The Action Research approach of this study follows the Look, Think, and Act217
method documented by Stringer. Look involves gathering relevant information and data through a literature review of information related to past historical incidents and the concept of cross-disciplinary team. This review also focuses on the existing Fairfax
County Unified Hostile Event Action Guide policy as well as other existing public safety
policies on the use of cross-disciplinary teams. Think involves exploring and analyzing the information and data collected in order to interpret and explain the either enablers and/or barriers to implementation of a cross-disciplinary response. Lastly, Act is the output of this thesis and includes the information and data that has been gathered, explored and analyzed as well as resulting recommendations for the successful implementation of cross-disciplinary teams in hostile contexts.
This thesis uses archival data that was collected during the full-scale exercise. None of the data included personally identifiable information (PII) or protected health information (PHI). The only data used for this study included the participants’ assessments of the effectiveness of the exercise, as described above. This exercise and data collection were conducted for the benefit of the federal agency and the public safety first responders.
This study analyzes two sets of data from this exercise:
• Five pre-exercise questions were provided to six participants representing the participating disciplines of police, fire and EMS, and security. These questions were distributed eight months prior to the actual full-scale- exercise and completed in a paper and pen format. The questions gauged the level of knowledge of the guidelines for response prior to the actual exercise (see Appendix B).
• A post-exercise analysis was completed by the sixty-eight exercise participants and seven observers and administrators with specific questions regarding the use of cross-disciplinary teams during the exercise. The data included observations from the exercise observers and administrators, and participant feedback to questions administered by the federal agency. Seventeen quantitative questions and three qualitative
217 Stringer, Action Research, 8–9.
questions were provided to the respondents and completed in a paper and pen format (see Appendix C).
Using data from the five pre-exercise responses, themes were developed that identified enablers and barriers for the use of the cross-disciplinary team concept and the actual upcoming exercise. The pre-exercise questions provided the exercise administrators with several perceived issues or concerns prior to the execution of the full- scale exercise. The qualitative responses aided in the identification of significant objectives for the full-scale exercise and areas of concern to which the evaluators could pay closer attention too during the actual exercise. The pre-exercise themes also aided in the development of the full-scale exercise questionnaire. These themes included the problems or issues expected from the team concept of fire and police working together; whether cross-functional teams will accomplish the mission of police, fire and EMS in an active shooter environment; the potential barriers of success of the cross-functional team concept; the type of training, equipment, and resources needed for success; and the opinion if Fairfax County is prepared to handle an active shooter incident.
The 17 quantitative and qualitative post-exercise questions were administered to each of the participants (see Appendix C). These questions and associated responses were tabulated on a 1 to 6 (1=low, 6=high) scale with an option for “not applicable” if the question was not applicable to the evaluator or participant’s activity or mission or not observed. Analysis included calculating the overall group mean, (N=75) and standard deviation for each quantitative question. T-Test contrasts were analyzed to compare the mean ratings for: the disciplines (police, fire, security and other), evaluator versus participant, and members versus non-members of cross-disciplinary teams. Three additional qualitative questions were asked to capture the evaluator or participant’s perceived effectiveness of the cross-disciplinary team concept during the full-scale exercise. The three qualitative questions that were provided focused on the advantages and disadvantages of cross-disciplinary teams as well as potential barriers that may have existed within the teams. Thematic analysis was utilized to identify the issues and findings from the three qualitative questions.
V.
FINDINGS
The research compiled as a result of Action Research and the associated full-scale practical exercise provided the opportunity to address the research questions as presented in this thesis. While a review of past historical incidents can provide key lessons learned and a potential look into the future, there is no guarantee that lessons learned will be adopted and applied to future incidents. The use of a full-scale scenario based practical exercise can be considered the most relevant analysis and training for public safety responders and administrators to test a new or improved method of incident mitigation. This chapter provides the research findings in the form of qualitative and quantitative data and analysis of the exercise which was conducted to determine how can public safety agencies effectively implement a first responder cross-disciplinary action plan to better coordinate police, fire and EMS responses in combined hostile events. The research identifies both enablers or barriers to the deployment of these teams and what are the benefits and risks of a cross-disciplinary approach from the eyes of persons that actually respond and mitigate these types of events.