Page 63 - JSOM Winter 2022

6. Effective and ongoing communication between law en- FIGURE 2 Additional fire and rescue units “respond” from
forcement and fire commanders. separate rooms.
The simulations were packaged into a unified command
competency training and simulation program. Each unified
command competency training with simulations lasted ap-
proximately 3.5 hours. Each session began with a 45- minute
lecture reviewing important aspects of responding to an AVI.
This lecture presented the determination of hot/warm/cold
zones, casualty triage designations, unified command’s im-
portance, operations at the Joint Assembly Area (JAA), the
makeup of joint teams (rescue task force, extraction), and
common language between LCSO and LCFR. This informa-
tion was consistent with the regional joint response manual. 7

Following this lecture, students completed four active shooter
unified command simulations. AVI simulations were cre-
ated using SimsUshare Command Training Center (https://
simsushare.com/ctc/) software. Figure 1 shows the layout of
the command competency laboratory. A simulation facilitator,
a fire dispatcher, and a law enforcement dispatcher facilitated rescue task force (RTF) teams and extraction teams. The sec-
the simulation from the control room. The command officers ond simulation included 11 patients at a community center re-
(who do not know the scenario) formed unified command and quiring the establishment of a protected corridor and RTF and
managed the simulation from the command room (i.e., “The Extraction Teams. The simulation continued until all patients
Hot Seat”). To simulate separate fire and law enforcement were extracted from the warm zone to an emergency medical
responses, the LCFR command officer (typically a battalion services (EMS) unit. Facilitators were available in the control
chief) responded from a separate room (Figure 2). Additional room, command room, “the Bull Pen” area, and the classroom
fire and rescue units (single resource units, staging, transpor- area to encourage a “no-fail” environment for the command
tation group, etc.) participated via radio from the large class- officers.
room (Figure 2). Staffed by law enforcement role-players, “the
Bull-Pen” area fed information to the LCSO supervisor via Command Team Debriefing Following Simulations
radio. Three radio “channels” were used: one facilitating in-
tercom for simulation control, one law enforcement intercom, After each simulation, the command facilitators for each dis-
and one fire and rescue 800-Megahertz talk group. cipline conducted a facilitated debriefing. This debrief con-
sisted of key tenets focused on establishing and operating
FIGURE 1 Layout of the command competency laboratory. unified command for an AVI (Table 1). The debriefings were
conducted in private. During this debriefing, each command
officer (LCSO and LCFR) provided feedback on the training
program and unified command operation. In the classroom
setting, other participants (i.e., noncommanders) were also
permitted to provide thoughts and feedback. This information
was collected by the authors for lessons learned and to further
refine unified command operations.

Fifty-two unified command competency evolutions were con-
ducted. Participants included command staff, supervisors, and
deputies from the LCSO and command staff, company offi-
cers, and firefighters from LCFR. Eighty-two law enforcement
and fire and rescue personnel participated in the simulations.
For each simulation, two LCSO personnel and one LCFR
command officer filled the role of unified command.

The facilitated debriefing provided subjective feedback from
the participants. Overall, participants described the simu-
lation as well-organized and beneficial. Often, participants
Each unified command simulation lasted approximately 30–40 commented, “Add these simulations to supervisory training”
minutes. The scenarios began with the LCSO supervisor (and or “These simulations should be conducted regularly.” Partic-
an aide) seated in the command room (i.e., “The Hot Seat”) ipants also commented on the modeling of unified command
(Figure 1). The Command Competency lab facilitator initiated and an AVI response, “Operating unified command helps you
the beginning of the simulation by directing the LCSO and learn how the response should work.” Despite the controlled
LCFR dispatchers to dispatch one of the scripted active shooter environment of the command competency lab, participants
incident simulations. The first simulation closely matched commented that some inherent stress was felt at the unified
1
the 2019 Full-Scale AVI Exercise. It included seven patients command post. The large amount of communication in the
at the Patrick Henry College requiring the deployment of simulation stressed some of the most experienced command
AAR: Simulated Unified Command in Active Shooter Incident | 61