CEMA Hurricane Matthew Review

CHATHAM COUNTY
HURRICANE MATTHEW
(DR-4284)
AFTER ACTION REPORT

Chatham Emergency Management Agency
124 Bull Street, Room 140
Savannah, GA 31401
912-201-4500
ChathamEmergency.org

HurricaneMatthewAfterActionReport
ChathamCounty,GA 2017
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK
DISASTERS ARE PERSONAL

In October 2016, high winds and heavy rain wreaked havoc on our community. For the first
time in nearly four decades, Chatham County faced the threat of a hurricane. We, as a
community, rose to the challenge of responding and recovering after such a monumental
event. Each and every one of us was affected in some small way and as the recovery
continues, Chatham County residents, employees and partners continue to inspire us.
The Chatham Emergency Management Agency (CEMA) would like to extend sincere
gratitude to the numerous County departments, municipal leaders, partner agencies, and the
various organizations who played key roles during the response and recovery efforts of
Matthew. The time and assistance provided were invaluable to our community and our
residents. Unhesitatingly, I can ensure, that without the assistance of these individuals,
Chatham County would not be where it is today.
For many residents, Hurricane Matthew was the first large scale storm theyve encountered.
Hundreds of homes, apartments and condos were damaged in various areas across Chatham
County. Dozens of Tybee Island residents lost their home when high winds ripped the roof off
their apartment building. Meanwhile, residents in Pooler required assistance from rescue
boats to leave their flooded homes. The devastation felt by Chatham County residents could
be found every few blocks in downtown Savannah, where the beautiful tree canopy began
collapsing on top of homes and cars. Needless to say, Hurricane Matthew left a permanent
mark on our county.
Since Matthew, our community has been the epicenter of an outpouring of generosity and
support from partners, political leaders, and faith-based communities. Chatham County is full
of examples of how our community has developed resiliency in the aftermath of tribulation.
Hundreds of trees were removed due to the sweat, skill and stamina of our non-profit and
Public Works team members. It doesnt take a sleuth to discover the myriad of stories outlining
the hope seen by individuals as our community dedicated itself to our recovery. Almost
immediately, our extraordinary community began helping those in need. Residents with power
opened their hearts and their homes to offer charging stations, warm showers and food to
those without. Neighbors walked the streets of their community to offer help and assistance.
Volunteer teams traveled from near and far to lift trees off homes without asking for anything
in return. To say that we are humbled by the work and generosity our community has
demonstrated over the past few months is an understatement. Our residents philanthropic
willingness to assist one another makes our community unique and valuable. Needless to
say, we are incredibly fortunate to be Chatham Strong.
Warmest Regards,
Dennis Jones, Director

Chatham Emergency Management Agency
Page i
Page ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary................................................................................................................ v
1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................1
1.1 Scope ................................................................................................................1
1.2 Report Methodology ..........................................................................................1
1.3 Organization of the Report ................................................................................2
2.0 Overview ......................................................................................................................3
2.1 Hurricane Matthews Path ................................................................................3
2.2 Preparations for Hurricane Matthew..................................................................4
3.0 Focus Area 1: Pre-Disaster..........................................................................................5
4.0 Focus Area 2: Disaster Impact.....................................................................................9
5.0 Focus Area 3: Post Disaster ......................................................................................13
6.0 Focus Area 4: All Phases...........................................................................................17
7.0 Conclusion .................................................................................................................19
Tab A Acronyms ...................................................................................................................21
Page iii
Page iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This after action report is a summary of comments received during after action meetings
conducted following Hurricane Matthew. Thirty-two after action meetings were conducted
and comments were solicited regarding plans, actions, and decisions occurring before,
during, and in the immediate response effort following Hurricane Matthew. The meetings
were coordinated through the Chatham Emergency Management Agency (CEMA) and
involved County agencies, municipal leadership, partner agencies, and groups who played
key roles during the response and recovery efforts. This report is considered to be a high
level review of the preparedness and response activities associated with the storm.
This report is not an exhaustive list of all lessons learned; it includes many internal operational
adjustments emergency management partner agencies will makeand in many cases have
already madeto staffing, communications, and the deployment of resources. It is a roadmap
of the strategic steps the County will take to improve our ability to protect life and property in
the face of the increasing risk of severe weather. Many of the comments received were similar
in content. To minimize redundant and recurring themes, comments have been consolidated
as much as possible. In many situations, specific comments related to a review of or update
to a plan, process or procedure will be addressed during scheduled workgroup discussions.
During Hurricane Matthew, several emergency plans were utilized. Most notably was
CEMAs Hurricane Incident Management Plan, last updated in June of 2016. The Chatham
County Emergency Operations Center (EOC) was progressively activated to support
Hurricane Matthew activities. With the safety of the general population at stake, emergency
plans such as: Evacuation Assembly Area (EAA), Functional Medical Needs (FMN), Critical
Workforce Sheltering, Re-Entry Operations, Debris Management, Logistics, External Affairs,
Mass Care and Sheltering, Damage Assessment (DA) both Individual Assistance and Public
Assistance, Host County Sheltering, Interoperable Communications and Evacuation
Coordination were executed. Many of the after action comments pertain to these specific
plans and will be incorporated into relevant planning documents. Comments directly and
solely associated with a single department are considered internal after action comments
and have been omitted from this report.
The content of this report has been organized into four main sections; pre-disaster, disaster
impact, post-disaster, and all phases. The four sections are then further structured into the
most prominent strengths and areas for improvement that emerged during meeting
discussions. This report establishes the Countys priorities for how to prepare for the next
severe storm. In many cases, recommendations in this report are applicable beyond coastal
storms and will increase the Countys overall preparedness to respond to catastrophic events.
Page v
STRENGTHS AND AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT

