© 2021

National Center for State Courts

This document was prepared under State Justice Institute (SJI) Grant #SJI-18-T-045. The points of view and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author, and they do not necessarily represent the policy and positions of the State Justice Institute. The National Center for State Courts grants the State Justice Institute a royalty-free, non-exclusive license to produce, reproduce, publish, distribute or otherwise use, and to authorize others to use, all or any part of these documents for any governmental or public purpose.

The publication of this guide and template has been made possible by the cooperation and hard work of many people. A special thanks is offered to the COOP focus group participants whose lessons learned and experiences from major disasters greatly informed the content of this guide and template. Also, FEMA is acknowledged both for the resource materials that have helped to inform many portions of this guide and template as well as for the participation of its representatives throughout the course of the NCSC project. Additional thanks is offered to the members of the CCJ/COSCA Joint Committee on Court Security and Emergency Preparedness who have supported the NSCS’s work in this area and have provided valuable advice throughout all of the initiatives included in this grant.

Nathan Hall, NCSC Principal Court Consultant, directed this important project. The NCSC consultant team on this project included Felix Bajandas, Steven Berson, Greg Cowan, and Justin Mammen. Special recognition is offered to Justin Mammen, who was relied on extensively as a primary subject matter expert during the development of the guide and template.

Contents

Introduction.. 1

COOP Planning Basics for State Courts. 3

Section I: Initiating the Planning Process. 5

Section II: Writing the Plan.. 10

Part A: Readiness and Preparedness. 11

Part B: Activating COOP in a Disaster or Emergency. 37

Part C: Ongoing COOP Operations During a Disaster or Emergency. 39

Part D: Reconstitution and Cost Recovery. 41

Section III: Further COOP Considerations. 45

Training and Exercise Programs. 45

Developing Annexes. 47

Sample Pandemic Annex for a Novel Virus. 49

Additional Resources. 53

Appendix: COOP Template. 54

COOP Template - Part A: Readiness and Preparedness. 55

COOP Template - Part B: Activating COOP in a Disaster. 67

COOP Template - Part C: Ongoing COOP Operations During Emergencies. 68

COOP Template - Part D: Reconstitution and Cost Recovery. 69

COOP Training and Exercise Program Identification Worksheet. 71

COOP Hazard Analysis Worksheet. 72

COOP Hazard Annex Template. 73

Introduction

State courts in this country provide important “mission-essential functions” that are critical to maintaining the rule of law and providing justice and equal access for the fair and timely resolution of cases and controversies. It is imperative that these essential functions not be disrupted or compromised during or after a natural disaster or other emergency. Given the critical nature of these functions, the development of a Continuity of Operations (COOP) plan is crucial for courts to continue their mission-essential operations in the face of a natural disaster or emergency.

The development of a COOP plan can be a daunting, time-consuming assignment, one that competes with the myriad other responsibilities facing court officials and staff. This Guide is designed to be user-friendly and to make developing a COOP plan less daunting. It offers clear step-by-step instructions. Following all the steps and providing the information requested at each step will ultimately yield a complete and comprehensive COOP plan at the end of the process.

This Guide is designed to assist both seasoned court emergency managers and as well as court staff with little or no emergency management experience. Regardless of experience, this Guide will help whoever has been assigned as the COOP point person tackle this endeavor one step at a time.

This Guide was produced by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) under a grant from the State Justice Institute (SJI). The SJI grant was awarded to fund the production of new court-centric materials to help courts function during an emergency or disaster. There were four “initiatives” contemplated under the grant.

The first initiative under the grant was the convening of an Emergency Management Lessons Learned Focus Group in Denver, Colorado to study: (1) what courts experiencing a recent natural disaster had previously put in place in terms of COOP planning and emergency management resources; and (2) how their respective positioning and planning affected their ability to respond to their respective disasters. The goal of the focus group was to provide an opportunity to share experiences and leverage the expertise of key court officials to improve state courts’ performance in the areas of emergency management and continuity of operations planning. A final report with recommendations from this focus group can be found on the NCSC website.

Under the second grant initiative, the NCSC provided direct technical assistance to each of the focus group participants, evaluating and providing recommendations to the court’s emergency management programs in the jurisdictions who participated in the focus group.

The third grant initiative includes this COOP Guide, which replaces the NCSC’s “Steps for COOP Planning” developed in 2007. This Guide reflects current trends in emergency management, technology, as well as all the lessons learned from the first initiative focus group. The fourth initiative under the grant will focus on the development of COOP specific tools/technology to assist courts in their continuity program.

This Guide is organized into the following three sections and one appendix:

Section I – Initiating the Planning Process. The process of planning for COOP is just as important as the plan itself. Section I includes a series of steps that a court should undertake to initiate the COOP planning process.

Section II – Writing the Plan. This section includes steps that will guide the court through the key elements needed for its COOP plan.

A discussion of important COOP considerations is included with each step presented. Each step also includes one or more tables for use in capturing and organizing important COOP guidance and information. These tables have been pre-populated with sample language based on a hypothetical court. Users of this Guide may choose to copy the sample language included in the tables for use developing their own COOP plan using the COOP template included in the Appendix of this guide. Hyperlinks are included to help navigate from the pre-populated tables in Section II to the corresponding blank table located in the COOP Template.

Entering information in the COOP Template, in effect, constitutes writing the court’s COOP plan. When completing the tables, the examples provided may prove relevant; however, planners should assess if the pre-populated information is appropriate and relevant for their specific court system. This pre-populated information has been added to make the process of completing a COOP plan as painless and straightforward as possible; however, it must be pointed out that the process of completing a COOP plan is typically highly involving. Writing the plan as detailed in Section II will be the most time-consuming aspect of COOP planning covered in this Guide, but the effort put into it will prove to be extremely helpful in the future when the court faces a disaster or emergency.

