skipass mountain patrols safe system for integrated...

Humanitarian and Civil Protection - ECHO

Grant agreement n° 070401/2010/579130/SUB/C4

SKIPASS

Mountain Patrols Safe System

for Integrated Disaster Management System

Final Technical Implementation Report

Start Date of action: 01 October 2011

End date of the action: 30 June 2012

Duration: 21 months

Co-ordinator:

CPRC Veneto (Centro Regionale di Studio e Formazione per la Previsione e la

Prevenzione in Materia di Protezione Civile)

Via Roma, 60 – IT- 32013 Longarone (BL) – ITALY

Email: [email protected] / [email protected]

Project website: www.civilprotectionskipass.eu

SKIPASS Final Technical Implementation Report

1

Table of contents

1. General remainder of project objectives, partnership and expected deliverables .... 2

2. General summary of project implementation process .............................................. 3

3. Evaluation of project management/implementation process.................................... 8

4. Activities................................................................................................................. 10

5. Presentation of the technical results and deliverables ............................................ 14

6. Evaluation of the technical results and deliverables............................................... 30

7. Follow-up ............................................................................................................... 32


2

1. General remainder of project objectives, partnership and expected deliverables

The main project task consisted in creating an Integrated Disaster Management

System (IDMS) in the Civil Protection organizations, to match visions of environment

risk prevention and management. IDMS joins technologies and tools, competences,

organizations and procedures to integrate and coordinate, across the disaster

management cycle, the various relevant stakeholders and their knowledge.

The project partners were:

• CO–CRPC (Veneto Regional Centre for Civil Protection Training in Forecasting

and Prevention, Italy)

• AB1-ADEP (Patras Municipal Enterprise for Planning and Development, Greece)

• AB2–Smolyan (Regional Administration Smolyan, Bulgaria)

• AB3–LBDCA (Lake Balaton Development Coordination Agency, Hungary)

SKIPASS actions were:

Best Practices: the partners analyzed their own practices, collected best practices and

evaluated them by SWOT-Analysis.

Training of Civil Protection Units: to build up knowledge and competences of the

Civil Protection Units about the IDMS and to facilitate groups’ participation into the

project.

Development of IDMS systems by each partner: each

beneficiary developed a prototype and then a mature

IDMS system. During the various phases, the developed

system was tested and evaluated.

Guidelines: thanks to partner’s contribution a Civil

Protection handbook, concerning the description of

IDMS system, the procedures and the guidelines, was

prepared.

Scheme 1. Main project actions


3

2. General summary of project implementation process

• General overview of the process

The project implementation process followed the four phases described in the scheme 2.

Scheme 2. Project implementation process

• Comparative analysis of the initial and actual time schedule

Initially the time schedule concentrated many actions in the first months of project

implementation (see Table 1) but it was soon clear that since each phase was depending

by the previous one it was necessary to distribute the activities along the entire project

life (see Table 2).

Phase 1

Preparatory

Phase 2

Collection of best Practices

Phase 3

Training of Civil Protection Units

Phase 4

Development of IDMS systems

Courses

IDMS Manual

SWOT

IDMS Handbook and guidelines


4

Table 1. The initial GANNT

Table 2. The actual GANNT

• Comparative analysis of planned and used resources

In table 3 is presented an overview of planned and used resources divided by category

cost and partner.


5

The project total expenditures is equal to € 309.061,49. There are some variations but

the changes in the values are not substantial, therefore coherently with the established

rules in the Common Provision (article 14) it was not necessary to present any

additional agreement to the Commission.

Table 3. Expenditures overview


6

Main relevant comments about partners’ expenditures:

CO-CRPC

Total Direct costs: the total direct costs are higher than planned because the

personnel costs increased. The requested UE contribution remains the same.

Personnel costs: personnel costs are higher than planned due to the higher unit

costs of the involved staff members (e.g. director of CRPC). The total of worked

hours corresponded to the planned one.

Travel cost: travel costs were less than planned because at the Steering

Committee Meetings held in Hungary and Bulgaria participated the consultant

of CRPC and not the staff members. In these cases the travel cost were

accounted in the subcontracting costs.

AB1 – ADEP

Personnel: some internal organization difficulties caused the a lower number of

worked hours dedicated to the project and therefore the personal costs are lower.

