnings from each workshop will be linked into future exercises.

37.3. Identifying, train and support Group and local Recovery Managers.

37.4. Review of Group Recovery Strategy during 2018/19 financial year.

37.5. Support recovery discussions and outcomes as part of the Community Resilience Planning process.

Welfare update

38. There continues to be a high level of engagement in welfare planning in Hawke’s Bay. The Ministry of Social Development led a workshop on navigation services in emergencies held as part of March Welfare Coordination Group meeting. There was a high level of engagement with this workshop and general agreement that navigation capability should be further understood and developed. A follow up workshop is planned lead by the DHB.

39. The Rural Advisory Group continues to evolve and proves to be an effective mechanism to understand rural needs and use rural sector capability to respond and recover. Several members interested in training as rural liaison role working in the GECC in an emergency to provide effective links to the rural community and coordinate rural response with CDEM. This Group provided very useful support during the resent Eskdale flooding event.

40. The other significant project for the Group Welfare Manager (Alison Prins) has been the development of the Group Welfare Plan and building welfare capacity in communities.

41. Submissions have now closed for the Group Welfare Plan. 11 internal submissions were received. Overall feedback was very positive with no significant gaps identified. Further work has been identified relating to the change in the mode of operations and this is being worked through at the moment.

Group Volunteer Strategy update

42. In early 2017 the CEG directed the Group office to develop a Group wide strategy on Volunteer Management. As a result a volunteer sub-group was established to determine how the Group should utilise volunteers in the future.

43. This sub-group met in April 2017, however during the discussion it became clear that a better understanding of the current level of volunteering across the Group in terms of numbers and capability was needed, and further information was required to determine how volunteering should be approached within the Group in the future.

44. A volunteer needs analysis was completed in the latter half of 2017 to enable a better understanding of the current state of volunteering within the Group and help determine how this could be structured into the future.

45. This needs analysis identified that whilst there is a need for volunteering to support a response within the Group, the way in which the existing volunteer pool is engaged, trained and utilised could be improved.

46. These findings were built into the development of a draft Strategy. The CEG sub-group decided that the Group should continue to support volunteering at its current level, however, the resources employed in developing and maintain this capability must be targeted and enhance capability in areas where our partner agencies and other volunteer groups are unable to provide assistance, as identified in the needs analysis.

47. The sub-group also identified that volunteering opportunities need to be consistent across the entire region and needed to be flexible enough to allow for people with a range of circumstances to be involved. In addition, the Group must ensure provision is made for community and spontaneous volunteers to be involved in any response.

48. As a result of this discussion a draft Group Volunteer Strategy has been developed for consultation. This document details how the identified needs of the Group will be met by a volunteer pool. The strategy will be accompanied by a Group Volunteer Management Plan which will provide specific detail regarding how this strategy will be implemented to ensure volunteers are engaged, maintained and utilised effectively as part of the Group.

49. It is intended the final draft Strategy will be presented for CEG approval at its August meeting and the outcome will be reported to the Joint Committee.

Group Work Programme update and review

50. At its meeting in April, the CEG reviewed progress on the Group Work Programme. Attachment 4 is an outline of the tasks completed and still under action.

51. At this meeting the CEG also decided that a complete review of the Group Work Programme was needed to take into account the review of the Group Plan in 2019 and the new resources available under the new Group office structure.

This review will occur over the next couple of months and will be presented to the CEG for approval at its next meeting in August. Once the CEG have approved the review this will be reported to the Joint Committee.

Recommendation

1. That the Joint Committee Group receives the “Group Manager’s General Update” report.

Authored and Approved by:

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager/Controller

Attachment/s

⇩1	Level of Emergency
⇩2	Facility Floorplan
⇩3	Group Office Structure
⇩4	Group Work programme

Item	Topic	Raised By
1.
2.