It means nothing unless people act.

I read an article in the Wall Street Journal entitled "Typhoon exposed limits of Warning System." In the article it talked about a new LIDR system that will replace the existing Doppler radar system in the Philippines used to do the same thing: forecast an incoming storm, but do so with added bells and whistles that will enhance early warning capabilities.

I find it strange that in the midst of ongoing recovery efforts, the government continues to invest in advanced weather forecasting technology, as if it were a limitation of technology that caused the loss of life and not a failure of the framework designed to prevent it. From everything that I've read and from the reports that have come out, the warnings weren't the problem. Days in advance of Yolanda making landfall, there were warnings from the government and PAGASA indicating that this wasn't going to be your average storm, and implored that people respond by evacuating. While the article acknowledges that community action based on the forecasts is needed, it feels like the upgrade to the LIDR system is spending money and resource on addressing something that wasn't broken to begin with, while failing to acknowledge where the real vulnerability lies--in connecting with and empowering communities to take action once information is known.

How is it that a country that averages 20 typhoons a year not know "the drill"? Leading up to Sandy's landfall, people didn't leave because they didn't believe the warnings would match the dire reality forecasted. After communities weather 1,2...or 20 storms, complacency, or hubris can affect their attitude towards the real danger these storms represent. However, it wasn't until I saw this video report from the Wall Street Journal that a new aspect of why people didn't heed to warnings as they should have came to light. As part of the warnings that came from PAGASA, the term "storm surge" was used to describe the tsunami-like wall of water that did so much of the damage; something many Filipino's didn't fully understand. One gentleman in the video goes as far as to call the term "english" and ignored the reality it represented.

While I have no doubt that confusion and unfamiliar terminology surrounding the most deadly aspect of Yolanda's impact played a role in the massive loss of life, I wonder why, given the history Filipino's have with enduring typhoons and the dangers they represent, more widespread proactive action wasn't taken as a precautionary measure.

As recovery gets underway, many are looking to understand where the breakdown occurred and why more action wasn't taken at the local level. If warnings were issued, and a storied history of Category 5 Typhoon's hitting the Philippines known, with Typhoon Bopha hitting last December, why wasn't more done to move people out of harm's way? And why is a technological upgrade seen as a move that will help mitigate loss of life when the reason people failed to leave had more to do with protection of personal property than skepticism surrounding Yolanda's forecasted impact?

Technology is a tool. Higher resolution maps are great, early warnings with higher probabilities on storm impacts and locations are even better; however (insert broken record here) if the people who stand the most to gain (i.e. not die) from the information that these newfangled systems provide are not paying attention or don't care, then you might as well not have any warning system at all. The problem hasn't been the ability to forecast a storm--it's been communicating it in such a way that generates action and interest amongst the people who it will impact.

In Mississippi and Louisiana, people didn't leave when Katrina was bearing down because they didn't believe it was going to be as bad as the forecasts warned. In Galveston when Ike hit, people didn't believe that the island would be all but washed away. In New York, people heeded the warning when Irene blew ashore and when Sandy came, pushing a significant storm surge, people stayed and payed the price. In each of those instances we knew; we knew because history told us, the Army Corps of engineers warned us, and because modern day meteorology showed us where, when, and how severe. To continue to say that advances in severe weather forecasting are mitigating the loss of life and helping people be better prepared, at least where Typhoons and Hurricanes are concerned, is a load of crap. The technology currently used to forecast is sufficient, it's the ability of those whose responsibility it is to turn that information into action at a community level is where the challenge lies. While it's easy to point the finger, I recognize that motivating any large group of people to act is no small task...but when you have history, science, and the blunt trauma of reality on your side...I have to believe that more can and should be done.

Advanced systems and fancier graphics are great but when the dust settles and it's up to friends, neighbors, and search and rescue teams to shoulder the grim burden of counting the dead, the flashy 3D modeling doesn't mean a thing.

