FEMA's Recognition of CAP -- CERT Teams Membership

[heliodoc]

IF CAP is going to do the program through a partnership...then CAP and CERT will definitely have to have a "come to Jesus meeting" on this

I remember CAP in one its PA blurbs about partnering with CERT...

CAP will be best served to share its "SAR" knowledge in a practical ways that CERT may need to use and CAP may need to leave  some of its Johnny Rambo gear at home.  CAP will also have to realize that CERT may or may not be a fit to incorporate into individual squadron programs and CAP will  also have to REALIZE that CERT has a TTT  program that actually is BETTER than the SET online program offered by CAP.

CAP needs to standby, LISTEN, and WATCH on how some of these training sessions are put on...  There are other SME instructors in CERT that FAR exceed some online tests that we are subject to.

CAP NHQ also better come prepared to LISTEN top the others in the DR world.  That means CAP actually having to take the CERT training and the TTT courses and having the so called DR experts at Maxwell that have an ACTUAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT background and real education credentials to merge  the two programs and having to create REAL and COHERENT regulations that do not have ICL's every ninety days 'cuz some one all of a sudden has some lawyering up to do to do to make it CAP, Inc ideas

Flame on folks......CAP needs some work in its own back yard before we can EVEN start slingin mud at ANY other volunteer organizations who are involved in disaster operations

[LTC Don]

Yes, there is a blurb about using standpipes in UNIT 2 of the instructor manual, but as RiverAux also pointed out, the primary focus on suppression in that module is on the use of fire extinguishers, and the practical exercise in that module is using extinguishers with an LP burn pan.  There are pretty significant parts of the module that stress Do's and Don'ts, and that was pushed strenuously during our course. Honestly, I don't remember if standpipes were even mentioned in our TTT class, and the bulk of our course was taught by a Fire Dept Capt.  There may have been a powerpoint slide with a picture showing examples or something along those lines.  I actually wish we could have received more training along those lines.  Fire hoses are cool.

But, really, it doesn't matter.  CERT was designed for 'lay people'.  In terms of standpipes, how many people that live in an apartment building have actually had training on them?  Most would probably at least mentally note the presence of a fire hose in a box, but that's about it. CAP members are not lay people, to the extent that they already belong to a formal organization, and for the most part, have already received, and are accustomed to receiving formal training.   This makes CERT and it's 'canned' curriculum and very attractive proposition.

There are many, many questions with regards of how CERT is to be deployed in CAP.

For example,

Are there going to be Tech, Senior, and Master levels of CERT technicians?

Will there be a specialty badge for CERT?

What will be the requirements for one to be a Tech, Senior, or Master CERT Technician?

Does simple completion of the basic CERT course qualify one as a CAP CERT Technican?

What other useful modules may or may not be needed to supplement the CERT curriculum as it currently stands for CAP needs?

What would a CAP CERT SQTR look like?

• General ES?
• IS200?
• CERT?

What would constitute a Senior Rating?

• Technican level?
• Attend and complete a TTT course?
• Instructor of at least three courses to CAP or community groups?

What would constitute a Master Rating?

• Senior Rating?
• Instructor of at least one or more TTT Courses?
• Be the primary coordinator for at least one TTT Course?

These are but just a few of the issues (and all the requisite details)  that need to be resolved surrounding the CAP CERT deployment.

I dare say though, that someone who achieves master level would be a pretty valuable commodity to an emergency manager who is struggling to set up and run a CERT program.  That fact alone makes this a very important way for us to move ourselves more into the mainstream emergency services picture.

A very important issue to be addressed is insurance and liability.  Typical CERT deployments most likely will not be an AFAM, so insurance and liability issues must be addressed with state and local government.  How will a CAP deployed CERT team working under a state assigned mission be affected if the event later becomes a Federally Declared disaster?

The new 60-3 really downplays the role of MOUs, but will they take on a whole new role with CERT?


Cheers,

[heliodoc]

Excellent proposal type layout, Don

Haven't got close and personal with a 60-3 this week..