Section III – Further COOP Considerations. This section covers important COOP items that should be considered following the completion of a base COOP plan as outlined in Section II.  These include the following:

• Training and exercising the plan. This portion of the guide reviews the establishment of training and exercise programs that are needed to integrate the COOP plan into the culture of the court system. A robust training and exercise program can help ensure the plan becomes a living document rather than a binder collecting dust on a shelf.
• Developing annexes. This last portion of the guide reviews the identification and development of annexes to the court’s base COOP plan. Annexes are typically developed to address unique hazards that are not specifically addressed in detail within the base COOP plan. Section III includes both a Hazard Analysis tool for the identification of needed annexes and a sample Pandemic Annex which may be used by the users of this Guide in the same manner discussed above.

Section III, like Section II, includes multiple pre-populated tables for use in inputting information. Hyperlinks are included to help navigate from the guidance in Section III to the COOP Template.

COOP Template (Appendix). A blank COOP Template is included as an Appendix to the Guide. As mentioned above, COOP planners may choose to use the sample language included in the Guide to complete their  COOP plan as appropriate for his or her own court.

COOP Planning Basics for State Courts

COOP is defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as an effort within an organization to ensure its essential functions continue to be performed during a wide range of emergencies. Typically, a COOP plan will be utilized when a court is faced with a major crisis that impacts its ability to perform all its various functions. Thus, when courts face a continuity scenario, they must focus solely on what is essential and not necessarily on all the various proceedings and services normally provided.

As seen in recent history, courthouses are not immune to disasters. Whether it be terrorism (e.g., 9/11), fires (e.g., California wildfires of 2017 and 2020), hurricanes (e.g., the 2017 and 2018 hurricane seasons) or the global COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, courts can be severely impacted by both natural and human-caused disasters. Despite this, courts have a constitutional duty to ensure their continuity of operations during a crisis.

A court’s COOP plan should not be the only emergency planning document it has. Many courts have other emergency plans such as its Emergency Operations Plan, Evacuation Plan, and/or IT Disaster Recovery Plan. A court’s COOP plan must ensure it both complements and supports its other emergency plans and planning efforts.

COOP forms the foundational structure of how courts can continue their essential functions in an emergency. It sets the framework that can be applied to every disaster. To provide more specificity and protocols to specific threats/hazards, courts should consider developing annexes. Each disaster scenario can bring nuances to a court’s response. Thus, development of annexes after completion of this overarching COOP plan can be helpful to address these specific nuances that come up in disasters (e.g., for earthquakes, define how building seismic evaluations would occur post-earthquake; for hurricanes,  name what specific steps need to be taken once a hurricane watch is reported by the National Weather Service). Developing annexes is discussed at the end of Section II of this document.

When disasters occur, our communities turn to the three branches of government to ensure their safety and security. Thus, the development of a COOP plan is vital for courts. Developing a plan will not be completed overnight. The planning process will take time, but it is every court’s duty to ensure this planning occurs so that when the time comes and the court is faced with a disaster, it stands ready to respond.

COOP planning will vary across jurisdictions depending on the number of courts operating independently in a jurisdiction and the number and types of court facilities involved. For purposes of this Guide, “court” refers to all the judges, court staff, and facilities under the authority of the Presiding or Chief Judge. In some jurisdictions, all courts are unified under a single leadership structure. In others, the general and limited jurisdiction courts may not be unified. In the latter scenario, the Presiding or Chief Judge of each court should make sure that COOP planning takes place for his or her respective jurisdiction. In locales where multiple independent court COOP plans are developed, it is strongly recommended that representatives from the different courts review the various plans with each other. This is done to ensure compatibility among the plans, coordination of available resources, and to promote the sharing of knowledge. The COOP Template presented in this Guide provides a framework for a single plan that covers an entire court system. It will be up to each court system to determine if this structure works or if individual continuity plans are needed for each courthouse.

Court facilities also vary by jurisdiction, and the composition of how facilities are arranged and managed will impact COOP planning. In some jurisdictions, all court-related functions occur in a single building under the control of the judicial branch. In others, the functions occur in a county-owned building that might be shared with executive branch agencies. In yet another scenario, functions are spread across the jurisdiction in several facilities that might or might not be under the authority of the judicial branch.

The COOP plan needs to consider the court's unique facility composition to provide a coordinated framework for directing all judges and court staff's efforts. A COOP plan is needed even in situations where the court does not own or maintain its own facilities and shares space with other non-court entities. This will ensure, to the extent possible, that essential court functions are compatible with the COOP plans of those other entities.

Section I: Initiating the Planning Process

As stated previously, the planning process is just as important as the written COOP plan itself. A continuity plan is not written overnight, nor can it be developed entirely by a single person. Thus, COOP planning is a cross-functional and collaborative team effort. Relationships are key and form the foundation of the planning process. Therefore, getting the right stakeholders to the planning table to develop the plan is critical.

Writing or updating a COOP plan is a major undertaking and should be treated with the same importance as rolling out a new case management system. It will require time and effort from all court departments/divisions as well as external stakeholders. Having the support of the Presiding or Chief Judge and the Court Administrator is critical to ensure the right people and amount of time are devoted to this project. The Presiding or Chief Judge and the Court Administrator will need to appoint a “COOP Planner” referenced in Step 1-2 and assemble a “COOP Planning Team” referenced in Step 1-3.

It may be beneficial to appoint an executive liaison to help along the way. This can be helpful when the planning process encounters roadblocks (e.g., a department that is not participating in the planning process or two departments that want to take a vastly different approach) to ensure the planning process stays on track.

A COOP Planner should be identified to lead the court’s efforts in developing its COOP Plan. The assigned person should have good project management experience and should be in a position of authority or have the delegated authority to call meetings, set deadlines, assign tasks (often to those who are in a more senior position). Though this process will require a team effort, as noted below, the COOP Planner will be the person in charge of running the project and putting the plan together.

As the COOP Planner goes through the steps in this Guide, a large amount of information will need to be gathered. There will be many documents to sift through, and revision control on electronic documents is important. Having a common virtual work area (e.g., SharePoint, Dropbox, Google Drive, etc.) to store and access these could prove beneficial.

