By Stephanie R. DeRiso, Captain, United States Army, IPSA Member

As the world faces the COVID-19 pandemic, America is experiencing a series of both peaceful and violent protests across major cities in response to the death of George Floyd on May 25, 2020, while in police custody. Public safety professionals to be mindful of operating in situations where their presence may not be celebrated, let alone wanted.

Answering the call of duty

When asked why they do what they do, many people in emergency services, law enforcement and the military will offer that they want to help and serve others. However, these professions continue to operate in contexts where the definition of ‘help’ varies widely. Regardless, public safety professionals are required to continue to perform their respective functions of enforcing the law, preventing and investigating crimes, apprehending offenders, maintaining public order and promoting public safety. It is critical that professionals operating within the context of heightened hostilities can refocus their efforts in a healthy way while still performing the roles entrusted to them by the public. Although the following mechanisms can apply to other public safety professions, they will be applied to law enforcement considering current events playing out across America.

Law enforcement principles, theory and practice

As law enforcement officers prepare for functioning within potentially hostile contexts, research is a constructive method for preparing the mind. It is useful to research the history of the law enforcement profession to understand its core values, theories and principles. It is also useful to research the region, communities and ideologies prevalent within the operational environment. However, most critical, is researching the intersection of the profession and these crucial factors.

Research is not considered reading through myriad of polarizing social media posts, but instead truly studying empirical academic research about the policing history, social history, racial segregation, political and economic factors that shape the dynamics at play between law enforcement and the populations they serve. Developing a historical frame of reference for the reactions of communities, allows for mutual understanding and empathy.

Focus on individual interactions

While building mutual understanding and empathy, it is also important to consider how one individual can make an impact. Public safety professionals must be diligent to focus on individual interactions and shape the trajectory they do have control over. While one officer cannot personally shape the universal narrative of a stereotypical law enforcement officer, he or she can interact in a way that impacts those perceptions positively. That is not to say that violence should be met with passivity; the use-of-force continuum is a crucial guideline for protecting constituents, officers and bystanders by escalating levels of reasonable action. However, whenever possible, officers must make deliberate efforts to remove themselves from the echo chamber of labels and work directly with the human being in front of them. While stereotypes are a mechanism for making sense of a complex world, they are also a method for eliminating opportunities to exercise critical decision-making.

Communicating before, during and after shifts

During polarizing situations, it is important to discuss experiences with colleagues. At the end of an especially challenging shift or operation, taking the time to swap stories about interactions while on the job allows leaders to better understand the evolving environment they are sending subordinates in to. This can open the door to additional resources, to include proper training, education and equipment.

This also presents opportunities for better scenario planning. While more seasoned officers may have a better frame of reference for making good decisions in stressful scenarios, discussing experiences provides a mechanism for adding others’ experiences to one’s metaphorical toolkit.

So much of law enforcement training is logically designed to allow for the human brain to rapidly move through a flow chart, selecting or bypassing crucial decision points to make the ethically and legally correct choice all in a matter of seconds. When the boxes on the flow chart are limited, officers may also be limited in their ability to make sound decisions within short timeframes. Open dialogues inform additional mental flow chart boxes.

Remind yourself why you wear the badge and the uniform

Getting back to your origins is a critical mechanism for handling situations of increased uncertainty and hostility. Although many public safety professionals are tired, angry and frustrated, there is a reason they have gone through all of the grueling steps to wear the badge and the uniform. There is something or someone that inspired you to willingly walk towards harm, to help people on their very worst day and to trade certain freedoms for those of your community.

Pull out the old photo of you graduating from the academy or even that horrible photo taken on the first day of basic training. Remember the excitement and hope you held for your future when you started the process and allow those embers to regain their flames. If you cannot do so, it is also important to consider the why and how of this feeling.

As reported by the Department of Justice, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder impacts an estimated 15 percent of law enforcement officers in the United States today. PTSD can lead to behavioral dysfunction, to include aggression, depression and substance abuse, as well as overall poor decision-making. It is a moral imperative that public safety professionals take care of their mental well-being. The streets you patrol and the protests you respond to should not be treated as a battlefield, but the stressors law enforcement officers face day in and day out can take the same emotional toll.

About the Author

Stephanie DeRiso has served in the U.S. Army for 8 years. She initially served as a Mortuary Affairs Specialist at Dover, Air Force Base, Delaware before receiving her commission in to the Military Police Corps. As a Military Police Officer, she led law enforcement operations in Fort Stewart, Georgia and across Europe in support of Operation Atlantic Resolve. She was selected as a Joint Special Operations Command Cultural Support Team Specialist and served on training and combat operations alongside special operations units across Afghanistan in support of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel. Most recently, she is pursuing qualification as a Civil Affairs Officer at the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School. She holds a Bachelor of Science in Criminology, Law, and Society from George Mason University and will receive her Master of Professional Studies in Emergency and Disaster Management from Georgetown University in May of 2021.