CAP downplaying MOU's??  EMA's, wildland fire, communities almost live and die by MOU's

IF CAP is downplaying it, then the issue becomes what EMA or anyone else is going to "put us to work" if we are not going to play in the real world with the real documentation........if this is true.... well lookeee at where CAP will stand in emergency services

Some communities may actually REQUIRE CAP to SIGN a MOU before participating... I know some EMA's that really look down on no signature actions

CAP will really become an island of its own and the only feed will be AFRCC AFAM's and maybe EMA's...  I am sure some EMA's will require MOU's for participation.  Hopefully NHQ CAP legal types have degrees in Public Administration....'cuz they are going to need if there are some SHARPER community lawyers ready to educate CAP on written MOU's...The current economy will sure dictate an MOU

[Senior]

The spirit of this discussion is what I have been thinking for awhile.
CAP is becoming more and more restrictive in anything we do.
I am seriously considering being trained by NASAR and CERT to be
better trained to be able to do actual SAR and DR.  I regret that, but
my time and energy is valuable so I really want to use it wisely where it can be used.   

[RiverAux]

My problem with trying to adapt CERT to CAP is that we're trying to make it something it is not.  Don is right about it being meant for the layperson, but we (and a lot of other agencies) are treating it more as a response program like SAR teams.  And there is a lot of good stuff in there that EVERYONE should know. 

But, it is not a generic disaster relief qualification that trains you to do a wide variety of stuff. 

If CAP wants its members doing light urban search and rescue, then lets figure out the absolute best light urban SAR training program there is and train our members to that standard, which is probably going to be much higher than CERT teams. 

If CAP wants its members providing medical care during disasters, then by god lets get our regulations and policies in line with doing that, adopt the highest training standards feasible, and go that route. 

In other words, CERT doesn't provide enough training to be credible for the sort of highly trained teams that CAP SHOULD be providing.  We SHOULD be going our own way, but doing so that makes us a BETTER selection than the local CERT teams (where they exist). 

I've been saying forever that CAP needs to conduct a serious look at just what we want our role to be in terms of ground-based disaster response and adopt the training to make that happen. 

[wuzafuzz]

My problem with trying to adapt CERT to CAP is that we're trying to make it something it is not.  Don is right about it being meant for the layperson, but we (and a lot of other agencies) are treating it more as a response program like SAR teams.  And there is a lot of good stuff in there that EVERYONE should know. 

But, it is not a generic disaster relief qualification that trains you to do a wide variety of stuff. 

Observing how various CERT organizations are actually operating, I submit that CERT qualifications are the de facto training for a wide variety of support level stuff.  http://www.citizencorps.gov/cert/newsletter.shtm

In other words, CERT doesn't provide enough training to be credible for the sort of highly trained teams that CAP SHOULD be providing.  We SHOULD be going our own way, but doing so that makes us a BETTER selection than the local CERT teams (where they exist). 

"Highly trained" teams?  Our internal CAP training, for many things, isn't exactly high speed.  Most people in CAP who are "highly trained" probably took that training outside CAP.  Don't get me wrong, I think we do some good stuff in CAP.  But will be ever be "highly trained" in a world of full time paid professionals?  We are third or fourth string for most things.  That's OK, it is what it is.  We do need to be competent in the skill sets we advertise.

Attaching to the concept of CERT will sell us better than rolling our own.  CERT is a known quantity, within parameters.  Selling a CAP DR mission requires marketing from scratch.

I've been saying forever that CAP needs to conduct a serious look at just what we want our role to be in terms of ground-based disaster response and adopt the training to make that happen.

I agree completely.  Even if we say "no" to DR.  That is preferable to advertising a capability we really aren't doing properly.

[RiverAux]

Observing how various CERT organizations are actually operating, Isubmit that CERT qualifications are the de facto training for a widevariety of support level stuff.

I wouldn't argue with that, but only because the only other real alternatives out there are some of the Red Cross courses. 

"Highly trained" teams?  Our internal CAP training, for many things, isn't exactly high speed.

Please tell me who has better training in light aircraft SAR and DR than CAP?  With the exception of high angle stuff, which CAP doesn't do, our basic ground SAR skills training are just as good as anything out there and we happen to be the largest ground SAR organization in the US.  Don't get me wrong, our training on ground SAR planning is weak, but at the GTL and below level, our standards are as good as anyone elses. 

Attaching to the concept of CERT will sell us better than rolling our own.  CERT is a known quantity, within parameters.

Yes, a lot of people out in the real world have heard of CERT, but I would submit to you that outside of the counties that actually have CERT teams, no one really would have any idea what to use them for.  If you tell a county without CERT that you've got a 10 man CAP CERT team ready to come help him out, that doesn't mean anything in particular. 

What they need to know is your capabilities and what CERTs do vary tremendously from what I can tell and the value seems to be the "extra" stuff that goes beyond basic CERT training. 

