Question #1: When we look at Hurricane Katrina’s worst effects

– what are the key issues, risks, and vulnerabilities?
– what combination of federal and state activities are affected?
– what primary mitigation and risk reduction measures are applicable?
– which aspects of preparedness are present and/or lacking?
– what pathways, solutions and ideas suggest ways to improve future results or outcomes?

Question #1: When we look at Hurricane Katrina’s worst effects on Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, and the aftermath of the Hurricane Sandy event which devastated much of the northeast including New Jersey and severely impacted a variety of infrastructures, what does it suggest as to the proper role of various states versus the federal government in preparing for, managing, and responding to massive natural disasters which feature maximum complexity, destruction, and disruption to our critical infrastructures?

WRITE THIS ESSAY FOR ME

Tell us about your assignment and we will find the best writer for your paper.

Get Help Now!

Question #2: Loss of the nation’s electric grid for an extended period of time (more than 15 days) is a real risk we must prepare for whether it results from natural disaster, accident, or terrorism. In determining the priorities that we must assign to diverse segments of our society for protection, rapid restoration, and sustained operations, what are the pros and cons behind supporting the rapid restoration of military and government activities first before other aspects of the civilian and industrial economy?

Question #3: Vulnerability assessments of critical infrastructure are seen as essential in any risk management strategy. Given rates of periodically significant natural disasters which can disrupt and destroy infrastructure (such as earthquakes, floods, tornados, etc.) in many areas, how best should energy sector and government leaders and managers gauge key risks, assess vulnerabilities, and prepare adequately for future emergencies?

Question #4: You now work for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and are part of a team tasked to update the NIPP 2013: Partnering for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience document. The DHS team lead has asked everyone to review the NIPP 2013 document and provide at least three (3) recommendations regarding updates, changes, modifications, additions, deletions, etc. that you would propose for potential inclusion into what would become a “new” NIPP 2016 document. Identify your three (or more) recommendations, and provide an accompanying explanation/rationale for each recommendation.

Grading Rubric

Criteria/
Weight
Failure
(69 or below)
Below Standards
(70-79)
Good
(80-89)
Excellent
(90-100)
Length
Weight: 10%
Written responses do not meet the assigned length parameters; i.e., percentage based on how close to attaining assigned length requirement. Note: length parameters to be defined in mid-term exam instructions.
Written responses do not meet the assigned length parameters; i.e., percentage based on how close to attaining assigned length requirement. Note: length parameters to be defined in mid-term exam instructions.
Written responses do not meet the assigned length parameters; i.e., percentage based on how close to attaining assigned length requirement. Note: length parameters to be defined in mid-term exam instructions.
Written responses meet or exceed the assigned length parameters. Note: length parameters to be defined in mid-term exam instructions.
APA
Weight: 5%
In-text citations and reference list mostly does not conform to APA 6th ed.
In-text citations and reference list somewhat conforms to
In-text citations and reference list mostly conforms to
In-text citations and reference list conforms to

formatting; more than 6 deviations noted.
APA 6th ed. formatting; no more than 6 deviations noted.
APA 6th ed. formatting; no more than 3 deviations noted.
APA 6th ed. formatting.
Research
Weight: 15%
Research sources are a mix of lesser open-source references. Response does not have a reference.
Research sources are mostly a mix of relevant government/ organization websites with lesser open-source references provided. At least one (1) reference per question.
Research sources are somewhat a mix of scholarly, peer-reviewed articles and government/ organization websites; some lesser open-source references provided. At least two (2) references per question, of which one (1) is an external reference.
Research sources are mix of scholarly, peer-reviewed articles and relevant government/ organization websites. At least three (3) references per question; of which at least two (2) are external references.
Content
Weight: 70%
No logical development and presentation of responses; no evidence of critical thinking, analyses or insight; no support to recommendations (if any); no conclusions; errors in punctuation, spelling and grammar.
Little logical development and presentation of responses; little critical thinking, analyses and insight; illogical little support to recommendations (if any); unsupported conclusions; frequent errors in punctuation, spelling and grammar.
Development and presentation of responses mostly clear; some critical thinking, analyses and insight; recommendations (if any) somewhat supported; conclusions partially supported; occasional errors in punctuation, spelling and grammar.
Clear and logical development and presentation of responses; high level of critical thinking, analyses and insight; well-supported and logical recommendations (if any); well-reasoned conclusion; rare errors in punctuation, spelling and grammar.