HomeMy WebLinkAbout01.28.20 Email from Jillian Beck - Policy Analysis on Wildfire Alert and Warning System
DATE: December 9, 2019
TO: Butte County Board of Supervisors
FROM: Jillian Beck
Master of Public Administration Student
Cal State LA
RE: Policy Analysis of Butte County Wildfire Alert and Warning System
Executive Summary
During the November 2018 Camp Fire in Paradise, Butte County, the deadliest fire in state
history, thousands of residents failed to receive timely evacuation warnings, preventing many
from fleeing before flames reached their homes. This policy analysis examines and provides
recommendations for alert and warning system. Criteria of efficiency,
effectiveness, and cost were used to evaluate policy options regarding whether alert and warning
systems should use warning message templates, privately operated and/or federal wireless
warning systems, and a combination of non-wireless alternative warning methods. Prior to the
start of wildfire season in August 2020, the Butte County Board of Supervisors should direct
county staff to ensure use and review of warning message templates for adherence to best
practices; the use of federal and privately operated wireless warning software systems that are
tested quarterly; the development of community watch groups to assist with neighborhood
evacuation warnings; and the establishment of public education and outreach campaigns to
ensure the effectiveness of recommended warning methods.
Problem Definition
Californias recent deadly wildfire seasons have brought renewed attention to failures in public
alert and warning systems during natural disasters. During the November 2018 Camp Fire in
Paradise, Butte County, thousands of residents failed to receive timely evacuation warnings,
preventing many from fleeing before flames reached their homes (Cal. Legis., 2019). The
wildfire became the deadliest in state history with the deaths of 85 people (Cal. Legis., 2019;
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, 2018; California Department of Forestry
and Fire Protection, 2019).
As the fire quickly spread, local officials utilized a county-contracted, privately owned
emergency notification system to send staggered evacuation warnings by landline and cellphone
to previously designated evacuation zones, but thousands of impacted residents did not receive
the warnings either due to failed connections or because they did not subscribe to the service,
and no citywide evacuation order for Paradise was ever sent (St. John & Serna, 2018; St. John,
Serna, & Lin, 2018; Butte County Grand Jury, 2019). Evacuation warnings were not successfully
sent through a widespread federal wireless warning system, and fire damage to cellular network
and internet infrastructure eventually shut down all cellular and internet warning capabilities
(Cal. Legis., 2019; St. John, Serna, & Lin, 2018).
1
came one year after similar warning system failures in Sonoma County during the deadly Wine
Country Fire in October 2017 (Cal. Legis., 2019). This policy analysis will examine and provide
recommendations for alert and warning system with a focus on components
related to communication, including preparing warning message templates and the selection and
use of alert and warning methods, including wireless warning systems.
Background
During the first hours of the Camp Fire on Nov. 8, 2018, the wildfire rapidly became
uncontrollable (Butte County Grand Jury, 2019). ecause of the speed, a lot of the normal
systems that we have been using and have been effective for decades just kind of went out the
window,recalls Jim Broshears, retired Paradise fire chief and emergency operations coordinator
for the town. At the same time, Butte County faced resource challenges that impacted its ability
to notify residents of evacuation warnings. Only several staff members were trained to send out
emergency notificationstwo were occupied working dispatch, one was out of the area, and the
who serves
messaging for the first 24 hours (S. Collins, personal communication, November 14, 2019).
Wireless Emergency Notifications and Templates
During the Camp Fire, opt-in CodeRED notifications were used to alert residents of evacuations;
however less than 40% of residents at the time were registered for the notifications and only
approximately 7,000 of 52,000 evacuees received warnings (Butte County Grand Jury, 2019).
According to Lt. Collins, Butte County attempted to send out evacuation warnings as Wireless
Emergency Alerts (WEA) through
System (IPAWS) (S. Collins, personal communication, November 14, 2019; FEMA National
Advisory Council, 2019; Cal. Legis., 2019). The CodeRED software is used to send both
CodeRED messages and WEA messages through IPAWS (S. Collins, personal communication,
November 14, 2019; FEMA, 2019a). Launched in 2011, IPAWS is operated by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and is an internet-based tool that authorities at the
federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial levels can utilize to disseminate public warnings and
alerts (State of California, 2019; FEMA, 2018).
Wireless Emergency Alerts are emergency messages sent to mobile devices by authorized
alerting authorities through the major mobile carriers; they can be targeted to specific geographic
areas and are accompanied by a repeated unique alert tone and vibration that distinguish the
messages from other notifications (State of California, 2019; FEMA, 2018). Wireless Emergency
Alerts are opt-out, meaning users of mobile devices will receive the warnings unless they
deactivate the messages on their mobile device (State of California, 2019). This system allows
for alerting authorities to send emergency warnings to all people with mobile devices in a
specified area, including visitors from out of county or out of state, unlike CodeRED, which is
opt-in and only sends messages to members of the public who seek out and sign up to receive
alerts, which likely leaves out residents of neighboring jurisdictions or out-of-town or out-of-
state visitors in the event of a disaster (Cal. Legis., 2019; State of California, 2019).
