by James Rush [written first in 2008 - brought back to Big Med for another run on September 14, 2009]

Public Health officials tell us that a Pandemic is only a matter of “when” and not “If.” If organizations plan to require employees to work from home during a Pandemic, it just makes sense to periodically test an organization’s ability to function in a decentralized mode before the actual Pandemic. Social distancing is a tried and true method of limiting contagion, so

1. Develop standard office procedures for decentralized work, establish standards and measurements for working from home, including expected work outputs. Train all employees on working from home procedures. Prepare Management Information Systems (MIS) division to relocate to an alternative site using hardened, redundant communication systems.

2. Select a division (or other operating unit) monthly and announce all employees will "Work from Home" and will sign on to their electronic workspace from home for a week.........Afterward, determine what worked well and what did not. Learn, implement corrective actions, and re-test in 30 days.

3. Once a quarter have a multi-divisional (or Total Program) "work from home week"....Determine what worked well and what did not. Learn and re-test as soon as practical.

4. Once a year have an agency-wide work from home week.  Learn, implement corrective actions and replace ineffective managers and executives as necessary. Firing ineffective employees may be distasteful and unfortunate, but the Nation's future and the lives of millions of American's may depend on organizational Readiness.

It makes no sense to me to identify a few "Mission Essential" functions like the Executive Command Group and then find out in an actual disaster that the Executive Command Group cannot effectively control the necessary functions of the Agency. It would seem a little late to say to Americans "Your Social Security checks will be discontinued until further notice." ...or tell hospitals "We'll process your reimbursements as soon as the pandemic is over."

I really do appreciate how hard this effort will be, but I don't see any real alternative to hard work and proactive measures. I believe that problems experienced by one Division during a "Work from Home Week" would almost certainly be common problems that can be corrected for all future Divisions exercising the "Work from Home" program. Thus, the learning curve may be much shallower than initially expected. These exercises will be extraordinarily challenging but they are the stuff of true Readiness and the essence of real Emergency Management.

Advanced Policy Directives

Imagine how many hospitals in America will fail if the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and major American healthcare insurance companies fail to  implement simplified reimbursement and billing procedures to hospitals for use during a Pandemic. The saddest aspect of this would be the same Agency that predicted the Pandemic failed to prepare for it. It needs to be said that HHS and DHS both have wonderful dedicated folks working hard and serving America with distinction. This paper is not intended as a criticism to any agency or firm.  I am simply concerned about our overall lack of National Readiness as evidenced by a lack of advanced policy directives.

The same concept of Readiness applies to many other Private and Public Sector organizations providing critical products and services. How many Americans have sufficient financial reserves to survive a 12-18 month Pandemic if their place of employment should fail and work is scarce? Are state unemployment offices prepared to pay the number of unemployment claims associated with a Pandemic?

The fact is checks have to get out, payroll has to be electronically transmitted, Healthcare and Public Health services need to be provided, Public Safety, and Public Works (like waste management) services have to be performed. We had better understand how essential services will be provided using a decentralized paradigm before Disaster Day (D-Day).

I know I have been harping on things for a long time now; like developing a patient evacuation system and a citizen relocation and resettlement plan for select Federal Planning Scenarios where relocation is necessary.  New Orleans during hurricane Katrina taught us how critical emergency services were, especially for persons with disabilities, patients and seniors. I hope those very sad lessons were in fact learned and not just observed (as one IAEM-Lister put it). A repeat of that 2005 experience would be a failure of historic proportions and a repeat of what was already a National disgrace.

Also, we need to develop Federal Reserve Inventories (FRI) of food (Meals Ready to Eat), medical supplies and equipment, over the counter (OTC) medications, chronic condition pharmaceuticals, test kits and supplies and life's necessities ..........like the things everyone seeks to purchase just prior to a forecasted hurricane or major snowstorm. 

There is nothing America can’t do when it puts its collective mind to it.  We proved this point in 1969 when we put a man on the moon and we can do it in Domestic Preparedness. It is time to set lofty goals and to achieve them for America’s sake.

Economic Consequences of Swine Flu Outbreak

by Geary Sikich [August 24, 2009]

Introduction

In an article entitled, “Matthews borrows against turkeys” (By Iain Dey, Sunday Telegraph, published on 24/06/2007) the following excerpts reveal the economic impact that H5N1 is already having:

Bernard Matthews, the poultry farmer whose eponymous empire was blighted by avian flu earlier this year, has been forced to refinance his business by securing its future against his stock of turkeys.

Sales of the company's "bootiful" turkeys have been hammered by the health scare. Recent research suggested sales of both frozen and fresh turkeys across the UK are down around 30 per cent in the wake of the outbreak. The last figures provided by the company suggested a 20 per cent plunge in sales.

Bernard Matthews has now been refinanced through an asset finance deal struck with Burdale, a subsidiary of Bank of Ireland, and supported by a handful of other major international lenders.

The loans have been secured against some of the company's 56 farms, its plant and equipment, as well as its livestock, according to banking sources.

Matthews founded the business in 1950 with 20 turkey eggs and a second-hand incubator. The business turned over about £400m last year and employs more than 6,000 people worldwide. The company produces 7m turkeys in the UK every year.

The avian flu disaster is estimated to have wiped around £70m from Matthews personal fortune. The business is run from his Norfolk mansion, Great Witchingham Hall, set in 36 acres, which he restored from dereliction.

My colleague, John Stagl and I transcribed some notes as we were preparing to discuss the economic consequences of a pandemic at a luncheon in Chicago in 2006.  We had come to the conclusion at the time, that a pandemic will have a domino effect worldwide.  We all know that a pandemic will create a unique set of conditions that impact society, the business markets and medical support systems.  One of the differentiating characteristics of a pandemic, unlike any other disaster, is its wide-spread impact.  We have already seen that this impact has occurred without human-to-human contagion occurring.  The economic consequences to the poultry industry have been dramatic.

The following are the initial albeit speculative impacts that we can attribute to a pandemic:

Substantial number of opportunities will exist as a result of company failures

Let’s take a look at one sector, transportation.  Within that sector take the slice dealing with passengers and cargo.  Just on the basis of moving people and stuff you can already project the complexity.  Below are the world’s thirty busiest airports in 2005 ranked by passengers and by cargo.  What was your estimate that a person, who knew that they had a highly infectious form of Tuberculosis, would be capable of flying internationally on several flights?  Now, take that projection and add the variability factor and random character of the event and think about the consequences in the context of flying from any one of these airports with a case of influenza.

NOTES: Total passengers enplaned and deplaned, passengers in transit counted once. Total cargo loaded and unloaded, freight and mail (in metric tons).

Source: Airports Council International World Headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland. Web: www.airports.org. 

During its four-month run in Toronto, ending in June, SARS killed fewer than 50 people.  Even China and Hong Kong, the two places hardest hit by the virus, suffered ‘only’ 648 deaths in total.  On April 23, the WHO sent out a warning against all unnecessary travel to Toronto, Beijing, and China’s Shanxi province.  Travel to and from Toronto plummeted overnight.  Overall SARS cost the city’s hotel industry more than $125 million Canadian; more generally, the tourism industry in the province of Ontario lost more than $2 billion Canadian in income and jobs.

In another example, an article titled, “Just plane gross” published on August 14 2007 in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ): 

A major Canadian brokerage firm has added its voice to those warning of the potential global impact of an influenza pandemic, suggesting it could trigger a crisis similar to that of the Great Depression. 