By Gregory L. Walterhouse, Associate Teaching Professor, Bowling Green State University, IPSA Member

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects persons against unreasonable searches of their property and effects by the Government. The Fourth Amendment is enforceable against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. This is not limited to searches by law enforcement officers, but by any agent of the government including fire inspectors and fire investigators in the performance of their official duties. Searches may be administrative, for example inspections, or criminal in nature such as arson investigation. The focus of this article will be administrative searches, but it will touch on criminal searches related to fire investigations. 

Inspections

Fire inspectors conduct thousands of inspections across the United States on a regular basis and rarely are they refused entry to perform an inspection. But what if the party in control of the property refuses entry to the inspector? First, the person in control of the property be it the property owner, or a tenant, has a constitutional right to refuse entry to an inspector and cannot be charged or convicted for failing to do so.

Absent consent, the inspector needs to obtain an administrative search warrant. In Camara v. Municipal Court the Supreme Court held that a city ordinance providing for warrantless inspections of leased residential properties was unconstitutional and barred prosecution of persons refusing to permit code enforcement inspections of a personal residence. The Court further held that the probable cause requirement to obtain an administrative search warrant for an area code enforcement inspection is not predicated on the inspector’s belief that a particular property violates the code, but on the “reasonableness of the enforcement agency’s appraisal of conditions in the area as a whole.”

Similarly, the Court has held that statutory authorization of warrantless searches of business properties is unconstitutional. In Marshal v. Barlow’s a business owner refused OSHA inspectors access to nonpublic areas of his business. The Court struck down a provision of the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act that empowered OSHA inspectors to inspect the work area of any employment facility for safety hazards and violations. However, this does not preclude an inspector from observing areas of a business, without a warrant or consent that are observable by the public. The Court cited Camara and See v. Seattle as controlling. In See the Court held that absent consent the warrant requirement established in Camara also applies to inspections of business properties.

An exception to the warrant requirement are closely regulated industries including firearms United States v. Biswell, alcoholic beverages Colonnade Catering Corp. v. United States and automobile junkyards New York v. Burger. The Court upheld the warrant exception citing a long history of regulation of these industries and the owner’s privacy interests being weakened where the government’s interest in regulating businesses are heightened.

Fire investigations

Entries to investigate the cause of fires must generally adhere to the probable cause and warrant procedure of the Fourth Amendment (Michigan v. Tyler). However, the Court in Tyler established some exceptions to the warrant requirement.

First, a burning building presents an exigency sufficient to render a warrantless entry reasonable.

Second, for a reasonable time after the fire is extinguished firefighters may seize evidence of arson that is in plain view and investigate the cause of the fire. In Tyler, the Court upheld a departure of investigators from the scene due to visibility problems and a return four hours later to continue their investigation.

Third, where the cause of a fire in unknown and the purpose of the investigation is to determine the fire’s cause; and absent consent from the person in control of the property (owner or tenant), an administrative search warrant is sufficient (Michigan v. Clifford).

However, upon discovering evidence of wrongdoing and establishing probable cause a criminal search warrant is required. Therefore, when investigating under an administrative search warrant and finding evidence of arson or another crime, suspend the investigation prior to obtaining a criminal search warrant.  

The “reasonable time” exception established by the Court in Tyler may be problematic and investigators should seriously consider the legal ramifications of investigating fires for a “reasonable time” as an extension of the suppression operation.

First, what constitutes a reasonable time is a question of law that will be determined later by a judge after it is too late for an investigator to correct the mistake. In Tyler, the Court found that a four-hour interruption in the scene investigation was reasonable. However, what about five, six, or more hours?

In addition, leaving an unsecured scene also compromises the change of custody for physical evidence. In Michigan v. Clifford, the Court held that arrival of investigators to the scene later on the day the fire occurred, to investigate a suspected arson without consent or a search warrant after the owner had taken steps to secure the fire damaged dwelling was unreasonable, and violated the Fourth Amendment.

Summary

In summary, property owners have Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches, which includes administrative searches for code enforcement and fire investigation purposes. Inspectors and investigators should first attempt to obtain consent from the property owner or tenant, preferably in writing for investigations, prior to conducting inspections or investigations.

If consent is denied, or for any reason is unattainable an administrative search warrant should be sought for inspections or determining the cause of a fire. Once, there is evidence of arson or other wrongdoing that establishes probable cause a criminal search warrant is required to seize evidence and further the investigation.