CEMA team members were charged to review all aspects of the Countys preparations for,
immediate response to, and initial recovery from the storm. Staff analyzed a wide variety of
data and supporting information from community-wide partners. Based on this analysis,
strengths and areas for improvement were identified and organized across four overarching
focus areas.
Focus Area 1: Pre-Disaster
In preparation for Hurricane Matthew, CEMA initiated a Level III activation of the EOC on
Monday, October 3, 2016. As the storm advanced toward Chatham County, the EOC
Activation levels progressively increased to a Level II and finally a Level I at the time of the
evacuation order. Key pre-disaster actions included: conducting conference calls with local
municipal officials and partner agencies, conducting a robust public awareness campaign,
activating critical workforce shelters including feeding operations, requesting anticipated
resource needs through the Georgia Emergency Management Agency and Homeland Security
(GEMA/HS) State Operations Center (SOC), establishing a joint Evacuation/Functional
Medical Needs Assembly Area to support the evacuation of specialty and general populations,
and coordinating inland sheltering operations with Augusta.
Strengths and Areas for Improvement
Strength: Coordination and communications were routine and beneficial.
Strength: Traffic Control Points and Contraflow were successful.
Strength: Having transparency of government for municipalities and partners was

advantageous for all involved.
Area for Improvement: Ensure continuous improvement and education of

pertinent evacuation plans and procedures for Chatham County.
Area for Improvement: Ensure evacuation language is clear and evacuation

timing is coordinated with the Command Policy Group and unique populations.
Area for Improvement: The County and States Operating Conditions
(OPCONs) do not align with South Carolina which causes confusion with
partners, the media and the general public.
Area for Improvement: Ensure coordination and communication of established
emergency management laws, plans and procedures with partners and
municipal governments are conducted annually.
Area for Improvement: Ensure supporting counties are included in conference
calls, press releases, situation summaries, etc.
Page vi
Focus Area 2: Disaster Impact
This focus area includes initial response efforts for Hurricane Matthew from the arrival of
sustained tropical storm force winds, suspension of response activities during the storm,
resumption of response activities, and search and rescue operations prior to the county being
opened for the return of the general population. Jurisdictional resources were pushed to their
limits requiring additional resources to supplement response efforts throughout the county.

Strength: The Countys presence on social media and the ability to adapt to
changing technological needs was helpful.
Strength: Having an Executive Officer (County Management Team) and a

Legal representative embedded in the EOC proved invaluable.
Area for Improvement: Ensure the resource requesting process is updated

and proper training is offered to the community partners.
Area for Improvement: Additional EOC and WebEOC training is needed to

ensure proper use of technology and to improve information sharing.
Area for Improvement: Appropriate staff are needed to support roles in field
based operations as well as in the EOC.
Area for Improvement: Coordinate resource management functions to track

resources from request to demobilization.
Area for Improvement: Coordinate support from municipal governments and

the business and industry sector to staff liaison positions in the EOC.
Area for Improvement: Evaluate and develop a more reliable system for
recalling government employees for disaster staffing.
Page vii
Focus Area 3: Post-Disaster
This focus area includes the timeframe beginning with the re-establishment of response efforts
through the re-entry of the general population. Significant functions occurring during this
timeframe include establishing re-entry checkpoints, conducting the initial damage
assessment, gaining situational awareness and establishing shelters.

Strength: All supporting partners of the response effort were very capable of
adapting to changing situations.
Area for Improvement: Ensure the re-entry plan is followed to allow for
partners to push debris, conduct damage assessments and re-establish
essential services before the general public is allowed to return.
Area for Improvement: Improve the coordination of sheltering operations and

support for evacuees who return to the County.
Area for Improvement: Plan ahead for the unique requirements of the
special needs population upon re-entry.
Area for Improvement: Establish a more flexible system to collect situational

awareness from municipal and community partners.
Area for Improvement: All partners should adopt the same Damage
Assessment process to ensure continuity in the information and unity in the
collective wide effort
Page viii
Focus Area 4: All Phases
This focus area includes all timeframes of the event. This encapsulates items that may have
occurred throughout the event as a whole, not necessarily in one phase. Topics covered
during this phase range from conference calls used to convey critical information to
incorporating volunteers in emergency operations.