If disaster preparedness and risk reduction initiatives can't take hold in the Philippines, a country continually rocked by Earthquakes, Volcanic eruptions, and Typhoons...why would Anytown, USA devote one dollar more than was absolutely necessary to Preparedness if they haven't experienced a disaster in recent memory?

The unfortunate circumstances that have brought us to this moment are tragic...but lets not let this opportunity to champion the preparedness cause slip through our fingers. We need to be able to point to a success story...to be able to show the value in investing in education programs and Disaster Risk Reduction, if there is any hope of it taking hold in vulnerable communities around the world, especially those in our backyards.

World Disaster Report 2013

Since 1993 the 'World Disaster Report' has been an annual examination of trends in humanitarian aid covering topics ranging from: Public Health and Ethics in Aid, to Urban Risk and Hunger & Malnutrition. Produced by the International Federation of Red Crescent Societies in partnership with Harvard's Humanitarian Initiative, this report aims to track trends, highlight facts, and analyze contemporary events and their impacts on populations worldwide.

The subject of this year's report focuses on the impact technological innovation has had on humanitarian action. It examines the progress made in reducing lives lost through the innovation and integration of tech. It also devotes a chapter to understanding two important assumptions: "that adding technology is inevitable and that doing so will generate progress." While not having read the chapter yet, I appreciate that there is an examination of the risks involved given the rapid transformation of how we use technology, and how those risks could potentially impact how humanitarian aid is delivered. With many new innovations, we tend to gloss over the bad in favor of the good, so the honest approach to both sides of the 'tech in aid' issue is welcomed.

I hope that after reading through the document that one comes away with a sense of optimism that technology can and will continue to play an important role in reducing loss of life and property due to disasters, and to remember that technology should remain a means to an end and not an end in and of itself.

http://www.ifrc.org/PageFiles/134658/WDR%202013%20complete.pdf

Mobile Apps in Disaster

Have you ever built an Avatar? That may exclude too many of you, so how about something more relatable--have you ever built a survey using SurveyMonkey? You know, where you're given a predetermined set of options to create a survey that you can customize to your hearts content?

Now, apply that 'drag and drop' idea to app creation for Droid phones. Have you done that? Good. Now read this article because the folks at MIT have done just that and they're excited about how it could impact early recovery in disaster response.

The operating table inside the app inventor

Remember when I posted about Disaster Response in the Digital Age? I talked about the potential issues the mass proliferation of web applications and digital data platforms could have on disaster response. Well I would like to lump this quantum leap forward in app creation in with that post. It's not because I'm a luddite, far from it--I'm hip, I tweet, I'm a redditor, a member of the of blogosphere, so why then am I so against the DIY app-building that this MIT tool enables?

First off, I shouldn't say that I'm "against," it, because I believe there's value in tools of this nature and that the smartphone will play a key role in the future of early recovery in disaster response. I guess I would rather issue, or re-issue a strong word of caution, because I foresee this tool creating quite a stir.

You know the old adage: too many cooks in the kitchen? Well what happens when, in our quest for the next version, the next update, the next _____, we create tools that lets everyone become a cook? What you get is a lot of food, but how good is the food, and more importantly, how many terrible dishes will you have to get through before you find one that's delicious?

When you create open source tools the goal is to get that tool into as many hands as possible, the concern, in this case is that you run the risk of too many people making crap and using it. Proponents say that this access spurs innovation and that only those who have a desire to create something will. While this may be true, I urge you to look at the number of tumblr's, blogs, and other inane things (this blog) that exist simply because the tools to create them were readily available and tell me if on the whole we're spurring innovation.

If google maps hadn't created an open source aspect to their mapping tool, we wouldn't have the collaborative work order system that is being used to aid in the coordination of nonprofit organizations active in early recovery -- so I understand and appreciate the upside. However, how many Facebook pages pop up after disasters? How many local groups spring into action without having a clear idea of what they're doing? When tools are created without addressing how they're meant to fit within the existing landscape of disaster response, they're not working towards addressing the challenges of creating more resilient communities, if anything, they're working to undermine the plans, procedures, and protocols that have been put in place by emergency management professionals.