Finally, even though the Court has established an exception to the warrant requirement for investigating a fire for a “reasonable time” as a continuation of the fire suppression operations, this exception has potential pitfalls, and obtaining consent or an applicable search warrant are better options. For legal questions on performing specific inspections or investigations, fire inspectors and investigators should consult their local municipal or prosecuting attorney for guidance.

About the Author

Greg Walterhouse is an Associate Teaching Professor in the Fire Administration and Masters in Public Administration programs at Bowling Green State University. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Management from Oakland University, a Master’s degree in Legal Studies from the University of Illinois and a Master’s degree in Management from Central Michigan University. Before joining BGSU, Greg had over 35 years experience in various aspects of public safety with 18 years in upper management. The author may be contacted at waltegl@bgsu.edu.

This is a test. The IPSA is testing a secured-content feature. Have a good day. 

All Affiliate, Associate and Active Level Members have access to this article. Not a member? Click here to join now. Affiliate is Free. Associate is $50/year. Active is $125/year. 

Already a member? Login to access full article.

By Niki Papazoglakis, Principal, Mobility 4 Public Safety

Text-based messaging, through SMS or third-party apps, is part of our daily lives. In fact, the convenience and instantaneous delivery makes messaging the preferred means of communication for many, including most public safety professionals.

Challenges with messaging

Messaging is convenient and operationally effective for public safety. Yet, public safety organizations experience multiple barriers to officially adopting these types of mobile collaboration tools because of technical, financial and policy challenges.

From a technical perspective, a lack of interoperability standards and identity sharing frameworks make it difficult to even connect the same products across different organizations, much less integrate different products.

Financial constraints limit the wide-scale deployment of department-issued mobile devices for most public safety organizations, not to mention subscription-based fees for messaging applications.

Further, many public safety organizations operate under outdated or non-existent policies for personal device use. To get around these organizational challenges, many public safety practitioners use consumer messaging tools on personal and department-issued devices for operational communications. These applications are not secure and because messages are stored on the phone, they leave the user open to having to turn their phone in for discovery. To address these concerns and begin to link together public safety organizations so that they can securely communicate, Bridge 4 Public Safety (Bridge4PS) has built a free, interoperable collaboration application.

Collaboration tools

As the Information Age evolved, the vast amount of data has become impossible for individuals to effectively consume. The need to streamline the overwhelming volume of emails and texts led to the birth of collaboration tools including chat-based platforms which allow users to collaborate in persistent rooms/channels. These are typically cloud-hosted and optimized for mobile devices.

While most industries are adopting collaboration as primary communications tools, public safety has been slower to adopt for a few reasons:

1. Many organizations do not consider mobile phones official operational communications tools and thus do not provide phones to most personnel.
2. Many organizations lack adequate personal device use policies.
3. No platform exists to promote scalable and secure multi-organizational public safety collaboration.

Need for messaging collaboration

Recent publications by the Texas Public Safety Broadband Program and the South Dakota Public Safety Broadband Network highlight just how critical these tools have become for many public safety practitioners (see Public Safety Messaging: A New Frontier for Collaboration and Interoperability and Interoperability Use with Mobile Broadband). Both papers cite the operational need for messaging and lack of a viable industry-wide solution.

Evolving public records laws which encompass messages on personal devices plus the common misconception that Over-The-Top (OTT) apps protect users’ phones from discovery and/or public records requests are leading many practitioners to replace SMS texting with consumer-grade apps like WhatsApp, GroupMe and Telegram. With no real alternatives, these apps are being widely used to fill a significant communications gap despite security vulnerabilities and lack of enterprise administration tools.

Security, privacy

To combat security vulnerabilities, some consumer apps are adopting End-to-End encryption (E2E) which encrypts the data from the sender to the recipient(s) mitigating many traditional vulnerabilities. While E2E offers some protection, these apps were not designed with strong security, so vulnerabilities still exist. Regardless of the real or perceived security from E2E, this type of encryption may be well suited for private correspondence but violates many states’ public records laws. Systems with E2E encryption do not store content on a server, thus enhancing exposure of personal phones rather than protecting them.

Interoperability

Messaging is widely utilized for many types of operations, particularly among individual teams; however, the lack of enterprise features limits the effectiveness of consumer-grade apps when scaling to larger groups. Some public safety organizations are adopting tools like Slack, Microsoft Teams and WebEx Teams which provide value internally, but offer limited scalability across organizations.

