ICS / NIMS Q&A

[floridacyclist]

I don't know if this will take off, but I was thinking that we could start a thread for anyone not understanding anything in their ICS training. We have several ICS instructors on here plus many more that are fairly knowledgeable, and we all know that unless you've played with it a while it can be fairly abstract. So ask your questions if you want, or the thread will simply die a slow natural death.

[isuhawkeye]

I welcome any talk reguarding NIMS and ICS

Ask, and answer away

[floridacyclist]

If you haven't taken them yet, this might be  good time to start taking the online courses, then come here if you don't completely understand something.

http://www.training.fema.gov/emiweb/IS/crslist.asp should be the starting point for all ICS / NIMS training as the most recent versions of the classes are listed there.

Everyone should have IS100 and 700 for starters, and IS200 if you have anyone under you in the field. I wouldn't worry too much about IS800 unless you were command/general staff or simply a glutton for punishment.

[IceNine]

Sorry to resurect this but

Does anyone have a decent course description for all of the levels of the ICS program.  And what level of trainees should take what ICS level

[floridacyclist]

I have quite a bit on our old ICS page at http://www.tallahasseecap.org/ICS . I'll have to slow down a little bit to find the descriptions (or speed up...I can't get the dialup to work here, so connecting over my cellphone, which is not high-speed), but that will answer your second question perhaps.

[arajca]

ICS 100 (IS100/IS700) - Introduction to ICS - Entry level, GTM, MRO, etc.
ICS 200 (IS200/IS800) - Single unit resource ICS - Front line leaders, GTL, MSA, MO, MP
ICS 300 - Mid-level Management - Strike Team leaders, Division/Branch Supervisors, AOBD, GBD, CUL
ICS 400 - Command and General Staff - Section Chiefs, IC, AL

The official NIMS grouping is here.

[isuhawkeye]

The above answers are 100% correct, but don't forget that CAP has aligned the courses differently. 

[Dustoff]

And here's a link to the chart.....

http://captalk.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1204.0;attach=320

Jim

[Eclipse]

At this point I am recommending that anyone involved in CAP-ES take 100/200/700/800.  Why?
Because A) its a simple thing to knock out, and B), to my chagrin, it came out the other day that
people I thought were fairly versed in ICS, are not.

Recent discussion:

Unit CC1: "I think its important we start working on NIMS requirements, because they will be required soon."

Me: "Anyone who wants to take additional training is encouraged to do that on their own time, but we shouldn't be pushing non-CAP required training, until we have to, besides, for the average CAP member its enough to know ICS = you listen to him, he listens to you, leave the other sections alone."

1 week later...

Me: (to Unit CC1's member, serving as POC for a funded mission): "This thing is growing and now we're going to have a staging area for GT's, what's your admin plan?  Have you got anyone to serve as an RSC or RUL?"

Mission POC: "What's an RSC and RUL?"

[RiverAux]

I agree on encouraging members to do 100/200/700/800.  Yes, they're not required now, but in all liklihood they will in the not so distant future.

[Dustoff]

NIMS/ICS is already being recognized by the courts as a "standard"

And since it is a National program it could easily (I think) be recognized as a "National Standard"

Now, what are the legal implications of a National Standard?  Is it similar to "Standard of Care" in the medical field?

Do you have to formally adopt a standard to be held accountable for not meeting it?

Food for thought.

Jim

[sardak]

No, you do not need to adopt a standard to be held accountable to it.  You can even be held to a standard you aren't even aware of.  That's why an organization needs to be familiar with standards in its "industry."

An organization needs written policies or statements stating why it has or has not adopted certain standards.  Very few organizations have done this, though.

Just last week I was at a conference where an attorney gave an hour long talk on standards and the problems that they cause.  At the end of the three day conference,  the attendees vote on the presentations for "Best of Show Awards" in six categories.  This presentation won the "Most Thought Provoking Presentation" out of 20 papers presented - at the International Technical Rescue Symposium.

As for NIMS, this is from NIMS documentation:
One of the primary responsibilities of the NIMS Integration Center [NIC] is to identify guidelines, protocols and standards that will help emergency responders and managers from all levels of government organize effective responses to emergency incidents and hazards, natural disasters and terrorism.
The Center's aim is to establish an Essential Standards List that would represent a set of the most significant national standards for NIMS.

The NIMS Integration Center also is working with standards development organizations to encourage the integration of NIMS concepts into standards that are now under development or being revised...

The two primary standards development organizations the NIC is working with are NFPA and ASTM.  I'm on two ASTM committees which are writing standards either at the request of the NIC or to fill needs identified by NIC working groups (including resource typing and credentialing):  E54 on Homeland Security and F32 on Search and Rescue.  I'm also involved with standards with NASAR.

There is no reason CAP shouldn't require the I-x00 series of courses.  The requirement to have them is not going to go away, and the the majority of the ES community requires them.  About the only ones that don't are local NGOs that have no need or desire for federal funding or deployment on federal incidents.  However, and this is why CAP needs to require them, they are the standard for managing local incidents, the ones that make up 99% of all incidents, including the ones CAP is involved with.

Mike