I'm not advocating that we discount or attempt to limit the power of motivated individuals and groups who play a much needed role in early recovery activities, quite the opposite. I'm one of the biggest advocates for increasing their involvement, I just want to make sure that when greater access to the building blocks that empower people to play a greater role within early recovery is enabled, that we do so with an eye towards the bigger picture. Technology without context will not contribute to situational awareness, it will merely give license to people to put themselves into potentially dangerous situations trying to capture images and video to add to this mobile app data tapestry.

Creating tools that empower is a step in the right direction; however, I would suggest that when this tool is launched, an educational module be incorporated that prepares individuals and groups for what happens after the emergency phase ends. By providing that context and the role that individuals can play by creating and using their apps, we're creating a shared understanding and a common goal, two key elements in creating community resilience and empowering individuals to take role in their communities recovery.

google glass and crisis situations

Information comes in all forms: in images, through text, on maps, through speech...it's the synthesis of this information that enables those in positions of power to make the best possible decisions based on the desired outcomes at that time.

Until now, the collection of this data and the ability to carry out response functions were mutually exclusive; you were either filming and transmitting the data from the scene, or you were actively participating in whatever was taking place: triaging, fighting the fire, etc...

I've been reading reports as of late on individuals who have been a part of the test pool of Google Glass users--the chosen few who had the proverbial golden ticket and allowed to test drive the latest piece of fashion hardware. Based on the accounts I've read, the functionality of Glass seems better suited for those in crisis situations than your average Joe; with it's built camera, bluetooth, wifi connectivity, and voice control, first responders could not only send data but also receive it to aid in their current task. Some other ways Glass could be used:

• Firefighters could transmit images of the fire while accessing building blueprints 
• EMT's could potentially access medical information on patients while administering first aid and transmit images to a doctor if needed
• Using voice recognition and Google translate, speaking with individuals and families who don't speak English can happen without the aid of a translator 
• With Google Hangout you can see what the user of Glass sees, greatly reducing the time it takes for data to get to the people who need it.

Data is a powerful thing during crisis situations, the better informed you can be, the better off you are and Glass provides a new set of tools to help expedite the sharing of information in real time which will hopefully benefit everyone.

Beyond the bells and whistles that Glass provides, I believe the ability to use Glass as a learning/teaching tool is one of the aspects of the technology that has some of the greatest potential. One of the challenges in disaster response, from a nonprofit perspective, lies in the retention of institutional knowledge and in the training of those not necessarily versed in response. With Glass, firsthand accounts can be recalled and examined not only for training purposes but to also distill best practices based on what actually happened. 

And while I see a lot of potential in the technology, I also see some issues that will need to be dealt with before Glass becomes disaster haute couture. Data privacy and the handling of sensitive personal information is an issue that will need to be dealt with; given that the response community struggles with how to share information without the option of doing so in real time, I imagine trying to safeguard homeowner/client information may prove to be beyond the scope of what nonprofits can handle from a liability perspective right now.

Whether it's in the next year or 5 years down the line, I look forward to seeing how this technology is used to aid those in need and its impact on the disaster response community.

If you've got some time, here's a presentation taken from SXSW on Glass...it gives developers an idea of what's possible with this product.

Disaster Response in the Digital Age

Have you ever seen a competition cooking show where each chef had to prepare a meal based on the same ingredients? The results are always diverse, utilizing different ingredients in ways unique to each Chef's background and training. While there isn't a TV showcasing the development taking place, we are experiencing something similar in disaster response, a renaissance if you will of application creation aimed at increasing efficiencies of response organizations active in disaster response and recovery.

This list represents a small fraction of the applications/companies with applications that have been created in response to the growing number of disasters and their impacts on communities. This list does not include the wealth of googledoc spreadsheets, excel files, or access databases that are created ad hoc to deal with the onslaught of information needing attention following an event.