Early experimental deployments of public safety collaboration under the Harris County FirstNet Early Builder and DHS S&T Mobility Acceleration Coalition (MAC) programs delivered transformational results during notable events such as Super Bowl LI, Los Angeles Marathon, Hurricane Harvey and numerous other local events and disasters. Each deployment demonstrated unprecedented interoperability and real-time, multi-agency information sharing. In contrast, a member of the U.S. Forest Service noted in a recap of the 2019 wildland fire season in California that at one point she had nine messaging/collaboration apps for different groups they coordinated with.

Operational value

Although the operational value is clear for the coordinated adoption of enterprise-grade, multi-organizational, public safety collaboration, these deployments were only possible under experimental programs not bound by typical constraints like funding and governance. Many stakeholders are looking for an industry-wide platform to use:

• Daily for regular duty, special events and incident response.
• Anywhere they may provide mutual aid.
• With anyone they need to collaborate with operationally.

Cost considerations

The lack of such a tool is not because the technology is unavailable. With enough funding, any vendor could build the public safety-specific features, meet industry security and compliance requirements and scale worldwide. The problem is economics.

Bridge4PS is a free, public safety collaboration platform born out of the DHS S&T MAC project after the loss of momentum for strategic mobility planning when the funding for the subscription-based app was exhausted.

Bridge4PS provides secure messaging, picture, video, file sharing and voice, video conferencing within a single nationwide platform exclusively for public safety. It is funded by the U.S. DHS and available at no cost to authorized public safety personnel as an alternative to 1) free consumer apps currently used by many practitioners; 2) premium subscription apps prohibitively expensive for most public safety organizations and 3) internal, enterprise tools that do not support interoperability.

Bridge4PS and COVID-19

Early deployments of Bridge4PS as a proof-of-concept exceeded expectations. In early 2020, DHS approved the expansion to users beyond the designated proof-of-concept regions of Houston and Los Angeles. Initial deployments for daily operations and special events produced dramatic operational results.

Just days after the Los Angeles Marathon, where Bridge4PS delivered seamless real-time communications for hundreds of users in 12 organizations across four jurisdictions, the COVID-19 pandemic hit the U.S. Since then, there has been a rapid increase in the number of users and dramatic shift in the types of use cases. It is being used across the country to coordinate COVID-19 response for local, regional and state-level operations.

Bridge4PS is available only to authorized personnel. All users are maintained in a single nationwide directory. This directory is proving highly valuable in coordinating and disseminating critical information across jurisdictions.

Disasters are not typically a good time to adopt new tools; however, COVID-19 is straining many traditional planning, response and communications models. Public safety organizations are being forced to find new means of communicating to remain effective despite predominantly remote workforces, reduced staffing from responders being quarantined, highly dynamic operational environments and increasingly limited resources (e.g., staffing, funding and supplies).

Public safety organizations are using Bridge4PS to securely disseminate COVID-19 related information such as evolving department policies, exposure procedures and various other non-sensitive content to personnel with limited access to department email when off-duty or working remotely.

As organizations adjusted to the new operational environment, many adopted Zoom for video conferencing. Like consumer messaging apps that were not designed to meet stringent security requirements, users began experiencing video bombing and security breaches that exposed hundreds of thousands of user credentials on the dark web.

The primary focus with Bridge4PS was to develop a secure, compliant and free public safety collaboration platform that could support nationwide interoperability. This is being achieved by those practitioners adopting it. Once verified and issued a credential, users can create groups and direct messages with any other user(s) in the directory without needing personal contact information.

Navigating the unknown

It is unclear how long the COVID-19 pandemic will last, and it impossible to predict its impact on individual communities. Many areas are experiencing increases in suicide, domestic violence and robberies. No one knows what will happen as communities begin re-opening. With wildfire and hurricane seasons approaching, there will likely be an even greater strain on public safety resources as cases of COVID-19 continue to rise in the U.S. and globally.

One step organizations can take to enhance preparedness and response efforts is to join the thousands of public safety practitioners around the country adopting Bridge4PS. Authorized personnel can learn more at https://www.bridge4ps.com or request access at https://access.bridge4ps.com. Public safety has a unique opportunity to avoid the interoperability challenges experienced with radios and CAD and truly harness the power of mobile broadband through mobile collaboration by bridging public safety communications with Bridge4PS.

Author Biography

Niki Papazoglakis has been actively involved in public safety technology and communications for nearly 20 years. She has led numerous ground-breaking projects that have helped advance the state of public safety communications and IT nationally including the first regional broadband requirements gathering project which DHS incorporated into its best practices guidance, the first all-digital PSAP with sub-second connections for wireless callers, and the first large-scale operational deployment of PSLTE for Super Bowl LI in Houston which set a standard for the utilization of mobile broadband technologies through seamless interoperability and information sharing. Building on the momentum from her role with the Harris County Early Builder program, Niki has formed Mobility 4 Public Safety, a consulting firm specializing in regional, interoperable mobility strategy and public safety collaboration.

