“Preparation through education is less costly than learning through tragedy.”
—Max Mayfield, director, National Hurricane Center
The unfortunate reality is that active shooter incidents are occurring with greater frequency and with greater loss of life and injuries in our communities. Recent incidents in the United States and around the world underscore the importance of first responder and community preparedness for active shooter and/or hostile events. Between 2000 and 2013, there were 160 active shooter events in the United States, with a 486 people killed and 557 people wounded, and between 2014 and 2015, there were 40 active shooter incidents, with 92 people killed and 139 people wounded. Three active shooter events over the course of less than 17 months—the June 2016 Pulse Nightclub shooting in Orlando, FL, the October 2017 Route 91 Festival shooting in Las Vegas, NV, and the November 2017 First Baptist Church shooting in Sutherland Springs, TX—produced more than 50 percent of the causalities reported from 2000 to 2013. These tragedies have a significant and lasting impact on entire communities, and unified and integrated preparedness, response and recovery strategies are vital to mitigate their impacts.
In the event of an active shooter incident in a community, first responders will be called upon to respond and provide lifesaving interventions at the scene, sometimes at great personal risk. The onus is on these organizations to become prepared to respond to these incidents in a manner that mitigates the risk in a way that has the greatest positive impact on the incident outcomes. Effective and safe response to these incidents will require increased levels collaboration and coordination between these first responder organizations, which typically have had differing tactical objectives on a scene.
The scene of an active shooter incident represents a definitive shift from typical response patterns, where different emergencies were considered “law enforcement scenes” or “fire department scenes,” with the respective agencies taking the lead and the other response partners taking on secondary roles. Basically, every entity that may have a role in responding to these incidents would have their own independent operations plan, with very little, if any, coordination with other potential responders.
Response to an active shooter incident requires a true unified response from all agencies participating, and this requires joint training and preparation. Traditionally, law enforcement has always taken the lead in preparation for and response to active shooter incidents, with fire/EMS personnel taking a secondary support role. While it is certainly appropriate for law enforcement to lead the planning and response, it is necessary for fire/EMS responders to increase their participation in the response.
Increased collaboration
On May 1, 2018, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) released NFPA 3000 (PS): Standard for an Active Shooter/Hostile Event Response (ASHER) Programs, which establishes minimum criteria for fire departments’ organization, maintenance and sustainment of an active shooter and/or hostile event preparedness and response program based on the organization's level of risk, to include all aspects of the process, from identifying hazards and assessing vulnerability to planning, resource management, incident management at a command level, competencies for first responders, and recovery.
This standard requires the use of established coordination and interoperability practices, such as the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and the Incident Command System (ICS), to include the use of Unified Command (UC), at the scene of an ASHER incident. It also requires fire and EMS agencies to conduct joint training on response to these incidents, including all anticipated response entities and communications personnel. In essence, it requires that fire and EMS responders coordinate their response plans with other community stakeholders, such as law enforcement, the local school system, etc. The publication of NFPA 3000 (PS) has started a vital conversation between response entities regarding roles and responsibilities before, during and after an ASHER incident.
Redefining roles and responsibilities
The realities of an ASHER incident require a paradigm shift in the way responding agencies prioritize and handle on-scene tasks. Up until recently, both law enforcement and fire/EMS personnel have been stifled by policies and procedures that require emergency medical providers to remain out of areas where threats remain, keeping potentially life-saving medical care from those who need it. NFPA 3000 (PS) lays out the roles and responsibilities of fire/EMS personnel who respond to an ASHER incident, breaking them down into three categories that should be familiar to Fire/EMS responders. These categories are delineated between roles and responsibilities in the hot, warm and cold zone. This standard represents a departure from traditional procedures that required fire/EMS personnel to remain clear of any scene that was not secure, meaning that the threat had not yet been neutralized by law enforcement, with the consequence of wounded and injured victims remaining in the threat area without treatment until the scene was secured. The new standard empowers properly trained and equipped Fire/EMS responders to remain in the hot and warm zones and provide threat-based care, a system of care that is used to provide medical care as determined by the threat or risk present. Additionally, fire/EMS responders have new standards and guidelines on PPE to help protect them on the scene of an ASHER incident, including ballistic protective equipment (BPE), such as Kevlar helmets, body armor and ballistic shields.
Unified command
The key to an effective response to an ASHER incident is coordination that can only happen through the implementation of the Unified Command model, where responding agencies share command and control responsibilities and develop a comprehensive strategy to handle the incident. This approach is vital because it allows each agency leader to share information pertaining to the differing capabilities, competencies and resources of their respective agency instead of placing all the responsibility on the shoulders of a single incident commander with limited access to information pertaining to other agencies.
This new standard represents a solid starting point for preparing to respond to future incidents and should serve as a sign to all agencies to revisit their response plans with an eye toward interoperability and to begin training exercises that integrate all potential responders. The success of future responses depends on the development and exercise of integrated skills.