Strength: Information and communication through conference calls and reports
from field based support teams was invaluable.
Area for Improvement: Have a single, unified voice during press

conferences and ensure all jurisdictions have representation.
Area for Improvement: Improve the implementation/coordination of volunteer

groups/agencies in disaster operations within Chatham County.
Area for Improvement: The conference call system needs to be evaluated

to enhance the quality of calls.
Area for Improvement: Evaluate the information management process,

rumor control methods and media coordination approaches.
NEXT STEPS
While Hurricane Matthews effects were expansive, Chatham County must prepare for
incidents that are larger and more complex. The strengths and areas for improvement
presented in this report are crucial for improving the Countys ability to respond to and recover
from future incidents.
In recognition of the importance of the findings in this report, CEMA has begun to address
areas for improvement. The Agency is continuing to update the key operational plans executed
during Hurricane Matthew and meet with community partners to ensure information is shared
in a collaborative planning effort.
Together with the ongoing focus of partner integration, these actions demonstrate the
communitys commitment to learning lessons from response and recovery operations,
developing solutions to identified issues, and following through on implementation in the
interest of better serving our community.
Page ix
Page x
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On the morning of October 7, 2016, Hurricane Matthew began impacting coastal
portions of Georgia as a Category 3 major hurricane. After weakening to a Category
2 hurricane, the center of the hurricane moved north and northeast, generally parallel
to the southeast Atlantic coast. The center of the storm passed 60 miles off the shore
of Brunswick, Georgia before passing 35 miles off the coast of Tybee. The worst
impacts began Friday evening and lasted through Saturday morning, and included
record breaking storm surge flooding, extreme rainfall, and sustained hurricane-force
winds. This was the first time since Hurricane David in 1979 that hurricane-force
impacts occurred along the Georgia coast.
Chatham Countys citizens were asked to evacuate inland ahead of Hurricane

Matthews arrival. Those that could not self-evacuate were processed through an
EAA and taken to Augusta/Richmond County, Georgia to shelter until it was safe to
return. Interstate 16 was contra-flowed west allowing traffic to utilize all lanes. This
action and process trended as one of the most prevailing positive observations from
after action meetings and briefings.
During the storm, Chatham County received tropical storm force winds and heavy
rainfall, more than 17 inches total. During this time the tidal rivers peaked at high-tide
causing much concern for storm surge in coastal and low lying areas.
Following Hurricane Matthew, the storms effects were extensive. Matthews high
winds, storm surge, and riverine flooding left unprecedented quantities of vegetative,
construction and demolition debris throughout Chatham County resulting in damage
totals in excess of $30 million.
1.1 Report Scope
CEMA coordinates disaster response and recovery efforts across Chatham County
and works closely with municipal and agency partners. At the direction of the Director
of Emergency Management, CEMA conducted a review of the Countys preparations
for, immediate response to, and initial recovery from the storm. This report contains
the findings of that review and focuses on the comments received during the post-
incident after action meetings.
1.2 Report Methodology
CEMA, as the coordinator of the Hurricane Matthew after-action report, examined a

wide variety of reports from Chatham County, municipal governments, and agency
partners. The approach included:
Developing an event chronology that catalogs decisions, actions, and events

related to the response and initial recovery from the storm;
Analyzing datasets that indicate the storms impact;
Page 1
Determining how response and recovery efforts evolved over time;
Interviewing personnel, including department and agency officials, field staff,

representatives from County, municipal agencies and departments;
Inviting partners to share their experiences and lessons learned through

various after-action meetings.
CEMA reviewed and analyzed these sources to identify strengths, areas for
improvement and necessary program adjustments.
1.3 Report Organization
This report begins with an overview of the storm, and is organized according to the
following four focus areas:
Focus Area 4: All-Phases
For each of these focus areas, partner comments allow for continued growth and
improvement for Chatham County as a whole.
Page 2
2.0 OVERVIEW OF THE STORM A N D ITS IMPACTS

2.1 Hurricane Matthews Path
The tropical disturbance that became Hurricane Matthew moved off the west coast of
Africa on Friday, September 22, 2016. After moving westward for six days, Hurricane
Matthew formed on Wednesday, September 28th east of the islands of Saint Lucia
and Saint Vincent in the Lesser Antilles.
Hurricane Matthew strengthened into a Category 1 hurricane on Thursday, September

29th as it moved westward approximately 250 miles south of Puerto Rico. While over
the warm Caribbean waters, Hurricane Matthew rapidly strengthened into a Category
5 hurricane on the evening of Friday, September 30th, peaking with a maximum
sustained wind speed of 160 MPH. Over the weekend, Hurricane Matthew began to
move to the north, setting up landfall in western Haiti as a Category 4 hurricane on
Tuesday morning and eastern Cuba on Tuesday evening. Hurricane Matthew then
turned towards the northwest, impacting the Bahamas as a Category 3 and 4 hurricane
on Wednesday, October 5th and Thursday, October 6th. Hurricane Matthew impacted
the eastern coast of Florida on Thursday, October 6th and Friday, October 7th.
Page 3
Hurricane Matthew began impacting coastal portions of Georgia on the morning of