Real estate values would be slashed, bankruptcies would soar and the insurance industry would be decimated, a newly released investor guide on avian influenza warns clients of BMO Nesbitt Burns.  

"It's quite analogous to the Great Depression in many ways, although obviously caused by very different reasons," co-author Sherry Cooper, chief economist of the firm and executive vice-president of the BMO Financial Group, said in an interview Tuesday.

"We won't have 30-per-cent unemployment because frankly, many people will die. And there will be excess demand for labour and yet, at the same time, it will absolutely crunch the economy worldwide." 

A leading voice for pandemic preparedness said the report is evidence the financial and business sectors - which have been slow to twig to the implications of a flu pandemic - are finally realizing why public health and infectious disease experts have been sounding the alarm.  

"I think that this particular report really signifies the first time that anyone from within the financial world, when looking at this issue, kind of had one of those 'Oh my God' moments," said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.  

"The financial world is finally waking up to the fact that this could be the boulder in the gear of the global economy," he said, suggesting a pandemic could trigger an implosion of international trade unlike anything seen in modern history.  

"All the other catastrophes we've had in the world in recent years at the very most put screen doors on our borders. This would seal shut a six-inch steel door," Osterholm said.  

Cooper, a highly influential figure in the Canadian financial sector, wrote the report with Donald Coxe, a global portfolio strategist for BMO Financial Group.

They warn investors the economic fallout out of a pandemic would inflict pain across sectors and around the globe.  

Airlines would be grounded, transport of goods would cease, the tourism and hospitality sectors would evaporate and the impact on exports would be devastating, Cooper wrote.  

"This would trigger foreclosures and bankruptcies, credit restrictions and financial panic," she warned, suggesting investors reduce debt and risk in their portfolios to be on the safe side.  

Absence of purchases due to illness and psychological reactions to a pandemic will present a new form of business impact that is currently not assessed as part of the traditional business impact assessment; and as such, it is not addressed in any business continuity, disaster, crisis management or recovery plans.  Another area that has not been addressed in impact assessment or plans is the loss or restriction of a company’s revenue.  Traditional plans start with an assumption that the marketplace is still viable; a potentially false assumption.  Traditional plans are designed to get an organization back into their market as quickly as possible – RTO, RPO and MTO come to mind (RTO = Recovery Time Objective, RPO = Recovery Point Objective, MTO = Maximum Tolerable Outage).  In the case of a pandemic markets may no longer be viable.  If your market is materially impaired, a consequence is that the revenue that is derived from that market may be restricted and/or completely gone. 

In another article, published on October 7, 2005 (NewsTarget.com) entitled, “Economic Shock Waves From Avian Influenza Spreading Faster than the Disease” the following is pointed out: 

The Avian influenza crisis in Asia has already caused more than $10 billion dollars in damage in the economies of the most-seriously affected countries, but this is just the tip of the iceberg compared with the possible global economic consequences of a human influenza pandemic according to a study, Thinking Ahead: The Business Significance of an Avian Influenza Pandemic, released today by Bio Economic Research Associates (bio-era™). 

“According to the quantitative measures we developed for assigning relative economic risk exposure to infectious disease outbreaks for countries in Asia, Hong Kong and Singapore are especially vulnerable to the initial economic shock waves that would ensue from a pandemic,” said James Newcomb, Managing Director and principal author of the bio-era report. “However, the secondary impacts on other countries, especially China, could have far-reaching impacts for economies around the world, including the US,” he added.  

Other key findings in the report include:  

Avian influenza is the latest in a series of major livestock disease outbreaks that have caused more than $60 billion in economic damages worldwide over the past 15 years.

Concerns about a possible influenza pandemic are already providing stimulus for increased spending and accelerated research and development efforts in some parts of the economy, ranging from custom microarray chips for rapid diagnostic testing to antiviral drugs.

Governments around the world have recently made commitments totaling an estimated $1.4 billion to stockpile oseltamivir (Tamiflu)—an antiviral drug produced by pharmaceutical giant Roche.

Manufacturers of flu vaccines are gearing up for what may be an unprecedented global demand for a vaccine effective against H5N1 variants, but it is not known whether the vaccines being developed now would be effective against the influenza strains that might emerge.

New “DNA vaccines” offer an alternative to conventional production technologies and could speed the vaccine industry’s ability to respond, but these technologies are not yet approved by FDA.

“We’ve been looking at how things might unfold under six very different but highly plausible scenarios for the evolution of the outbreak,” said Stephen Aldrich, President of bio-era. “In the process, we’ve made assessments of potential outbreak risk by country, the relative economic exposure by country — and how selected industries and companies are likely to be affected.” 

Several steps can be taken to prepare your organization.  First, put in place an effective surveillance program; meaning, expand your business impact assessment activities.  In my article, “"Futureproofing" - the Process of Active Analysis” written in 2003, I recommended that we rethink the business impact assessment process: 

Traditional analysis such as that performed at the initiation of the business continuity plan development is recognized as necessary to develop a baseline of information.  However, it should also be recognized as having certain limitations: 

·         Pre-Event - Best guess as to what could occur

·         Static - Best guess based on available facts and models 

Traditional analysis creates undecidability due to the inability to predict all behavior in a dynamic environment.  Therefore one should adopt an Active Analysis methodology, such as that developed by Logical Management Systems, Corp. (LMS).  LMS' methodology is based on the U.S. Military's "Joint Special Operations Targeting and Mission Planning Procedures" (JP 3-05.5 10 august 1993).  It is detailed herein. 

The advantages that can be realized by adopting this methodology and maintaining an active analysis process are: 

·         Uses Static Analysis as a basis

·         Touchpoint complexity factors

·         Dynamic - based on creating a mosaic

·         Time Factors (Time Critical, Time Sensitive and Time Dependent) act as drivers 

Termed "Futureproofing" by LMS the active analysis process is designed to create a mosaic that enhances decision making by identifying behavior patterns in a dynamic environment. 

Active analysis can be subdivided into three categories of possible threats/occurrences that could befall an organization.  Dr. Ian Mitroff refers to the three categories as Natural Accidents, Normal Accidents and Abnormal Accidents.  I have renamed them and to differentiate the three aspects of each.  That is, the threat, the actual occurrence and the consequence of the occurrence. 

·         Natural Threats/Occurrences/Consequences consisting of such things as drought, floods, tornadoes, earthquakes, fires and other naturally occurring phenomena.

·         Normal Threats/Occurrences/Consequences consisting of such things as Economic Disasters, such as:

·         Recessions

·         Stock Market Downturns

·         Rating Agency Downgrade, etc.

Personnel Disasters, such as:

·         Strikes

·         Workplace Violence

·         Vandalism

·         Employee Fraud, etc.

Physical Disasters, such as:

·         Industrial Accidents

·         Supply Chain

·         Value Chain

·         Product Failure

·         Fires

·         Environmental

·         Health & Safety

·         Abnormal Threats/Occurrences/Consequences consisting of Criminal Disasters, such as:

·         Product Tampering

·         Terrorism

·         Kidnapping & Hostages, etc.

Information Disasters, such as:

·         Theft of Proprietary Information

·         Hacking, Data Tampering

·         Cyber Attacks, etc.

Reputation Disasters, such as:

·         Rumors

·         Regulatory Issues

·         Litigation

·         Product Liability

·         Media Investigations

·         Internet Reputation, etc. 