Crisis Cleanup
GRT Mobile Solutions
Project SGE 2.0
Palantir
Jointly.us
CERTify (an app for CERT Team coordination)
ArcGIS
WebEOC
Help Me Help
GeoOp (used by the SVA after the Christchurch Earthquakes)
HelpBridge
Crisis mappers
Ushahidi
Google Crisis Maps
Needmapper
Ready QLD (Queensland, Australia's app)
Recovers.org

While the creation of tools to help communities work with the myriad of groups that aid in response and recovery is great, and certainly welcomed, there is a growing concern that we're progressing too fast and not approaching this in a thoughtful or strategic manner. Just because you can go to an all you can eat buffet doesn't mean that you have to eat until you vomit right? Well the same idea applies--just because we can create an unlimited number of apps that marry GIS,workflow, and damage assessment data, doesn't mean we should...without first putting some parameters around what it is we're trying to accomplish and how these tools can help advance an overall plan. As it stands it feels like each response organization is using and in some cases pushing a unique application which can lead to competition for the one app to rule them all.

We're Not Speaking the Same Language
A consistent issue brought up after events is the lack of access to real-time information, data that can be used to help inform the decision making process during response and recovery. Due to privacy issues, organizations on the ground are reluctant to share information with one another or anyone else for that matter until after they've left. This is a problem, but it doesn't encompass the whole problem. Even if groups were better about sharing information, it couldn't be done easily because the applications that are currently being used don't "speak the same language." There are multiple apps doing the same thing but because of the way they've been built, they can't share info, and given that collaboration and cooperation are the cornerstones of successful response--this inability to share is becoming a problem. Everyone is pushing for faster and more efficient, which is great, but rare is the instance where all responding groups are using the same technological platform to work from so those gains in efficiency are marred when trying to work together.

It's understood that timely information is key to promoting a coordinated response effort, what isn't understood is what information we're talking about. I believe that the wealth of apps created to help communities is great, I just want to ensure that all of the apps created can "talk" to one another so that information can be shared in real time...that way, an established response organization and spontaneous groups are working with the same data sets. Experience tells me that no platform is going to be used 100% of the time by 100% of the groups active in response, if we know that then we should be working to provide a framework so that whatever applications are being used can easily interface with everything else out there to aid in response activities.

Disaster Data-Standard
In essence what I'm talking about is the creation of a disaster data standard. Core data sets that can be the foundational elements of any application mobile or otherwise, think of it like a disaster API. If the foundation upon which all the apps are built is the same, then communication and the sharing of info should no longer be an issue. It turns out that I'm not the only on who's been thinking this way, Nethope, a tech focused nonprofit has spearheaded something called the Open Humanitarian Initiative, a broad-ranging effort with the goal of creating a unified data set that will aid in the delivery of disaster response in the information age. This presentation gives you a more detailed view of what their aim is:

Open Humanitarian Initiative - 2013 Plan from Gisli Olafsson

Technology is a tool, not a solution
In the midst of the conversation on the mass proliferation of technology and how it can impact disaster response, it's important to remember that technology is only as powerful as those who wield it, and that during times of crisis people tend to go with what's easiest and most comfortable. While the agencies responding may be well versed in the latest and greatest, if all disasters begin and end at the local level, it's important that those who will be there long after the National groups have left are comfortable with whatever system has been left for them, if they're not, a new system will be cobbled together and people will start over.

Access to reliably accurate and timely information is essential to gaining situational awareness following a disaster. When every responding organization holds a different piece of the puzzle to gaining situational awareness, efforts are hampered and gaining unity of effort becomes exceedingly difficult. But don't take my word for it, the former Minister of Science and Technology of South Africa said it much better in 2005 at the Southern African Telecommunications Networks and Applications Conference :

“The tsunami that devastated South Eastern Asian countries and the north-eastern parts of Africa, is perhaps the most graphic, albeit unfortunate, demonstration of the need for global collaboration, and open ICT* standards. The incalculable loss of life and damage to property was exacerbated by the fact that responding agencies and non-governmental groups were unable to share information vital to the rescue effort. Each was using different data and document formats. Relief was slowed, and coordination complicated.” 