I took a look at some of the recent national CERT newsletters and here were some of the main things CERTs were being used for:
1.  Communications during a bike race (CAP could do and with our airborne capability probably could have exceeded what they did)
2.  A SAR exercise in a park (CAP's GSAR training exceeds CERTs)
3.  Helped open a community shelter (CAP could do this with Red Cross training)
4.  In a drill regarding a plane crash in a park, CERT helped set up a command post, assisting victims, and managing the emergency site (CAP should be well capable of this).
5.  In a drill regarding a train derailment, CERT members went door to door warning community members about a hazordous materials situation.  Don't see CAP getting involved in something like that.  Just no time to go through the paperwork to call us out.
6.  Providing general support for first responders at accident scenes (providing cool water, shelters for firefighters during fires in the summer, for example).  Doesn't really have anything to do with CERT training except touching on first aid.
7.  During a power outage CERT volunteers were posted inside a building on "fire watch".  Assisted people coming in and out of the building using flashlights. 
8.  Providing crowd control and basic first aid at public events. 

So, basically communities are just using CERTs as a pool of volunteers that they sort of know to do a wide variety of things.   CAP certainly could get involved in a whole lot of stuff, but what does CAP WANT us to do?  If my unit takes the time to get CERT trained are we going to be able to promise the locals that we can help do anything the other CERTs are going to do?  They're still going to have to jump through hoops to call us out no matter what, and a lot of CERT stuff appears to be time sensitive. 

So, if they're going to have to go through some work to get us, which they will, we have to be the most value-added organization out there and be able to provide MORE than their local folks. 

[heliodoc]

Guess this will go on and on

But here goes:

There are plenty o' LE and assorted agencies that do not know about CAP let alone CERT....NHQ and Wing problem not getting out to stakeholders

Squadrons limited in getting MOU's due to NHQ and Wing training reqs TO DO MOU's...apparently earlier threads are saying CAP getting away from MOU's  .... what up with that?

I still question why CAP is not on the FEMA National Volunteers Active in Disaster  (NVOAD)  still waiting for the CAPers here to answer that.
Even REACT, Salvation Army, Mennonites and other faith based groups have better credibility with the Feds and States than even CAP on a National level.

Surely and admittedly, CAP could do everything CERT does....so why does a 10 year old volunteer group have better recognition in some circles than a 68 year old AF Aux when it comes to "CAP DR" operations.  Surely we are manpower with additional folks and if folks think ARCHER is a lone program for assessment...welll there are other assessment procedures out there for IA and PA  that need tho be done on the ground as welll as from the air.  Bridge assessments and public bldg (government facilities ) need to be assessed and photos taken on the ground as well as in the air.  So touting ARCHER as the only type of IA / PA  procedure, needs to be redefined as ONE method of assessment.

I speak from experience from one Wing that had many floods and wildland fire, and admittedly, none of us requested ARCHER let alone CAP for some of these DR missions.  Most needed to be done from the ground and there were Highway Patrol assets and Guard assets that were up BEFORE CAP even rolled out their aircraft.  Remember it takes approx 2 from initial call to wheels up......I know, I know, there will be CAPers that SAY they can be airborne in 20 min....righhhhht.


So again I will argue....why is CAP not recognized in FEMA's NVOAD circles, why is CERT recognized after 10 years in some circles where CAP can barely get a foot hold?    I looked at the Disaster Preparedness Officer PD or "Job Aid"    SURE LEAVES ALOT TO BE DESIRED FOR CAP IN DR OPERATIONS especially if CAP NHQ and the Wing is MOU averse with State EMA's

I will develop some where I can... and I will NOT BS them into believing that we got the Cavalry comin with ARCHER, G1000, and 26 vans and 400 GT personnel available after, lets say, a tornado touchdown, and be there on scene passing out water and sammies  in twenty minutes, even if the touchdown was 10 miles from the Sqdn.  Just will not happen.

So where was CAP when CERT was just coming out 10 yrs ago?    Where has CAP been in the TRUE DR field and why has CAP with its "KNOWN QUANITY" being advertised have not a TRUE DR curriculum, FOG's, and trainin program zeroed in on these issues if we advertise and claim we do all the things CERT can or has done??   WHERE HAS CAP BEEN??  Our standard MAY be goood as everyone elses as far as standards go...then WHY is CAP not MORE ACTIVE in more ways for DR, HUH?