Ideally, the COOP Planner should be someone who knows the various departments of the court. Preferably the Planner will be someone with an emergency management background. Though preferable, this is not necessarily a requirement. There are resources, training, and tools to assist court staff in gaining the knowledge to help put together a plan. The FEMA National Continuity Programs offer a variety of resources to support anyone putting together a COOP plan. Online classes can be found at the FEMA Emergency Management Institute – Independent Study website. FEMA also offers in-person COOP training courses. A list of all COOP related training can be found on the FEMA training website. Courses pertaining to continuity of operations, reconstitution, devolution, and pandemic planning can prove beneficial.

FEMA training is typically provided at no cost to the court. Connecting with FEMA Regional Continuity Coordinators and/or local emergency management office can also help a planner get trained to develop a COOP.

The development of a court COOP plan is a serious and involved endeavor that will likely require the attention and expertise of other personnel beyond just the COOP Planner. A COOP Planning Team should be assembled to advise and assist the COOP Planner in developing the plan. The COOP Planning Team should include representation from all major court departments. Examples of possible departments represented:

• Facilities
• IT
• Courtroom Operations
• Case Processing
• Jury Operations
• General Counsel
• Finance
• Procurement
• Accounting
• Human Resources
• Security (e.g., County Sheriffs, Court Marshals, Court Security Contractors, etc.)

Ideally, a planner will need at least one representative from all major departments who will serve as the COOP lead for their respective area/department. Ultimately, for the scope of the COOP plan development, the COOP Planner will oversee the COOP Planning Team.

Inviting a judge or multiple judges to participate on the planning team is helpful to help convey the needs of the bench to the team, and to promote  the importance of the COOP program with other judges. Courts should also consider assigning an executive liaison to the COOP Planning Team such as a respected Judge, the Court Administrator, or other senior official. The liaison’s role is to be a champion for the team and help advocate for the resources needed to complete the plan. The liaison can also be helpful when the planning process encounters roadblocks (e.g., a department that is not participating in the planning process or two departments that want to take a vastly different approach) to ensure the planning process stays on track. If time does not permit the liaison to attend all planning meetings, the planner should ensure the liaison is kept aware of the planning team’s progress,  successes, and challenges. Ongoing reports to the Presiding or Chief Judge on the COOP development progress helps maintain momentum and interest.

As part of developing the team,  clear guidelines should be established to direct how the team will work together to create a COOP plan. By way of example, this may include a variety of items such as but not limited to the following:

• Establishment of a two-hour bimonthly meeting, establishing a schedule of when action items need to be completed.
• Establishment of protocols for use in case the Planning Team encounters resistance or can’t obtain information.
• Establishment of protocols detailing how information will be stored and shared.

The COOP Planner should seek to involve and engage local emergency management officials (typically, these officials may reside in the County Sheriff, Fire, Risk Management, or other executive offices) to assist in plan development. Examples of the potential benefits of such connections and engagement include sharing of best practices and emergency management information resources, review of draft COOP plans, coordination of COOP plans with other government entities, sharing of training resources, and networking connections to the local professional emergency management community. This may prove particularly helpful if a planner has been assigned to write the plan who does not have an emergency management background. More on working with local emergency management officials can be found in Step 1-7: Meet with local/county emergency management.

The COOP Planner should work with his or her court’s Legal Counsel to understand any applicable state and/or local judicial emergency orders or rules regarding disasters or other emergencies. It is helpful to understand the laws/policies surrounding important issues such as suspending or extending statutes governing speedy trial provisions. Knowing this will be helpful when completing the essential function tables below (see Step 2-6: Identify essential functions through a Business Impact Analysis (BIA) and Step 2-7: Conduct a Business Process Analysis on prioritized essential functions). There will be a section within the table annotating any emergency regulations which provide relief on time-sensitive hearings/cases.

In many cases, these emergency orders or rules can help guide what will be considered essential court functions that need to continue and what legal relief a court of last resort can provide in a disaster.

The COOP Planner should review any existing emergency plans currently in use or any that have been written in the past. Knowing what emergency protocols have already been developed will prove useful in developing the COOP. This can include plans such as Emergency Operations Plans/Occupant Emergency Plans, Evacuation Plans, and IT Disaster Recovery Plans. As a reminder, COOP is for significant emergencies that will impact operations typically over 24 hours. Many emergencies are short term in nature and may not necessitate activation of the COOP plan. A solid Emergency Operations Plan/Occupant Emergency Plan should be established to determine the policies and procedures dictating the response to short-term emergencies (e.g., fire alarm activation, bomb threat, medical emergency, or brief power outage). Many courts operate in mixed use courthouses. In these situations, all tenants of the building should operate off of a common set of emergency procedures to prevent conflicting guidance. Examples of other important pieces of information to be aware of include the following:

• Previous disaster or emergency after-action reports. If the court has experienced a disaster or an emergency situation in recent history, it is helpful to review past after-action reports, debriefs, or lessons learned. By learning how the court has responded to its past disasters, the court can better integrate those lessons learned into the COOP plan.
• AOC COOP Plan guidance. The COOP Planner will also want to assess if the State Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) has any specific regulations or guidance pertaining to COOP. For example, is a COOP plan mandated by the AOC? Is there a format, template, or style that is mandated by the AOC?
• Other projects and initiatives. Other major projects and initiatives underway either internally or statewide could impact the development or implementation of the COOP plan (e.g., the use of video hearings, a new courthouse being built or decommissioned, a change in case management systems, or a new e-filing system). When writing the COOP plan, it is important to address how the plan may need to be modified due to any ongoing or planned projects or initiatives.