*Information and Communications Technology 

The Digital Divide

While the rapid evolution of technology appears to be the panacea for what ails communities struggling with preparedness, response, and recovery issues, it's important to remember that not everyone has the same access to, or comfort with existing or newer technological innovations. While the technologist is pushing the envelope and creating new opportunities to utilize technological platforms following disasters, there are a lot of people out there who don't fall under the digital umbrella.

Dubbed 'The Digital Divide,' the below infographic does a good job of highlighting some of the remaining challenges to the widespread adoption of technology; however, what the infographic fails to include is the aging population and how the internet usage of those 65 and older are only at 42 percent according to livescience.com. Given that the focus of so many organizations following an event is on addressing the needs of vulnerable populations like the elderly, their lack of access to reliable communications has, and will continue to hamper the communication of critical information before, during, and after an event.

As we look to technology to spur innovation and enable resource strapped muncipalities to do more with less, we must remember that crucial stakeholders aren't currently a part of the preparedness/resilience conversation. I believe that civic engagement and tech innovation are essential to mitigating the loss of life during an event and leveraging the support given after, but that it's up to the communications providers to put the infrastructure in place and offer reliable services so that the innovations can have an impact.

Innovation + Civic Engagement = Secret Sauce

Who doesn't love a Venn diagram?

Secret Sauce...that's what we're all after right? Finding the balance, the intersection between civic engagement and innovation, where capable, hungry individuals and organizations are working to streamline access to new and exciting ways to help their communities in both times of disaster and not.

The fluid nature of innovation and the reactive spikes in civic engagement following disasters makes harnessing the confluence of these two elements difficult. However, I believe what happened following Hurricane Sandy is a great example of Secret Sauce in action; where volunteerism and civic engagement fueled by new tech platforms aided community-wide response and recovery activities. At the time it was messy and chaotic, but the new ideas and perspectives on how to approach many of the challenges that continue to pervade response and recovery, were a welcomed breath of fresh air.

Because the life cycle of a technology employed in response is so short, it's almost guaranteed that the next time it's used, lessons learned from its previous deployment will have gone into creating version 2.0. While creating newer and more efficient applications and systems is good, I believe the key to retaining the secret sauce is to maintain a technology's simplicity while enhancing its functionality. Of course that's easier said than done, but it's important to remember that during times of disaster people revert to what they know and what's easiest, which is why you see so many people doing coordination with a pen and legal pads.

The confluence of motivated people and new technology rallying around a common cause is rare, but we have the good fortune in disaster response to have an abundance of both. I believe the key to ensuring that every community gets their own brand of Secret Sauce is to aggressively promote innovation while nurturing and rewarding civic engagement that promotes community cohesion.

Hacking our way towards Resilience

The concepts of preparedness and whole of community are being pushed to the forefront of the conversation when talking about creating community resilience; transforming them from abstract ideas and words used in grant proposals, to tangible ideas and actions.

Civic engagement and the growing base of concerned and motivated individuals rallying around the idea that they can create a tangible impact on their community through technological ideation is spurring a wave of innovation. It's casting a broad net that is reaching a new breed of disaster practitioner--the technologist. An example of this transition can be seen in the integration of technology in civic activism through groups like Code for America and events like the national day of civic hacking. These forms of civic engagement have also worked to influence disaster response and recovery.

http://h4d2.eu/ (Hackathon for Disaster Response 2.0)

http://codeforamerica.org/2013/05/31/be-part-of-something-big-this-weekend/

http://hackeroo.io/

http://rockawayhelp.com/

https://www.hackerleague.org/

The recent surge in civic engagement has predominately come in the form of Hackathons; a hackathon being an "event in which computer programmers and others involved in software development, including graphic designers, interface designers and project managers, collaborate intensively on software projects" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hackathon). The focus or theme around these events is to address a community-based issue and they are drawing bright, young innovators to the table and are producing some surprising ideas and apps centered around the idea of Peer-to-Peer disaster recovery / survivor-centric response. 