Friday, October 7th as a Category 3 major hurricane. After weakening to a Category
2, the center of the hurricane moved north and northeast, generally parallel to the
southeast Atlantic coast. The center of the storm passed 60 miles offshore of
Brunswick before passing 35 miles off shore of Tybee. The worst impacts began
Friday evening and lasted through Saturday morning, and included record-breaking
storm surge flooding, extreme rainfall, and sustained hurricane-force winds. This was
the first time that hurricane-force impacts occurred along the Georgia coast since
Hurricane David in 1979.
Major, record-breaking flooding occurred along the Georgia coast. The Savannah
River at Fort Pulaski broke a 37-year record by nearly four inches early Saturday
morning due to excessive storm surge. Hunter Army Airfield received 17.49 inches of
rainfall between 11:00 AM Thursday and 10:00 AM Saturday. Savannah International
Airport received 11.51 inches. The record for daily rainfall in the Savannah area was
9.02 inches, which occurred on September 16, 1924. The average annual rainfall in
Savannah is 47.96 inches; parts of Savannah received more than one-third of their
yearly total over this period. Widespread amounts of 6-10 inches of rainfall were
reported, with parts of Bryan, Chatham, Effingham, and Glynn counties receiving 10-
16 inches.
Widespread hurricane-force wind gusts were observed, and in some areas lasted for
almost five consecutive hours. The highest wind gusts recorded state wide occurred
on Tybee Island: a 94 MPH wind gust at 4:19 AM and a 96 MPH wind gust at 4:38
AM on Saturday morning. By 8:00 AM on Saturday, October 8th, hurricane-force
impacts and heavy rain moved into South Carolina. Southeast Georgia continued to
experience light rain and tropical storm force winds for the remainder of Saturday.
2.2 Hurricane Matthew Preparations
In preparation leading up to Hurricane Matthews impact, Chatham County and its

partner agencies began extensive preparations for the storm. CEMA based pre-
landfall decisions on the predictions of the storms track and intensity. Key pre-impact
actions included:
Conducting conference calls with local municipal officials and partner agencies;
Conducting a robust public awareness campaign through press releases and

social media engagement;
Activating critical workforce shelters and coordinating with Salvation Army for
mass feeding resources;
Requesting anticipated resources through the GEMA/HS SOC;
Establishing a joint Evacuation and Functional Medical Needs Assembly Area.
Coordinating inland sheltering with Augusta/Richmond County.
Page 4
3.0 FOCUS AREA 1: PRE-DISASTER
3.1 Strength: Coordination and communications were routine and beneficial
Many partners felt informed and received adequate information to make

informed decisions about their operational activities. This proved challenging
early in the process due to the uncertainty of the storm; however, partners felt
information was shared and communicated appropriately.
3.2 Strength: Traffic Control Points and Contraflow were successful.
Chatham County has a robust and very capable law enforcement community.
Likewise the States Department of Transportation and the Georgia
Department of Public Safety have an above average preparedness capability.
All parties involved had measures in place to activate traffic control points and
the contraflow of I-16 as expeditiously as possible.
3.3 Strength: Having transparency of government for municipalities and partners

was advantageous for all involved.
The communication between CEMA and municipal and partner agencies was
good. Many comments were received about the clear and concise conference
calls and the transparency of information flow through the EOC.
3.4 Area for Improvement: Ensure continuous improvement and education of

pertinent evacuation plans and procedures for Chatham County.
Activation and staffing of the EAA was challenging. In many cases, the
decision makers and operators were not familiar with previous planning efforts
and commitments. A review of the plan should be compared against
operational realities and adjusted to meet the gaps. Education to ensure
integration and communication of the plan, responsibilities and expectations
should be coordinated on a regular basis.
Additionally, this enhanced planning effort should also extend to supporting

counties. Clear and concise information should be detailed in planning efforts
to address timing, financial commitments, etc.
Bus serials leaving and in route to Augusta should be controlled to ensure a

systematic processing of evacuees at the end of the run. Larger than expected
bus serials caused significant challenges; including a serial consisting of 27
buses. This created challenges in processing, decision-making, transportation,
staffing, etc.
Communication between the EAA, the EOC, and Augusta could be more
efficient when transferring manifest information. Investigate a more efficient
system to track evacuees.
Page 5
Security was an issue during the transportation process and upon arrival at the
evacuation location. Law Enforcement escorts were expected to stay to assist
with shelter security; however, many escorts returned to Chatham County to
carry out additional assigned tasks.
3.5 Area for Improvement: Ensure evacuation language is clear and evacuation
timing is coordinated with the Command Policy Group and unique populations.
There should be clearer language or an explicit evacuation order to encourage

healthcare facilities and other unique populations to evacuate prior to the
general population evacuation order. These unique populations typically take
longer to evacuate, have a sensitive population demographic and should be
alerted ahead of time of the increasing danger.
The evacuation terminology (evacuation and mandatory evacuation) used