Once the background work identified in Steps 1-1 through 1-5 is complete, it is time to engage the expertise and assistance of the COOP Planning Team. Before the COOP planning work begins in earnest and prior to the first COOP Planning Team meeting, it is helpful to provide some basic orientation so that all team members understand the purpose of the COOP planning process. FEMA offers a basic one-hour online COOP Independent Study course (IS-1300: Introduction to Continuity of Operations) that provides an overview of what COOP is.  As the planning team begins to meet, reviewing possible emergency scenarios is a good way to ensure the entire team is familiar with the potential complexities and challenges that can arise out of courthouse disasters or emergencies. Some examples of these include the following:

• Disruption to the operations of the court and/or courthouse may occur without warning and the COOP plan may have to be activated at any hour of the day or night.
• The physical infrastructure of court facilities may be compromised and the ability to continue to use the physical courthouse may be threatened or non-existent. Key infrastructure components and systems include the exterior envelope, structure, HVAC, power, water, and sewer.
• Once the COOP plan is activated, key personnel and the court’s emergency organization may need to be moved to an alternate facility.
• The health and safety of employees may be at risk.
• Staff levels may be significantly reduced due to high levels of displacement, injury, illness, lack of transportation, and need to attend to family concerns.
• Remaining workers may be psychologically affected by disease, family concerns, concerns about economic loss, or fear, and require behavioral assistance.
• Some court functions (those deemed less vital) will have a lower priority and may need to be deferred until a later time.
• Information systems, communication, and transportation may not continue to function either unimpaired or at all; plans need to be activated almost immediately to compensate.
• There will likely be funding constraints.
• The geographical relocation of some or all the population may be extensive and/or may impact the resources available for recovery.
• Procurement of goods, services, and supplies may be impacted.
• Justice partners and other stakeholders will likely be impacted and their operational capacity may tangentially limit what the court can accomplish in an emergency.

A key takeaway from these scenarios is that each emergency or disaster brings unique complexities and issues. It is important to recognize the need for both careful planning and flexible response protocols that allow the court to maintain operations in challenging and dynamic situations.

Either the COOP Planner or the entire COOP Planning Team should convene meetings with the local and/or county emergency management agencies. This meetings can be used as an opportunity to define or clarify roles and responsibilities the court may have when interacting with its surrounding emergency management entity or entities.

The following is a list of questions that should be reviewed during this meeting. Many of these questions are relevant to specific components of the COOP plan and are referenced accordingly.

1. How does local emergency management envision the court’s role in the local emergency response framework?
2. How can the court report operational status and resource requests to the local or county Emergency Operations Center (EOC)? (e.g., does the court have a seat at the EOC? If not, how are communication channels maintained?)
   • Information can be used in Step 2-11: Define emergency communications
3. What are the primary and alternate points of contact for court and Emergency Management entities?
   • Information can be used in Step 2-11: Define emergency communications
4. Can the court have access to any web incident management systems the county is using (e.g., WebEOC)?
   • Information can be used in Step 2-11: Define emergency communications
5. Are there any grant opportunities available the court can take advantage of?
6. Are there any ongoing emergency management meetings or workgroups the court should participate in?
7. Where appropriate, how would the court apply for FEMA Public Assistance in a large disaster? Who would be the applicant? (Depending on facility ownership, this question may need to be coordinated with the State AOC as described in Step 1-8 below.)
   • Information can be used in Step 2-19: Identify the cost recovery process
8. Can emergency management help provide introductions or collaboration with local FEMA representatives or regional FEMA Continuity Managers?
9. Are there any training programs the court can participate in?
   • Information can be used in Step 2-20: Training and Exercises
10. How can the court be integrated into future local emergency management exercises?
    • Information can be used in Step 2-20: Training and Exercises

In addition, it will be critical to coordinate efforts with key justice partners (e.g., elected clerk of the court, public defender, prosecutor office, probation, etc.). It is important to determine how each stakeholder’s COOP plan will mesh with the court’s COOP plan to better ensure the overall resiliency of the community’s justice system.

The COOP Planner or Planning Team should also consider convening meetings with State AOC representatives. Like meetings with local emergency management officials, these meetings can be used as an opportunity to define or clarify roles and responsibilities between the court and State AOC.

The following is a list of questions that should be reviewed during this meeting.  Many of these questions are relevant to specific components of the COOP plan and are referenced accordingly.

1. How does the court apply for an emergency order from either the State AOC or court of last resort?
   • Applying for an emergency order from the State AOC/court of last resort will be an essential function. This information can be used in Step 2-6: Identify Essential Functions through a Business Impact Analysis
2. What support or resources can the State AOC provide to the court in an emergency?
   • Information can be used in Step 2-13: Identify the resource management process
3. How does a court’s operational status get communicated to the State AOC? What type of information does the AOC need to obtain from a court during an emergency?
   • Information can be used in Step 2-11: Define emergency communication
4. How does the FEMA Public Assistance process work in the judiciary in a major disaster? What support or coordination do courts need to work with or through the AOC?
   • Information can be used in Step 2-18: Identify the cost recovery process
5. Will the AOC collaborate with the executive or legislative branch during an emergency? If so, how would this collaboration occur and what impact would it have on a local court?

Section II: Writing the Plan

Section II covers the essential components of writing the COOP plan and is organized into the following parts:

• Part A: Readiness and preparedness
• Part B: Activating COOP in a disaster
• Part C: Ongoing COOP operations during emergencies
• Part D: Reconstitution and Cost Recovery

Section II includes a series of steps for the COOP Planner to follow in building a COOP plan. A detailed description of the purpose for each step and important COOP considerations related to each step are provided. As mentioned previously, users of this Guide are encouraged to make use of the tables presented as they work through the steps. These are the same tables as those included in the COOP Template located at the end of this document with one significant difference: the tables in Section II have been pre-populated with sample language based on a hypothetical court. The provided content can be used, where applicable and appropriate, as a starting point to facilitate the completion of the COOP Template. The completed template is the COOP plan! Hyperlinks allow the reader to “toggle” back and forth from the Section II tables to the template. Therefore, users of this Guide can simply copy, toggle, and paste the information from Section II into the corresponding table in the COOP Template and then edit/complete as appropriate. This process is intended to assist COOP Planners in completing their own court COOP plans in an efficient, step by step manner.

As mentioned previously, entering information in the COOP Template, in effect, constitutes writing the court’s COOP plan. In some cases, the pre-populated tables in this Guide may suit an individual court’s needs. However, COOP Planners using this Guide to build their own COOP plan should carefully assess if the pre-populated information included in the tables is appropriate and relevant for their specific court system. It is also important to note that although all of the steps in Section II are designed to build on one another, the COOP Planner may choose to proceed along the steps in any order that best suits his or her own court’s needs and planning efforts. The key is to make sure that, at the end of the process, all of the component parts included in this Guide have been addressed.

