Agenda of HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group

Civil Defence Email 2

Meeting of the HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group

Joint Committee

Date: Friday 22 April 2016

Time: 1.00pm

Venue:

Council Chamber

Hawke's Bay Regional Council

159 Dalton Street

NAPIER

Agenda

Item Subject Page

1. Welcome/Notices/Apologies

2. Conflict of Interest Declarations

3. Confirmation of Minutes of the HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group held on 24 March and 14 December 2015

4. Matters Arising from Minutes of the HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group held on 24 March and 14 December 2015

Decision Items

5. Amendments to the Group Plan: Controllers 3

6. Capability and Assessment 2015 Report 5

Information or Performance Monitoring

7. Group Work Programme Update 33

8. 2015-16 Annual Plan KPIs Update 37

Public Excluded Items

9. Changes to CDEM Staff Structures 47

HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group

Joint committee

Friday 22 April 2016

Subject: Amendments to the Group Plan: Controllers

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 Group and Local Controller. These 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 Local Controller appointments and, as a result, proposes resulting changes to the HB CDEM Group Plan.

Financial and Resource Implications

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

Confirmation of the Appointments of Local and Alternate Local Controllers

4. Each of the Territorial Local Authorities currently identifies Local Controllers and Alternate Local Controllers.

5. Each Territorial Local Authority was asked to confirm current titles and the names of the appointees so that the Joint Committee can be informed and if necessary make any amendments to the Group Plan.

6. Correspondence from the Territorial Local Authorities confirms the following changes are required:

6.1. Napier City Council

6.1.1. Delete Bill MCWATT (resigned)

6.1.2. Appoint Adele HENDERSON

6.2. Hastings District Council

6.2.1. Delete Dennis MORGAN (resigned)

6.2.2. Delete Alice HEATHER (resigned)

7. 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 section 6 above.

Decision Making Process

8. 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:

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

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

8.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of the Administrating Authority’s policy on significance (for the Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group this is the HBRC).

8.4. There are no persons affected by this decision.

8.5. There are no other options as the appointment of controllers is a requirement of the Act.

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

8.7. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, 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 Committee:

1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in HBRC’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.

2. Resolves to make the appointment of a new local controller as detailed in section 6.1 of this report.

3. Resolves to make amendments to Appendix 5: Key Appointments of the operative Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group Plan as detailed in section 6 of this report.

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager/Controller

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group

Joint committee

Friday 22 April 2016

Subject: Capability and Assessment 2015 Report

Reason for Report

1. In 2010 the Ministry of Civil Defence Emergency Management completed its first Monitoring and Evaluation process (M&E) on the Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group. This report recommended a number of areas across the 4Rs where the Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group needed to make improvements.

2. The recommendations of this report were collated and corrective action plans and priorities put in place.

3. In July 2015 MCDEM carried out the second M&E assessment and interviewed a number of people across the Group and partner agencies. Based on this M&E process, the Hawke’s Bay Capability and Assessment Report 2015 was received on 31 August and was accepted by the CEG at its meeting on 30 October. A copy of the report is attached to this item.

Discussion

4. The report shows an improvement in performance and capability across all four of the assessed CDEM Goals and the one Enabler assessed in 2010. Enabler Two is a new area of assessment which was not assessed in 2010. The scores mean that the Group has now moved from a “Developing” to “Advancing” category.

5. This represents an overall increase in score from 51.4% to 60.8%. While this is less that the 64% target set by the Minister the overall comments show some significant improvements and progress have been made and that any remaining areas of weakness have already been identified for improvement and in some cases addressed since the assessment was completed in July.

6. Since the July assessment the Group has firmed up the key work streams in the Work Programme and has completed the recruitment process to put in place the resources needed to effectively implement a number of key projects. These key projects will address many of the issues raised in the Report and start in the New Year. These are commented on as follows:

7. Training and Exercising. One of the key projects in the Group Work Programme is building the capability of the staff working in Council emergency operations centres and community volunteers. This will be achieved by identifying the training needs and developing a training and exercise programme to achieve these needs.

8. In addition the Group wide Exercise Te Matua a Maui and associated build up training was completed in November. This exercise will be discussed in another item on this agenda.

9. Community Response Planning. This project aims to identify the key requirements and components of a programme of Community Response Plans for the Hawkes Bay CDEM Group. It will establish a process for prioritising the environmental hazards and risks of the different communities within the Hawke’s Bay region, and the areas where Community Response Plans need to be implemented.

10. This project will work in conjunction with planning already underway on the Cape Coast project. As part of this project a template is being developed – which could be applied to other areas if appropriate. A finalised template for guidance will be shared across the Group for consistency and to assist with implementation.

11. Community Response Plans require engagement with the local communities at various levels and with different community groups. This Project will establish generic levels and methods for engagement while ensuring they are adaptable to specific local community groups.