Please note Abnormal Threats/Occurrences/Consequences are becoming more of the norm than abnormal as we see the normalization of threats such as hacking and data tampering. 

Five key assumptions were used as a basis to for the developmental framework of the "Futureproofing" methodology.  These are: 

·    Assumption # 1: The modern business organization represents a complex system operating within multiple networks 

·    Assumption # 2: There are many layers of complexity within an organization and its "Value Chain" 

·    Assumption # 3: Due to complexity, active analysis of the potential consequences of disruptive events is critical 

·    Assumption # 4: Actions in response to disruptive events needs to be coordinated 

·    Assumption # 5: Resources and skill sets are key issues 

Based on the above assumptions and the results of the baseline analysis (static analysis) one realizes that the timely identification, classification, communication and response, management and recovery from a disruptive event are critical.  As depicted in the graphic on the next page over time uncertainty will decrease, as will available options for response and recovery. 

This is contrasted with increasing numbers of issues and higher and higher costs associated with response and recovery efforts.  As such, an organization should seek to continually analyze situations so as to develop a clear picture of the current state of the business system network.  Referred to as "Data Fusion - Constructing a Mosaic" by LMS; this is a process of getting enough bits and pieces of information in place in order to transform seeming chaos into recognizable patterns upon which decisions can be made.

Second, recognize that you cannot depend on public authorities (read this as government at all levels) to be there for your organization.  They will have too many issues to deal with and they will also be impacted by the pandemic – remember that 30% of the population could be affected; that means that civil authorities are just as susceptible to contracting the disease.   Your organization and its “value chain” must its own comprehensive plan for dealing with the business consequences of a pandemic.  Rethink the basis on which you developed your plan – talk to the risk management and strategic planning personnel in your organization and find out what they are looking at with regard to business expansion, contraction, risk mitigation, etc.  They should be very conversant as a result of the recent hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunami and general competitive forces in the economy.  Revise your business continuity plan.  Develop the ability, as an organization, to sequence back your operations while ensuring that your business system and its network (“value chain”) can maintain level of functionality while operating at reduced capability.  When your business system and its network reaches the state of minimum functionality, the organization can begin to conduct a campaign of "agile restoration" until it achieves a state of full functionality and a return to normal operations. 

If Only We Had Known…A New Paradigm for Planning Strategists 

In my latest book, “Integrated Business Continuity Planning: Maintaining Resilience in Uncertain Times” I asked: 

The table below is a look into the proverbial “crystal ball” at what could be some of the possible outcomes when the pandemic strikes.  

Conclusion: Seize the Initiative - It Makes Sense

Today business leaders have the responsibility to protect their organizations by facilitating continuity planning and preparedness efforts.  Using their status as “leaders,” senior management and board members can and must deliver the message that survivability depends on being able to find the opportunity within the crisis.   

Market research indicates that only a small portion (5%) of businesses today have a viable plan, but virtually 100% now realize they are at risk.  Seizing the initiative and getting involved in all the phases of crisis management can mitigate or prevent major losses.  Just being able to identify the legal pitfalls for the organization of conducting a crisis management audit: can have positive results. 

We cannot merely think about the plannable or plan for the unthinkable, but we must learn to think about the unplannable.  Business continuity planning must be overlapping in time, corrective in purpose complimentary in effect. 

References 

Drabek TE, Tamminga HL, Kilijanek TS, Adams CR. Managing multi-organizational emergency responses: emergent search and rescue networks in natural disaster and remote area settings. Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center. University of Colorado, Boulder CO, 1981 

Harris, Gardner, October 8, 2005 – New York Times; Bush Plan Shows U.S. Is Not Ready for Deadly Flu  

Meyer, Gerald C., "When it Hits the Fan: Managing the Nine Crises of Business," 1986 

Mittelstadt, Michelle, Dallas Morning News, Sunday, September 11, 2005 “Four years after 9-11, Katrina reveals flaws in emergency planning” 

Mitroff, Ian, I., Avoid "E3" Thinking, Management General, 1998 

Mitroff, Ian, I., Smart Thinking for Crazy Times: The Art of Solving the Right Problems, 1998 

Sikich, Geary W., The Financial Side of Crisis, 5th Annual Seminar on Crisis Management and Risk Communication, American Petroleum Institute, 1994 

Sikich, Geary W., Managing Crisis at the Speed of Light, Disaster Recovery Journal Conference, 1999 

Sikich, Geary W., Business Continuity & Crisis Management in the Internet/E-Business Era, Teltech, 2000 

Sikich, Geary W., What is there to know about a crisis, John Liner Review, Volume 14, No. 4, 2001 

Sikich, Geary W., The World We Live in: Are You Prepared for Disaster, Crisis Communication Series, Placeware and ConferZone web-based conference series Part I, January 24, 2002  

Sikich, Geary W., September 11 Aftermath: Ten Things Your Organization Can Do Now, John Liner Review, Winter 2002, Volume 15, Number 4 

Sikich, Geary W., Graceful Degradation and Agile Restoration Synopsis, Disaster Resource Guide, 2002 

Sikich, Geary W., “Aftermath September 11^th, Can Your Organization Afford to Wait”, New York State Bar Association, Federal and Commercial Litigation, Spring Conference, May 2002 

Sikich, Geary W., "Integrated Business Continuity: Maintaining Resilience in Times of Uncertainty," PennWell Publishing, 2003 

“It Can’t Happen Here: All Hazards Crisis Management Planning”, Geary W. Sikich, PennWell Publishing 1993. 

Sikich, Geary W. and Slavik Nelson S., Industry Expectations Concerning Healthcare Response to OSHA 1910.120 "Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response"; Environmental Health Manager; Spring Issue 1990, VOL. 4, No. 1. 

Sikich Geary W., "The Emergency Management Planning Handbook", McGraw Hill, 1995.

Sikich Geary W., Stagl, John M., "The Economic Consequences of a Pandemic", Discover Financial Services Business Continuity Summit, 2005. 

Zuckerman, Mortimer B., New York Daily News, 20 June, 2005, “A Nightmare Scenario – H5N1 Pandemic” 

Economic Shock Waves From Avian Influenza Spreading Faster than the Disease Source: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/3/prweb220610.htm 

The following citations are taken in total from The Lancet carried an article entitled, “H5N1 influenza pandemic: contingency plans” (The Lancet 2005; 366:533-534 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67080-8): 

1. World Health Organization. Cumulative number of confirmed human cases of avian influenza A/(H5N1) since 28 January 2004. May 4, 2005 http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/country/... (accessed May 8, 2005)

2. Ungchusak K, Auewarakul P, Dowell SF, et al. Probable person-to-person transmission of avian influenza A (H5N1). N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 333-340. CrossRef

3. Zeitlin GA, Maslow MJ. Avian influenza. Curr Infect Dis Rep 2005; 7: 193-199.

4. Kirkbride HA, Watson J. Review of the use of neuraminidase inhibitors for prophylaxis of influenza. Commun Dis Public Health 2003; 6: 123-127. MEDLINE

5. World Health Organization. National influenza pandemic plans. 2005: http://www.who.int/csr/disease/influenza/nationalpandem... (accessed May 8, 2005).

6. GlaxoSmithKlineRelenza datasheet. Issue number 5. June 8, 2000. Evreux, France: Galxo Wellcome Production, 2000: http://www.msds-gsk.com/uk_presc/11057406.pdf (accessed June 1, 2005).