Related Content

IPSA COVID-19 Webpage

By Heather R. Cotter, Executive Director

The International Public Safety Association reached out to a few member to get their perspectives on emerging lessons learned and considerations related to the COVID-19 pandemic specific to continuity of operations, safety and mental health. The article contributors include: 

1. Emma Poon, Chief, Regional and Stakeholder Branch, National Continuity Programs, U.S. DHS, FEMA
2. George Steiner, Lieutenant, Elgin (Illinois) Fire Department, IPSA Board Member, IPSA RTF Committee Chair, IPSA Secretary
3. Nicholas Greco, M.S., B.C.E.T.S., C.A.T.S.M., F.A.A.E.T.S., IPSA Mental Health & Wellness Committee Chair

Q: What are you seeing related to the COVID-19 pandemic, specific to COOP, safety and/or mental health?

Poon: As organizations at all levels are finding their key resources are limited and personnel may be unavailable due to the COVID-19 pandemic, now is the time for everyone to review and reassess their essential functions so that the resources that are available can be applied in efforts that will be most beneficial to your organization.

FEMA has various tools to support continuity-related planning to include the Business Process Analysis and Business Impact Analysis User Guide. This guide supports the development, review and validation of essential functions by taking you through the steps of conducting a Business Process Analysis and Business Impact Analysis. This and other useful continuity-related tools and information can be accessed in the FEMA Continuity Resource Toolkit.

FEMA also have online trainings through the Emergency Management Institute, and the most relevant ones now are:

An Introduction to Continuity of Operations: IS-1300

Introduction to Continuity of Operations Planning for Pandemic Influenzas: IS-0520

And the Continuity Guidance Circular is also available in the Resource Toolkit as our foundational document that has basically outlined how much of national resilience depends upon everyone in the whole community having continuity plans. Continuity isn’t limited to government or any specific sector.

Steiner: COVID-19 is requiring us to rethink our normal response to our routine emergencies. Protect yourself and your personnel right away as part of your initial scene safety. It is important to remember that people can be asymptomatic and still be contagious. Even people who are showing symptoms may not be forthcoming with that information about their symptoms in fear of being labeled (stigmatized) or denied entry into a place.

We are treating runs as though the patient has COVID-19 by protecting ourselves right away wearing surgical masks, eye protection, gloves and other PPE as needed. We are also placing masks on all our patients to provide an additional level of protection. We are sending one medic in to evaluate the patient and determine the proper level of PPE and care. We are even trying to get the patients to meet us at the front door, lobby or outside when possible to help limit the potential exposures.

Greco: The mental health field is seeing resiliency, strength and courage through this difficult time. We continue to see first responders struggling with existing stress that is being compounded by this crisis.

Q: What else should organizations be thinking about and addressing?

Greco: We need to start looking at physical and mental wellness during and after this crisis. And not just in our first responders, but for our doctors, nurses and other medical professionals. I am concerned about the rates of acute stress disorder and PTSD. I would ask that organizations begin to look at wellness efforts now and plan for taking care of their people after this event. This is critical to help mitigate burnout, compassion fatigue and PTSD.

As Chair of the IPSA’s Mental Health & Wellness Committee, I am proud to serve with a terrific group of first responders and medical and mental health professionals. IPSA has several resources available on their website including infographics depression, PTSD, suicide, family and officer wellness. I encourage agencies and individuals to download and distribute these free resources.

Steiner: The well-being and mental health of your personnel and their families during this difficult time needs to be near the top of every leader’s mind. Plus, the economic impact the COVID-19 pandemic is having on both the public and private sectors; many individuals and companies are experiencing financial stress. It is going to be a long road to recovery.

Poon: This event is really highlighting how important it is to have good continuity plans in place. Even though we are not activating plans in the traditional sense, or relocating operations, we are using the strategies and capabilities we have developed over the years to maintain functions and services. We need to focus on four continuity planning factors:

People

• Identifying essential personnel based on identified essential functions of an organization (the Business Process Analysis and Business Impact Analysis User Guide referenced above).
• Knowing who is essential and how can help planners understand who must be where to make sure functions and services happen.
• In the case of a pandemic, this information can be used to identify who can stay home to telework and who must be in the office to perform functions.
• As more people get impacted, there will be a “graceful degradation” of functions that can be supported, but because continuity planning has already identified essential functions, all personnel can be reallocated or reassigned to perform tasks for the essential functions vs normal functions.

Leadership

• Orders of succession and delegations of authority helps mitigate impacts if/when leadership could be impacted by an incident. 
• FEMA recommends at least three deep, with at least one out of the area.