12. Once the method has been confirms a program of Community Response Plans will be developed based on priorities guided by the risk profile for particular communities.

13. The project will complement the overarching goal of building a more resilient Hawke’s Bay community, preparing us for risks and enabling communities to help themselves in the case of an emergency.

14. Hazard Initial Response Plans. This project will develop and implement a programme for establishing inter-agency initial hazard response plans. Initially his will be focused on the top five hazards for Hawke’s Bay being earthquake, tsunami, volcanic ashfall, human pandemic and flood/storm.

15. This will be broken into two parts being the identification of a generic process of inter-agency planning and plan template; and the development of the plans themselves. Some generic action plans across all hazards will also be developed (e.g. reconnaissance and evacuation action plans).

16. The aim is to have a collection of plans where agencies can confidently undertake initial actions in situations where there is ambiguity and communications are interrupted. These plans will also guide the initial actions of EOC staff.

17. Other. Significant progress has also been made in the welfare area as the changes to the National Plan are implemented. There will be further discussion on welfare in Item 8 on this agenda.

18. The intent is that the recommendations of the Capability Assessment Report 2015 will inform the Group work programme over the next few years. However significant progress has already been made since July 2015. For this reason the CEG has asked that the Ministry look at conducting another monitoring and evaluation at the beginning of 2017 to measure how the current work being undertaken is imbedded in the Group.

19. Enabler 1. One of the Enablers assessed in the evaluation process is the Governance of the Group (Enabler 1). This enabler will be of significant interest to the Committee as the governance for the Group and the score for 2015 did not advance significantly from 2010.

20. The CAR focus on Joint Committee and CEG leadership needs to be tempered by the level that most of the members operate. The Hawke’s Bay is one of the few Groups in the country to have all its Mayors on the Joint Committee and all its CEOs on the CEG. This in itself defines a high level of commitment.

21. It is unrealistic to expect the Committee to have an intimate level of understanding about CDEM at an operational level. That is why over the last few years most Groups in New Zealand have been employing Group Managers to work at second tier management levels. These managers are expected and trusted to get on with the job.

22. This is a fundamental shift from when the senior CDEM person in a council worked for a second/third tier manger and the CEG was made up second tier managers all of whom were more operational in focus. Mayors and CEs work at a strategic level and cannot know everything about anything.

23. One reason why the Group may have collectively scored itself lowly in this area (virtually the same as the 2010 CAR) reflects the fact that majority of members do not recall were the Group was and how far it has come. In 2010 the Group Plan had expired, there was no welfare or recovery manager, no recovery plan, no CDEM target rate, no joint CDEM webpage/social media, no joint public Natural Hazards Web Portal and no major exercise have been run for a number of years.

24. There has also been a significant increase in funding approved for 2016/17 and 2017/18 to increase the resources at the Group office to implement a number of the areas identified in the Report for improvement. This was a significant investment recommended by the CEG and approved as part of the 2015 Long Term Plan for the HBRC.

25. It also needs to be noted that the Group office is now funded by a separate CDEM targeted rate which has increased the transparency for the community on the cost of CDEM.

26. All of the above are now reality and reflect well on the leadership and governance of the Group. Since the 2010 report the CEG has also had a corrective action plan which the Group has been implementing. It is accepted that the work programme post the Group Plan needs to be addressed and work on this has been ongoing over the last few months.

27. One area that would benefit from more attention is the training of elected officials on CDEM roles and responsibilities. One solution could be to develop a short half day course which would be delivered at each Council. This would be more focused than the current delivery of workshops to elected members that occurred earlier this year. It is recommended that such a course be developed for delivery at the start of the next triennium.

Conclusions

28. While the 2015 monitoring and evaluation process identified a number of issues, the majority are known to the Group and with the additional resources available from the beginning of 2016, the identified work programme can be progressed. In the interim a number of recent actions have taken the Group a step forward particularly in the training and exercising, welfare, Lifelines and recovery areas.

Decision Making Process

29. 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:

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

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

29.3. The decision does not fall within Council’s definition of significance.

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

29.5. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, 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 the HBRC 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.

2. Receives the Hawke’s Bay CDEM Capability Assessment Report 2.0 2015.

3. Endorses the CEG decision that areas of concern identified in this Report be included in the Group Work Programme and, if necessary, included in a variation to the Group Plan.

4. Requests that MCDEM carries out another monitoring and evaluation in early 2017.

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager/Controller

Attachment/s

HB CDEM Capability Assessment Report 2.0

HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group

Joint committee

Friday 22 April 2016

Subject: Group Work Programme Update

Reason for Report

1. The purpose of this report is to update and seek feedback from the Committee on the Group Work Programme. This Programme sets the priority of work and projects for the Group and is linked with:

1.1. The Group Plan as approved by this Committee,

1.2. Outcomes from the Hawke’s Bay Monitoring and Evaluation Report, and

1.3. Post exercise and training reports.

Background

2. In 2015 the Coordinating Executives Committee (CEG) identified six priority work streams derived from the Group Plan. These are:

2.1. Community Response Planning,

2.2. Initial Response Plans (based on significant hazards),

2.3. Developing and Maintaining People (training for staff and volunteers),

2.4. Group Coordination Centres Review (operations centres/EOCs),

2.5. Exercises and Exercise Programme, and

2.6. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).