2
During the Camp Fire, an emergency official attempted to send the evacuation warnings through
CodeRED to the opt-in system and the opt-out IPAWS system at the same time (S. Collins,
personal communication, November 14, 2019). The message appeared to send through both
avenues, Lt. Collin said; however, the IPAWS message never went out (S. Collins, personal
communication, November 14, 2019). Butte County officials have not received guidance from
FEMA regarding why sending the messages at the same time does not work, Lt. Collins said;
instead, since the Camp Fire, Butte County officials send the CodeRED and IPAWS messages
separately and verify the message was logged in the IPAWS system subsequently (S. Collins,
personal communication, November 14, 2019).
There is currently a lack of training and continuing education for alerting authorities regarding
IPAWS, which FEMA identified as a priority to remedy, set to be implemented over the next 24
to 36 months (FEMA National Advisory Council, 2019). The California Office of Emergency
Services (2018) identified a lack of training and knowledge of the IPAWS Wireless Emergency
Alerts system as a driving factor as to why Sonoma County officials failed to utilize the system
as a means of issuing timely evacuation warnings during the Wine Country Fire in 2017. A
forthcoming training being developed by the California Office of Emergency Services, as
mandated by Senate Bill 833, is required to include information on the evaluation, purchase, and
operation of Wireless Emergency Alerts system and Emergency Alert System equipment and
software (S. Bill No. 833, 2018). Though IPAWS certification is free, alerting authorities must
still purchase the software used to operate the Wireless Emergency Alerts system; as of May
2019, 25 software providers have demonstrated capabilities for supporting the system (FEMA,
2019a).
Technical limitations also exist within IPAWS Wireless Emergency Alerts. Currently, there is a
90-character limit for warning messages sent through the system (FEMA, 2019b); however,
FEMA has a goal to increase the limit over the next several years to 360 characters (FEMA
National Advisory Council, 2019). Such limited space for a warning can be challenging and it is
highly unlikely for emergency officials to be able to write effective, brief mobile warning
messages in the midst of an emergency (Bean, Sutton, Liu, Madden, Wood, & Mileti, 2015).
message is preferable to a t
(2019) new guidelines aim to address this issue through its suggested templates.
Another limitation of IPAWS Wireless Emergency Alerts, and other wireless alert methods, is
their reliance on internet and/or cellular network connectivity due to the possibility of such
infrastructure failing during natural disasters or a lack of connectivity in rural areas (Li, Cova,
Dennison, Wan, Nguyen, & Siebeneck, 2019). The Wireless Emergency Alerts system froze
during Hurricane Harvey in Texas when officials attempted to alert a large geographic area, and
damage to communication infrastructure in the Caribbean prevented the system from being used
during Hurricane Maria (FEMA National Advisory Council, 2019). Similarly, cell towers were
damaged during the Camp Fire, which prevented many residents from receiving warnings or
information through their mobile devices (Cal. Legis., 2019).
Best Practices
In response to communications failures during recent wildfires, including the Camp Fire, the
California Legislature passed Senate Bill 833 in 2018, mandating the Office of Emergency
3
Guidelines, which were
released in March 2019 (S. Bill No. 833, 2018; Cal. Legis., 2019; State of California, 2019). The
guidelines provide best practices, guidance, and expectations for localities throughout the state to
use to update, revise, or create specialized alert and warning plans and procedures for their
communities (State of California, 2019).
Research into public natural disaster warnings, dating back to the mid-19th century, coalesces
around the idea that to be effective warnings must be timely and reach all those who are at risk
regardless of where they are located or what they are doing (Anderson, 1969; Working Group on
Natural Disaster Information Systems Subcommittee on Natural Disaster Reduction, 2000;
Steelman & McCaffrey, 2012). Many components go into ensuring the timeliness, accuracy, and
thus, effectiveness, of disaster warning systems.
Warning Messages. In a review of 200 publications studying public disaster warnings, Mileti and
-8). Disaster warning messages must
be clear, consistent, accurate, and credible (Mileti & Sorenson, 1990; State of California, 2019),
should be locally-specific, and should include guidance of what protective action to take that can
rey, Velez,
& Briefel, 2013, p. 21).
During the Wine Country Fires in Sonoma County in 2017, officials often had to improvise
warning message text in the midst of the crisis due to a lack of pre-written templates (California
Office of Emergency Services, 2018). Prior to the Camp Fire, Butte County did not use warning
ency manager (S. Collins, personal
communication, November 14, 2019). However, in the year since the wildfire and following the
templates into its process. The county was able to implement the templates into its system (S.
Collins, personal communication, November 14, 2019).
In its new guidelines, the State of California (2019) recommends the utilization of templates and
provides examples for localities so they can craft effective messages prior to disaster striking.
