Ground Team composition

SAR-EMT1 · January 22, 2007, 03:29:09 AM

Ok, I suppose I ought to put my 2 cents (and my ID tag ) into the mix.
NASAR, boy scouts, NIMS etc require a medic or EMT to accompany the team. It used to be a CAP requirment as well (maybe it was unofficial; but everybody did it...I dont know) I just think that in any non urban area - ae when you arent around O'Hare, but are in say...the backwoods of Idaho or Colorado, that if you dont have a medical asset on board you are just asking for trouble.
If it were me Id push for the reintroduction of a GTE- ground team ems position into our team makeup. ... no reason it cant replace one of the 3 GT member positions.

lordmonar · January 22, 2007, 06:06:55 AM

Well you have asked the $100K question.

CAP does not do medics because our insurance does not cover it.

It is simple as that.

NIMS requires a medic on the team to be typed.

There is no requirment for that medic to be a CAP medic......so there is our first out. We just have to find a supplier of medics who will be willing to work with us. On their insurance (We do this all the time....look at the repelling rules for cadets. You can repell under the BSA rules but not CAP....so if you get hurt....make sure you bill the BSA and not CAP).

Or...we can find an insurance carrier (ours currently sucks big time!) Or...we can require our medical personnel to purchase their own liabilty insurance as part of the credintaling process.

The bottom line....while the medical requirment (and the team member medical skills requirment) will cause us to examine our process and policies...they are not insurmountable.

I agree with you though....we should be taking an EMT with us out into the field for our own safety and the possibility of helping the victims.

Eclipse · January 22, 2007, 07:03:46 AM

If we were a first-responder agency, I would agree.

But we are not.

DNall · January 22, 2007, 07:43:56 AM

Is the poitn of ther thread this: FEMA-NIMS-NIC: WSAR (LINK - last three pages):
excerpt medical capabilites...
Type I: Nat Standard EMT curriculun, ACLS, BTLS
Type II: Nat Standard EMT-B, or wilderness responder, BTLS
Type III & IV: None, supported (augmented with a member of) local EMS.

Virtually all GT missions we do are Type III/IV. The mississippi stuff in Katrina was in that range. Most REDCAPs in the woods are in that category. We do on occation cross into Type II, and very rarely but do sometimes cross into Type I. Now that's my judgement of what gets done on the substantial number of missions I've been on, not FEMA's who will be making the call on the situation & type level they require for it.

I believe we can easily adjust our task guide & add some training to meet type III/IV standards (LINK - pg 86). That should be just about priority number one in CAP right now. I think we can also support a fair number of Type II teams, at least one per Group/Wg. I think we MIGHT also be able to support a few type I teams, probably a couple per region. And yes, the medical specialist seems to be the greatest limiting factor in this. All I can say is that as we move up under NIMS over the next 2-3 years, it's a good idea to recruit a bunch of EMTs. It would be appropriate also for us to get some sort of EMT scholarship program going as well with a service obligation on it. That'll attract some young driven people to help us out.

How does everyone feel about that?

Also, the federal govt designates us a first responder, hence the issues, but states generally do not, which covers you under their good summaritan laws. This is one of those gray areas that is almost always going to come down on your side. The restriction though is temporary!!! In the long run it will probably remain in effect for corporate missions, but Congress is making the adjustment (not for us) to cover volunteer medical personnel serving federal agencies w/ medical liability that works the same as the other coverage we already have. That's taking some time to get the details worked out, but it's coming. We're waiting on the same legislation to put HSOs in augmentation roles w/ the AF just like we do with Chaplains now. There's one or two people on here that were involved in writing that spec track & understand the inner working of the situation better than I do. I can check into the progress on this though. Give me a couple weeks to get some other things off my plate & I'll see what I can do.

SAR-EMT1 · January 22, 2007, 10:06:17 AM

DNall.. Id appriciate if you could give me any/all info on any possible way I could vollunteer for this HSO specialty track... And/or serve as an EMS asset on base.

.. I already do that with the CG-aux.

DNall · January 22, 2007, 10:55:15 AM

The HSO track is pretty well done from what I understand, I don't have access to it. I'm not involved in that process, but I've heard from some who were, either directly or on the perifery. From what I understand, the hold up is witing for legislative change that FEMA is asking for, which will open up a few things. The options I've seen disucssed ranged from augmenting on base to DMAT style units for disaster response & everything in between. From what I understand they don't want to put out an interm spec track to get all our medical people working on & then change course mid-stream as soon as the stuff works its way thru. If it turns out to be delayed even further then it may come down to that, but I don't know. Like I said, I'll try to check into the progress on the legislation here ina couple weeks or so. I think it's kind of back burner & needs the details hammered out on standards & who's covered vs not & for what. It'll get done though, it just takes time.

lordmonar · January 22, 2007, 04:45:38 PM

Quote from: DNall on January 22, 2007, 10:55:15 AM
The HSO track is pretty well done from what I understand, I don't have access to it. I'm not involved in that process, but I've heard from some who were, either directly or on the perifery. From what I understand, the hold up is witing for legislative change that FEMA is asking for, which will open up a few things. The options I've seen disucssed ranged from augmenting on base to DMAT style units for disaster response & everything in between. From what I understand they don't want to put out an interm spec track to get all our medical people working on & then change course mid-stream as soon as the stuff works its way thru. If it turns out to be delayed even further then it may come down to that, but I don't know. Like I said, I'll try to check into the progress on the legislation here ina couple weeks or so. I think it's kind of back burner & needs the details hammered out on standards & who's covered vs not & for what. It'll get done though, it just takes time.