3. These were developed into projects and formed the backbone of the Group Work Programme which contains a number of interrelated work streams.

4. At its meeting on 29 February 2016, the CEG approved a work programme with key milestones. This is attached to this paper as a Gantt chart. Each project has an underlying scoping document which identifies the objective of the work and key issues/assumptions. This Gantt chart have been updated to show how projects are progressing.

5. The highlighter projects in the Gantt chart are projects that are under development. An important underlying principle of this work programme is that the number and complexity of projects is linked to existing resources. To achieve this projects are prioritised and additional projects are not added until an existing project is completed. This ensures the Group is achieving work in a timely and effective manner.

6. The work programme and projects are across the Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group and as such council staff other than CDEM will be involved. Other partner agencies such as the emergency services may also be involved.

Update

7. The following tasks are currently being actioned and are on track to be presented to the CEG for approval at its next meeting at the end of May:

7.1. Development of a draft Community Resilience Strategy for approval, including templates to guide the community response plans (content and process) and a programme identifying priority communities. This has progressed well with ongoing consultation with local EMOs. The pilot community is Westshore, Napier.

7.2. Development of a draft Group Training and Exercise Strategy for approval including a training needs analysis and Group Training and Exercise Plan focusing on the next 12 months in detail and the next 3 years in outline. The training needs analysis has been completed with the results currently being analysed. Many council staff have identified they need more training to be confident in their roles.

7.3. Development of a draft coordination and control structure for approval that provides for the new more centralised coordination centre (EOC/ECC) structure as outlined by the CEG last year. This will include a gap analysis, structures and an implementation plan. New SOPs will be developed as a result of this process.

7.4. A completed work programme showing linkages back to the Group Plan and where appropriate post exercise action and the Monitoring and Evaluation Report.

8. The work programme is a living document and as such is subject to changes as projects are progressed and/or the unexpected happens. However having some key priorities confirmed ensures that the CDEM Group’s work remains focused.

9. The monitoring of progress of the implementation of the work programme will be a standing item on future Joint Committee and CEG meetings and will include tracking of the progress of projects.

Decision Making Process

10. The Committee is required to make every decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no substantive decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.

Recommendations

1. That the Joint Committee receives the “Group Work Programme Update” report.

2. That the Joint Committee endorses the Work Programme approved by the Coordinating Executives Group.

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager/Controller

Attachment/s

Work Programme Gannt Chart

HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group

Joint committee

Friday 22 April 2016

Subject: 2015-16 Annual Plan KPIs Update

Reason for Report

1. The purpose of this report is to update the Committee on how the Group is tracking against its current KPIs.

Background

2. As the administering authority for the Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group, the current reportable KPIs for the Group are set as part of the HBRC Long Term and Annual plans.

3. As part of developing the Group Plan and a Group Work Programme, these KPIs will need to be reviewed. Unfortunately Audit advice is that this cannot easily occur until the next LTP.

4. In the interim the Group Office is developing another set of KPIs which reflect the objectives set in the Group Plan and the Group Work Programme. These will be reported on in the future.

Discussion

5. The up-to-date reporting for the current KPIs is attached to this report. This shows that in general the Group is achieving its KPIs.

6. Financial reporting also shows that the Group budget is on track. Although there is an over spend in some areas, this was envisaged as part of the LTP and is to be funded from existing CDEM reserves.

7. This over expenditure was a result of the employment and related costs of new staff and the running of the 4 yearly Group wide Exercise Te Matau a Maui in November 2015.

8. In the LTP years of 2016-17 and 2017-18 increases to the CDEM targeted regional rate will come into effect, which will address this additional expenditure.

9. It needs to be noted that this report is only for the KPIs and financials of the Group office and not local TLA objectives or funding.

Decision Making Process

10. The Committee is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no substantive decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.

Recommendation

1. That the Joint Committee receives the “2015-16 Annual Plan KPIs Update” report.

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager/Controller

Attachment/s

Emergency Management Progress Narratives to 31 December 2015

GENERAL SUBJECT OF THE ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED	REASON FOR PASSING THIS RESOLUTION	GROUNDS UNDER SECTION 48(1) FOR THE PASSING OF THE RESOLUTION
Changes to CDEM Staff Structures	7(2)(a) That the public conduct of this agenda item would be likely to result in the disclosure of information where the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons.	The Council is specified, in the First Schedule to this Act, as a body to which the Act applies.