Some steps may be relatively simple to complete (e.g., Step 2-5: Identify the court’s emergency operations center (EOC)/Meeting locations), whereas other steps may require a great deal of planning and discussion (e.g., Step 2-6: Identify the court’s essential functions and Step 2-7: Conduct a Business Process Analysis). The pre-populated tables have been added to make the process of completing a COOP plan as painless and straightforward as possible; however, it must be pointed out that the process of completing a COOP plan is typically highly involving. Writing the plan as detailed in Section II will be the most time-consuming aspect of COOP planning covered in this Guide, but the effort put into it will prove to be extremely helpful in the future when the court faces a disaster or emergency.

It is important that COOP plans have a purpose statement. This statement establishes a foundation of how the policies and guidance contained in the plan are relevant to the court in a disaster or emergency situation and sets the stage for how the court would respond in a continuity scenario. Table 2-1 below includes a sample purpose statement that may suit a court’s needs.

Link to Template (Copy and paste the text from Table 2-1 above into the corresponding Table 2-1  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

This step describes what entities/individuals are covered by the plan and under what types of circumstances. Table 2-2 below includes a sample description that may suit a court’s needs.

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 2-2 above into the corresponding Table 2-2  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

In the case of an existing COOP plan, this step includes a place to note when revisions/audits of the plan were completed, what changes were made, and by whom. It is recommended that the plan be reviewed and updated annually. Below is an example of a completed revision control table.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-3A in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

The following Table 2-3B provides an example pertaining to the logistics of maintaining a newly completed or updated COOP plan. A COOP Coordinator should be identified who will be responsible for maintaining the COOP plan. In most instances, this will be the same person (COOP Planner) who led the court’s efforts in developing its COOP Plan identified previously in Step 1-2.

Link to Template (Fill out Table 2-3B in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

If the court already has an Emergency Operations Plan/Occupant Emergency Plan, a Crisis Management Team (CMT) may already be identified. If not, this is where the court will establish which staff and judges are needed to assemble in a crisis.

The CMT should function as an overarching policy/executive body that governs and directs policy related to crisis response for the court. In larger jurisdictions with multiple courthouses, there should also be some designation of Local Courthouse Unified Command Teams consisting of individuals who have crisis management responsibilities at the local courthouse level.

• Policy Group – Policy Group serves as a decision-making authority helping direct the priorities in an incident. This group decides major policy decisions such as closing a courthouse, deciding when to send Court staff home, determining court wide communication message, providing the court’s statement to the media, etc. The Policy Group should consist of the Presiding or Chief Judge, Chief Officers, General Counsel, Facilities Director, Public Information Officer, Emergency Management, and Lead Security Personnel (e.g., Sheriff Captain, Commander, etc.)
• Local Court Unified Command Team – A Unified Command Team will help direct incident response at their specific courthouse. They help provide quick emergency actions that take place at a single courthouse location. This team can consist of the senior judge at that courthouse, operations manager, facility manager, and local security lead. Ideally, this should be a small team (4-5 persons) but can expand to include other key management officials (e.g., jury services) as needed.

The CMT should include the COOP Coordinator. The COOP Coordinator will serve as the emergency management lead for the courthouse to help guide the court in implementing the COOP plan, serve as a liaison to external emergency management agencies, and help direct the court’s overall emergency management activities. As this position plays a key role, it is important to also identify a backup.

It is also helpful to consider additional supporting crisis teams that may need to assemble to work on specific functional issues. For example, an IT Crisis Team may be needed to provide support addressing IT considerations for a disaster or emergency (e.g., expanding telework options, expanding videoconference hearings, addressing cybersecurity threats, etc.). The following Table 2-4 provides an example of a CMT worksheet.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-4 in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Knowing where the Crisis Management Team (CMT) members are to assemble in a disaster or emergency situation is critical. In traditional emergency management terms, the command center where emergency response is coordinated is often referred to as an Emergency Operations Center (EOC). Courts are encouraged to identify a centralized meeting place that will function as an EOC in the event of a disaster or emergency. This can help ensure the right people are gathering in the right location to make critical decisions. As disasters or emergencies can happen at any time during the day or night, it is helpful to explore both physical and virtual options. Table 2-5 below provides an example of a completed meeting locations worksheet.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-5 in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

The core element of a COOP plan is the identification of a court’s essential functions. These functions are fundamental to support the safety of the community, especially in times of crisis and with limited resources. Many essential court functions are determined by law, internal regulation or in a state or county-wide emergency preparedness meeting with justice partners. Essential functions are often linked to what is statutorily required of the courts. Other functions are judged essential based on criteria such as their importance to the court’s mission, their role in the continuity of government, and/or their necessity to the performance of essential functions by other departments or agencies.

There are likely many other functions that are all very important but may not necessarily be “essential” in a disaster or emergency. Knowing what is truly essential and important to the safety and security of a community is vital. If essential functions are not clearly identified, it is easy for a court to become overwhelmed in a crisis, not knowing what is truly essential and what can be accomplished with limited resources. Thus, the mantra when selecting essential functions is: “If everything is important, then nothing is important.”   This step of the Guide is designed to help a court identify a list of its most time-critical and essential functions that cannot be left undone without running afoul of statutory obligation or risking failure of its mission.

Nailing down a court’s essential functions is often the hardest part of COOP planning but one of the most critical elements of a COOP. Therefore, the COOP Planner and Planning Team may find that there is a considerable amount of work involved with completing Step 2-6 (and Step 2-7) as compared to the previous Steps 2-1 through 2-5.

Through the work completed under the first two initiatives of the SJI COOP grant as described earlier in this Guide, and as observed during the novel coronavirus pandemic in 2020, there are multiple case types that are typically prioritized during a disaster or emergency. Examples of these include the following:

• Criminal proceedings required to ensure due process of law and continuity of the criminal justice system.
• Domestic and civil proceedings required to meet the needs of the most vulnerable, such as those seeking protective orders.
• Probate proceedings required to resolve custody and property matters.
• Juvenile dependency and delinquency cases required to safeguard our youth even in times of crisis.
• Matters that arise because of the special circumstances of a disaster or emergency (e.g., hearings related to public health quarantine and isolation orders during a pandemic).