Travel cost: there were no travel costs because at the Steering Committee

Meetings held in Hungary and Italy participated the consultant of ADEP and not

the staff members. In these cases the travel cost were accounted in the

subcontracting costs. In Bulgaria ADEP couldn’t participate.

Equipment: ADEP didn’t buy any equipment.

AB2-SMOLYAN

SMOLYAN expenditures were regular and coherent with the planned costs.

AB3-LBDCA

Personnel: there is only a little difference with the planned costs because were

worked less hours than forecasted.

Travel cost: travel costs were less than planned because the participant tried to

reduce these costs (for example travelling by car to the Italian meetings) and the

travel cost of participated expert(s) was accounted in the subcontracting cost

type.


7

• Comparative analysis of Expected and actual results

Expected results Actual results

Establishment of a Best Practice Database

for IDMS in civil protection (published

online)

The database is available on project website

and in the Bulgarian partner website

http://idms.smolyan.info/index.php

Report with analysis and mapping of the

best practices for IDMS

On the website there is the report with

analysis and mapping of the best practices

for IDMS

Development and carrying out of trans-

national/local training course for CP on

IDMS

Each partner developed training course for

CP following a common module useful to

transfer competences on IDMS concept

Report with guidelines for CP training in

IDMS

Each partner elaborated a report about the

implemented training experience

Development and implementation of

IDMS for CP organizations of each

beneficiary

Each partner developed an IDMS

completed by its descriptive Manual

Trans-national Final Dissemination

Conference

In Venice on June 1st 2012 was held the

Final Conference

Handbook, guidelines and procedures

(Handbook produced in extended version

for dissemination)

Partners developed a general handbook and

guidelines for application in their countries.

Establishment of local and trans-national

networks for the further development

after the end of the project

During the project partners collaborated

actively and now are ready to develop new

cooperation initiatives in the field.


8

3. Evaluation of project management/implementation process

• Positive aspects / opportunities

Project management was positive; the continuous monitoring activity helped the

partners to follow both technical (actions to be implemented, results to be obtained,

deadlines) and administrative trends (expenditures situation, deadlines).

Technical coordination was based on a continuous exchange and confrontation, the

periodic steering committees and skype conferences allowed to monitor project progress

and to promptly solve eventual problems and misunderstandings.

• Internal and external difficulties encountered

Main difficulties faced during the project were:

1. the project was characterized by strict implementation times: this caused the

necessity to compress work times with an overlap in the project phases.

2. The resignation of CRPC director (1st December 2011) and the designation of a new

responsible (January 2012) caused a temporary discontinuity in the management,

even if the constant presence of the consultant society assured the maintenance of

the relations with the partners and the respect of the deadlines (progress reports).

Once the new director was established, the activities went on with a full continuity

with the past.

3. the Greek partner faced some difficulties in the intermediate phases of the project

(July 2011- December 2011); this caused a delay in the fulfilment of task C and in

the training courses (task D). Greek partner didn’t participate to the steering

committee held in July in 2011 in Smolyan.

• Partnership/core group cooperation

Partnership was not homogeneous as regards the competences in Civil Protection and

the experiences in European projects. Despite these differences, all partners

demonstrated a strong will to cooperate and exchange experiences.


9

• Cooperation with the Commission

The relations with the commission were positive. Some doubts were solved thank to the

prompt answers by the officer.

In December 2010 the coordinator participated to the meeting organized by the

Commission in Brussels, where information on reporting modalities and other

administrative aspects were given.

• Comments on European value added

The project allowed the construction of a European partnership working on a common

issue. The beneficiaries, that usually operate at local level on their territories, had the

opportunity to get in touch with different experiences and realities, increasing the

process of European integration.

• Lesson learnt and possible improvements

Main lessons learnt on management are:

It is fundamental to assure a constant and continuous management to the project

The creation of a working group cohesive and motivated allow to get good results

It is important to assure the same referents by the beginning to the end of the

project, changes in the referents risk to create managements gaps.