The templates include identifying the credible source the warning is coming from, describing the
hazard, identifying the impacted location, advising specific protective actions, and alerting the
public to when the warning expires or when new information can be expected (State of
California, 2019).
Alternative Warning Methods. Recent public disaster warning literature emphasizes the need for
multiple methods of disseminating warning messages to the public during a natural disaster
(Working Group on Natural Disaster Information Systems Subcommittee on Natural Disaster
Reduction, 2000; Steelman & McCaffrey, 2012; Mileti & Peek, 2000). A report by the U.S.
Working Group on Natural Disaster Information Systems Subcommittee on Natural Disaster
Reduction Warnings (2000) recommended that warnings during natural disasters be distributed
risk can receive warnings regardless of their location or present activities (p. 7). Mileti and Peek
(2000) have found that warnings disseminated across multipl
4
Mileti and Sorenson (1990) identify several potential communication methods for disaster
warnings: personal notifications or door-to-door warnings, portable loud speakers and public
address systems, radio and tone alert radio, television and cable overrides, signs, reverse-911
telephonic warnings, sirens and alarms, and aircraft. Over time, the possible methods of
communicating warnings to the public have vastly expanded, especially with advances in
technology, and now include social media, text messages and apps, digital billboards, email, and
websites (State of California, 2019). The need for multiple communication avenues is
necessitated by limitations that exist within each method, especially those that rely on internet or
cellular network connectivity (Li et al., 2019). In light of the unique limitations of each method,
the California Legislature and state emergency officials, in line with the literature, have
During the Camp Fire, Butte County used various warning methods, including wireless
emergency notifications, door-to-door notifications, traditional media, ham radio operators, and
social media (S. Collins, personal communication, November 14, 2019). In the year since the
fire, -
low tone that will only be used for evacuation warnings (S. Collins, personal communication,
November 14, 2019; Mensch, 2019). Some neighborhoods in the county have also started
community watch groups that focus on emergency warnings (S. Collins, personal
communication, November 14, 2019). A liaison with these groups is in touch with county
emergency officials through radios and can assist with disseminating evacuation warnings when
needed (S. Collins, personal communication, November 14, 2019).
alert and warning system, especially as it relates to the Camp Fire (Howle, 2019). The state
auditor recommended Butte, and other high-risk counties, improve its preparedness and urged
the state to commit more resources, support, and oversight to ensuring localities are adequately
prepared to alert and warn their residents in the event of a disaster (Howle, 2019).
California Board of Forestry and
Fire Protection, 2019). In the early days of the Camp Fire, then-Gov. Jerry Brown referred to the
sifying fires caused by factors including the effects of climate
change (California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, 2019; Ashton, 2018). Thus,
uncontrollable and fast-moving wildfires like the Camp Fire are likely to reoccur.
Criteria for Policy Analysis
For the purposes of this policy analysis, several criteria were identified to be used to evaluate
policy options for
evacuations. These criteria include the effectiveness of reaching the affected population of
residents, effectiveness of communicating the warning message, efficiency of resources and time
spent by emergency management staff, and cost. These criteria will be used to evaluate options
related to warning message templates, selecting among wireless alerting methods, and utilizing
additional alternative warning techniques.
5
Effectiveness
Effectiveness, whether the policy option achieves its intended effect (Patton, Sawicki, & Clark,
2013), will be valued as the most important criteria in this analysis. The ability to reach as close
to all residents and visitors of Butte County during a wildfire in order to deliver evacuation
warnings is imperative, as evidenced by state legislative reports on failures during the Camp Fire
as well as recommendations by local accountability boards and interviews conducted with local
emergency officials (Cal. Legis., 2019; Butte County Grand Jury, 2019; S. Collins, personal
communication, November 14, 2019). Butte County Lt. Collins that we
can reach as much of the public as possible and get them the information they will need in order
communication, November 14, 2019). Effectiveness includes two outcomes: reaching all of the
affected people and communicating the necessary warning.
Efficiency
Efficiency, or maximizing the benefits from the use of resources (Patton et al., 2013), will be
evaluated as a criterion in this analysis. In the context of wildfire evacuation warnings in Butte
County, efficiency relates to the speed of warning methods and the use of resources, including
staff and time. This criterion was chosen due to Butte Countys finite amount of resources and
staff time and the necessity to deliver warning messages quickly as discussed previously.
Efficiency will be prioritized over cost due to the urgency of the policy outputs and outcomes.
Cost
Cost will be used to evaluate policy options related to wildfire alert and warning systems. These
costs include tangible costs, expenses that can be feasibly counted such as spending on software
or infrastructure and staff time, as well as further monetizable costs that can be accounted for
with dollar amounts (Patton et al., 2013). Adopting and implementing new software, conducting
trainings, and exploring new methods will require different levels of county expenditures and use
of resources. In recent years, Butte County has had to cut spending due to reductions in revenue
in the form of state and federal funding, which has resulted in job cuts (Schoonover, 2018).
