About the NETS Emergency Preparedness & Training Mission:

Since Columbine, it has been widely recognized by the law enforcement community that the response to active threat events needs to change. Law enforcement has traditionally focused on first containing a potential threat or scene and then deploying highly specialized individuals or teams to resolve the situation at hand. This process can often be quite time consuming as numerous resources must first be gathered, organized and then subsequently deployed at the scene. While this may be an appropriate response to certain high-risk situations, it has now been recognized as an inappropriate tactic when dealing with an “active” threat. The initial goal of responding to an active threat should be to limit the amount of destruction that is actively being caused by the perpetrator. As such, the law enforcement community has since adapted their response for an active threat situation, to one where the first arriving officer(s) on scene are tasked with seeking out the active threat and neutralizing that threat, as quickly as possible.

Post Aurora, it was discussed at the Hartford Consensus by numerous national leaders within the emergency response professions that EMS organizations had to follow suit and change their practices as well in order to prevent further loss of life, post injury. Traditional responses called for EMS to stage in a safe location, well outside the area where any threat was believed to exist. EMS would then remain in that staging area even after the threat had been located, neutralized and/or contained and would typically not be allowed entry until the scene was deemed completely clear and secure of any and all potential threats. This approach, though considered relatively safe for EMS, was problematic for the victims of the active threat event as some of these victims still had the potential to survive their injuries, so long as they received medical intervention in a timely manner. Though it’s difficult to accept, it’s recognized that some victims will ultimately expire due to the nature and severity of the injuries they’ve sustained; however, there still remains a varying number who can still survive in the event that they receive timely lifesaving medical intervention from EMS at the scene, prior to their transport to a hospital setting.

A combined response has been recognized by leading organizations in both fields to be a best practice and a necessary effort in order to decrease loss of life during such incidents. As most active threat events are unplanned and dynamic situations, this recommendation must follow suit and remain flexible and is only intended to serve as a guideline for any response to an active threat situation.

This combined response is not meant to be a replacement for hospital care but rather a way of expeditiously evaluating and treating an abnormal volume of victims, often with specific wounding epidemiology, and providing those who can still be saved with a fighting chance at survival as they are evacuated to a hospital. Due to the nature and unpredictability of these events, it is not enough to merely have a policy or guideline in place. Personnel must continually train and gain exposure to these situations, in order to effectively make tactical decisions in an ever evolving scene or situation, as there is little time to consult a playbook during the early stages of the event.

The reality is that emergency preparedness is more than just the response function of emergency services. It is an all encompassing partnership and involvement between emergency services and community engagement to combat the unfortunate trend that has become increasingly all too common. When looking at emergency management, we must focus on all five pillars from both the perspective of emergency services, as well as that of the community.

Prevention – Focus is on preventing the incident from occurring in the first place

Mitigation – Focus is on lessening the impact of an incident that is unable to be fully prevented

Preparedness – How do emergency services train for an incident | How do community members train for an incident

Response – How do emergency services respond to an incident| How do community members respond to an incident

Recovery – How do we restore organizations, allow for healing, and provide a path for a return to normal

Only through a collaborative approach, can we truly decrease the likelihood of an occurrence, limit the damage that is done, and speed the path to recovery. While there are typically a multitude of reasons behind the occurrence of Active Shooter/Hostile Events, the data is clear in several areas.

• They are not decreasing in frequency.
• The two most frequent settings they occur in are:
  • Areas of Public Commerce
  • Places of Employment
• Roughly 50% of all active shooters make some sort of revelation prior to carrying out their act of violence and those closest to them are the ones in the best position to recognize it.
• A coordinated and combined response, not only from emergency services but from the community as well, is the best way to effectively prevent, mitigate and respond to these acts.
• Prevention, Mitigation and Response…. can not happen if you don’t prepare.

Here at NETS, our mission is to provide a complete and combined approach for not only emergency services, but the community as well.

Kyle Brouillette, Vermont State Emergency Management Director