during Hurricane Matthew confused some citizens. Better communication of the
terminology pre-event should occur to ensure clear communication.
The CPG should be convened to discuss evacuation decisions, school

closings, and other important policy level decisions. This, at a minimum, puts
all elected officials and key decision makers on the same level of awareness.
When the evacuation was issued, the scope of the area was confusing to the
population. Using a geographic boundary that most people, even tourists,
recognize will be more beneficial.
When issuing the evacuation order, more clarity needs to be given about what
actions citizens should take.
Combining the FMN evacuation plan with the General Population evacuation
plan was problematic. FMN registrants must be evacuated prior to the general
population.
Many local businesses will not release employees until a mandatory evacuation
order is issued.
Foster parents and parents with custody issues are not allowed to leave the
county until a mandatory evacuation is ordered because they must have
coordinated permission from the Division of Family and Children Services.
3.6 Area for Improvement: The County and States Operating Conditions
(OPCONs) do not align with South Carolina which causes confusion with
partners, the media and the general public.
Page 6
While Chatham Countys OPCONs are aligned with the State of Georgia, they
do not align with our neighboring partners in South Carolina. Following the
South Carolina flooding event in 2015, they updated their OPCONs to be more
aggressive and applicable for any emergency or disaster. Chatham County
and GEMA/HSs OPCON schedule only refers to a hurricane threat. A state-
to-state meeting should be arranged to discuss alignment solutions.
Because of the perception that Chatham County had not made evacuation
decisions as early as Florida and South Carolina, there was unnecessary
anxiety in the community.
3.7 Area for Improvement: Ensure coordination and communication of

established emergency management laws, plans and procedures with partners
and municipal governments are conducted annually.
Elected officials and City/County Managers need to be educated in the decision

making process and emergency management law so they can fully understand
roles, responsibilities and expectations. This can be mitigated by annual
coordination and training with key decision makers throughout the County.
3.8 Area for Improvement: Ensure supporting counties are included in conference
calls, press releases, situation summaries, etc.
Often times, partners outside of Chatham County were not included in

information dissemination and situational awareness updates. This included
Augusta-Richmond County. An evaluation of distribution groups should occur
more frequently.
3.9 OTHER RELEVANT PRE-DISASTER AFTER ACTION COMMENTS
Many persons with qualifying functional needs did not register prior to the
evacuation order. An aggressive public education campaign should be adopted
prior to and throughout the year.
Just-in-time FMN registration forms should be streamlined to make the form

more user friendly and shorter.
There were logistical issues regarding loading functional clients on buses.

Some clients were physically carried on and off buses that were not wheel chair
compliant. This will be mitigated with conducting the evacuation of this
population in advance of the general population.
The EOC operated efficiently during the evacuation process. More staff are
needed to ensure regular rotation and rest time.
Page 7
Page 8
4.0 FOCUS AREA 2: DISASTER IMPACT

4.1 Strength: The Countys presence on social media and the ability to adapt to
changing technological needs was helpful.
During the storm, changes in technology and capabilities needs to be

monitored on the hour. Adjustments to distribution methods and terminology
helped to ensure partners were informed. The technology challenges caused
some delays in information management, however; solutions were identified
and implemented with efficiency. This will assist with distribution of real-time
information during tropical storm force conditions.
4.2 Strength: Having an Executive Officer (County Management Team) and a

Legal representative embedded in the EOC proved invaluable.
The County Managers Office and a representative from the County Attorneys
Office had a physical presence in the EOC throughout the event. This support
assisted the Emergency Management Director in executing mission critical
tasks and also helped to facilitate partner coordination. The Attorneys Office
worked diligently to ensure all executive decisions were in legal form and also
provided guidance to questions coming in through the call center. This is a
significant sustainment item.
4.3 Area for Improvement: Ensure the resource requesting process is updated
and proper training is offered to the community partners.
Many partner agencies thought it was unclear as to who was paying for the
resources requested. Many thought the County was paying for everything
ordered in the EOC, others assumed that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) would cover all purchases because of the federal disaster
declaration. Education on how to properly request resources and
responsibilities when ordering is needed with special consideration to address
the language used on the requesting forms.
4.4 Area for Improvement: Additional EOC and WebEOC Training is needed to
ensure proper use of technology and to improve information sharing.
More training on WebEOC is needed county-wide. Many operators during

Hurricane Matthew were new to an EOC environment and had a slow ramp up
time. Few users understood what should and should not be logged into the
WebEOC system. Additionally, each Emergency Support Function (ESF)
realized they had more to handle than what they initially thought. Required
training in EOC and WebEOC workstation requirements is needed.
Page 9
4.5 Area for Improvement: Appropriate staff are needed to support roles in field
based operations as well as in the EOC.
Staffing challenges were experienced in many operational elements. Staffing

to support field based operations, the EOC, and the management of information
should be evaluated and a recruitment campaign should be initiated to fill the
gaps. Additionally, for partners supporting the EOC, we need to ensure the
appropriate staff members are providing support. A decision maker is needed
in each position in the EOC.
4.6 Area for Improvement: Coordinate resource management functions to track

resources from request to demobilization.
Due to the amount of requests and limited manpower, the logistics section
could not always follow up with the purchasing section on requests. Resources
were put into the WebEOC system when requested, but tracking was lost after
the request was marked as filled. Receipt, operational assignment and
demobilization should be evaluated and tracked using a more efficient process.
4.7 Area for Improvement: Coordinate support from municipal governments and
the business and industry sector to staff liaison positions in the EOC.
Some County and City of Savannah departments have dual responsibility.