Facilities

• Continuity of operations always gets confused with “Relocation of Operations.” Not all incidents involve relocation or should relocate. In a pandemic scenario, relocating everyone to another location together is not going to mitigate the impacts.
• Continuity is function specific not location specific. However, continuity alternate sites and capabilities can be used in different ways. People that must be in a physical location to do their tasks, can be dispersed to all of the locations an organization has at its disposal, whether it’s the primary site, telework or alternate sites.

Communications

• Having alternate means of communication is critical as we are seeing with the issues with the conference bridges. It is not always about the continuity satellite phones or classified gadgets.
• The IT infrastructure to be able support dispersed operations, the ability to access files, and essential records.

Summary

The IPSA will continue to reach out to its stakeholders during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. We promise to continue to share the information we receive from our multidiscipline network so we can all learn from one another. Afterall, our vision is for a stronger, more integrated public safety community capable of an effective joint response to all public safety incidents. Together we are stronger.

Related Content

IPSA COVID-19 Webpage

IPSA Mental Health Infographics

IPSA FEMA COOP Webinar Recording 

IPSA Webinar Recording: Burnout - Staying Out of the Red Zone

10 tips for emergency responders, healthcare providers for managing stress during the COVID-19 crisis

"The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) at the U.S Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued guidance on how covered entities may disclose protected health information (PHI) about an individual who has been infected with or exposed to COVID-19 to law enforcement, paramedics, other first responders, and public health authorities in compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) Privacy Rule.

The guidance explains the circumstances under which a covered entity may disclose PHI such as the name or other identifying information about individuals, without their HIPAA authorization, and provides examples including:

When needed to provide treatment;

When required by law;

When first responders may be at risk for an infection; and

When disclosure is necessary to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat.

This guidance clarifies the regulatory permissions that covered entities may use to disclose PHI to first responders and others so they can take extra precautions or use personal protective equipment. The guidance also includes a reminder that generally, covered entities must make reasonable efforts to limit the PHI used or disclosed to that which is the "minimum necessary" to accomplish the purpose for the disclosure.

"Our nation needs our first responders like never before and we must do all we can to assure their safety while they assure the safety of others," said Roger Severino, OCR Director. "This guidance helps ensure first responders will have greater access to real time infection information to help keep them and the public safe," added Severino.

The guidance may be found at: https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/covid-19-hipaa-and-first-responders-508.pdf "

Source: HHS

By Andrew Devine

Editor’s Note: This article is reprinted with permission from the Mesothelioma Guide.

The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) have teamed up to study the causal relationship between firefighting and diseases such as mesothelioma. The study found that firefighters have a substantially higher risk of developing mesothelioma than the general population.

Firefighters are a group of people that have one of the more notable risks for developing mesothelioma. These risks aren’t hard to imagine when considering the amount of debris and toxins released into the air when an older building burns down.

The smoke and dust generated from these fires are likely to contain unsafe levels of asbestos. When structures are on fire and when they collapse, asbestos fibers present in the structure become airborne.

There are also unforeseen risks that firefighters serving prior to the 1970s may have incurred. Such a risk is the use of asbestos in the protective materials worn by firefighters prior to this period. Since the risks of asbestos were not widely known, it seemed logical at the time to manufacture helmets, coats and pants with fire-resistant asbestos.

While firefighters today have protective equipment, such as masks and respirators, it is not always a requirement for them to use the equipment. This obviously puts firefighters at risk of exposure if asbestos is present.

Study background
The idea behind the study was to create a more conclusive understanding of the occupational risks of firefighting and developing cancer. By increasing the number of participants in the study, researchers hope to back up previous studies with a more scientifically significant analysis.

The study consisted of nearly 30,000 career firefighters who served between 1950 and 2009 in San Francisco, Chicago and Philadelphia.

While the research does not consider factors such as smoking, personal health and consumption of alcohol, they did determine that firefighters are twice as likely to develop mesothelioma compared to the general population.

This was the first study ever to identify higher rates of mesothelioma among firefighters in the United States. It also found that firefighters have a higher rate of developing several other types of cancer.

The study is projected to have a second phase in which researchers will look at the occupational history of the firefighters in this study to gain more specific information about the relationship of firefighting and the development of cancers like mesothelioma.

9/11: A recent example of asbestos risks for firefighters
One of the most infamous asbestos exposure risks for firefighters were those who served at Ground Zero on 9/11. The lower floors of the Twin Towers were coated in tons (estimated between 400 and 1,000 tons) of asbestos that was released into the air when the buildings collapsed.

The dust cloud resulting from the collapse swamped lower Manhattan, engulfing skyscrapers and people. Those without respirators were sure to inhale the toxic dust.