My God! Someone with a plan and a vision is actually working at CAP! That's unheard of!

I'm glad that they are working on this issue...it has been a long time in coming.

Eclipse · January 22, 2007, 04:58:28 PM

Where are we designated at the Federal level as First Responders?

Can you quote a reg or document?

SAR-EMT1 · January 22, 2007, 05:24:21 PM

Cannot quote a reg sir, but I believe the term is used to describe our ability to be called out after ELTs at 3am NOT as a medical reference.

SAR-EMT1 · January 22, 2007, 05:25:40 PM

And the group designating us as such at the federal level is probably AFRCC or CAP-USAF

DNall · January 22, 2007, 05:38:54 PM

National response plan, CAP is designated as a primary response asset. No other unpaid group is. That's always been the case. In varrious court cases we've been found to be an emergency response agency. You're certainly not a private citizen nor acting in that capacity when on a mission. The legal issue of medical liability is one that's never been a problem, & still shoud not be, just some silly lawyers making trouble where there's been none ever before.

SAR-EMT1 · January 22, 2007, 05:51:11 PM

Well hang the lawyers and give me a certification in Ground Team EMS!

fyrfitrmedic · January 22, 2007, 05:53:42 PM

Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on January 22, 2007, 05:51:11 PM
Well hang the lawyers and give me a certification in Ground Team EMS!

Better not call 'em medics (even if quite a few here and there are) or some folks will have a conniption fit

SAR-EMT1 · January 22, 2007, 06:12:17 PM

No, just call it what it is GTE - ground team EMS- 3 or 4 levels FR through paramedic.

DNall · January 23, 2007, 11:09:30 PM

I believe the official designation in this case is WSAR-M. Pretty sure the term ground team is going to disappear.

SAR-EMT1 · January 24, 2007, 11:11:25 AM

Couldnt call it WSAR-Medic because we arent all medics.
For the sake of the thread if I'll just call it GTE -ground team ems-
My question is this: If / when the HSO program gets off the ground does anyone else see value in adding an EMS qualification to the 101?
And if so, would the idea of 4 levels work out?
4: FR 3:EMT-B 2:EMT-I 1: EMT-P

fyrfitrmedic · January 24, 2007, 04:31:14 PM

Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on January 24, 2007, 11:11:25 AM
Couldnt call it WSAR-Medic because we arent all medics.
For the sake of the thread if I'll just call it GTE -ground team ems-
My question is this: If / when the HSO program gets off the ground does anyone else see value in adding an EMS qualification to the 101?
And if so, would the idea of 4 levels work out?
4: FR 3:EMT-B 2:EMT-I 1: EMT-P

I think it makes sense.

I think four levels could work; it seems to work just fine for Canada.

DNall · January 24, 2007, 04:40:01 PM

I believe it's WSAR-M for medical specialist, which covers the slot if it's a wilderness first aid course at the lower level or EMT-I/P at the top.

Pace · January 24, 2007, 06:04:22 PM

Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on January 24, 2007, 11:11:25 AM
Couldnt call it WSAR-Medic because we arent all medics.
For the sake of the thread if I'll just call it GTE -ground team ems-
My question is this: If / when the HSO program gets off the ground does anyone else see value in adding an EMS qualification to the 101?
And if so, would the idea of 4 levels work out?
4: FR 3:EMT-B 2:EMT-I 1: EMT-P

Forgive my bluntness here, but what exactly can they contribute without violating CAP regs? Making an ES certification is rather pointless in my book since there's no training CAP can give you that you can actually use on victims at missions. You can give first aid and stabilize (with training given by the Red Cross or the American Heart Association).

The training doesn't come from CAP, and CAP doesn't have (and shouldn't have) a program in place to test your proficiency since your certifying agency should be on top of that to cover their FPOC. If we're not doing the training, and we're not verifying proficiency, why do we need an ES qual for it? Wear the EMT, Nurse, or Doctor badge and be done with it. And I'm aware that radiological monitoring isn't normally training CAP provides, except there are no limitations on their skill usage in the field, and they don't get a cool badge (the patch is fugly) for their uniform.

DNall · January 24, 2007, 08:02:37 PM

^ Temp policy till the legal issues get sorted out, which is a bigger than just CAP. These are FEMA requirements, not ours. If they say an EMT has to be on the team or you can't work the mission, then you need to find one even if they aren't allowed to practice their trade - which by the way I think watching the guy die & quoting CAP regs is probably going to get your license jerked & charges filed.

Far as 101 though, since FEMA is moving to doing the credentialing, I think there might be a point soon thereafter where the 101 is redundant. At some point on past that I'd think they'd drop all that info onto your handy dandy scanable combination picture ID & membership card. Hey what do I know though.