Therefore, cost will be of importance to the county when evaluating any policy
recommendations. However, due to the political saliency of this policy issue (Butte County
Grand Jury, 2019), cost will be weighed as the least important policy criterion.
Policy Options for Alert and Warning System
This policy analysis is divided into three subsections: warning message templates, wireless
warning methods, and alternative warning strategies. An outline of options follows for each area
of the warning and alert system.
Warning Message Templates. The options for warning message templates include using
templates or not using templates. Warning message templates are pre-scripted messages that are
written prior to a disaster striking; they include clear directions on the protective actions the
public is being asked to take (State of California, 2019).
6
Wireless Warning Methods. The options for wireless warning methods are CodeRED, or other
privately operated opt-in emergency notification systems, Wireless Emergency Alerts through
-out mass notification system, or
both.
Alternative Warning Techniques. The options for alternative warning techniques include sheriff
and police patrol car sirens, permanently installed siren systems, door-to-door notifications, and
community watch programs. Based on the evaluation, some, all, or none of these options may be
recommended.
Methods of Analysis
A Criterion-Alternative Matrix Analysis and cost-benefit analysis will be used to evaluate the
policy options using the previously established criteria. Qualitative interviews, government
record research, and a literature review have also been conducted and will be used when
assessing policy alternatives. Triangulation, or using multiple research methods, can help avoid
potential bias and strengthen the validity of research findings (Newcomer, Hatry, & Wholey,
2010).
Criterion-Alternative Matrix Analysis
Three separate Criterion-Alternative Matrix (CAM) Analyses will be used to evaluate the
proposed policy options: one regarding the use of warning message templates, another
concerning wireless warning methods, and the final to evaluate alternative warning methods.
Each of the alternatives within the wireless warning methods and the alternative warning
strategies are analyzed individually; however, the options may be adopted in varying
combinations dependent upon recommendations.
The criteria of effectiveness, efficiency, and cost have been weighted from 1 to 3 for this
analysis, with 1 being least important and 3 being most important. Effectiveness, for both
reaching all of the affected population and communicating the necessary message, is weighted at
3, efficiency at 2, and cost at 1. These weights were selected based on qualitative interviews with
local officials, state and local government reports, and best practices from emergency
communications literature that put the most importance on reaching all people with accurate
protective messaging over efficiency or costs (S. Collins, personal communication, November
14, 2019; State of California, 2019; Mileti & Sorenson, 1990).
Each policy option is weighted from 1 to 3, with 1 representing low, 2 representing medium, and
3 representing high. In the case of the criterion cost, 1 equates to a high cost, 2 a medium cost,
and 3 a low cost. In the attached Appendices A, B, and C, raw scores and weighted scores are
displayed. Total scores were calculated by multiplying the column weight (criteria) with the row
weight (alternative). Higher scores indicate favorable policy options based on the identified
criteria.
CAM Analysis of Warning Message Templates
Appendix A illustrates the CAM Analysis of the policy options for the use or non-use of warning
message templates. Not using pre-written templates, or writing emergency messages entirely
after the onset of a wildfire, received a low efficiency score, a low effectiveness score, and a
7
medium cost score. Using templates received a high efficiency score, a high effectiveness score,
and a medium cost score. In studies of alert and warning systems, the warning messages
one of the most important factors in determining the effectiveness of
Mileti & Sorenson, 1990, p. 3-8).
In past wildfires in other localities, having to improvise the text of warning messages during the
onset of a wildfire hindered communication efforts (California Office of Emergency Services,
2018). Additionally, the State of California (2019) recommends the utilization of templates and
provides examples for localities so they can craft effective messages prior to disaster striking.
Cost will be examined in closer detail in the subsequent cost-benefit analysis. Not using pre-
written templates was scored at a 7 and using templates was scored at a 17. Templates were not
used by Butte County officials during the Camp Fire; however, Lt. Collins reported that
templates have been drafted in the year since (S. Collins, personal communication, November
14, 2019).
CAM Analysis of Wireless Warning Methods
Appendix B illustrates the CAM Analysis of wireless warning methods, including the use of
CodeRED, or other privately operated emergency notification systems, and the use of IPAWS
WEA, the federal wireless warning system. CodeRED received a low score for effectiveness of
reaching all populations, a high score for effectiveness of communicating emergency warnings,
and a medium score for cost. IPAWS received a high score for effectiveness of reaching all
populations, a medium score for communicating emergency warnings, and a medium score for
cost. The opt-in nature of CodeRED limits its ability to reach all populations, as illustrated by the
low registration rate of residents during the Camp Fire, and all but eliminates the capability to
reach out-of-town visitors (Butte County Grand Jury, 2019; J. Broshears, personal
communication, November 18, 2019). Alternatively, IPAWS was scored as effective for
geographic area without prior registration (State of California, 2019; FEMA, 2018).