Possible improvements to be considered for similar projects in future are:

Projects that forecast consecutive implementation phases linked one to the other (i.e.

study and analysis, training, experiences, publications) need more time for each

step;

the adoption of initial strategies to create a cohesive working group (individuation

of referents for every partners; sharing a common technical language, knowledge

and sharing of every partner cultural/technical background).


10

4. Activities

In the following table a detailed comparison between initially planned and actually

implemented activities is presented. Every activity is evaluated in a qualitative way.

Phases Planned activities Implemented activities Qualitative evaluation

Establishment of the

steering committee

with representatives

from each

beneficiary.

Four Steering

Committees were held.

To all meetings, hosted

and organized by each

partner in its country, all

partners participated.

Only ADEP could not

participate to the meeting

held in Bulgaria.

In occasion of the

meetings projects events,

(transnational

workshops, final

conference) were

organized to reduce

travelling costs.

Management meetings

were very useful to

evaluate together the

state of the art of the

ongoing activities and to

decide how to face next

steps.

All partners participated

very actively, with the

only exception of the

absence of ADEP in the

2nd Steering Committee.

Every Steering

Committee had its

agenda, a set of slides

presented by each

speaker and final minutes

shared by every partner.

Establishment of a

local management

group by each

beneficiary.

Every partner organized

its local management, to

implement the activities

at local level and to

cooperate with Civil

Protection Groups and

other stakeholders.

The local management

worked well, making

possible to implement

project activities at local

level.

Phase 1

Preparatory

Set up of the trans- At the beginning of the The TWG, being


11

national Technical

Working Group

(TWG).

project TWG was

constituted; it

represented the technical

guide of the project.

Every partner designed a

technician, as component

of the group.

constituted by technicians

specialized in Civil

Protection processes,

assured a good technical

level to the project.

Collection of best

practices

By the way of a common

form, every partner

described its best

practices and from other

European countries in

the field of disaster

management systems.

The implementation of an

initial common form was

surely important and

positive since it allowed

to collect information and

to compare them. It was

not so easy to collect

information in other

European countries, not

directly involved in the

project.

Analysis of

experiences with

SWOT-Analysis

The following step was

collected best practices

evaluation through

SWOT analysis

Evaluation of collected

experiences was

important to share a

methodology with

partners.

Phase 2

Collection of

best

Practices

Elaboration of a

report

Bulgarian partner

collected all information

and elaborated a final

report.

A strong effort to

harmonize collected

information made it

possible to write down an

exhaustive report.

Phase 3

Training of

Civil

Training of the Civil

protection Units

Every partner carried out

training courses for Civil

Protection Volunteers on

It is not easy to give a

qualitative evaluation of

the courses, since the


12

Protection

Units in

IDMS

the concept of IDMS. organization and the

experiences were

different in every

country. Anyway a large

number of volunteers was

involved in these courses

in every country.

Development,

testing and

evaluation of IDMS

prototype

On the basis of the lines

established during the

steering committees and

of the results of the study

of the best practices,

every partner elaborated

its IDMS system; after it

was tested and evaluated,

an IDMS manual was

written to describe it.

The large differences

between local, regional

and national realities,

made it necessary to

define different IDMS

(instead of a unique one).

Definition of a

common IDMS

concept (handbook)

Partners elaborated and

shared a common

handbook where the

main components of an

IDMS are presented.

A significant effort was

made to extrapolate

common and general

indications on the

concept of IDMS. The

result was the handbook,

translated in all partners

languages.

Phase 4

Development

of IDMS

systems for

the CP-

organizations

for each

beneficiary

Dissemination

events

Two transnational

workshops and a final

conference were

organized. These events

represented the occasion

for an active exchange of

Thank to the events it

was possible to establish

an exchange of views

with local realities on

these technical issues.

Results spread was


13

views between partners

on the IDMS concept

and to present to local

stake holders project

results.

positive also because it

was supported by several

dissemination/project

materials (leaflets,

reports, website, ...).


14

5. Presentation of the technical results and deliverables

The deliverables and results of SKIPASS project are presented in the following pages.

They are listed individually following the list of deliverables (see Form T).

TASK A

Deliverable A.1 Technical and Financial interim and final reports as required

The Coordinating Beneficiary elaborated the progress reports with the assistance of an

external technical consultant. The Progress reports were sent to the Commission in the

required times (30th June 2011 and 31st December 2011).