7. Hoffmann-La RocheTamiflu datasheet. Core data sheet version 1.5. May, 3 2004. Basel: F Hoffmann-La Roche, 2001: http://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/t/Tamiflucap... (accessed June 3, 2005).

8. The MIST (Management of Influenza in the Southern Hemisphere Trialists) Study Group. Randomised trial of efficacy and safety of inhaled zanamivir in treatment of influenza A and B virus infections. Lancet 1998; 352: 1877-1881. Abstract | Full Text | PDF (80 KB) | MEDLINE | CrossRef

9. Treanor JJ, Hayden FG, Vrooman PS, et al. Efficacy and safety of the oral neuraminidase inhibitor oseltamivir in treating acute influenza: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000; 283: 1016-1024US Oral Neuraminidase Study Group. MEDLINE

10. McKimm-Breschkin JL. Management of influenza virus infections with neuraminidase inhibitors: detection, incidence, and implications of drug resistance. Treat Respir Med 2005; 4: 107-116. MEDLINE

11. Kiso M, Mitamura K, Sakai-Tagawa Y, et al. Resistant influenza A viruses in children treated with oseltamivir: descriptive study. Lancet 2004; 364: 759-765. Abstract | Full Text | PDF (95 KB) | CrossRef

12. Tran TH, Nguyen TL, Nguyen TD, et al. Avian influenza A (H5N1) in 10 patients in Vietnam. N Engl J Med 2004; 350: 1179-1188. CrossRef

13. Imuta F, Toyoda M, Toyoda T. New application method of zanamivir with a straw. Pediatr Int 2003; 45: 366-367. MEDLINE | CrossRef

14. Murphy KR, Eivindson A, Pauksens K, et al. Efficacy and safety of inhaled zanamivir for the treatment of influenza in patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled multicentre study. Clin Drug Invest 2000; 20: 337-349.

15. Cass LM, Brown J, Pickford M, et al. Pharmacoscintigraphic evaluation of lung deposition of inhaled zanamivir in healthy volunteers. Clin Pharmacokinet 1999; 36 (suppl 1): 21-31.

16. Hill LS, Slater AL. A comparison of the performance of two modern multidose dry powder asthma inhalers. Respir Med 1998; 92: 105-110. MEDLINE | CrossRef

17. Webby RJ, Webster RG. Are we ready for pandemic influenza?. Science 2003; 302: 1519-1522. CrossRef

18. Tzeng HM. Nurses' professional care obligation and their attitudes towards SARS infection control measures in Taiwan during and after the 2003 epidemic. Nurs Ethics 2004; 11: 277-289. MEDLINE | CrossRef

Editor's note: Big Medicine is very proud to present a sneak preview of the first chapter of W. David Stephenson's upcoming book 'Democratizing data to transform government, business & daily life'. I had the privilege of hearing/seeing David in action over the past several days at the Ogma gathering at NPS in Monterey, California. His thoughts on social media provide a compass heading for many of us as we consider where we need to go and how we're going to get there. - HN [July 4 2009]

     1

Access to data
triggers transformation

by W. David Stephenson

When many of us go to Washington D.C., we like to visit historic landmarks.

We don’t necessarily like carrying maps and guidebooks, especially since most try to be comprehensive, while you might be particularly interested in one aspect, such as Lincoln, so the other material would be irrelevant to you. Now you can use the D.C. Historic Tours application on your iPhone[i]. Just type in “Lincoln,” and it instantly creates a walking tour only of Lincoln-related places, then guides your actual path block-by-block. As for the content of that tour? Your author and other willing volunteers located the places to include in the tour and uploaded the data and photos about them to the Web for use in the application!

In New Zealand, Aukland drivers use an application that uses real-time data from the government’s InfoConnect program[ii] to show where there are traffic jams & then zero in on a local traffic cam. They can change their routes to steer around the jams.

In the Netherlands, companies have the option of filing a single set of numbers instead of the multiple reports to multiple agencies that they formerly had to file. Participating companies can save up to 25% on their reporting costs, and the agencies can actually do a better job regulating the companies.[iii]

What makes these innovation work?

Free, real-time access to unfiltered, valuable data.

Data pervades our lives.[iv]

Government agencies and companies collect data around the clock about our births, deaths, education, jobs (or lack thereof), our race and gender, our spending and saving, our health. Then they use that data to make decisions affecting our incomes, our buying options, even whether we qualify for special benefits.

Data determines how much governmental assistance our communities receive.

Data determines which services companies will market to us, and where they’ll build stores to deliver them, as well as which they will scuttle because data says there’s not enough demand.

Data determines where roads will be built, then our GPS devices process data from government satellites to guide us down those roads and help us find services.

Yet, for all of data’s influence on our lives, you and I have surprisingly little direct access to it ourselves to use as we might like.  That’s particularly true with the most valuable type, real-time data. Because it is made available as it is gathered, this data can be used to automate equipment and services and/or help us make decisions, rather than simply analyze the past, as can be done with historical data.

Despite those benefits, this data is more likely to remain buried in data warehouses and be costly and/or difficult to obtain. When we do get it, it’s often in a form that is difficult to use.

That’s outrageous.

As you will see, if you did have access to that data we could do our work more efficiently and cheaply, engage in more productive political debates, and even contribute directly to new ways to deal with some of our era’s most pressing problems, such as global warming or health care cost containment.

Yet, there’s little sense of public concern, and even less outrage, about our relative lack of unfettered access to critical information.

Frank DiGiammarino, former vice-president of strategic initiatives at the National Academy for Public Administration and now the Obama Administration’s deputy coordinator for Recovery Implementation, says that’s a major problem in the United States (and worldwide, for that matter):

“We as a country need to treat data as a national asset and resource. It is a valuable commodity but we don't treat it that way. We don't think in terms of where it is. In current structures, it is stovepiped but, needs to be moved fluidly  …. The default question has to be why can't we share it? Data has to become a core component of how government works and how leaders think of dealing with issues.”[v]

We’ve been in this situation regarding critical information before: in the 16^th century when it was the written word that was inaccessible to all but a few.  How that situation changed – in less than a decade – may provide us some valuable insights into how direct access to data could come about in far less time, and the revolutionary change it would bring.

Luther provided a roadmap

In 1517, Martin Luther’s theology, especially his 95 Theses attacking the practice of selling indulgences and other forms of corruption in the Roman Catholic Church, created controversy. It also mobilized the church establishment to defend the status quo.

In hindsight, the means Luther used to spread his Reformation message had as much lasting global impact as the message itself.

Gutenberg invented the printing press in 1439.  In 1502, a printer opened shop in Wittenberg, where Luther wrote and taught,[vi]  but printed materials were still relatively rare in 1517.