EXACTLY, What does CAP want us to do?  Hopefully, CAP NHQ wont botch that partnership with CERT and try to call DR operations there own!!
Do we really have a value added organization?  Depends on where CAP's action is and who is calling them  up on the Rolodex!

[sardak]

Regarding MOUs - Almost a year ago, National put out a new draft reg for review, CAPR 111-2 "Memorandum of Understanding."  In the opening paragraph it states: "This regulation is new and replaces CAPR 60-3, Chapter 5, in its entirety." From the summary paragraph:"This regulation establishes the policy on MOUs and letters of agreement (LOA) in Civil Air Patrol (CAP)." Creating a new reg on MOUs seems to indicate that National doesn't want to bury them.

Para. 2.b b. Purposes. MOUs today are a tool for:
(1) Institutional Marketing – developing and maintaining relationships between CAP and state governments and organizations selected by corporate officers.
(2) Managing and Administering Operations – facilitating the conduct of recurring missions for other organizations, most typically NGOs, through operational MOUs.

3. Policy.
a. MOUs in General.
(1) Purpose. An operational MOU is appropriate when an organization or agency has a recurring need for CAP services and support. A non-operational MOU is appropriate when a corporate officer has determined that an ongoing relationship between CAP and the entity would be mutually beneficial.

On the other hand, Para. 1.i i. Recurring Need for CAP Services and Support. For operational MOUs, this means the parties anticipate CAP performing approximately 12 or more missions per year.

Excerpted from Para 3.a.2 ...every CAP wing is required to maintain a current MOU with the state in which it operates. Each wing that does not have a current MOU with the state must submit a statement of reasons through its region commander to the CAP/CC with a copy to National Headquarters General Counsel (NHQ CAP/GC).

The draft reg also discusses local MOUs. Why a final version hasn't been published yet is anyone's guess. Also, at the General Counsel's section of the NHQ website, there is more information on MOUs, including copies of all national level MOUs (most of which are out-of-date, by years) and a sample MOU for units to use.
================
As for CERT, it was one of those items that was included in the latest 60-3 before CAP really figured out what it wants to do with it. CERT as an ES qual is listed in CAPR 60-3 para. 2-3(f) with note 4, which applies to the new and changing quals:
Note 4: New training programs and levels in certain specialties are currently in development. In order to allow enough time for proper testing and fielding of new curricula and to avoid delaying the release of this regulation, these new specialties were included in the regulation even though CAP is not ready to implement all of these specialties at this time.

In some communities, CERT is nothing more than neighbors helping neighbors until emergency responders arrive - which was the original intent of CERTs. In other locales, CERT members are organized and trained to respond beyond their neighborhood. In either of these situations, CERT trained CAP members have to understand that they're not responding as CAP members - until authorized. That's where I see potential problems with CAP as CERT.

I don't think that CAP should be offering itself to agencies as CERTs in either capacity. We should approach agencies as we always have, as an emergency services agency trained in search and rescue, communications and now, in some cases, CERT. CERT should be part of a new ground team member rating*, not a standalone rating. The CERT training should be per the national CERT standards, not our own in-house CAPified version. CAP could be deployed into areas that lack CERTs. We could potentially be deployed into areas with CERTs to organize them. CAP members have knowledge, skills and operational capabilities different than, and in some areas, above the level of CERTs.

*Note 4 also applies to GTL "any level" and GTM "any level." We don't have levels of GTL right now. At one time, the National ES Team was working on multiple levels of GTL and more levels of GTM than we have now.

We'll just have to wait and see what guidance comes out in the "final" 60-3 that replaces the current interim release.

Mike

[Major Carrales]

The idea behind CERT, to me, seems to be a simple one (although I am new to it): folks can do something for themselves during and emergency instead of languishing in despair waiting to be rescued.  It seems I agree with RiverAux's posts that a CERT team provides for "default emergency services" in times and places where they would be needed and positioned during an emergency.

Am I correct?

[wuzafuzz]

Please tell me who has better training in light aircraft SAR and DR than CAP?  With the exception of high angle stuff, which CAP doesn't do, our basic ground SAR skills training are just as good as anything out there and we happen to be the largest ground SAR organization in the US.  Don't get me wrong, our training on ground SAR planning is weak, but at the GTL and below level, our standards are as good as anyone elses. 