The partners reported regularly to the coordinator according to the indications

established in the management kit, a document prepared by the coordinator.

Deliverable A.2 Meetings and continuous dialogue with the European

Commission (ECHO)

During the project the Meeting with EU Commission was set up in Brussels on 18th

December 2010.

The dialogue with the European Commission was essential to increase the added value

of the project and to give flexibility to the project in order to pursue in the best way its

objectives.

The contents of the meeting were transferred to SKIPASS beneficiaries.

Deliverable A.3

Efficient and outcome-oriented project management focused on

European Added Value and Sustainability at Partnership and local

beneficiary level

The project management was guaranteed by the Coordinator supported by a specialized

enterprise - ST Consulting. ST Consulting collaborated both on administrative aspects

and technical management aspects (coordination).


15

The management staff assured the success of the Steering Committee and planned

Skype Conferences (for example Agenda and Minutes drafting).

Project Management was strategic for SKIPASS project. It guaranteed:

o management of project timetable (actions, meetings, reporting)

o organization and management of Steering Committee meetings

o integration between actions management and financial management.

Deliverable A.4 Steering Committee Meetings

The steering Committee Meetings were hold regularly during the project life. The list of

the meetings is presented in table 4.

To contain travel and subsistence costs the steering committee meetings were connected

to the trans-national events (Conferences and workshops), organized immediately after

or before the event.

The coordinating beneficiary sent out an agenda in proper time before each meeting, on

which the other committee members could comment or add points. The coordinating

beneficiary also ensured proper preparation before each meeting, by sending out

meeting documents, presentations etc. in advance and giving clear indications to all

members of what to prepare or read before each meeting. Minutes were taken from each

meeting and a project task list was evaluated and updated for each meetings. These

documents are available for the members online in a document archive. These

procedures (preparatory and organizational) were followed for each meeting.

Table 4. Management meetings carried out during the project

Date Type Site Participants

25th February 2011 1st Skype conference ON LINE All partners

5th May 2011 2nd Skype conference ON LINE All partners

23-24th May 2011 Steering Committee Meeting (called

“SKIPASS Kick Off meeting”) Siòfok (HU) All partners

19 July 2011 Steering Committee Meeting Smolyan CO-CRPC, AB2-


16

(BG) Smolyan, AB3-LBDCA

– AB1-ADEP Absent

2nd November 2011 3rd Skype conference ON LINE All partners

18th November

2011 4th Skype conference ON LINE All partners

29th February 2012 Steering Committee Meeting Patras (GR) All partners

31st May 2012 Steering Committee Meeting Venice (IT) All partners

TASK B

Deliverable B.1 Project Website

SKIPASS project has its website www.civilprotectionskipass.eu.

The website has three sections.

The first section is the public window for the project.

The second section is for the local networks of relevant stakeholders. This has a

subsection for each beneficiary, with room for sharing documents, possibility to

announce events, subscription to receive newsletters, calendar functions.

The third section is dedicated to communication and cooperation among the

beneficiaries equipped with the web-facilities for online project management.

The project website has represented an important tool for the communication network

within the partnership of the project, for communication with relevant local

stakeholders and for general external communication and dissemination of the projects.


17

Image 1 The website homepage

Deliverable B.2 Layman’s report

The Layman’s report was written at the end of the project with a description of the

project, objectives, activities, main results and recommendations. The report is linked to

the webpage.

Also the Layman’s report contributes to disseminate knowledge about the project in a

simple language easy to be understood also by non-technicians.

Deliverable B.3 Local Stakeholder Workshop and creation of network

Every partner organized at least one local workshop:

- CO-CRPC: one local workshop on February 22nd , 2011


18

- AB1-ADEP S.A.: one local workshop on June 28th 2011

- AB2-Smolyan: 3 local workshops on March 10th 2011, May 11th 2011 and t May

31st 2011

- AB3-LBDCA: one local workshop on May 20th, 2011

For every meeting were produced several materials: photos, agenda and/or other

(signature book, minutes).

Every beneficiary already had networks and collaborations with various key

stakeholders necessary to work with prevention and preparedness. The objective of the

workshops was to involve the local stakeholders in the development of a collaboration

scheme for integrated disaster management, identifying roles, resources, knowledge,

tasks and needs for all stakeholders.