It is important to note that continuity of the court is not confined only to courtroom operations. It is critical to identify the administrative functions the court needs to operate. (e.g., payroll, payment to critical vendors, maintaining network connectivity, maintaining cybersecurity of court networks and databases, HR response to emergency leave requests, required building maintenance, collection payments, etc.).

A Business Impact Analysis (BIA) is typically performed within each department of the court to identify and prioritize essential functions. An essential function is defined as a court function that cannot be left undone for 30 days without risking failure of mission; failure to meet statutory/mandatory obligations; or loss of trust, respect, and funding. Each department should complete a business impact analysis and identify the specific essential functions needed to sustain critical court services. Court departments should also identify a Recovery Time Objective (RTO). An RTO is the amount of time within the department in which the process must be restored after an emergency event in order to avoid severe consequences. Once the department has a list of essential functions, each function should be prioritized as to its impact on returning to normal operations.

Table 2-6 below illustrates an example of a completed BIA worksheet. The worksheet should be used as a planning tool to determine and document what critical activities should be considered a true essential function. This activity may take several sessions to help define what is truly “essential.” BIA worksheets are often included as an attachment to the completed COOP plan. The department leads assigned to the COOP Planning Team would be responsible for completing these worksheets for their respective areas. The COOP Planner should ensure that all court departments have assessed their essential functions.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-6 in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

After each department completes their BIA, the COOP Planner and Planning Team should assemble and compile all BIA worksheets and prioritize all the essential functions on a court-wide basis. The compiled BIA allows the court to prioritize critical services and guides resource allocation. Presenting a compiled, prioritized list of essential functions to executive management and the Presiding or Chief Judge for their initial review can prove beneficial to ensure executive buy-in and support.

After completing Step 2-6, the COOP Planner should now have prioritized lists of what each department considers as its essential functions. The next step is to identify the specific activities and processes that allow essential functions to be maintained during a disaster or emergency. This is where a Business Process Analysis (BPA) is helpful. The BPA is a systematic process that identifies and documents the activities and tasks that are associated with the court’s essential functions. The essential functions section of the plan should identify the resources, space requirements, costs, interdependencies, workflow processes, and support functions that ensure the continued execution of all the court’s essential functions. A BPA on each essential function should be conducted to determine the following:

• Recovery Time Objective – How quickly does this essential function need to come back online (e.g., one day, three days, one week, one month, etc.)? This information was already completed in Step 2-6 so information can be pulled from there.
• Department/Person Responsible – Which court department does this essential function fall under? In addition, which person will take the lead role to ensure the continuity of this essential function?
• Key Staff/Personnel – Who are the key staff/personnel needed to carry out this essential function?
• Resources – What are the necessary equipment and supplies to accomplish the essential function (e.g., court stamp/seal, laptops, etc.)?
• Work Location and Space Requirements – What specific layout or room is needed to accomplish the essential function?
• Supporting Activities – What are the activities that need to occur to ensure successful completion of the essential function (e.g., Facilities setup of a courtroom)?
• Internal Dependencies/Essential Records – What critical case management systems, computer programs, databases, bank routing numbers, etc., are needed to accomplish this essential function?
• External Dependencies/Essential Records – What external justice partner IT applications/programs or services are needed to accomplish this essential function? (e.g., DMV interface, credit card processing system, criminal complaint from prosecutor’s office)
• Manual Workarounds – Are there manual workarounds developed in the event critical IT systems supporting the essential function are not available?
• Judicial Emergency Orders – Can emergency orders from the State's court of last resort provide any assistance to suspend deadlines or extend timeframes for accomplishing the essential function?
• Related Regulation – What requires the court to perform the essential function? Cite the government section or penal code reference if known.
• Telework – Can the essential function be conducted remotely?

Completing the BPA provides context and key information to help management continue essential functions in a disaster or emergency. A BPA will help the court understand the complexities and interdependencies needed when a disaster or emergency occurs. As the court will most likely have many BPA tables (one for each essential function), it may be helpful to organize them via department and/or case type to help with easy retrieval during a crisis. The court may also consider integrating this information into an Excel workbook or other data analysis tool to help with organizing, filtering, and sorting of information.

The following Table 2-7 is a court-centric version of the Essential Function worksheet included in the FEMA Continuity Plan Template and Instructions for Non-Federal Entities and Community-Based Organizations.

Link to Template (Fill out Table 2-7 in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Ultimately the final COOP plan describes how all the required resources will be allocated during a disaster or emergency to ensure that essential functions can be maintained. The administrative, technological, legal, and human resources aspects of these resources allocated during the disaster or emergency should be considered, e.g., purchase orders, agreements with companies, technology protocols, communication plans, legal requirements, and HR considerations.

Court technology is often considered the backbone of maintaining the continued administration of justice. The process of prioritizing critical court technology elements and identifying what essential functions they support will be important to determine prior to a continuity event. Thus, this step should be done somewhat concurrently when developing an essential functions list (Step 2-6 and 2-7). Some of the questions listed when conducting a business process analysis for the court’s essential functions are directly related to this Step 2-8. When considering the essential function list, often there are critical IT elements that are needed to successfully execute an essential function (e.g., case management system, imaging systems). These are often referenced as either internal or external dependencies. Ranking those applications with their recovery time objective will assist the IT department in knowing what the priority restorations are and where to divert limited resources during a crisis. For example, only the applications that support the essential functions are ranked and considered critical, other applications are ranked lower with return times set after the critical applications are restored.

Planners must also consider the sequencing of how these steps come back online. If, for example, a case management system needs to be restored, servers and internet access will first need to be restored. Thus, the order of restoration is a key determining factor when evaluating how quickly technology needs to be brought back online. The order of restoration of systems should be considered for all critical software applications and infrastructure (e.g., email, phones, servers, etc.). An IT Recovery Time Objective (RTO) identifies the maximum amount of time that IT systems can be down before severe consequences are experienced. The important question for the court to answer is how long it can afford to be in the dark?