I am neither a pilot or an observer and did not intend to address their training.  (Note I referred to our training in many areas.  Not all.)  But I'll bet there are law enforcement aircrews out there who who have it down far better than we do.  Sticking to the ES side, areas where we are not "highly trained" include some of my specialties: MRO & CUL, PIO, & GTM.  Many of our MRO's are not highly trained dispatchers, yet that is the role they fill. Earn your ROA an you are on the air, potentially a high stress multi-tasking situation.  CUL's in most cases don't compete with professional communications managers and some don't even compare to your average ARES/RACES member.  Some of our PIO's are great, some commit routine FUBAR's mentioned in other threads.  We deploy new GTM's after relatively limited training and 2 field exercises.  They don't hold a candle to our local SAR team members, a number of whom are in our squadron.  GTM 3 requires you to shoot an azimuth on a compass but doesn't even require map reading!  And that's when people don't pencil whip SQTRs like they are a NASCAR pit stop.

CAP might be the cats meow at a few things.  On other things we are on the "short bus."  That's a reality we need to recognize and is why I believe we would benefit from increased participation in a nationally recognized training curriculum.  The alternative is rolling our own...again...and expecting people to know where we fit.  That applies CERT for DR, and more.  Playing to recognized standards is becoming more important.  The days of getting most missions from AFRCC are waning, we need to market to others if we want to stay relevant in ES. 

As for DR, excepting the paid folks and SDF's, the only recognized games in town I know of are Red Cross & CERT (not sure if MEMS would cover it, thinking not.  CAP already poo-poo'd MEMS anyway).  Red Cross doesn't offer a franchise to CAP, so that leaves CERT.

In the meantime a few members of my squadron are planning to take the CERT instructor course. We'll see if it fits for us or not.  Beats talking it to death on CAPTalk.   

[LTC Don]

Hands down, there is great material taught during the CERT course, so it is time well spent.  But, let's call it what it is, a warm and fuzzy from the Government for citizens to at least make them feel like they have some control over their situation after a disaster.

CAP can easily take the basic course, and supplement it with more in-depth material or add-in modules to increase the value of the training.

It is our thinking that we, being the members in our squadron who are instructors, can offer our services to community groups and provide the training for them, with the county em folks providing support where they can.  That's the marketing component, by getting us out there in front of the community doing the training.  This also demonstrates to the county em folks our commitment to developing a system and infrastructure of support should a disaster situation occur.  Really, this is a no-brainer.

Get that TTT course, done, then start getting active in the community.  There are tons of community groups who want to help out, but need direction and training.  We can help steer that and be a constructive part of it while getting our name out there.  In North Carolina, at least until about two months ago, there were only two registered CAP CERT groups.  If you want to see how little CAP has participated in CERT on a local level, look at the directory for your state.  N.C. has 100 counties, yet there are over 120 CERT groups spread all over the state.

CAP has paid lip service to DR for decades, now here is a meat and potatoes curriculum it can sink it's teeth into and really do something with it with fairly little effort.

Our SAR training still leaves a LOT to be desired, because we have this SAREX mentality, and not weekend based classroom and field training mentality.  Here in North Carolina, there are Fire and Rescue schools all over the state virtually ever weekend that features SAR training such as land navigation, man-tracking, wilderness survival, and other fundamentals, but you never see CAP members attending them because we 'do our own thing'. << and I've seen this sentiment echoed  here before in CAPTalk by other members.

I actually had a member of the Guilford County SAR Team, back in the 80's at a SAR school in the eastern part of North Carolina ask me "Who are you and what are you doing here?".  And, her tone wasn't exactly friendly (like I was some kind of alien here to suck the life out of their work, or something).  That was over twenty years ago now, and it's burned into my brain.

Hands down, the best training I've attended in a very long time was the school Virginia Wing and VDEM holds to train and certify their Field Team Members and Leaders per State of Virginia law.  I've always heard the training at NESA is also first rate.  So, there really needs to be some serious paradigm changing in the way CAP provides it's training.

The only hangups I have with the CERT is this notion of the fire extinguisher training and the collapsed rubble training with the cribbing and crowbars.  There are really two phases where CAP CERT would be utilized.  Either as a first-in resource immediately after the event: And, this is where a CERT team may very well need those materials to do rapid fire extinguishment and victim rescue so the team would need to be self sufficient with suppression and rescue equipment. The other phase is a support phase whereby CAP CERT is put on standby, then dispatched in to be a force multiplier to existing CERT teams after the preliminary suppression and rescue has been done.  In this scenario, CAP CERT would be relieving in-house CERT members, doing house/structure clearing, shutting off utilities, and doing other tasks as needed.

