Project #156779 - Private Sector Partnerships

Law Tutors

Subject Law
Due By (Pacific Time) 12/27/2016 12:00 am

Required Reading

Congress Report on H.R. 658, FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2012. Congressional Record 158(16); Wednesday, February 01, 2012, House, H230-H304. Retrieved from:

National Incident Management System (2008), FEMA, Department of Homeland Security. Retrieved from:

Unmanned systems integrated roadmap (FY 2011-2036)(2012). Department of Defense. Retrieved from:

Required Website

FEMA: National Response Framework,

Recommended Websites

California Earthquake Program.

Coping With Depression and Thoughts of Suicide after a Disaster, CDC.

Water: Tools and Technical Assistance. EPA.


Case Assignment

Private Sector Partnerships: Terrorism

Locate the proper Response Partner Guide and the Emergency Support Function Annexes from the NRF Resource Center for this Case Assignment. Also, refer to previous readings and required websites. For our focus in the Module 4 Case Assignment, examples of private sector partners of an emergency response plan for a town or city include:

  1. Transportation (e.g., trains, planes, ships)
  2. Telecommunication systems
  3. Utilities (e.g., water, electricity, waste disposal)
  4. Banking
  5. Hospitals
  6. Retail (e.g., lumber outlet, supermarket)

One of the main components of an emergency response plan is medical care. Depending on the type of terrorist response, medical facility caregivers must be ready to attend to the sick and injured. Injuries could be from shrapnel, blasts, brain trauma, contamination from a biological agent, or radiation poisoning, for example. Those injured will be civilians, children, and first responders. Medical triaging, accessing supplies, and fielding medical personnel will certainly take priority. The Incident Commander must establish a liaison with the medical gatekeeper.

Respond to the following:

Go online and search "Hospital Emergency Response Plan." Locate a hospital’s specific plan (use your hospital/clinic if employed in one—or a comparable setting). Then write a sentence or paragraph about:

  1. Disaster procedures for staff members
  2. Alternative clinic sites
  3. Toxic external atmosphere
  4. Bomb threats
  5. Emergency evacuation

Assignment Expectations

Length: Case Assignments should be at least three pages long.

References: At least two references should be included from academic sources (e.g., peer-reviewed journal articles). Required readings are included. The references should be cited within the text and also listed at the end of the assignment in the References section (preferably in APA format).

Quoted material should not exceed 10% of the total paper (since the focus of these assignments is critical thinking). Use your own words and build on the ideas of others. When material is copied verbatim from external sources, it must be enclosed in quotes.

Organization: Subheadings should be used to organize your paper.

Format: APA format is recommended (but not required) for this assignment. See Syllabus page for more information on APA format.

Grammar and Spelling: While no points are deducted for minor errors, assignments are expected to adhere to standard guidelines of grammar, spelling, punctuation, and sentence syntax. Points may be deducted if grammar and spelling impact clarity.

The following items will be assessed in particular:

  • Relevance - All content is connected to the question.
  • Precision - Specific question is addressed. Statements, facts, and statistics are specific and accurate.
  • Depth of discussion - Points that lead to deeper issues are presented and integrated.
  • Breadth - Multiple perspectives and references, multiple issues/factors considered.
  • Evidence - Points are well-supported with facts, statistics, and references.
  • Logic - Presented discussion makes sense; conclusions are logically supported by premises, statements, or factual information.
  • Clarity - Writing is concise, understandable, and contains sufficient detail or examples.
  • Objectivity - Paper avoids use of first person and subjective bias.


out of 1971 reviews

out of 766 reviews

out of 1164 reviews

out of 721 reviews

out of 1600 reviews

out of 770 reviews

out of 766 reviews

out of 680 reviews