The use of mass notification systems has been proven effective for keeping citizens informed before, during, and after a local emergency, as such systems are capable of providing geo-targeted, actionable, interactive content and instructions. Why then, have some raised questions recently about their efficacy? Many of the concerns are in response to recent reports by the media of notification system inefficiencies. In Hawaii, the mistaken launch of a missile attack warning sent citizens into a panic, while in California, while wildfires raged across the north and south, authorities decided not to deploy emergency notifications.
To help answer the questions about the proper use of mass notification systems, and about what went wrong in Hawaii and California, Ryan Strait, Product Director for Public Safety Solutions at CivicPlus® in Manhattan, Kansas, is setting the record straight. She aims to help public safety managers understand how to leverage the power of a mass notification system effectively and ensure all critical messages reach targeted citizens promptly.
The Hawaiian Missile Alert Malfunction
On Saturday, January 13, residents of the state of Hawaii spent an agonizing 38 minutes believing they were about to be the victims of a missile attack. An alert distributed from the state’s emergency notification system was the cause of the panic—an alert that was distributed in error. 38 minutes after Hawaiians were told to prepare for the worst, they received an updated communication stating that the message was sent in error.
“38 minutes is a long time,” said Strait. “At first it was reported by the media that an employee pushed the wrong button. Then the employee came forward and said he honestly believed an attack was imminent because he mistook a drill for a live event.”
According to Strait, what’s most important about analyzing this and any mass communication event, is not placing blame or passing judgment on those involved, but using it as an opportunity to reassess processes and ensure such situations to do not happen again in any community.
Attempting to uncover the mystery of what went wrong, Strait added, “When we first analyzed this situation, from what we could tell, the system used did not include a testing environment separate from its live environment. In such a scenario, one click could launch, and did launch, an emergency message without anyone being able to confirm if it was being sent as a test or as a live warning alert.”
Strait went on to add that since this event occurred, Hawaii has implemented a feature in its mass notification system that will allow authorized personnel to send a retraction message quickly.
“Ideally, your mass notification solution should include a preview message to add an additional safeguard to your process,” said Strait. “It also appears in the case of Hawaii, that their process did not include a two to three-person sign-off before the alert was sent to the entire state.”
Strait’s advice is to ensure you have processes in place for multiple individuals to review and approve the launch of any emergency messages.
Since the Hawaiian Missile Warning Message Malfunction, some have questioned whose job it will be to put together emergency alert messages for inbound missile warnings, especially as some communities fear the threat of a nuclear attack from a foreign power. FEMA has since said it will be the responsibility of local and state authorities to issue missile warning messages.
“This determination has many public safety officials reevaluating their alerting processes,” said Strait.
California’s Radio Silence in the Wake of Raging Wildfires
In the fall and winter of 2017, 9,133 wildfires ripped across California, making it the most destructive wildfire season on record. The spread of the fires into towns and neighborhoods required the evacuation of many communities—yet digital notifications to citizens were not issued until hours after the blaze began in many areas, leaving some residents and tourists trapped. Even when notifications were eventually sent, far too many citizens did not receive them. 44 people were killed in the wine country fires, leaving many to wonder, what else could have been done?
What Went Wrong? How to Ensure Timely, Targeted Communications.
In one California community, public safety personnel initially chose not to issue warning messages due to a discomfort with its notification system’s targeting functionality and a fear that an evacuation message would lead to mass panic and an eventual traffic jam
“When you use a mass notification system, there are ways to restrict the area to which a message will be deployed using geolocation,” said Strait. “You should have the ability to control the area of your message, but you need to make sure all authorized personnel are familiar with the functionality and how to use it before an emergency occurs.”
In Mendocino, news outlets reported that authorized system personnel grappled with messaging and agonized over what to write, which added to delays in message deployment. By the time several staff members had weighed in, and authorities were ready to send the painstakingly crafted messages, cell phone towers were down, so not everyone was able to receive the alerts. Strait urges public safety officials to choose a mass notification system that offers the ability to create pre-written, disaster-specific messages in advance that will be ready to use at a moment’s notice.
“Consider all the possible emergencies that your community could face, and write a warning message, an evacuation message, and a retraction message in advance for each one so that no one is stressing over the wording while the clock is ticking,” said Strait.
Further complicating safety efforts, the wine country fire warnings were only issued to those citizens who had preregistered to receive messages from their community’s emergency notification system and to residents in the county’s database of landline phone number. Those who had not preregistered, and tourists, were uninformed.
“There are so many harrowing stories of Napa Valley wildfire victims who didn’t get the messages because they were tourists,” said Strait. “Lots of them were evacuated by hotel staff and sheriff’s deputies who knocked on hotel doors. Such near fatalities could have been avoided if the municipality had integrated its alerts with FEMA’s IPAWS alerting system.”
Best Practices for Integration with IPAWS
According to Strait, when choosing a mass notification system, be sure to select one that integrates with FEMA’s Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS). The national alerting system is designed to help create and distribute local emergency notifications through all the nation’s available alert and warning channels, including:
- The Emergency alert system (EAS), which broadcasts to AM/FM radios and public televisions.
- Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) sent to capable wireless devices.
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather radio alerts
- Digital signs and other local systems
Strait explains this functionality is particularly important in cases of natural disasters, AMBERT AlertsTM, and active shooter events.
The only way to access the IPAWS system is by choosing a mass notification solution that is IPAWS integration-approved. Communities that utilize such a solution can amplify their emergency communications and reach as many citizens and travelers as possible during a disaster. Had the California communities been comfortable using an IPAWS-capable system, they could have maximized the reach of their emergency message and expedited timely evacuations.
“When you’re looking at the number of entities that provide mass notification software, there are eight including our solution, CivicReady, that work directly with local governments,” said Strait. So, while FEMA provides and maintains the channel, softwares like CivicReady are the ones that connect you to use those channels.
Encouraging Subscriptions
For municipalities that have the tools and processes in place to keep citizens informed during a local emergency, Strait says the next task is continuously encouraging citizens to subscribe to receive alerts.
“40 percent of your population can be reached when you import databases and when residents opt into your mass notification system,” said Strait.
She suggests that communities choose a mass notification system that has an easy-to-use citizen interface that easily lets them sign up to receive notifications from your organization. Depending on the software, citizens can choose how they would like to receive the messages, whether by text, phone, or email. They may also be able to select a preferred language for received notifications.
According to Strait, citizen subscription rates skyrocketed after the California fires in some counties by people who wanted to stay connected to their local government’s emergency alerts. Strait added, “During is an emergency is when we see the highest number of opt-ins. During the wildfires, some communities achieved 90 percent registration of their emergency notification system.”
Final Advice: Stay Hypervigilant and Prepared
Strait’s last piece of advice for public safety officials today is to remain prepared.
“No community can predict a local emergency, but every community should be prepared for one,” she said. “A mass communication miscommunication will only complicate an already dire situation. By ensuring proper plans and systems are in place, you can keep your citizens safe and informed, no matter when a disaster strikes.”
About Ryan Strait- As the Product Director for CivicReady, Ryan’s focus is on understanding the communication challenges faced by local governments in times of disaster, and ensuring the CivicReady solution offers the most efficient, and effective capabilities to allow governments to keep citizens safe and informed.
About the Author
CivicReady is the mass notification solution built specifically for local governments to communicate emergency alerts and routine information with citizens. CivicReady is a product of CivicPlus, THE integrated technology platform for local government. CivicPlus has more than 20 years of experience focused exclusively on local governmets. Over 55,000+ local government employees use CP’s software solutions. Learn more about CivicReady at www.civicready.com and CivicPlus at www.civicplus.com.