Deliverable B.4 Publication on website of results from workshop

The web-site was used to disseminate the meetings dates and some materials.

Deliverable B.5 Two Leaflets (one at project start, one near the end)

During the project life were prepared 2 leaflets about the project:

1. the first with description of objectives, activities and results of SKIPASS project

2. the second one with a short description of results

The leaflets were written in English and translated in the local languages.

The official leaflets (in English) were printed and delivered to the partners.

Deliverable B.6 Dissemination of the project integrated in the PR-activities of each

beneficiary

Each beneficiary carried out several dissemination activities on the project:

CRPC


19

Dissemination in occasion of the exercitation of 18th September: 1 video, TV

broadcast, press articles

Article on “Quaderni di Protezione Civile” n. 4

AB1. ADEP S.A.:

The project and its aims and objectives were disseminated through the official

website of ADEP S.A. (www.adep.gr):

http://www.adep.gr/news.php?id=223

A press release was distribute to local internet media for the Local Stakeholder

meeting (28 June 2011), the Training seminar for the Volunteers (25-28 January

2012) and the Steering Committee meeting in Patras (28 February 2012):

1. www.symboulos.gr/index.php?view=details&id=38%3A-------

skipass&option=com_eventlist

2. http://patrasevents.gr/Events/b0b698e7-f6b3-4b5c-bf48-

36d1d6bf4f03/skipass

3. www.econews.gr/2012/02/23/imerida-ethelontikes-organwseis/

4. www.thebest.gr/news/index/viewStory/109396

AB2.Smolyan:

1. The Project Manager and Deputy Regional Governor Nedyalko Slavov gave

an interview to the local radio “Fokus” on 25th March 2011

2. On the website of the Regional Administration – Smolyan was published

information about the project on 15th March 2011: http://www.region-

smolyan.org/news.php?id=465

3. The local TV channel broadcasted information about the project.

4. The Regional Governor Stefan Staykov has a meeting on 21st April with His

Excellency Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Ambassador of the Republic

of Italy in Bulgaria Stefano Benazzo. It was discussed the present project as

well as the possibilities for new projects and meetings. The Italian

Ambassador invited the Regional Governor for a meeting in the Embassy.


20

The Italian Ambassador was interested in and asked the Internet-side of the

project as well as the coordinates of the Italian Partner.

AB3-LBDCA

Dissemination activities:

3 articles in regional newsletters (March, May, November 2011)

March: www.balatonregion.hu/balatoni_gazdasagi_forum/public/m1d.php?d=1001

May: www.balatonregion.hu/balatoni_gazdasagi_forum/public/m1d.php?d=1014

November: www.balatonregion.hu/balatoni_gazdasagi_forum/public/m1d.php?d=1057

20 articles published on-line

The website was used to share all dissemination materials (even materials written only

in one local language); in this way every beneficiary could communicate to the others

the activities carried out and the materials produced in order to spread good ideas for

dissemination or to give the possibility of choosing to translate some of the materials in

other local language.

TASK C

Deliverable C.1 Collection of European/World-wide Best Practices for IDMS in

Civil Protection

The partnership collected existing Best Practices and Innovative approaches to

Integrated disaster management systems, the collection was done by search via internet,

contacts and networks. A specific form for the description of each Best Practice was

developed in order to obtain a homogenous structure for the description of each BP. In

the development of this structure various parameters on which the BP’s differ from each

other were identified. With these parameters the BP’s can be systematized and mapped

in order to get an overview of the spectrum of approaches in more dimensions.


21

Image 2 The form for collecting the Best Practices

BEST PRACTICE

IDMS Local Description Form

І. Introduction

1. Characteristic of the region

1.1 Territorial level (local / regional / national/ international

1.2 Description of context

2. Civil Protection]

3. Legal framework]

4. Risk Management

ІІ. Description of IDMS

1. Types of IDMS

What is emergency about? 1. floods 2. avalanches 3. fires 4. technological disasters 5. others ...