However, CodeRED allows for 160-character messages, while IPAWS currently only supports
90-character messages, which county emergency officials have found to be extremely limiting
(S. Collins, personal communication, November 14, 2019). effectiveness score
for communicating warnings was also due to previous technical difficulties experienced by Butte
County officials when attempting to use the system (S. Collins, personal communication,
November 14, 2019). Overall, CodeRED received a weighted score of 14 and IPAWS received a
weighted score of 17.
CAM Analysis of Alternative Warning Methods
Appendix C illustrates the CAM Analysis of alternative warning methods, in other words
methods to mitigate gaps left by the wireless warning methods discussed previously. Patrol car
sirens were scored at 14, a permanent siren system at 13, door-to-door notifications at 17, and
community watch programs at 24.
Patrol car sirens, which have recently been implemented in Butte County, received a medium
score for effectiveness of reaching all populations, effectiveness for communicating warning
message, and cost because some patrol cars may be limited in reaching all populations during a
8
The permanent siren system received a medium score for effectiveness of reaching all
populations, a medium score for effectiveness of communicating messages, and a low score for
cost. If sirens are placed throughout the county, it is likely most populations will receive the
messages; however, this is dependent upon education of the public about the siren meanings
(Cal. Legis., 2019; Kuligowski & Wakeman, 2017). Some emergency officials dispute the
effectiveness of sirens of reaching all communities (such as those who are hearing impaired) and
warn of negative unintended consequences due to loud noise levels (Berkeley Disaster and Fire
Safety Commission, 2019). Additionally, the cost is high as shown in Appendix C.
Door-to-door notifications received a medium score for effectiveness of reaching all populations,
a high score for effectiveness of communicating the warning message, and a medium score for
cost. Door-to-door notifications, which are currently used as a supplemental method in Butte
County, are likely to clearly get a warning across but divert personnel during the crisis to
notifications (S. Collins, personal communication, November, 14, 2019).
Community watch programs received a medium score for effectiveness of reaching all
populations, a high score for effectiveness of communicating warning messages, and a high
score for cost. This method is limited to no cost to the county to maintain due to its grassroots
nature and has a high likelihood of effectiveness due to its reliance on already existing social
networks.
Cost-Benefit Analysis
A cost-benefit analysis will be conducted on the policy options for warning message templates,
wireless warning methods, and alternative warning techniques. A cost-benefit analysis is a tool
that can help assess the economic feasibility of various policy options, which provides a
determination on whether or how much the benefits of a particular alternative outweigh the
associated costs (Patton et al., 2013). Some costs outlined can be explicitly monetized or include
estimated monetary costs and others are designated as non-monetary costs, such as staff time or
unknown future costs.
Warning Message Templates
Using Templates: The costs of using templates include the staff time used to craft
the messages; however, these costs can likely be mitigated by using sample
templates created by the State of California (2019) or using free trainings
provided by OnSolve, the company behind CodeRED, with which Butte County
has an existing contract (Butte County Grand Jury, 2019; OnSolve, 2019). The
benefits of using templates outweigh the minimal costs and include improving the
accuracy and consistency of warning messages by drafting them prior to the high-
pressure environment of a wildfire or other disaster (State of California, 2019;
Mileti & Sorenson, 1990).
Not Using Templates: Not using pre-written templates provides minimal costs on
the front end because staff time is not needed to develop or curate templates.
However, potential costs exist with diverting staff time to drafting messages after
the onset of a crisis as well as the potential steep costs associating with repairing
public trust or assuaging public confusion if inconsistent or inaccurate messages
are sent out.
9
Wireless Warning Methods
CodeRED/privately operated emergency notifications:
contract with OnSolve for the CodeRED software is $37,500 annually with an
additional cost of $900 per year for a toll-free phone number that can host pre-
recorded messages for the public to supplement 160-character wireless emergency
notifications (Butte County Board of Supervisors, 2017). Benefits that balance
these costs include the ability to send wireless emergency notifications and
provide expanded recorded messages to residents, though limited to those who
sign up due to opt-in nature of software (Butte County Grand Jury, 2019).
IPAWS WEA: The costs of using IPAWS are approximately the same as
CodeRED (subtracting the additional $900 annually) because the CodeRED
software through OnSolve is an approved developer by FEMA (FEMA, 2019a).
The benefits of IPAWS ability to reach all cellphone users in the targeted
geographic region without prior registration far outweigh the costs. However,
limitations to the benefits exist because of the 90-character limit and technical
difficulties experienced by emergency officials in the past (S. Collins, personal
communication, November 14, 2019).
Both CodeRED and IPAWS WEA: Using both CodeRED and IPAWS WEA
produce negligible cost differences when compared with using the two options
separately since the same software is used to disseminate both wireless alerts (S.
Collins, personal communication, November 14, 2019; FEMA, 2019a). Benefits
of using both can include capturing a wider group of people due to redundancies.