A study released a year after 9/11 by the American Thoracic Society highlighted the risks associated with asbestos exposure for firefighters at Ground Zero.

Although the study wasn’t speculative about firefighters developing mesothelioma in the future, it determined there was a significant amount of asbestos released in the air after the collapse.

The study did, however, determine that firefighters at Ground Zero had immediate respiratory side effects, including pleural effusions and pleural thickening. These are serious symptoms, which illuminate the risks firefighters must face.

There isn’t any event comparable in magnitude that posed risks to firefighters quite like 9/11. However, it does go to show that firefighters responding to calls involving buildings containing asbestos face an inevitable risk of being exposed to dangerous levels of asbestos.

Why is this study important?
The study released by the USFA and NIOSH is important for many reasons, but one reason stands out in relation to mesothelioma: awareness. Knowing that firefighters have two times the risk of developing mesothelioma than the average American is powerful information.

This is information that can be used to help protect firefighters from unseen, airborne risks such as asbestos. It may also encourage firefighters who are tempted to remove their respirators to protect themselves.

Many people are still unaware of the potential threat of asbestos exposure. The toxic fibers are regulated in the U.S., but they still aren’t banned. Firefighters, especially, need to be aware of these risks.

About the Author
Andrew Devine is a contributing writer for Mesothelioma Guide. He has developed an interest in educating patients and their families on everything from new treatments to what to expect after diagnosis.

Submitted by the Fairfax County Department of Public Safety Communications, Fairfax County, Virginia

In cooperation with Fairfax County’s Health Department, Fire and Rescue Department Medical Director, and Police Department Safety Officers, the Department of Public Safety Communications in Fairfax County (Virginia) have added the following questions to all calls:

1. Does the patient or anyone else on scene have these symptoms?
   
   --Measured body temperature of 100.4 or higher.
   --Fever (hot to the touch in room temperature).
   --Chills.         
   --Difficulty breathing or shortness of breath.
   --Persistent cough.
   --Any other new respiratory problems (e.g., persistent sneezing, wheezing, --congestion, etc.).
   
   
2. Has the patient or anyone else on scene traveled outside the United States (any international travel) in the past 14 days?
   
   
3. Has the patient or anyone else on scene been exposed to someone with Coronavirus?

If any of the below criteria are met, for any call, click the INFECTIOUS DISEASE button and list the criteria in CAD.

Medical pre-arrival instructions
Keep the patient/subject isolated. Do not allow anyone to come in close contact with him/her.

Return to chief complaint card

Start with chief complaint card/information gathering. Enter call for dispatch according to EMD protocol or event type.

Law enforcement pre-arrival instructions
Direct the involved subject(s)/parties to come outside, to exit the residence/office to meet the responding officer. (Our goal is to meet the involved subject(s) outside in open air to help minimize exposure).

Medical events
Provide pre-arrival instructions. Screen for Coronavirus – ask questions in any order.

PD events
Screen for Coronavirus – ask questions shortly after event entry. Return to line of questioning.

Related Content
IPSA COVID-19 Webpage

By Lieutenant (Ret.) Joseph “Paul” Manley, IPSA Board Member

In the United States, an increasing number of law enforcement officers, firefighters and EMS providers have been ordered into 14-day quarantine at home or in-quarters after exposure to a COVID-19 positive patient.

As of March 18, 2020, we are aware of 25 Kirkland firefighters and two police officers; four King County EMS paramedics, including two interns; 77 San Jose firefighters; six Reedy Creek Florida firefighters; nine Albany County deputy sheriff’s; and five FDNY EMS providers who have been ordered into quarantine. There is a high likelihood additional personnel will be reported as in-quarantine, quarantine completed or released from quarantine in the days ahead.

Kirkland, Washington cases
More than two dozen first responders were quarantined for possible exposure to the coronavirus after they responded to a nursing home where numerous people have tested positive.

The City of Kirkland issued a press release that confirmed 25 Kirkland firefighters and two Kirkland police officers have been placed under quarantine “out of an abundance of caution” after they were exposed to the virus at a nursing home.

Kirkland Fire Station 21 was shut down to house the first responders under quarantine who cannot, or do not, want to go into home quarantine for fear of infecting family and friends. Neighboring fire departments will be providing additional support as one-quarter of the 100 sworn members of the Kirkland Fire Department remain under quarantine.

King County, Washington cases
EMTs working for American Medical Response Company (AMR) in King County, Washington were not informed when they transported a patient with COVOID-19 symptoms.

San Jose, California cases
The San Jose Fire Department placed 77 firefighters under quarantine after four of the department's members tested positive for the coronavirus. 