2. Description of IDMS (How is it working? What is the procedure?)

3. Draw a flowchart

ІІІ. Crisis Management 1. Risk assessment

a) Program Risk Assessment

ІV. OFFICE (Call center) 1. Technical equipment 2. Main tasks 3. Organization

1. Communication connections 2. Information connection 3. Systems for monitoring 4. System for early warning to the population

4. Subsystems

V. Forces for crisis response [involvement, role, responsibility, …]

1. Institutions

2. Rescue services

3. Citizens, companies

4. Red Cross

5. Volunteers

VІ. Training in IDMS [Are there any courses? How many courses they do in a year? How many people were trained? Who dothe training course? What are main topics?]

VІІ. Conclusion

1. Necessity of build IDMS


22

Deliverable C.2 Trans-national Best Practice Workshop

A transnational workshop was organised with the participation of beneficiaries (absent

ADEP). The input for the workshop was the identified BP’s of the beneficiaries and the

SWOT-analysis and a first draft of the report together with a presentation of the

preliminary results giving an overview of the collected BP’s.

The organizer (AB2-Smolyan) invited representatives of local civil protection

organisations of host beneficiary. It was sought to have a broad representation of

participants with various roles, competences and experiences.

The workshop lasted two days. The activities were a combination of presentations,

group sessions and plenary sessions with the focus on the two last. There were three

main phases in the workshop: 1) Analysis of the Best Practices and SWOT-matrix made

by each of the participants. The work forecast discussions, benchmark and learn across

the experiences, the weaknesses, strengths opportunities and threats of each beneficiary.

2) Analysis and discussion of the collected experiences evaluating their strengths and

weaknesses, identifying features which could be appropriate for the beneficiaries to

implement. 3) During the third phase the participants detailed how an IDMS system

could look like and how it can be implemented with respect to the specific strength,

weaknesses, needs and challenges of the beneficiary.

Deliverable C.3 e C.4 Database of BP’s and Report on Best Practices

The report, based on the inputs from previous actions was elaborated, and all Best

Practices were put into a database. This action started before the transnational workshop

in order to deliver inputs to the workshop. Subsequently the report included and

analysed the results and findings of the workshop. The database of the Best Practice in a

structured form was described in the report.

The database is available on the project website and in the Bulgarian partner’s website

(http://idms.smolyan.info/index.php).

The report gives an overview (mapping) of existing BP’s and describes the process of

using these experiences for an appropriate design of an IDMS for each beneficiary.


23

Deliverable C.5 SWOT-Analysis for each Beneficiary and collection of local Best

Practices

In this action a SWOT-analysis was made by each beneficiary on its Disaster

Management System. The central question was: what are the S.W.O.T of the civil

protection system with regard to the aim of creating an effective IDM? Further each

beneficiary identified and described existing good practices in its system (the partners

followed a common template-form – see scheme 3 - to have a homogenous structure for

the descriptions).

Scheme 3. Structure of the Local SWOT analysis

Internal analysis

SWOT - analysis STRENGHTHS WEAKNESSES

OPPORTUNITIES

STRATEGIES S-O

“develop new

methodologies to exploit

the strengths”

STRATEGIES W-O

“eliminate the

weaknesses to enable

new opportunities”

Ext

erna

l ana

lysi

s

THREATS

STRATEGIES S-T

“exploit the strengths to

defend against threats”

STRATEGIES W-T

“identify defence plans

to prevent external

threats increasing the

points of weakness”

Once SWOT analysis were collected, it was necessary to develop a comprehensive

SWOT analysis on the abilities. The proposed scheme is a pyramid with three levels.

On the top of the pyramid is the organizational level; in the middle of the pyramid is the

operative level and on the base of the pyramid is technical level.


24

Scheme 4. Comprehensive SWOT analysis scheme

Organization

al level

Operative level

Technical level

TASK D

Deliverable D.1 Local Training Modules and courses for CP-volunteers

The training modules were an implementation of three main activities and lasted 5 full

days, following this scheme:

1. two days focused on IDMS management in a IDMS office (operational

communication, information room with dispatch centre);

2. two local operational intervention on the field;

3. one day on the psychological reactions of the intervening personnel.

Italian partner developed the training course module, like as following table.