In 1514-5, Luther began to lecture on the Psalms. He had psalters printed for his students, with wide margins so they could write notes.  He removed medieval priests’ commentary, forcing the students to interpret the Bible themselves. [vii]

Thus began Luther’s efforts, crowned by his translation of the New Testament into German during 1521-2[viii] (and eventually all of the Old Testament as well) to make the Bible directly accessible to the lay public, through printed copies they could own and interpret themselves, instead of having to rely on the priesthood as intermediaries.[ix]

Printing and distribution of his revolutionary message was immediately effective, at least as measured by the amount of printed matter. In Germany alone, 390 editions of Luther’s works were published just in the year of 1523. By 1525, about 3 million copies of pamphlets relating to Luther were printed.[x]

Making the Bible changed the very nature of scholarship. As Diarmaid MacCulloch observed in The Reformation: a history:

"Now that printed copies of texts were increasingly available, there was less copying to do, and so there was more time to devote for oneself … Copying had been such a significant activity that in previous centuries of Christian culture, it had been given a privileged place against original thought.  Now the order was reversed, and original thought became more important.[xi]

In a tangential result of the impact of the newly-empowered congregations, some of the early seeds of democracy were planed that were to flourish in the New World. Zwingli, another of the early Reformation leaders, won the right of each parish in a village to decide by majority vote of the male members which religion they would adopt.[xii]  

Management consultant Wendy Jameson pointed out to the author the parallel between Luther’s impact and what might happen if we liberate data:

"Martin Luther was effective because he both translated the Bible into language that the general public could understand and made it widely available through printed versions.   The confluence of translation and availability enabled the transformation. A literate person in a home or community could now read it to the other community members, the genesis of the empowered layperson.

“The Internet today serves as the analogous means for widespread distribution of data, combined with new tools that make data understandable to everyone.  For the first time, data will become a valuable tool for many to whom it was an impenetrable mystery in the past."[xiii]

However, we tolerate a mind set regarding data not all that different from what was commonplace with the written word before Luther. Sara Wood, a leader in the nascent movement to make data both available and understandable to the general public, says that:

 “It may not be obvious to everyone, but there exists an important problem of data apathy.  No one cares about data. And by no one, we mean in the democratic sense…. “Good data should affect policy - but politicians don't care because they know their voters don't care. People who vote don't care because data is not engaging, not to mention accessible, usable, and relevant to their lives.”[xiv]

Data apathy is no longer tolerable. Data is so important to our lives that we must all care about data and demand access to it.

The transformation from democratizing data

The time has come to emulate Luther’s example and make data as freely available as he made the printed word ubiquitous

The results, as demonstrated by the limited examples from around the world where democratizing data has taken hold, are astonishing.

Take some simple steps to transform your organization’s raw data into a more versatile and usable form, place that data at the center of your organization’s operations, make it accessible to everyone who really needs it, and everything changes.

Data that has been “processed, organized, structured or presented in a given context so as to make [it] useful” is elevated to the status of information.[xv] It is this more elevated, valuable sense of data as information that will be used throughout this book.

A handful of tools that you will learn about in this book, none of them radically innovative by themselves but revolutionary when combined, make it simple for organizations to make valuable information available to those who need it, when and where they need it, to improve their decision-making and actions. Since that was never possible before, the potential for change in every aspect of how we work and live is profound and pervasive.

Let us call this transformation democratizing data:

"Democratizing data makes it automatically available to those who need it (based on their roles and responsibilities), when and where they need it, in forms they can use, and with freedom to use as they choose -- while simultaneously protecting security and privacy."

It seems audacious to claim that an act as modest as modifying the way you treat your organization’s raw data can lead to sweeping economic, governmental, and social change.

That is precisely what Democratizing Data will demonstrate.

For far too long, we have been more concerned with creating data warehouses in which to store data than we have been with actually using that data to its full potential. In fact, it’s rather astonishing that organizations have prospered to the extent they have, considering how limited access to real-time, actionable information has been.

This remained true even recently, when we have had powerful computers to gather, accumulate, and disseminate data. It still remained costly and difficult to deal with data, so access to it was typically limited to management, analysts, and other elites. Even these power users rarely had access to the most important data, in real-time, non-aggregated form, which allows the user the most freedom and makes its ability to affect current actions most powerful.

Putting data squarely at the center of everything we do, and making it usable – and shareable -- by everyone, not just those with statistical skills, is a dramatically different approach from how we’ve regarded data in the past.

Democratizing data sparks wide range of change

Making data automatically available when and where it is needed triggers widespread and fundamental changes.

To begin with, with easy access to real-time data, we can make better decisions. As we will explore in Chapter 3, for the first time groups can easily analyze data collaboratively. The result is fundamentally different from when an individual analyzes it in isolation. Different perspectives come into play, assumptions are challenged, and the chances of uncovering problems in advance that might otherwise only be discovered after a decision is reached are increased.

Because this data is machine-readable, i.e. encoded in a way that a computer or machine can automatically scan or process, it can provide the real-time information necessary to operate a wide range of devices, which has both economic and quality-of-life benefits.

Perhaps the most common example today of real-time data spawning an entirely new industry would be global positioning systems (GPS). Location-based services (LBS), just one components of the range of businesses made possible by GPS, are expected to grow by 104% through 2011.[xvi] Can you imagine the potential economic development and quality-of-life opportunities if all of the non-confidential geospatial data compiled by government agencies was routinely released on a real-time basis?

In the political realm, debate and disagreement will always be with us, so one should not over-estimate the benefits of access to data. However, beginning debate on proposed legislation from a pool of data that was accessible to all on a simultaneous basis  might increase the chances of reaching consensus or at least isolating the most extreme positions that were clearly not supported by data. The more data is analyzed and debated before passage of legislation, the less likely it will be that critical data that only comes to light after passage would undermine the law itself, or significantly alter public opinion.

Similarly, when data on government operations, campaign finance and “earmarks” are made public, it is much harder to conceal corruption or unjustified disbursements. For example, making campaign contributions public allows watchdog groups and the media to create visualizations that explore possible correlations between contributions and votes that might favor a particular contributor. 

Equally important, although few organizations have tried it so far, making real-time, actionable data available to your entire workforce (with the exact amount and type available filtered depending on your role: this is not a one-size-fits-all approach) can elevate all workers to the status of “knowledge workers.”  That will help workers increase their efficiency and reduce costs. They will be able to see which other employees have access to the same data and therefore are likely to share tasks, responsibilities and oversight and interests, engage in the kind of “collaborative data analysis” mentioned above. They can see potential synergies, overlaps, and gaps between programs that must be addressed.

Democratizing data essential today

The lack of broad public access to real-time data was regrettable in the past. Given the unprecedented worldwide organizational and social changes facing government, the global economy, and our personal lives today as a result of the global crisis that began in 2008, it is intolerable.

We need every potential tool and piece of information at our disposal to deal with these conditions.

For business people, given the massive layoffs over the past few years, it is essential that your remaining workers be able to be as efficient and effective as possible. As mentioned above, democratizing data will make it possible for the first time to give your entire workforce the raw, real-time information needed for them to work more efficiently, new tools to help them better analyze that information, and to collaborate as never before.

Businesses will also be able to significantly reduce their non-labor costs when data is democratized. They will be able to improve business process management (BPM) and supply-chain management because all of those needing to coordinate procedures, procurement, and logistics will be able to communicate more readily.

In addition, embedded-devices[xvii] activated by real-time data will have access to it at the same time, automating previously manual processes. Data will give us usable information on everything from traffic to our personal carbon footprints to our health conditions in applications and devices that will allow us to act on that data and improve our lives.