How CAP CERT is to be utilized will really lay with how the local EM folks write up their SOPs at the county or municipal level.  This is why the local ES Officer and DR Officer are so important.

It is NOT national headquarter's job to inform the local sheriff or EM person of what CAP can offer.  That responsibility lies with the local squadron.  CAPR 20-1 is very clear on this.

What proves to be the biggest stumbling block is how CAP is activated.  The usual way is for the responsible government entity to notify the state EOC that CAP resources are needed.  The problem is, this vital piece of communication procedure is never practiced.  The reality is, on a local level, with local resources, managers just want to be able press an alert button on the 911 console, and have the resource dispatched to where they are needed.  Having to go through beauracratic processes to activate a quasi-state/federal volunteer organization just isn't very appealing to an emergency manager without first getting comfortable with the process.

One of our goals, once we've established some semblence of a CERT presence, is to establish an annual or semi-annual exercise so the area CERT teams can come in and practice their skills so alert notfifications would be a great area to receive some attention, including addressing CAP's peculiarities.

Cheers,

[RiverAux]

why is CERT recognized after 10 years in some circles where CAP can barely get a foot hold?   

Partially because CERT offers local governments a group of people under their total control (while it is a hassle to activate CAP), and some of these CERTs can include 100s if not several thousand individuals.  There are major American cities where CAP probably couldn't put a few dozen people out on the ground to do disaster relief. 

Thats why I've been arguing for quality, since CAP probably never will be able to offer quantity in ground based disaster relief. 

Our SAR training still leaves a LOT to be desired, because we have thisSAREX mentality, and not weekend based classroom and field trainingmentality.

I strongly agree that our ground SAR exercises are woefully unrealistic most of the time, but our actual individual qualifications are just fine. 

[CAP Marine]

I have been an avid watcher of this site for a while and this posting caused me to register in order to weigh in. We are, in fact, putting the wheels in motion here in Group IV TX Wing to pair our efforts alongside community CERT members, civilian radio operators, and TX State Guard in a DR role. We are doing this in partnership with (and at the request of) a local municipality following their experience with assistance provided through CAP during (the very real world) DR mission following Hurricane Ike.

From the sounds of the posts here, we may be breaking some new ground and appear to be heading in a very positive direction. This effort is still in its early stages as we work out MOU's, organization, training schedules, etc. We have done one joint training mission during a DSAREX that was very interesting and worthwhile. CAP members of this group will all be trained to CERT standards before being allowed to participate. This is not in an effort to circumvent CAP regulations but is to allow the members to be on common ground when operating together. CAP members are well aware of the things they can and cannot do (as many posts here have illustrated). This is being done with the blessing of TX Wing ES and will be done the correct way and by the book.

If you are in TX Wing and interested (we are also looking in the Corpus area), feel free to PM me and I will provide additional info. If you are not in TX and are interested, I will try to update this post or start a new one with CAP/CERT in the subject as we experience successes/ lessons. There isn't anybody undertaking this effort that believes that things will be perfect and we all know that we have a long road ahead of us. All CAP members of the working group are spurred by making a positive effort to expand the role and public image of our organization. All of the CERT and other members are, quite frankly, just happy to have the help and support. We have all found that there is a lot to be learned from each other and that should be a positive in everybody's book.

[LTC Don]

ROCK On CAP Marine! 

North Carolina keeps dodging hurricane bullets...it is only a matter of time before one hits. 

Can you provide a summary of the exercise you participated, and perhaps some other highlights of your DSAREX that come to mind.


Cheers,

[sarmed1]

There was a thread on the DR/CERT topic a while back..it was interesting.  I will re-iterate some things I said there as they are relevant to the discussion:

CERT is not a solve all cookie cutter DR qualification...
CERT is geared toward community involvement in the disaster recovery process, (technicaly the pre-planning for the disaster)
CERT is not a proffesional Disaster/USAR/Medical/Fire Supresion qualification.
Many places "CERT" teams are regarded as useless...(old handicap dudes in reflective vests thinking they are saving the world)  often lower in respect or proffesionalism than Fire Police

If CAP wants to play in the world of FEMA and Disaster opertions(other than air assets) real certifications/training to FEMA and NFPA type standards are the credentials they need to bring to the table.  Even awareness level would be better than CERT training
CAP also needs its own qualification (SQTR) for disaster operations that detail what skill sets they want their people to be able to do (particuarly if it doesnt match up to another "qualification", CAP or otherwise).


mk