Another important metric in managing expectations in recovery efforts is defining a Recovery Point Objective (RPO). If IT services are interrupted before backups are updated, some data loss can occur. The RPO establishes the maximum age of the files recovered from backup storage that are necessary for operations to resume. For example, if the RPO is 24 hours, backups should be made at least once per day. This means that, in the event of a disaster, the court would potentially lose up to one days’ worth of data.

In addition to IT applications and infrastructure, it is critical that consideration be given to the essential records necessary to continue essential functions in the event of a disaster or emergency. Examples include emergency plans, manual workaround procedures, legal and financial records, property management records, procurement agreements, inventory records, payroll rosters, next-of-kin notification, etc.

The following Table 2-8A will help prioritize and identify IT applications and essential records that were identified when developing an essential function list.

Link to Template (Fill out Table 2-8A in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

The strategy for ensuring the integrity of essential records may vary depending on the data systems in place. FEMA has provided guidance on several options for ensuring access to essential records during an emergency. These include:

• Using backup servers. Data and records are backed up on a secondary server, in addition to the primary server. When the backup server is stored in a different location than the primary facility, an organization increases the possibility that data and records are available and accessible.
• Pre-positioning hard copy records. Printing hard copy records ensures an organization is not reliant on electronic equipment to access records. Prepositioning copies at alternate operating locations further protects an organization should the primary facility become inaccessible.
• Leveraging cloud computing. In cloud computing, remote servers hosted on the Internet are used to store, manage, and process data. This disperses risk to an organization as data is not hosted on local servers, provided that the cloud service provider also has adequate continuity plans.

The COOP plan should cover how essential records and applications are maintained, how they are backed up, and how they can be accessed in an emergency. If operations need to be taken offsite, there should be a discussion of how staff/judicial officers at offsite locations can access these essential records and applications. Some external records may be restricted from being accessed anywhere else but a courthouse.

The work being done in this step of the COOP plan is only a very small part of the work needed to prepare IT departments for disasters. With the increasing reliance on technology and the emergence of cybersecurity threats, it is critical that courts also consider developing a full IT Disaster Recovery plan separate from the COOP plan. An IT Disaster Recovery plan will provide much greater detailed protocols for networks/application backups and restoration, and will specify the mitigation measures needed to protect a court’s IT infrastructure. The IT Disaster Recovery plan should include a process by which all essential functions can be executed in the event that IT systems are not available and a process by which essential functions and essential records are maintained and reintegrated into networks/applications once systems are restored. The technical expertise required to complete an IT Disaster Recovery plan usually dictates that it be prepared under a court’s IT department and will typically fall outside the scope of the base COOP plan described in this Guide; however, the information contained within the IT Disaster Recovery plan will be critical in a crisis.

Telework considerations – Telework may be a critical tool in maintaining the court’s essential functions during an incident. When developing essential functions and the key requirements for executing them, it is helpful to consider if telework can be utilized.

The following Table 2-8B provides an example of telework considerations.

Link to Template (Fill out Table 2-8B in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

As a reminder, low-tech solutions can also help courts deal with the disruption of IT systems in the event of a natural disaster. During significant natural disasters, courts may have to implement manual paper processes. Although much progress has been made with e-filing and “going paperless,” retaining paper copies can be beneficial during disasters. In situations where a disaster requires the implementation of manual processes, it is also important to plan for the transition from temporary manual processes back to the automated electronic processes during the recovery. This will help set expectations for time and resource allocation during recovery. The table described in Step 2-7 above (Table 2-7: Essential Functions - Business Process Analysis) includes a section that discusses what manual workarounds are available to fulfill essential functions in the event that the technology needed is not available.

Disasters can potentially impact the ability of key judges/staff to report to the courthouse to fulfill their responsibilities. As such, it is important to identify successors for key positions as well as what authority will be delegated to them during the crisis.

Orders of Succession provide for the orderly and predefined assumption of authority and responsibility during a disaster or emergency in the event that court leadership officials are unavailable to execute their duties. Successors should be identified for at least the CMT, Executive Management, Judicial Leadership, and Directors of all court departments. The number of key decision-makers will be dependent on the size of the court and its management structure. Ideally, courts should identify three successors for every key decision-maker; however, this may not be realistic for smaller courts. When possible, it is helpful to identify at least one successor who works in a different location than the key decision-maker and other named successors.

Delegation of Authority – Delegation of authority is the process of transferring responsibility for a task to another employee during a crisis. In most cases, a successor will assume the authority to perform all functions that the position performs under normal operations. However, for some successors, the authority to perform certain functions may be limited. For example, if an assistant accountant is designated as the court’s third successor for the Finance Director, the planning team may decide to limit the assistant accountant’s authority for expenditures to a certain amount. The successor would need to obtain permission from the Court Administrator and Presiding or Chief Judge to authorize expenditures over that designated amount. It is also important to identify when a successor’s authority is activated and when it is terminated. When considering succession planning, a court should consider if the successor has the tools and resources to complete that job function. Therefore, the plan should address what types of physical/IT/essential record access may need to be modified when a successor assumes their position.

Table 2-9 below provides an example of defining successors, their delegated authority, timeframes of their authority, and what resources might be needed.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-9 in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Not all disasters will impact courthouse facilities. However, the court must be prepared to continue essential functions in alternate locations to ensure the continued administration of justice. Often, alternate facilities are not a traditional courthouse. It is important to prioritize essential functions before considering alternate facilities so the court is aware of what essential functions must resume at an offsite facility if needed. When considering alternate facilities, it is helpful to identify who will take the lead in the event an alternate facility needs to be identified and set up. It is important that the IT department is part of any alternate facilities discussions during both the planning and implementation stages. Network access, bandwidth capabilities, and access to critical case management systems and databases are all critical elements needed to successfully create a functional alternate facility.