Table 5. The common module of the IDMS courses

Timetable Topics Skills

Prevention activities in local

areas

Volunteers role, emergency answer, different phases (attention, readiness, alert, ...), intervention tools, emergency management Day 1

Local Emergency local area analysis, risks definitions, operative


25

plan tasks, emergency tasks, coordination, etc.

Local base of operations

Emergency plans, organization plan of Civil Protection, management of risks

Day 2 Operatives activities

Groups dynamics, working in a base of operations, system simulators,...etc.

Kind of interventions

fire prevention, safety area, assure rescue interventions

Priority of intervention Tools

of interventions

How operate during a rescue action ... Use of radio, boat, electric shock devices, signal systems, ... Day 3

Intervention planning* How define a rescue operation

Type of situation* How take part in a rescue action, different type of rescue situations (car accident, railway disaster, water rescue, ...) Day 4

Use of tools* Simulation of rescue

Psychological environment

stress definition, type of stress, burnout concept (experience of long-term exhaustion and diminished interest), Yerkes-Dodson rules, etc.. day 5

Stress management How manage a stress situation, relaxing methods, breathing methods, etc..

*Activities that it could be done outdoor.

Deliverable D.2 Local Training using modules developed in cooperation between

beneficiaries

Every partner carried out training courses based on the common modules previously

described (Deliverable D.1).

Dates of training course:

o CO-CRPC: 15-16-17/04/2011 - 11/5/2011 - 22/06/2011

o AB1- ADEP: 25-28 January 2012

o AB2- Smolyan: 1-4 November 2011

o AB3- LBDCA: 21, 22, 23 October 2011 Kaposvár – 28 October 2011

Balatonföldvár 29 October 2011 Kapsovár


26

Deliverable D.3 Expert/Practitioner Exchange

The SKIPASS project has guaranteed the exchange of knowledge and experiences on

training issues. The Technical Working Group (TWG) had a important role to give

technical indications to the partnership. TWG members elaborated and used feedback

from pilot training modules and indications from local stakeholders to improve the

quality and efficiency of IDMS and training issues.

Deliverable D.4

and D.5 Evaluation workshops and evaluation reports

Each beneficiary evaluated its training action both as regards to the skills acquired by

the participants and by an exchange of views with local stake holders.

TASK E

Deliverable E.1,

E.2, E.4, E.5

IDMS: prototype, testing and evaluation of prototype testing,

guide/manual

Based on the output of task C each partner developed a IDMS prototype. Each partner

set down a group responsible for creating the prototype. During the development of the

process the prototype was presented and discussed with the Local Civil Protection Units

and relevant local stakeholder network.

Each beneficiary described its prototype on IDMS Manual, available on the project web

site.

The IDMS prototypes were evaluated by volunteers groups of the Civil Protection

Units.


27

Deliverable E.3 Trans-national workshop on exchange of experiences with

prototype and benchmarking actions

A trans-national conference-workshop was organised with the participation of all

beneficiaries, where the preliminary results were presented and discussed between

representatives of each beneficiary.

The conference aimed at the possibility of exchanging advices and good experiences

between the partners.

The transnational workshop was held in Patras on 28th February 2012.

The workshop showed that each beneficiary had a different starting point and that it can

be complex for the participants to understand well enough the systems and context of

the other beneficiaries.

During the workshop the partnership also decided how to present the results of project:

the handbook, the individual guidelines, …

Deliverable E.6 Final Trans-national conference for dissemination and exchange

workshop

The final Conference was organized in Venice (Italy) on 1st June 2012 with the

participation of all beneficiaries. Relevant stakeholders, Civil Protection Organizations

and related knowledge centres/universities, international organisations of civil

protection, the European Commission and other relevant organizations and associations

were invited.

The main focus was to disseminate the results of the project together with findings and

recommendations. Expert speakers were invited to give presentations.

The conference was a good opportunity to make networks about the themes treated at

the conference and thus contributing to the sustainability and long term impact of the

project.


28

Image 3 Agenda of Final

Conference

Deliverable E.7 Handbooks, guidelines and procedures for each Beneficiary

(extended version of handbook for dissemination)

The final common documents represent the main deliverables of the project and are

composed by:

a. General handbook: on the base of the IDMS system developed by every beneficiary,

a general handbook, containing the general description, procedures and suggestions

of the IDMS system, was created. Every partner translated it in its national

language.

b. IDMS Guidelines (one for each beneficiary) consisting of suggestions from the

partners to integrate the IDMS on the specific conditions in their countries: in

English and national languages.