The regulatory system, in shambles after revelations of lax enforcement in the past decade, was at least in part to blame for the sub-prime mortgage scandal and its cascading effects on the overall economy. Regulation can be reinvigorated through a shift to “smart” regulation, which substitutes a single data file for countless traditional forms. All of the agencies responsible for reviewing a company’s operations will be able to share data simultaneously, allowing coordinated review and enforcement for the first time. This should improve the quality of regulatory review and uncover suspicious activities sooner. The same single-business reporting approach will allow companies to reduce their regulatory compliance costs, perhaps as much as 25%.[xviii]

In the past, effective regulation would inevitably have driven up corporate reporting costs, because the only way to have increased scrutiny would have been to require filing more forms. Now a radically simplified, but more informative and integrated, system can benefit government, the public, and corporations.

Equally important, government agencies and corporations alike must rebuild public confidence after widespread revelations of shoddy management, lack of oversight, and imprudent investments that brought the global economy to the brink of disaster in 2008-9. They will be able to do so through democratizing data.

Demeaning, “trust us” platitudes are no longer enough in the face of consumer and voter outrage. Instead, by releasing large amounts of unedited data directly to stockholders, voters and watchdogs, they can take a “don’t trust us, track us” approach, inviting unfettered scrutiny by watchdogs, the media, and the public.

The soaring federal budget and deficit have united the political spectrum in demands to cut out waste and inefficiency, and to open up the legislative process so that the public can be heard.

Vivek Kundra, the former District of Columbia chief technology officer, named by President Obama as the first chief information officer of the United States, refers to this approach as the “digital public square.”[xix]

“… technological advances now allow people from around the world unfettered access to their government. Through these advances, constituents can hold their government accountable from the privacy of their own homes. The District of Columbia is bringing people closer to government through collaborative technologies like wikis, data feeds, videos and dashboards.  We’re throwing open DC’s warehouse of public data so that everyone—constituents, policymakers, and businesses—can meet in a new digital public square. “[xx]

Kundra, incidentally, was originally to Democratizing Data’s co-author. His new responsibilities required that he recuse himself, so he didn’t actually write or edit any of the book. However, because of several long Saturday discussions of the democratizing data philosophy during the fall of 2008 --- long before he assumed his new job -- and a small project on the future of transparency that the author did for him in his prior job, Kundra’s  thinking is a powerful influence throughout the book.

Finally, and perhaps most exciting, democratizing data can lead to innovation.

It is now possible, by allowing free access to real-time data streams, to unleash “crowdsourcing” of new services for government and industry alike, better serving diverse groups’ needs at low or no cost.

Crowdsourcing, as explained in the book by the same name by Jeff Howe,[xxi] is the phenomenon in which communities, whether intentional or ad hoc ones, come together using Internet resources, especially open-source software, to accomplish a task collaboratively, by each providing a small portion of the overall solution.[xxii]

Even better, the more organizations embrace this revolution, the more the benefits will multiply, because democratized data inherently fosters linkages and synergies between programs and services that share the same data, and open source solutions that all can share and improve upon. Because these programs use global standards, free to everyone, the revolution can and must be global in nature, benefitting nations of all sizes and development status.

stumblesafely: the revolution in microcosm

Democratizing Data will introduce you to some revolutionary examples of the democratizing data transformation. One, for instance, integrates all data to help a state handle natural disasters or terrorist attacks. Another provides emergency room doctors with critical information in life-or-death situations. A third gives soldiers dealing with the unprecedented challenges of asymmetrical warfare all of the data they need to both fight battles and wage “soft peace.”

But to get a basic introduction to the approach and its power, let’s begin with a far more modest example.

A group of young Washington D.C. application developers developed “stumblesafely” to help them and their friends navigate home on foot safely after a convivial evening in bars in the city’s Northwest section. While stumblesafely wasn’t intended to change the world, it turns out to tell us a lot about democratized data’s power to transform every aspect of our lives.

Illustration 1.1 Stumblesafely

 “stumblesafely” was an after-hours product of DevelopmentSEED, a leading D.C. web development firm that does ambitious online projects for clients such as the World Bank, the UN Millennium Campaign, and the American Institute of Architects.

In fall 2008, Kundra announced a first-of-its-kind contest that caught the company’s attention.

The Apps for Democracy Contest (“Apps” being developer-shorthand for computer applications) offered nominal prizes for developers who took one or more of the real-time data feeds that the city issues as part of its “Citywide Data Warehouse,[xxiii]” and developed an “open-source” application that others are free to use or improve upon that, in some way served the public interest.  How the entries served the public interest was intentionally left vague to encourage creativity.

Oh, and the teams had only a month to prepare their entries.

The DevelopmentSEED team jokingly called Apps for Democracy “Iron Chef for developers,” referring to the TV show in which chefs are given a limited number of ingredients and length of time to create dishes.  Their “ingredients” were the 270+ data feeds the city issues through the Citywide Data Warehouse, and the time frame the one-month deadline to submit applications. Given those limits, the team decided to have some fun, and do an “Apps for Democracy” entry that they’d like to use themselves.

According to firm strategist Eric Gundersen, stumblesafely, which they call a “guide to bars and avoiding crime in NW [Washington]”[xxiv]:

“.. was one of those ideas that happened when we were working late one night. We figured it would be cool to show off some of our favorite drinking spots in DC. We like to joke that it doesn't matter when or where you start drinking for stumblesafely to help you, since you can see crime data based on daytime, evening  or night.”[xxv]

As you can see from the screengrab, stumblesafely is attractive, resembling an aerial view of the neighborhood at night, with large squares that represent popular bars (“stumblesafely” is very popular with bartenders!), gray circles that show the location of recent robberies, red x’s that show assaults. Following the map are phone numbers to call a cab (for those who really had too much of a good time), and the right sidebar lists real-time Twitter “Tweets” referring to nightlife in the area, re-enforcing the message that this isn’t just a canned, static map, but a real-time tool.

Cute, and probably fun for pub-crawlers, but a closer analysis of stumblesafely shows that it combines most of the important elements regarding free access to valuable data that this book will explore, and which underlie much more serious work:

·         Creatively use data formerly inaccessible to the public.
The District of Columbia issues more than 270 “structured” data feeds from their massive city databases (Structuring data, as we will explore in the next chapter, means bracketing the data with “tags” that describe it and give it context,” such as <description> or  <phone>. DevelopmentSEED used 6 of the feeds, most of which are delivered automatically as new data is entered, so they are always current.
The names illustrate the wide range of data, especially geo-spatial data, that agencies compile and could be valuable to the public or within agencies as well (since, as we will see, most workers also didn’t have real-time access to it in the past):

·                     DC Crime Data

·                     DC Road Polygons

·                     DC Liquor Licenses

·                     DC Water Polygons

·                     DC Parks

·                     DC Metro Stations

·         Use universal standards.
The DC data is valuable because it is identified by a standardized “tag” system that attached additional information to the data so it can be recognized and processed by any program or any device that is programmed to draw in that data. Those tags are based on global standards that are free and accessible to all, which increases their versatility, and makes it easier for others to copy and improve upon pioneering applications.

·         Visualize data & evaluate it collaboratively, which makes it valuable.
Most of this data would be incomprehensible to non-statisticians in its traditional tabular form. However, when presented graphically, the data instantly becomes understandable to the general public.

Also, the fact that the DevelopmentSEED staff examined the DC data feeds collaboratively rather than individually improved the quality of results. When many perspectives examine the same information, the interpretation will be richer and more nuanced than what even the most brilliant individual could do in isolation.

