Incident Commander Case Study

The common structure of the ICS is based upon a modular format in a top-down approach that allows for adaptability as needed. An ICS can expand or contract based upon the complexity or impact of an incident to respond in a more expansive or contracted way based upon the overall incident (United States Department of Homeland Security, 2004). This approach allows for efficient adaptability that is crucial in being able to adapt as an incident occurs, or even expands in complexity and impact. In managing an ICS from this top-down method requires the development of objectives in attaining goals in response to an incident, issuing assignments and procedures to be utilized in response to an incident, and the documentation of the performance in

These steps include, but may not be limited to, conducting sizeup, evaluating the situation, setting incident priorities, estimating potential incident course and harm, and choosing strategic goals and tactical objectives (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1999). In conducting sizeup, the Incident Commander must consciously evaluate the situation in totality to determine what the first step should be based upon previous experiences of a similar manner (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1999). Through the process of preplanning and previous incidents, the Incident Commander can refer to these incidents and how they were responded to in making the decision as to how to respond to the current situation. As each incident is unique, the Incident Commander must evaluate the situation and continually evaluate the situation as first responders respond to the incident (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1999). As the Incident Commander continually evaluates the situation as the response process occurs and the incident is managed, they must then prioritize resources to preserve life. Setting incident priorities is a methodology in which societal aspects such as infrastructure and public services are responded to and maintained to stabilize the situation at hand (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1999). When prioritizing what aspects of society are most integral to preserving life, the Incident Commander must also evaluate the potential harm that may be incurred, overall, by the incident. In estimating the potential harm caused by an incident the Incident Commander must predict the course of the incident as well as the damage incurred and life lost (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1999). As these predictions are made goals and objectives are set. The goals and objectives the Incident Commander