Both deliverables are contained in a unique publication (see Image 4), available on line

(in pdf format) in English.

The handbook is an important tool for CP-personnel and for training of CP-personnel,

but it can also be useful for dissemination in particular to other Civil Protection

Organisations.

9:15 Registration of participants

9:45 Opening and welcome speeches

10: 00 The Civil Protection system in the context of SKIPASS project Civil Protection of Veneto

10:20 The operative room of Fire fighting Corps: description, interaction

with Civil Protection, future prospective

Fire fighting Corps of Venice

10:40 The application of IDMS: the experience of testing in Veneto CRPC

11:00 Operating room activities of Civil Protection of Veneto Civil Protection of Veneto

11:00 Coffee break

11:20 Presentation Project SKIPASS CRPC

11:40 The application of IDMS (state of art, experience, constraints and

future development): the case of Greece

ADEP (Greece)

12.00 The application of IDMS (state of art, experience, constraints and

future development): the case of Hungary

LBDCA (Hungary)

12:20 The application of IDMS (state of art, experience, constraints and

future development): the case of Bulgaria

Regional Government of Smolyan

(Bulgaria)

12.40 General discussion

13:00 Lunch Break


29

Image 4 Table of content of handbook and guidelines


30

6. Evaluation of the technical results and deliverables

• General lesson learnt

SKIPASS activities confirm that the Civil protection is a complex and articulated

system which is similar by an organizational point of view to a network model.

Different administrations, agencies and institutions can contribute to the civil protection

activities and each one of them may be provided with their own operative room. In case

of large emergencies, operative rooms must have the capacity to collaborate and it is

therefore necessary to develop common procedures with the help of specific

technologies and know-how.

SKIPASS project allowed to connect different realities and partners with various

experiences and competences, that were deeply involved in the project and exchanged

know-how and competences also about the more strict technical aspects (from

organization procedures to technical characteristics of equipments).

• Strengths

The project brought to a critical review of the actual procedures and to the definition of

new procedures able to connect different operative rooms. The project process focused

on the general characteristics of the multi operative rooms systems to direct the

evolution process of local disaster management systems.

The project pointed out the importance of the volunteers’ role not only in the

emergencies activities but also in the disaster management systems. Fundamental is the

continuous training on operative rooms procedures.

• Possible challenges and/or improvements to be tackled

through further action

The future challenge will be to align the various IDMS developed on national and

regional territory of the European Union and to create a dialogue within them through

consistent and correlated behaviour, methods and procedures, while retaining certain

differences due to local specificities. Only this large effort will make it possible in a

near future for the system to become a European System of Civil Protection with multi-


31

level logic of coordination of the territories and skills: from the Municipality, to the

Province, the Region and the European Union Member States.

• Recommendation to stakeholder, partners, authorities in

charge, national and EU institutions

In order to facilitate the management of civil protection emergency that requires the

assistance of multiple institutions or administrations or states, is becoming more

strategic and essential to integrate and harmonize the operative rooms.

It is necessary to invest in a organizational and political model, which requires to adopt

a common language, concert and adapt organisational procedures, enable the exchange

of information and data in real time and provide common operative tools. In a word, the

model to develop is a model of interoperability in the rescue.


32

7. Follow-up

• Comparison between initial and current follow-up measures

Initial follow-up measures current follow-up measures

IDMS-System in SKIPASS project is

perceived like a continuous learning process,

where all the components and the skills

involved are permanently updated from the

SKIPASS project staff and Civil Protection

groups involved in project activities.

Training schemes implemented in the

project will be used also for the future

training activities.

Moreover the already trained

volunteers will give an active

contribute to future training activities.

Civil Protection groups and organizations

involved will dedicate part of their activities to

IDMS maintenance and application as

standard civil Protection Prevention activity.

Ownership of IDMS will be guaranteed

through SKIPASS project methodologies as

strategic part of results continuity.

The Civil Protection groups and

organizations will continue to develop

the project issues in the effort to

improve the designed IMDS

skipass mountain patrols safe system for integrated...

Documents