We hear the term “Taking Care of Our Own” used quite often in the emergency response community. Unfortunately, we are observing more and more incidents in the technical rescue arena where this concept is being forgotten or ignored.
As we look deeper into the situation, many factors appear to be at the root of this matter.
In today’s fire service, we do not think twice about having a rapid intervention team in place at a structure fire; so why are we sending technical rescuers into dangerous situations without some form of a team assembled in the event one of our own runs into a problem?
One reason I hear is that the agency has a limited number of trained technical rescue members and they are all tied up with the initial incident. To those groups of individuals, two things immediately pop into my head:
Pre-planning — If you are going to equip your agency, and train your members in the various technical rescue fields, you should expand the process by becoming aware of other assets in your community. The day of an incident is not the time to begin canvassing your community for additional trained responders.
Mutual aid — This need actually follows a parallel line with pre-planning. Bringing in additional responders (both with specialized training and as support personnel) and extra resources early in an incident can prove invaluable to the timely completion of an emergency response.
A few more of the reasons given for not having a properly staffed back-up plan in place include:
We are the only agency in our area trained to provide this type of a response — If this is the case in your area, a number of solutions exist to help you keep your members safe. First and foremost, do not commit 100% of your assets to the initial deployment of resources. Well-trained rescue technicians are an excellent tool to be utilized as “force multipliers.” Assign one or two trained specialists to a squad staffed by other responders who together can perform many of the activities required during a technical rescue incident under the guidance of the trained responders.
If you are the only agency in your area that can provide these skills, you should refer back to the pre-planning component. Additionally, you can establish programs to add more trained members from your agency. If your numbers do not allow for this you can always reach out into neighboring communities and work collectively to build capabilities outside your department.
From a financial standpoint, the concept of a regional response capability provides many positive options. The cost of training and equipment required to safely and effectively prepare for these complex incidents is very extensive. It is much more fiscally responsible to develop and work with others than to have excessive amounts of expensive, seldom-used equipment sitting at multiple locations not being used or cared for.
So often I hear of a department purchasing equipment that truly falls into the "want" category as opposed to those items that are actually "need" items within their department.
We can handle this with our own people — This is the statement, whether it is said outwardly or part of an individual agency’s leadership’s way of thinking, that scares me the most. The reasons for this mindset to still exist in the emergency response community can be debated indefinitely. The important thing to focus on is that this cannot be the accepted way of thinking in a majority of today’s emergency service agencies. Unless you come from a department that has unlimited manpower and equipment, supported by extremely deep financial pockets, you must not fall into this way of thinking.
By operating as an island, you are in essence putting the lives of your responders and those who we serve at risk. The unwillingness to have sufficient resources in place shall in the long run extend the operation, which can result in less-than-positive outcomes.
Some responses are traditionally shorter in duration (such as rope rescues), while others can be sustained events (such as missing person searches and structural collapse incidents).
Focusing On The Rescuers
Let’s now change our focus and explore how individual responders can help take care of our own.
As responders, we must foster a way of thinking that will promote safe and successful operations. By successful I mean that all available skills and resources are utilized to their fullest value. We cannot always control the victim’s outcome at the calls we go on, however, we can do our part in providing the best level of care possible.
Knowing when you need to ask for more help and when to rest your squad is many times easier said than done. Much of the response community will work well past exhaustion if not provided with some controls and guidance related to this way of thinking. Remember, a very high percentage of responder injuries happen at the later stages of an incident. The combination of fatigue, complacency and premature removal of safety margins all contribute to these statistics.
Constantly train for that moment when all of your skills will be summoned to meet the needs of the challenges you face. As an individual, you know your strengths and weaknesses; make it your priority to lessen the list of weaknesses as you continue along your career.
Avoid playing the role of the blind mice. Utilize your training and experience to evaluate mission assignments. I am not advocating debating directions from command; what we are hoping to do is empower our responders to strategically evaluate complex assignments in order to promote safe and timely execution of the task they are assigned.
If you do not have the proper staffing or equipment for a particular assignment you should not blindly wander off into the hazard zone without addressing these matters. It all falls back on the old adage “proper planning prevents poor performance.” Don’t let pride get in the way of common sense! Never hesitate to obtain clarification of expectations and goals that have been set for you. Remember, many Incident Commanders are excellent at the incidents they are familiar with (structure fires, MVAs, etc.); your responsibility is to confirm that they are equally versed in the technical rescue field you will be handling.
At a recent training session for our county technical rescue team, our Incident Support Team (IST) Leader provided some great guidance on some common best practices and red flags that can be used by all responders. This is not an all-inclusive list, but a great starting point for your agency to build upon.
Some best practices for a Type 4 incident:
- Establish a command post
- Establish unified command early
- Make sure there is adequate command and general staff for the incident
- Establish personnel accountability: early and accurate
- Communicate clear objectives to all responders
- Start the ICS 201 incident briefing
This short list provides great guidance to command staff as well as early arriving responders at technical rescue incidents. Setting an organized stage for the balance of the event provides great value for both those we are responding to help and the responders on the call.
Because we do not live in a perfect world, many of the above mentioned practices are not acted upon. The lack of organization at an incident should trigger red flags in your thought process. The following is a list of some of the observations that could be triggers for a red flag to appear:
- Incident commander wandering, not staying at the command post
- Loss of span of control by not using groups, divisions or branches
- No safety officer
- Operations Section Chief (OSC) overseeing discipline specific activities, such as acting as a Branch Director not an OSC
- Inadequate accountability
- No time tracking
- Not a good picture of the situation after 60 minutes
The concepts listed are intended to foster ongoing evaluation of the incident you are at and to better prepare you for the future incidents you will respond to.
Remember, "Taking Care of Our Own" is much more than a catch phrase that is easily used around the coffee table; it is a way of life when operating at any incident in the emergency response community.
BOB DUEMMEL, a Firehouse Contributing Editor, is the Deputy Coordinator for Special Operations in Monroe County, N.Y. and recently retired as a captain with the City of Rochester, N.Y., Fire Department. He is the Plans Manager for New York Task Force-2 USAR Team, a member of the Western New York Incident Management Team and a member of the New York State Technical Rescue curriculum development team. He is a nationally certified instructor with a focus on technical rescue programs. He has delivered training to fire service, industrial, military and international rescue teams and has assisted with exercise evaluation for the United Kingdom and the European Union's USAR program. Bob has also participated in numerous USAR exercised as both a participant and evaluator. He is host of “The Buzz on Technical Rescue” podcast. Bob can be reached at [email protected].