With the recognition that technology and mobile platforms are rapidly changing how the business of disaster response and recovery is conducted, the focus of some of these coding marathons is to address the challenges communities face as they work through the turbulence of community-wide recovery. The resources are out there as well as a loose infrastructure needed to galvanize a community around the cause of streamlined/expedited disaster response and recovery...all that remains is the will to push it forward and make it a reality.

Given the popularity and explosive growth civic hacking has experienced, I believe there is  an opportunity for National VOAD and FEMA's Innovation advisory team to sponsor a disaster hackathon of their own. Organizing and leveraging the ideas and spirit of civic engagement to address the common challenges of community-wide response and recovery, is a way to create resilience and engage a constituency that has the 'local touch' and can provide the context needed to make the apps relevant with the backing of national coalitions and entities that can push for widespread adoption.

The resilient organization needs to speak the language of technology

The evolution of technology and its pervasiveness are influencing our daily lives. As a result of this rapid evolution, many feel like they're jumping from the rotary phone to the smartphone and are still unsure of what 'the cloud' is, and if it's something that will affect the weather.

Because of our reliance on servers and a host of technological platforms to conduct day-to-day business, continuity planning for businesses is a growing concern given the importance economic recovery plays as a community gets back on its feet.

Techsoup, a nonprofit tech resource has put out 'The Resilient Organization: A guide for disaster planning and recovery,' this guide to planning for and responding to a disaster from an IT perspective will aid in the mitigation of the impacts of disasters on your IT infrastructure.

You know the frustration you feel when you get access your email? Well imagine the feeling of anger and helplessness when you can't conduct business because a [insert type of disaster here] has wrecked havoc on your IT hardware/software/access to services...

Do yourself a favor and skim it, and while you're at it check out the other resources Techsoup has to offer...they're a great resource.

The proof is in the analytics and sweet infographic

While saying: "Social Media is a big deal and we need to start paying attention," it's interesting to see statistical data gleaned from the real world to back it up.

In addition to the below infographic (compliments of USF's MPA program), Patrick Meier posted a breakdown of the 2.1 million tweets in the first 48 hours after the Moore tornado...providing data that will reaffirm your burgeoning love affair with social platforms.

University of San Francisco Online Master of Public Administration

Show me the money...

While not all disasters are created equal in terms of news coverage, scope of damage, and economic impact, etc...the desire to do something is powerful, and oftentimes that desire manifests itself in the form of making a monetary donation.

The knee-jerk reaction is to donate to the Red Cross, a response that can be seen in the high profile donations of Kevin Durant, Carrie Underwood, The Oklahoma Thunder, and Chesapeake Energy Corp. Following the Moore tornado, the Red Cross has received more than $15 million in donations which underscores the power donations have following an event. However, with the advent of crowdfunding sites, the landscape of how people donate money to response & recovery is beginning to change. With a stronger emphasis being placed on accountability, speed, and impact, donors are looking at new ways to ensure their donations go to the people who need it as expeditiously as possible.

This shift towards a higher degree of accountability and results reporting is best illustrated by the authority in non-profit rankings, Charity Navigator. They are introducing additional metrics as part of their ratings to include timely, detailed donor reporting on fund allocation and program impacts. To read more about the evolution of the non-profit rating system and how your charity of choice ranks, their site is a wealth of information.

In response to the donor desire for greater accountability and speed, sites like: indiegogo and gofundme are working to eliminate "the middle man" by empowering donors to give directly to impacted families. While donors feel a more direct connection, the potential for fraud increases significantly due to the fact that anyone can claim to be a survivor and need help.

With the understanding that millions of dollars are flowing into communities following disasters, coupled with the perception that traditional aid is too clunky and bureaucratic, I believe there will be a rapid proliferation of direct giving tools and applications aimed at shifting donations to impacted communities from traditional aid structures.