Alternative Warning Methods
Patrol Car Sirens:
vehicles was approximately $3,000 (Mensch, 2019). Additional costs are
associated with this option for an outreach campaign to educate the public about
the sirens. Benefits, if outreach is effective, include a recognizable and fast
warning option.
Permanent Siren System: Costs of a permanent siren system installed throughout
Butte County can be estimated to be approximately $800,000 for 21 sirens and an
additional $100,000 for a public outreach campaign (Berkeley Disaster and Fire
Safety Commission, 2019). This is a conservative cost estimate based on one
provided to the City of Berkeley, which is much smaller in area than Butte
County, so the costs may be higher if additional sirens are required. Benefits of a
permanent siren system include permanency and ability to be installed in
neighborhoods that may be difficult to reach via patrol vehicle. However, some
negative consequences associated with noise level of siren system and
effectiveness is disputed (Berkeley Disaster and Fire Safety Commission, 2019).
Door-to-Door Notifications: The cost of door-to-door notifications delivered by
emergency personnel consist of staff time, specifically the use of personnel
resources that may be needed in other areas during crises. Benefits include clear
messaging from interpersonal communications.
Community Watch Programs: There are limited costs associated with community
watch programs due to the grassroots nature of the method. Benefits of such
methods are great due to the use of existing networks and social ties.
10
Recommendations
As part of its alert and warning system, Butte County should use pre-scripted warning message
templates to ensure clear communication of protective warnings to the public during a disaster.
The use of templates follows emergency management best practices and can help county staff
avoid being rushed as warnings are assembled during future disasters, as was the case during the
Camp Fire. Since the Camp Fire, templates have been drafted. Ensuring the messages are kept
up-to-date and follow best practices should be of minimal cost to the county and can be
implemented immediately.
The Butte County Board of Supervisors should:
Direct county staff to have warning message templates reviewed by California Office of
Emergency Services officials to ensure they meet FEMA and emergency management
best practices.
Require state-mandated After Action Reports, which following local emergencies,
include an assessment of the effectiveness of warning message templates, allowing for
evaluation and adjustment as needed.
individuals with cellphones in Butte County with a unique and recognizable alert tone during a
disaster regardless of cellular congestion issues. However, the 90-character maximum for
wireless messages sent through IPAWS presents a significant challenge for adequately
communicating vital protective instructions and warnings to the public. Thus, it is recommended
that Butte County use both Wireless Emergency Alerts and its CodeRED notification system.
The Butte County Board of Supervisors should:
detail in its draft Alert and Warning Plan
quarterly exercises to test the IPAWS and CodeRED notification systems.
Direct the Butte County Alert and Warning Group to develop a formalized public
outreach campaign to increase registration for the CodeRED opt-in notification system.
Campaign may require additional funding to be allocated by the Board.
A widely agreed upon principle in emergency warnings is redundancy. Because no one method
can currently reach all populations effectively, it is recommended that Butte County use a
combination of warning methods to supplement the wireless warning methods. Currently, the
Plan stipulates the use of IPAWS and
CodeRED notifications, conventional media, social media, high frequency radio, local radio
stations, changeable message signs, mobile public address systems and vehicle sirens, and in-
person door-to-door notifications (
With a substantial public education campaign, a permanent siren system installed throughout the
However, successful implementation will be unlikely without significant financial support from
the state or federal government, so such a system is an optional recommendation for future
exploration. The new two-tone vehicle sirens that were recently installed in patrol vehicles must
be accompanied with a public education campaign. It is also recommended that the county
explore the establishment of a formalized community watch program specifically geared toward
emergency alerts and warnings.
11
The Butte County Board of Supervisors should:
Direct the Butte County Alert and Warning Group to develop a comprehensive public
education campaign to inform residents about the evacuation warning vehicle sirens,
including but not limited to social media advertisements, community events, and physical
signage. This effort must involve key stakeholders including representatives from
communities with access and functional needs to ensure siren messages can be
adequately communicated or that necessary accommodations can be identified.
Direct the Butte County Alert and Warning Group to begin working with residents in
each county evacuation zone to establish community watch groups with liaisons who are
contacted in the event of a disaster. This recommendation may need to be implemented in
a phased approach, beginning with the establishment of a public subcommittee of
residents that works with the alert and warning group to assess unique neighborhood
needs and feasibility.
Implementation of these recommendations will be contingent on available Butte County
resources as well as any additional funding provided by the state as a result of the recent state
season in 2020, the Butte County Board of Supervisors review, approve, finalize, and publish the
; ensure review of warning message
templates for adherence to best practices; require wireless warning exercise tests with software;
and establish public education and outreach campaigns to increase resident registration in opt-in
emergency notification system and ensure understanding of new vehicle sirens.