Having staffing requirements for multiple locations proved challenging and
created communication and logistics difficulties. Additionally, information was not
fully disseminated between the EOC and municipalities. A representative from
each municipality should staff the EOC to improve situational awareness and
provide better communication between all partners.
Business and Industry leaders need reliable and relevant information in order to
make informed decisions. Many business and industry partners were calling the
CEMA Director directly for information. For obvious reasons, this was not the
most efficient method for sharing information. Establishing a Business and
Industry Liaison position in the EOC will satisfy this direct one-to-one
communication need.
4.8 Area for Improvement: Evaluate and develop a more reliable system for
recalling government employees for disaster staffing.
The County and other municipal governments experienced challenges in

recalling staff. Once the executive order to evacuate was issued, many staff
left without instruction on recall procedures. Each government and supporting
partner should, at a minimum, review their recall procedures and ensure
updates are regularly made.
Page 10
4.9 OTHER RELEVANT DISASTER IMPACT AFTER ACTION COMMENTS
CEMAs Mobile Emergency Operations Center (MEOC) was not connected to

the County network. Because of this, some county departments who used the
MEOC were not able to access their systems.
The phone operations section in the EOC needs a ghost number for automatic
call-outs in order to minimize callbacks and call center saturation.
Some partners are uncertain about who makes the official decision to stop
emergency response resources and seek shelter. This should be made clearer
to municipal leadership.
NIMS channels were not utilized.
The integrity of the information in the EOC needs to remain confidential and
free of photography and live video feeds except during designated times.
More work space and better layout of the EOCs ESF desks. Consider what
sections work more often with one another in order to minimize the amount of
movement away from work stations.
Some hospitals and long-term care facilities did not evacuate due to time
limitations after the mandatory evacuation order was declared.
Sheltering in place helped mitigate issues at some local colleges/universities.

Because of this, other colleges in the area are considering sheltering in place
for future disaster events on a case-by-case basis.
Memorial University Medical Center was used as a critical workforce shelter.

The pre-existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) planned for Memorial
to shelter 53 personnel. Approximately 300 critical workforce partners sheltered
at this location creating an unanticipated strain on resources.
Page 11
Page 12
5.0 FOCUS AREA 3: POST DISASTER

5.1 Strength: All supporting partners of the response effort were very capable of
adapting to changing situations.
Once the storm passed, emergency response crews were able to begin an
assessment of existing capabilities. Our workforce was quickly able to adapt
to the changing situations and find solutions to operational needs. Many
partners supported critical infrastructure restoration priorities and discovered
alternatives to re-establishing services.
5.2 Area for Improvement: Ensure the re-entry plan is followed to allow for
partners to push debris, conduct DA and re-establish essential services before
the general public is allowed to return.
The accelerated move into Phase IV of re-entry, caused great consequences

throughout the community. Many municipalities, especially in eastern Chatham
County, were not prepared to allow vehicle traffic back onto the roads. Many
roads had downed trees and powerlines, standing water, and other hazards
that had not yet been cleared. In addition to these hazards, power had not been
fully restored to many areas which resulted in intersections not having working
traffic control devices.
The CPG should convene to discuss phased re-entry. This will allow all elected
officials and key decision makers the opportunity to voice concerns.
5.3 Area for Improvement: Improve the coordination of sheltering operations and
support for evacuees who return to the County.
Sheltering was a significant challenge. Backup plans were developed in real-

time and caused problems with site specific leadership, staffing, facility
availability, resources, and implementation of procedures. The shelter
management decision making process was bureaucratic and caused delays in
post-storm sheltering decisions. A decision maker from the organization
managing the shelter process needs to be in the EOC in the event there are
issues/concerns with operations. CEMA should develop a sheltering strategy
to use a as backup should the primary partner not be able to meet the needs
of the sheltering population.
When trying to find a shelter location, many places that the American Red
Cross had pre-designated as suitable shelter locations were either not available
for the duration of the sheltering time period or could not hold the pre-
determined sheltered capacity. This caused Chatham County to move citizens
multiple times between multiple shelters until they were able to return home
and/or find long-term placement.
Page 13
Over the counter medicines and dialysis services were priority concerns during
sheltering operations. Shelter medical staff needed access to over the counter
medicines in shelters. Resources for over the counter medicines were available
at the health department, but were not requested or brought to the shelter.
We experienced confusing shelter counts, particularly regarding Functional

