URS CORPORATION 4 - 2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

preventions elements may be weighted higher than some response elements. The Delphi method of assessing group consensus will be used. This method involves a discussion of assessment objectives. anonymous voting by each participant regarding the relative importance of the different preventionlresponse elements, statistical feedback on the distribution of individual responses. an open discussion of the significant differences of opinion. and conducting additional rounds of assessment as necessary. The raw gap for each item listed in the capability assessment under planning. organization. equipment. training. and exercises will be calculated as the difference between the target and current levels of the resource. The gap will be expressed as a percentage of the desired level. For example, if the capability assessment indicates that 4 urban search and rescue (US&R) vehicles are needed and only 1 is present. the gap would be 75%. The impact of the gap for each item on the various prevention/response elements will be assessed by the URS team and will be reviewed with the WG. Continuing with the example. a 75% gap in US&R vehicles will have zero impact on the preventionlresponse elements of "collecting PTE intelligence" because the lack of these vehicles is not expected to effect intelligence gathering. However. but this gap would have a very high impact on the preventionlresponse elements of "rescue victims from a site". The results for each item will be weighted on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 indicating that the preventionlresponse element will be completely impacted and 0 indicating no impact to the preventionlresponse element. The cost of closing each gap will be estimated based on a unit cost of adding the resource and the quantity of the gap to be closed. In addition, the cost and benefit of closing each gap will be evaluated. A plot of cost versus benefit will be prepared for all gaps. The graphical display of the cost versus benefit matrix (see Figure 2.3.3) will be used to identify relative priority groups (high, medium, low etc.) of the different needs. The relative plotting position of a given need in the cost versus benefit matrix provides an effective visual tool to identify the relative priority of the need. If a given need plots in the portion of the matrix with relatively high benefit (i.e., high gap impact score) and relatively low cost. the priority of addressing that need would be high. Conversely, if a need plots in a portion of the matrix with low benefit and high cost. the priority of addressing such a need would be low. Thus, the different portions of the cost versus benefit matrix will be used to define different priority groups of needs. The gaps will be listed in a descending order of the weighted gap impact score. The cumulative cost of closing gaps in this priority order will also be shown. In addition. gaps will be sorted by priority groups and the total cost of closing all gaps in each priority group will be estimated. URS will utilize the results of the needs prioritization to develop a spending strategy for the OA that achieves the goals and objective in the strategic plan. The updated data in the capabilities assessment will inciude the items already purchased or slated for purchase with the current grant expenditures. The needs prioritization process and the recommendations will be oriented to focus on strengthening regional preparedness and capabilities in the mutual aid regions of the OA. URS will develop a draft report section for review and comment and we will finalize this section incorporating comments received. In our experience. many UA's desire the flexibility of a subjective approach to establishing the distribution of funds among the various jurisdictions in an UA year to year. However. some jurisdictions prefer that a Page 15 of 51