Attachments
Appendix A: CAM Analysis of Warning Message Templates
Appendix B: CAM Analysis of Wireless Warning Methods
Appendix C: CAM Analysis of Alternative Warning Methods
12
References
Anderson, W. (1969). Disaster Warning and Communication Processes in Two Communities.
Journal of Communication, 19(2), 92-104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-
2466.1969.tb00834.x
Ashton, A. (2018). Brown swings back at Trump: Climate change is
governor says. Sacramento Bee. Retrieved from https://www.sacbee.com/latest-
news/article221518685.html
Bean, H., Sutton, J., Liu, B. F., Madden, S., Wood, M. M., & Mileti, D. S. (2015). The Study of
Mobile Public Warning Messages: A Research Review and Agenda. Review of
Communication, 15(1), 6080. https://doi-
org.mimas.calstatela.edu/10.1080/15358593.2015.1014402
Berkeley Disaster and Fire Safety Commission. (2019). Commission Referral: Recommendation
to Install an Outdoor Public Warning System (Sirens) and Incorporate It Into a Holistic
Emergency Alerting Plan. Retrieved from
https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2019/09_Sep/Documents/2019-09-
10_Item_33_Commission_Referral_Recommendation.aspx
Butte County Board of Supervisors. (2017). Agenda Transmittal: Contract with Onsolve LLC
For Emergency Mass Notification System. Retrieved from
http://buttecounty.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=411&meta_id=71
487
Butte County Grand Jury. (2019). Annual Report 2018-2019. Retrieved from
https://www.buttecourt.ca.gov/GrandJury/reports/2018-
2019%20Grand%20Jury%20Report.pdf
2019). Retrieved from S. Collins.
California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. (2019). Responding to Wildfires in the Era of
Retrieved from http://californiasaf.org/wp-
content/uploads/2019/03/Responding-to-Wildfires-in-the-Era-of-the-New-Abnormal.pdf
Cal. Legis. Joint Legislative Committee on Emergency Management, & Assembly Committee on
Communications and Conveyance. (2019) Joint Informational Hearing Background
Paper. Emergency Alerts and Evacuations Lives Saved or Lives Lost?. Retrieved from
https://acom.assembly.ca.gov/sites/acom.assembly.ca.gov/files/Background%20Paper%2
0-%20Emergency%20Alerts%20and%20Evacuation.final_.pdf
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. (2018). Camp Fire. Last updated Nov. 15,
2019. Retrieved from https://www.fire.ca.gov/incidents/2018/11/8/camp-fire/
13
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. (2019). Top 20 Most Destructive
California Wildfires. Retrieved from
https://www.fire.ca.gov/media/5511/top20_destruction.pdf
California Office of Emergency Services. (2018). Public Alert and Warning Program
Assessment for Sonoma County. Retrieved from
https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=2147555230
FEMA. (2018). An Introduction to IPAWS. Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov/media-library-
data/1543325778432-
9b4f87f4e3621e225c7b3f53e9c896a9/2018_An_Introduction_to_IPAWS_final.pdf
FEMA. (2019a). Alert origination software providers that have successfully demonstrated their
IPAWS capabilities. Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov/media-library-
data/1558451891984-2c0dd8fa4474f0ff4c4dce730b6619ed/1.pdf
FEMA. (2019b). Frequently Asked Questions: Wireless Emergency Alerts. Retrieved from
https://www.fema.gov/frequently-asked-questions-wireless-emergency-alerts
FEMA National Advisory Council. (2019).
System. Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1550587427456-
30d4179ee4fa8b97ecf4ab6bee76ace6/NAC_IPAWS_Subcommittee_Final_Report.pdf
Howle, E. (2019). California Is Not Adequately Prepared to Protect Its Most Vulnerable
Residents From Natural Disasters. Emergency Planning Report Number: 2019-103.
California State Auditor. Retrieved from http://auditor.ca.gov/reports/2019-
103/index.html
Kuligowski, E. D., & Wakeman, K. (2017). Outdoor Siren Systems: A review of technology,
usage, and public response during emergencies. National Institute of Standards and
Technology. Technical Note 1950. Retrieved from
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/TechnicalNotes/NIST.TN.1950.pdf
Li, D. Cova, T. J., Dennison, P. E., Wan, N. Nguyen, Q., Siebeneck, L. K. (2019). Why do we
need a national address point database to improve wildfire public safety in the U.S.?
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 39, 1-11.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101237
McCaffrey, S., Velez, A., & Briefel, J. (2013). Differences in Information Needs for Wildfire
Evacuees and Non-Evacuees. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters,
31(1), 1-3. Retrieved from
https://www.fs.fed.us/nrs/pubs/jrnl/2013/nrs_2013_mccaffrey_001.pdf
Mensch, J. (2019). In Case of
Sirens. Fox 40. Retrieved from https://fox40.com/2019/07/23/in-case-of-wildfire-butte-
county-sheriffs-vehicles-now-have-evacuation-sirens/
14
Mileti, D. S., & Peek, L. (2000). The social psychology of public response to warnings of a
nuclear power plant accident. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 75, 181-194. Retrieved
from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.463.2441&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Newcomer, K. E., Hatry, H. P., & Wholey, J. S. (2010). Handbook of Practical Program
Evaluation (3rd ed., p. 446). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
OnSolve. (2019). Online Product Training. OnSolve. Retrieved from
https://www.onsolve.com/training/
rd
Patton, C., Sawicki, D. & Clark, J. (2013). Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning, 3
ed. New York, NY: Routledge.