Needs. It was discovered that the definition of Functional Needs differs
between Public Health and the American Red Cross. Additionally, we
discovered there is a difference in shelter types which caused
miscommunication. This needs resolution at the State level.
5.4 Area for Improvement: Plan ahead for the unique requirements of the
special needs population upon re-entry.
There were issues assessing the housing of Functional Needs clients and also
the services available for the homeless population. Shelters were not able to
release a Functional Needs individual until it was confirmed they had power,
running water, and a structurally safe building. This function was coordinated
through the DA group and caused delays in conducting a proper county-wide
damage assessment. Further discussions need to take place regarding the
development of procedures for evaluating properties belonging to Functional
Needs clients and meetings should be arranged with the Homeless Authority
to address re-establishment of necessary resources and support services.
5.5 Area for Improvement: Establish a more flexible system to collect situational
awareness from municipal and community partners.
At times, it became challenging to collect information from municipalities and

critical partners. Situational awareness is paramount and a more efficient
process should be established to collect information from critical components.
Having a municipal representative in the EOC will assist in mitigating
challenges associated with this area for improvement.
5.6 Area for Improvement: All partners should adopt the same DA process to
ensure continuity in the information and unity in the collective effort.
Resources and staffing to support DA Teams were inadequate to perform the

mission. Continuity in the recording and reporting information should also be
evaluated to ensure common practices are put in place. Recruitment, training
and the supply of equipment is needed to support future DA operations.
Investigate the availability of the Dispatch Center adding the DA information to

their maps to be pushed over to GIS. Responders in the field can call dispatch
with their information, record the data and push it to the GIS map viewer. This
will allow transparency and maximize situational awareness.
Page 14
5.7 OTHER RELEVANT POST-DISASTER AFTER ACTION COMMENTS
National Guard support was difficult to coordinate and track. Guard resources
began to arrive blindly which caused confusion as to what resources were
available and what their mission / tasking would be. When the National Guard
was working in the community, the support was excellent; however, often times,
the EOC had minimal awareness. Even the Guard Liaison in the EOC had
difficulty getting information from the State. Guard support was tasked with
supporting security operations at the shelters. The decision to pull units was
made without advanced notice and caused immediate law enforcement and
manpower shortages across the community. A discussion and education
regarding approved missions for Guard support should be conducted to ensure
locals are familiar with limitations.
Page 15
Page 16
6.0 FOCUS AREA 4: ALL PHASES
6.1 S trength: Information and communication through conference calls and reports
from field based support teams was invaluable.
Conference Calls were appreciated. Everyone was busy and having a set time
to get new information and updates worked very well. Many partner agencies
stated that the overall communication with CEMA and the County was great.
Conference calls were very informative and helped create a common operating
picture with municipalities.
Having a GEMA/HS liaison embedded and available 24/7 in the EOC helped
with communication between the County and the State.
6.2 Area for Improvement: Have a single, unified voice during press conferences
and ensure all jurisdictions have representation.
On occasion, during press conferences, conflicting information was provided.

This could be due to the number of people scheduled to present information. In
a disaster situation, there should be one unified voice during media events and
all municipalities should be represented. Having the CPG convene prior to
media events would allow all elected officials and government leaders to know
the message before the press conference. The message should be relayed via
one single unified voice and echoed by the elected leadership for message
consistency. This will promote unity in the response and recovery effort.
6.3 Area for Improvement: Improve the implementation/coordination of volunteer

groups/agencies in disaster operations within Chatham County.
There is a need for better volunteer agency coordination. Many volunteer

resources were not utilized to their fullest extent because the Chatham
Community Organizations Active in Disasters (CCOAD) was not active and had
minimal participation. An active CCOAD would have taken the lead on
volunteer agency coordination.
6.4 Area for Improvement: The conference call system needs to be evaluated to
enhance the quality of calls.
An evaluation of the conference call platform should be conducted to improve

efficiency. The conference call system CEMA utilized did not auto-mute
participants which caused distractions from the message. Changing the time
and conference call phone number was problematic at times. Conference calls
should also be set to a defined time and call in number.
Page 17
Evaluate the purpose of the conference calls and adjust to ensure information
dissemination is the primary focus. Conference calls should be used to
distribute information, provide guidance and offer direction only. Asking for
unmet needs, trying to discuss resource requests, and getting status updates
from County departments should be handled independently.
6.5 Area for Improvement: Evaluate the information management process, rumor
control methods and media coordination approaches.
Many partners had issue with the rapidly changing information. By the time they
were able to brief their staff after a conference call, the message had changed
because of how fast everything was moving.
There needs to be a clearer message to the citizens regarding how long they
will be out of the community during an evacuation.
There needs to be two Public Information Officers (PIOs) on shift at a time so

when one is out at press conferences, the other can remain in the EOC to
answer questions.
A dedicated PIO on-call cell phone and phone number should be established
and disseminated on all press releases and information. Possibly consider use
of a Google Voice line or a dedicated phone for disasters only.
Employees who can translate other languages (Spanish at a minimum) and