·         Use open-source software.
Open-source software (i.e., software whose source code is freely available to use and improve) is usually cheaper than proprietary alternatives, and built on open standards, just as the structured data feeds are. DevelopmentSEED only used open-source applications to create stumblesafely, increasing this versatility and ease of adapting the program to other cities. Gundersen said, “A couple of years ago we could not have done this kind of stuff with government data because the tools were not there. Now open-source tools are more powerful and more secure than proprietary applications. We were able to build this in a couple of days with the only cost being our time.”[xxvi]

·         Create 0pen-source solutions to encourage constant improvement.
One of the contest rules required that the solutions themselves be open source, so that others could copy and/or improve on them. This will significantly speed adoption of democratized data solutions worldwide, because other governmental entities that begin to offer the necessary structured data feeds can easily examine then share or improve on the work of the pioneers.

·         Create mashups.
Each data stream by itself would only provide a small part of the information needed to create interesting and informative maps. However, when all 6 of them were combined – “mashed up” (in developers’ lingo) -- the picture was comprehensive and valuable.

·         Don’t prejudge what data to not release. Someone may find it valuable.
Management may be tempted to decide that certain data doesn’t need to be released because it would be of little interest to others. However, it was combining 6 of the data feeds that DevelopmentSEED used that made stumblesafely possible. Some data feeds may be appealing only to a relatively small number of people, but may be invaluable to them (the long-tail phenomenon at work[xxvii]), so access shouldn’t be arbitrarily limited.

·         Partner for innovation.
DevelopmentSEED’s Eric Gunderson learned after the Apps for Democracy that stumblesafely had some unexpected users: the DC Police. The city administrator told him that the police “… were using our map to better visualize crime hot spots near bars to improve their coverage during the key times of the day when it mattered. This is a great example of a positive externality coming from open data… open data will have many benefits for taxpayers that we can’t even imagine now. It is not like the government would have ever paid us to build a drinking site!”[xxviii] When government agencies – or private companies, for that matter – release data, others will use them in creative ways that may create new revenue streams for the company or help a government agency better serve the public interest.

As an added bonus, Gundersen says that the project for fun directly benefited some of their prestigious regular clients: “the same mapping tools powering the bar site are also being used to help USAID map [food security operations in Africa] and by non-profits like New America to map public health data in the U.S. In fact it was New America that helped pay for a lot of the mapping work with Drupal that gave us the tools to do this.  Everything we do ends up getting reinvested back in. It feels great.”

On further examination, stumblesafely looks like much more than a group of friends’ fun little project for themselves and their buddies.

It’s a harbinger of a new era in which free access to data leads to innovation in every aspect of our lives.

Democratizing data happening now

stumblesafely isn’t the only example of democratizing data in practice today. This is not just a vision of possible transformation in the future. True, the amount of innovation is severely limited by the lack of freely-available structured data that is the underpinning of democratizing data.

Despite those limits, pioneers in government and industry worldwide are already realizing tangible results with innovative data-centric strategies that would have been impossible only a few years ago.

In the Netherlands, companies now have the option of filing a single data file with the government instead of the traditional 30-40 quarterly and annual reports to a wide variety of agencies. The change is possible because all of the agencies have reprogrammed their mandated reports so that they can automatically access relevant data from the unified file.  Multiple agencies can examine the company’s filing simultaneously, improving the quality of regulatory scrutiny. Participating companies can cut 25% off of their compliance costs. Australia will follow the Dutch government’s lead with a similar program in 2010.[xxix]

Wacoal, the Japanese apparel firm, had 32 different legacy IT systems in place, which it had added over a number of years. The company went to a new system based on universal access to the same data. As a result, they consolidated their financial reporting, shortened the closing of accounts by two days, and added real-time cash management.[xxx]

In the District of Columbia, Aki Damme, director of the District of Columbia’s IT ServUs team, had to manage a project to buy and install 6,000 computers in city classrooms for a high-visibility new program. The original estimate was that the project would take an entire year to complete. However, an expedited purchasing program and his ability to plan the installations using a Google Maps mashup cut the total length to only 7 weeks, and saved thousands of dollars in costs.[xxxi]

Agencies responsible for disaster preparedness and response in Alabama can now access “Virtual Alabama,” a comprehensive, integrated array of real-time geospatial information – right down to the layout of individual classrooms – that helps them change emergency evacuation routes, know instantly where response vehicles are located, and monitor real-time sensors locating chemical releases and their plumes.[xxxii]

The US Patent Office now allows individuals outside its staff to participate in the review of patent applications under the trial “Peer to Patent system” designed in part by NYU Law Professor Beth Noveck, now an Obama Administration official. The project promises to reduce the “patent thicket” that slows innovation.[xxxiii]

Although these examples are impressive, the organization that perhaps epitomizes the use of democratized data better than any other at the time of this book’s publication is the District of Columbia’s Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO).

Under former CTO Vivek Kundra, OCTO pioneered numerous innovations, including:

·         publishing a wide range of real-time data streams to invite public scrutiny and allow mashups[xxxiv]

·         introducing rigor and accountability to project management by treating each project as a “stock”[xxxv]

·         treating every worker as a knowledge worker, and giving them real-time data to do their jobs more effectively[xxxvi]

·         running the precedent-setting “Apps for Democracy” contest, which resulted in an astonishing array of crowd-sourced open source applications—and reaped a return on investment of 4,000% [xxxvii]

Now that Kundra has become the first CIO of the U.S. government, his innovations at OCTO will provide valuable clues to the kinds of changes he has already begun spreading throughout the US government. Those in turn will likely stimulate similar initiatives in the private sector and other governments worldwide. Accordingly, an entire chapter of the book will be devoted to a case study of his accomplishments there.

All of these examples, and more, will be discussed throughout the book.  Since, as mentioned above, these pioneering examples are made possible by international, open-source standards for handling data, it becomes very easy for other companies and agencies to launch their own programs of these sorts, building on the experience of the pioneers and adding to the “library” of data-based solutions to complex problems.

That will mean that those who begin democratizing data now can directly benefit from the case studies detailed in the book. The benefits, should other government agencies and companies move quickly to take the basic steps required, should increase exponentially because of the synergies between initiatives worldwide.

Keys to the strategic shift

Effective democratizing data initiatives require a paradigm shift from past ways of regarding data. The book will explain in depth these key goals:’

·            Make your organization data-centric.
 In the past, because the tools to distribute and use data were primitive, it was understandable that access to data was primarily second-hand. It was usually warehoused, embedded in proprietary software, and/or interpreted by an elite group of analysts and executives. Today, open source software, metadata and other tools that we will examine allow the data to remain independent, accessible to all whose jobs require access to it. Truly, data must be thought of as at the heart of everything the organization does.

·            Treat all workers as knowledge workers.
When data was hard to access and the software to interpret it costly, limiting access to real-time data to a relative few was justifiable. Now it isn’t. Every worker’s job performance and satisfaction can be increased by direct access to data (the exact mix of data delivered to individual workers will be determined on the basis of his or her role.)

·            When appropriate, release real-time data for outside use and scrutiny. 
Government agencies and businesses accumulate vast amounts of data that could be used externally, not only to earn public trust through transparency, but also (especially with real-time and geo-spatial information) to create valuable new services that can complement what the agencies and companies do themselves, or, in its machine-readable form, to drive embedded devices in a wide range of products. That data is also more valuable when it is released in the original, granular form in which it was collected, rather than as interpreted and aggregated by others.  Today the default must be to release data. Exceptions to that rule must be justified.