S. Bill No. 833, California Legislature, 2017-2018. Retrieved from
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB833
Schoonover, S. (2018). Butte County budget balanced, but with job cuts. Chico Enterprise-
Record. Retrieved from https://www.chicoer.com/2018/06/10/county-budget-balanced-
but-with-dozens-of-job-cuts/
St. John, P., & Serna, J. (2018). Camp fire evacuation warnings failed to reach more than a third
of residents meant to receive calls. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from
https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-ln-paradise-evacuation-warnings-
20181130-story.html
and became a deathtrap. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from
https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-camp-fire-deathtrap-20181230-story.html
State of California. (2019). Alert & Warning Guidelines. Retrieved from
http://calalerts.org/document
Working Group on Natural Disaster Information Systems Subcommittee on Natural Disaster
Reduction. (2000). Effective Disaster Warnings. National Science and Technology
Council Committee on Environment and Natural Resources. Retrieved from
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc25972/m2/1/high_res_d/EffectiveDisaste
rWarnings2000.pdf
15
Appendix A: CAM Analysis of Warning Message Templates
Total
Efficiency Effectiveness Cost Score
2 3 1
Write Hinders speed of Variable due to quick Low cost on front-end;
messages disseminating turnaround; accuracy however, potential
after warnings; staff may be inconsistent; costs associated with
wildfire resources and time could lead to correcting inaccurate
onset, as used to draft and get confusion with public messages if sent out
incident approval for and distrust
develops messages in their
entirety
Weights Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted
1 2 1 3 2 2 7
Pre-write Reduces time spent More time to vet Some costs due to staff
warning during incident; more messages; ensures time used to craft
message time and resources consistency and messages; however,
templates can be dedicated to accuracy free trainings provided
for a other purposes via OnSolve/CodeRED
variety of and examples readily
scenarios available from state
ahead of and other localities
incident
Weights Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted
3 6 3 9 2 2 17
16
Appendix B: CAM Analysis of Wireless Warning Methods
Total
Effectiveness for Effectiveness for Cost Score
reaching all communicating 1
populations message
3 3
CodeRED or Opt-in nature 160-character limit $37,500 annually
other reduces for content (more for OnSolve
privately effectiveness, with than IPAWS) allows software; additional
operated low percentage of for additional $900 per year for
emergency public registered; information and phone number with
notifications unable to capture clarity; expanded pre-recorded
out-of-town feature includes toll messages
visitors; reliance free number to call
on cellular for additional
infrastructure and information
impacted by
jammed networks;
ability to geotarget
Weights Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted
1 3 3 9 2 2 14
IPAWS WEA Opt-out system; 90-character limit $37,500 annually
system captures residents hinders message for OnSolve
and out-of-town content; gets software (used for
visitors; ability to attention with loud both CodeRED and
geotarget; relies on alert tone; past IPAWS)
cellular failure due to
infrastructure but unresolved IT
not affected by problems
network congestion
Weights Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted
3 9 2 6 2 2 17
17
Appendix C: Alternative Warning Methods
Effectiveness for Effectiveness for Cost Total
reaching all communicating 1 Scores
populations message
3 3
Patrol car Does not rely on Variable due to need $3,000 for siren
sirens cellular technology; for education and installation; plus
could be limited by outreach to be additional cost for
hard to reach effective outreach and
regions education of public
and training of officers
Weights Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted
2 6 2 6 2 2 14
Permanent
Siren System Does not rely on Relies on outreach Estimates at $800,000
cellular technology; and education for for 21 sirens
can be stationed in efficacy; hard to (conservative estimate
hard to reach educate out-of-town due to possibility of
neighborhoods and visitors may have more sirens); plus
throughout county unintended negative estimated $100,000 for
externalities due to public outreach
noise level campaign
Weights Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted
2 6 2 6 1 1 13
Door-to-Does not rely on Person-to-person Cost of staff time
Door cellular technology; message provides during wildfire
Notifications could be limited by limited room for
hard to reach areas misinterpretation
or fast spreading
wildfire; reliant on
staff resources
Weights Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted
2 6 3 9 2 2 17
Community Success relies on Likely to be highly Limited costs due to
Watch widespread use; effective once put in grassroots nature of
Programs would not capture place due to use of method
out-of-town visitors strong informal and
friendship networks
and social ties
Weights Raw Weighted Raw Weighted Raw Weighted
2 6 3 9 3 9 24
18