Reedy Creek, Florida cases
Reedy Creek Improvement District, the city-state that acts as Walt Disney World’s governmental agency, reports that seven firefighters and EMTs have been put under quarantine due to coronavirus.

Albany County, New York cases
According to Sheriff Apple, an Albany County Sheriff's deputy tested positive for COVID-19. The deputy, who was assigned to the judicial center, is recovering and has minor symptoms. The positive diagnosis forced the county to quarantine nine other deputies, putting a staffing strain on the department.

New York, New York cases
John Knox, former FDNY Fire Marshal, dies of coronavirus complications.  Additional FDNY members have also tested positive for COVID-19.

This news is highly illustrative of the dangerous role that our first responders play each and every day. Despite the ongoing risks associated with this virus for first responders, their families and their friends, they are all absolutely dedicated to protecting their communities with the services they need during these uncertain times.

About the Author

Paul Manley is a 30+ year public safety professional and adjunct faculty member at Endicott College in Beverly, MA. Paul is the Founder of Risk Mitigation Technologies, LLC and a retired Police Lieutenant and Executive Officer for the Nahant, Massachusetts Police Department. Paul has a Master’s Degree in Criminal Justice Administration from Anna Maria College and is a Board-Certified Homeland Protection Professional (CHPP). Paul is honored to be a Board Member of the IPSA.

Related Content

IPSA COVID-19 webpage

By Nicholas Greco, M.S., BCETS, CATSM, FAAETS, IPSA Mental Health Committee Chair

Emergency responders and healthcare professionals have stressful jobs due to the type of work they perform. During a crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, these professionals may start to feel overwhelmed and have higher levels of stress. While they may be physically prepared to respond to a higher volume of public needs, it is important for them be mindful of maintaining their mental health and overall well-being.

Here are some quick and useful tips for emergency responders and healthcare providers to reduce stress:

1. Talk. Yes, it’s that simple. Talk with those you trust. Start with a good friend or your spouse or partner and involve them. You can’t carry the weight all by yourself and you don’t have to.
   
   
2. Accept your limitations. You are not invincible, you, just like every other human can and will make mistakes. You need to rest, recharge and center yourself.
   
   
3. Meditate. Even taking two minutes of quiet time can make a big difference in helping you to stop and take a step back. Other options include yoga and deep breathing too (e.g. inhale for five seconds, exhale for five seconds and repeat a few times).
   
   
4. Exercise. Lift weights, do some push-ups, run outdoors or on a treadmill, hit the heavy bag, practice yoga, go for a walk – just do something active. Get out there and burn off some steam in a healthy way. If you don’t have the time, make time and take a brisk twenty-minute walk. Even five minutes walking outside could be beneficial.
   
   
5. Sleep. Easier said than done, but sleep is restorative and promotes both physical and mental health. Ideally, you should try to get 7-9 hours of sleep a night.
   
   
6. Hydrate. That means cutting back on the high caffeine power drinks and weight gaining sodas. Water is an optimal choice and you can flavor it with sliced fruit, cucumbers or even some non-caffeinated drink additives. Just read the labels.
   
   
7. The power of pets. Research has consistently shown that the mere act of petting an animal can reduce stress levels, blood pressure and help a person’s mood.
   
   
8. Reconnect. Take time to spend with your family and reconnect with them. They need you as much as you need them to get through this.
   
   
9. Take breaks from the news. Step back, turn off the TV, put down the phone, disconnect from the world to avoid negative news. Set aside times in the day when you will check the news, but don’t constantly check throughout the day as this can raise stress levels. When you do get your news, only go to reliable sources. Do not feed into rumors and social media.
   
   
10. Talk to someone. If you find yourself unable to talk with friends or family or simply want to seek out greater peace in your life, make an appointment with a trained therapist.

About the Author
NICHOLAS GRECO IV, M.S., B.C.E.T.S., C.A.T.S.M., F.A.A.E.T.S., is President and Founder of C3 Education and Research, Inc. Nick has over 20 years of experience training civilians and law enforcement. He has directed, managed and presented on over 350 training programs globally across various topics including depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, verbal de-escalation techniques, post-traumatic stress disorder, burnout, and vicarious traumatization. Nick has authored over 300 book reviews and has authored or co-authored over 35 articles in psychiatry and psychology. He is a subject matter expert for PoliceOne/Lexipol and Axon as well as a CIT trainer for the Chicago Police Department and the the State of Illinois. Nick is a member of the International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association (ILEETA), IACP, IPSA, and CIT International, as well as Committee Chair for the IPSA Mental Health Committee. Nick can be reached at psychcomm@yahoo.com

Related Content

IPSA Mental Health Infographics

IPSA COVID-19 Webpage