·            In no way does a democratizing data strategy justify breaches in personal privacy and/or security standards.
In fact, as we will see, establishing the right access standards can mean people ranging from those with no security clearance at all to top-secret clearance may all access portions of the same data set based on the situation and their roles, but with widely-differing specific levels of access. A comprehensive democratizing data strategy should in fact help uncover security and privacy breaches rather than encourage them.

·            Above all, adopt a new collaborative attitude toward data.
In the past, if data was shared at all, it was usually sequentially, because data was effectively captured and altered by various proprietary programs. Now, with open-source, open-access programs and structured data, data can be more effectively analyzed and used if it is shared on a real-time basis. Collaborative data analysis is fundamentally different than analysis by individuals, harnessing different perspectives and expertise to yield a richer, more comprehensive picture that benefits from all of these perspectives and is more nuanced and balanced.

Democratizing Data’s overall goal is to introduce you to the benefits of democratizing data and to the simple tools you can use to structure and automatically distribute data, the fundamental building blocks of the democratizing data approach.

Along the way, you’ll learn that democratizing data is both a process and an attitude. The more people who can access data and use it, the more valuable the data will become, the more workers will be able to improve their performance, government and corporations will become more accountable and transparent, and average people will become both better consumers of data and be able to use it to become active participants in creation of goods and services.

Let us begin to explore this profound transformation and its implications for our government, our workplaces, and our daily lives.

Given the monumental challenges facing us today, we don’t have a moment to spare, and data, used in innovative ways, can provide many of the solutions.

The conceptual model most frequently acknowledged in scholarly research is the "Source-Channel-Message-Receiver-Effect-Feedback" model (Lasswell 1948 as cited in Tierney, Lindell and Perry 2001). This multi-stage model should be viewed as a process that may be experienced differently, at any stage, by various populations. To illustrate, the source (emergency manager, media) may be seen as credible or not; the channel (text message, phone call-down) may be accessible or not; the message may be understood in varying degrees; the receiver may not receive the message; the message may generate desired behavior (as possible) within the target population; receivers may then seek additional information to onfirm the message content (Tierney, Lindell and Perry 2001). What is key to understand is that emergency messaging takes time to deliver, interpret, and act upon.

Build trust and credibility. Direct connections between the source and the recipient can enhance credibility and build trust. Emergency managers, media personnel, advocates and social service providers can all reach out to target populations through direct media campaigns, presentations at public meetings, targeted brochures, service on each other’s boards, and working with community groups. The more frequent the contact, the more likely it is that trust and credibility can develop. However, it is crucial that the person(s) involved in the direct connection be able to connect with the target population in a sincere fashion. Doing so may take considerable time with some populations reticent to shed decades of mistrust.

Educate the media. The media can serve as an important and crucial point of dissemination for warning messages. However, media personnel rarely have enjoyed the benefit of training or education in such information dissemination. Further, in the urgency of the moment, crucial details can be glossed over or reported inaccurately. To address these concerns, it is important to develop prior relationships with the media, to engage in mutual training workshops with authorities and the target population, and to practice warning transmission. Mutual aid agreements with the media, though unusual, may serve as a useful public service activity between all parties.

Link with advocates and service providers. Typically not involved in warning dissemination, preparedness, and response initiatives, researchers concur that local community organizations and service providers should be more fully involved. Local providers and advocates know their populations well and can serve as resources for preparing and assisting target populations. Their expertise as important linking organizations to the target populations cannot be overlooked.

Use social networks (family, friends, neighbors). Warning research consistently demonstrates that receivers confirm the warning message with those they trust: their family members, friends and neighbors. Such social networks can be used to help with buddy systems, delivery of prophylactics, information dissemination, transportation, evacuation to emergency shelters and more. Authorities an motivate connections to social sources too, such as asking the media to have neighbors check on each other. Disaster research also shows that gender matters, in that women tend to want to respond to warning messages at higher levels than men. Women also tend to be more likely to shoulder responsibility for the target populations. Thus, engaging in outreach to women’s organizations (faith-based, civic, neighborhood, workplace) is a potential way to increase awareness and enhance the usefulness of social networks.

Understand that federal policies do not guarantee that emergency messaging will be delivered. Although FCC policies expect that closed-captioning will occur during emergencies, a number of exemptions have been granted to cable and satellite channels. Further, research suggests that even local networks experience difficulty in affording or providing caption during emergencies, especially rapid-onset events.

Develop and test message content for specific scenarios and populations with those populations. Research indicates that those at risk represent a useful source of information for message content. Accordingly, messages should be written, tested, assessed and revised in concert with those at risk.

Be specific, giving actions to be taken appropriate to the population. Audiences require that the source give specific information on actions that need to be taken. It is not enough, for example, to direct receivers to a location. Rather, specific information on the route and the resources that can be used to reach the location must be included. Or, if shelter-in-place is the recommended action, instructions on the best location or strategy to SIP is required. For a population that is unable to take the preferred action, alternatives must be given including the activation of social networks, linking organizations, and other viable, pre-established connections to the target population.

Repeat a consistent message through multiple sources and channels. All sources and channels used must give consistent, correct information. Variations from the official warning message cause confusion, increase confirmation behavior, and delay compliance. Pre-event training of sources should be undertaken to increase compliance with this principle.

Rehearse, exercise and assess message relays. Drills and exercises can include test messages coupled with an assessment or research component. Use opportunities to test content, for example, testing a message with a representative group during a severe but non-life threatening weather event.

Expand efforts to reach those at risk. People do not simply live with one life circumstance, such as using a wheelchair. For a low-income elderly paraplegic, for example, a warning device or television access may be financially impossible. If that person is also hard-of-hearing or socially isolated (more common with elderly men), expanded efforts may be necessary to reach the individual. Community and civic groups may be a source to raise funds and deliver assistive devices such as pillows attached to vibrating devices, visual smoke alarms, text messaging devices, protective kits, emergency bags, etc.

Develop educational and outreach programs. Those who understand their risk are more likely to take action. People who know what to do and who have undergone frequent training are more likely to take action. Empowering those able to respond may also reduce unwillingness to register as having special needs out of fear of privacy invasion or loss of independence.

Anticipate disbelief. Research indicates that most people, regardless of disability status, tend to not believe a warning message. Typically, most persons delay compliance until they have confirmed the message content with another source, usually a trusted social contact. To motivate compliance, those at risk must understand that the message applies directly to them and that their life is in immediate danger. Sources must connect to their target population.

Solicit feedback prior to actual implementation from target populations. The audiences they seek to reach should review warning messages for content. Focus groups can be used for this effort. Assessment of the focus group conversations and refinement of messages should follow.

The CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media (NCAM) is a research and development facility dedicated to the issues of media and information technology for people with disabilities in their homes, schools, workplaces, and communities. NCAM's mission is: to expand access to present and future media for people with disabilities; to explore how existing access technologies may benefit other populations; to represent its constituents in industry, policy and legislative circles; and to provide access to educational and media technologies for special needs students. For more information, please click on the following website: http://ncam.wgbh.org/ 

(October 2004 - September 2008). The Access to Emergency Alerts project unites emergency alert providers, local information resources, telecommunications industry and public broadcasting representatives, and consumers in a collaborative effort to research and disseminate replicable approaches to make emergency warnings accessible. For more information, please click on the following website: http://ncam.wgbh.org/alerts/.