American Sign Language need to be added to as critical workforce to assist with
translating press releases.
A site/area needs to be created for all citizens as a one-stop shop for

information dissemination.
6.6 OTHER RELEVANT ALL PHASES AFTER ACTION COMMENTS
EOC expectations for cell phone connectivity and computer network capability
were high. Many factors could have caused network connectivity issues. When
constructing the new EOC consideration needs to be made to ensure the facility
has sustainable communications.
Page 18
7.0 CONCLUSION
Hurricane Matthew provided a significant test of Chatham Countys capabilities and those of
its partners. The scale and severity of the storm resulted in extensive effects including
flooding, damages to homes and businesses and other critical infrastructure, power outages,
fuel disruptions, and property damage across the coast and inland.
In reviewing all aspects of the Countys preparations for, immediate response to an initial
recovery; CEMA identified strengths and areas for improvement organized across four
overarching focus areas:
Focus Area 4: All-Phases
In recognition of the importance of the findings in this report, CEMA has begun to address a
number of the areas for improvement. Over the coming weeks and months CEMA is
committed to strengthening its partnerships throughout the whole community and being
innovative in methodologies to make improvements to the Emergency Management Program.
Page 19
Page 20
TAB A ACRONYMS
CCOAD Chatham Community Organizations Active in Disaster
CEMA Chatham Emergency Management Agency
CPG Command Policy Group
DA Damage Assessment
DOT Department of Transportation
DPS Department of Public Safety
EAA Evacuation Assembly Area
EOC Emergency Operations Center
ESF Emergency Support Function
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FMN Functional and Medical Needs
GEMA/HS Georgia Emergency Management Agency and Homeland Security
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
PIO Public Information Officer
SOC State Operations Center
Page 21
Page 22

CEMA Hurricane Matthew Review

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

CEMA Hurricane Matthew Review

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

CHATHAM COUNTY

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK

DISASTERS ARE PERSONAL

Dennis Jones, Director

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK

1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................1

1.1 Scope ................................................................................................................1

1.2 Report Methodology ..........................................................................................1

1.3 Organization of the Report ................................................................................2

2.0 Overview ......................................................................................................................3

2.1 Hurricane Matthews Path ................................................................................3

2.2 Preparations for Hurricane Matthew..................................................................4

3.0 Focus Area 1: Pre-Disaster..........................................................................................5

4.0 Focus Area 2: Disaster Impact.....................................................................................9

5.0 Focus Area 3: Post Disaster ......................................................................................13

6.0 Focus Area 4: All Phases...........................................................................................17

7.0 Conclusion .................................................................................................................19

Tab A Acronyms ...................................................................................................................21

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK

STRENGTHS AND AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT

Focus Area 1: Pre-Disaster

Strengths and Areas for Improvement

Strength: Coordination and communications were routine and beneficial.

Strength: Traffic Control Points and Contraflow were successful.

Strength: Having transparency of government for municipalities and partners was

Area for Improvement: Ensure continuous improvement and education of

Area for Improvement: Ensure evacuation language is clear and evacuation

Focus Area 2: Disaster Impact

Strengths and Areas for Improvement

Strength: Having an Executive Officer (County Management Team) and a

Area for Improvement: Ensure the resource requesting process is updated

Area for Improvement: Additional EOC and WebEOC training is needed to

Area for Improvement: Coordinate resource management functions to track

Area for Improvement: Coordinate support from municipal governments and

Focus Area 3: Post-Disaster

Strengths and Areas for Improvement

Area for Improvement: Improve the coordination of sheltering operations and

Area for Improvement: Establish a more flexible system to collect situational

Focus Area 4: All Phases

Strengths and Areas for Improvement

Area for Improvement: Have a single, unified voice during press

Area for Improvement: Improve the implementation/coordination of volunteer

Area for Improvement: The conference call system needs to be evaluated

Area for Improvement: Evaluate the information management process,

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK

Chatham Countys citizens were asked to evacuate inland ahead of Hurricane

1.1 Report Scope

1.2 Report Methodology

CEMA, as the coordinator of the Hurricane Matthew after-action report, examined a

Developing an event chronology that catalogs decisions, actions, and events

Analyzing datasets that indicate the storms impact;

Determining how response and recovery efforts evolved over time;

Interviewing personnel, including department and agency officials, field staff,

Inviting partners to share their experiences and lessons learned through

1.3 Report Organization

Focus Area 1: Pre-Disaster

Focus Area 2: Disaster Impact

Focus Area 3: Post-Disaster

Focus Area 4: All-Phases

2.0 OVERVIEW OF THE STORM A N D ITS IMPACTS

Hurricane Matthew strengthened into a Category 1 hurricane on Thursday, September

Hurricane Matthew began impacting coastal portions of Georgia on the morning of

2.2 Hurricane Matthew Preparations

In preparation leading up to Hurricane Matthews impact, Chatham County and its