Due to the unique challenges and configurations of courthouses and courtrooms, it is advisable for courts to investigate the possibility of moving operations to another existing courthouse before considering external alternate facilities. Identifying how existing courthouses could absorb critical essential functions in the event a courthouse becomes unusable can prove highly beneficial given the unique facility needs for conducting court operations.

It is helpful to consider alternate facilities from the perspective of a court user. A disaster or other emergency may require court services to be provided in different locations or buildings, which in some cases may not be a traditional courthouse.  It is important to ensure that public access issues are addressed, such as informing the public how and where services may be accessed.  Key questions to consider include:

• How will visitors know where to go?
• Where will visitors park?
• Is the alternate facility universally accessible for persons with disabilities?
• Is there appropriate signage and is that signage available in multiple languages?
• Can staff assist in guiding court users where to go?

A best practice in emergency management is to have a “hot site” available where It is move-in ready with the necessary IT, furniture, configuration, security, etc., but that is not a reality for most courts due to the ongoing financial burdens. Thus, considering partnerships with other government entities, federal courts, surrounding court systems, universities, law schools, convention centers, hotels, and the like can prove beneficial. Courts should explore creating Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) to assist in this (FEMA provides a sample MOU agreement that can be utilized, which can be found on page 42 of the FEMA COOP Template). Partnerships with local emergency management to identify space options can also be helpful.

The following Table 2-10A illustrates a sample completed checklist of court specific considerations related to the identification and evaluation of alternate facilities. Completed checklists can be included as an attachment to the court’s COOP plan for later reference.

Link to Template (Fill out Table 2-10A in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

The following Table 2-10B can be used to record key information pertaining to alternate facilities once those facilities have been identified. Additional information needed for activation of may be referenced from completed checklists in Table 2-10A above.

Link to Template (Fill out Table 2-10B in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Go Kits – When relocating to an alternate facility, the court will most likely need to transport necessary supplies to ensure the continuation of that essential function. Court departments should develop “Go Kits” in advance to ensure the continuation of their specific essential functions.

Each court department should have one or multiple Go Kits in the event a court department must relocate quickly. These kits help ensure the court can continue its essential functions if asked to relocate to a different facility. These kits only contain items that are vital to the performance of the department’s essential functions. A kit may include a USB drive to include important documents such as manuals, forms, contacts, and links necessary to perform essential functions, even if this data is hosted on a cloud site. The kit may also include a physical box or bag with manuals, supplies, equipment, etc. that are necessary to perform a department’s essential functions. As stated earlier, one should not rely on the presence of technology and should always consider a manual work around to execute essential functions.

‘Pre-Staged’ vs. ‘To Be Recovered’– One suggestion to ease the financial burden of purchasing numerous items for Go Kits is to consider the concepts of ‘pre-staged’ and ‘to be recovered’. When considering Go Kits, court management must balance cost versus preparedness. There are numerous items that can be easily purchased or pulled to be ‘pre-staged’ inside a Go Kit. These ‘pre-staged’ items include forms, documents, basic office supplies, etc. There are also high-value items (e.g., laptops, printers, scanners, etc.) or items that require frequent updates. It may not be fiscally viable to purchase these high-value items for emergency use only. As such, one option is to have managers designate high-value items as ‘To Be Recovered.’ When a COOP event occurs, the hope is that managers will have access to the courthouse just long enough to recover these items from existing stock to be used at another location.

Below are some key considerations when evaluating Go Kits:

• Number and Location:Court management will need to determine (based on their essential functions) if a single Go Kit can serve the unit or if multiple Go Kits are needed at each facility.
• Security and Accessibility:Go Kits should be securely stored but also must remain readily available in an emergency. They should not be locked in an individual’s cabinet as access could be problematic in a real incident. However, these items should be stored in a secure area to prevent theft or employees using these items for day-to-day use.
• Maintenance:Go Kits should be maintained and inspected annually to ensure they are still applicable and readily deployable.
• Suggested items: Each department’s Go Kit will be unique to the essential functions it must carry out. Below are some suggested items to include in the Go Kit:
  • Documents, forms, and guides
  • Manual forms and procedures
  • List of critical websites (internal/external)
  • Electronic storage media (e.g., USB) containing applicable documents
  • Basic office supplies (e.g., post its, writing pads, stapler, pens, envelopes, receipt books, etc.)
  • Carrying case or backpack

The following Table 2-10C is an example of a Go Kit checklist that can be created. Completed Go Kit checklists can be included as an attachment to the court’s COOP plan.

Link to Template (Copy and paste the text from Table 2-10C above into the corresponding Table 2-10C  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

There are three key areas of communication the court must consider during a disaster or emergency:

1. Communications to inform court judges/staff about the status of the court in addition to their roles and responsibilities during an incident; and
2. Communications to advise justice partners and other government entities of the court’s operational status and coordinate services and resource requests; and
3. Communications to advise the public about the court’s operational status and the status of individual court cases.

The court should identify all available modalities of communications that can be used during a crisis. Ideally, a mix of redundant modalities should be considered so the court does not become overly dependent on just one or two forms of communication. Day to day modalities such as email and phone can certainly be utilized but it is helpful to review other communication options for use in a disaster or emergency situation. A sample of these different options include the following:

• Mass notification systems (Typically these are third party systems which provide rapid alerting to many individuals through a simultaneous email, phone call, and text message. These systems are a way to quickly contact many individuals and take the place of older phone trees.)
• Court website
• Emergency phone message number (Number where judges/staff can call in to obtain recorded updates about the court’s operational status.)
• Cloud based websites (Location where judges/staff can obtain information offsite in the event they cannot access the court’s network.)
• Emergency conference lines (internal/external)
• Two-way radios (Confer with the local sheriff and/or emergency management office to see if they can provide recommendations on frequencies or radio infrastructure.)
• Satellite phones
• Videoconference platforms
• Social media
• External facility signage
• Fax lines
• Building public address (PA) systems

In addition, the court should explore priority communication services reserved for government entities to maintain continuity of critical services. The following are a few examples the court could explore as judicial branch entities are eligible to receive these services. Some come with recurring costs while others are available at no cost.

• GETS – Courts can register for the Government Emergency Telecommunications Service (GETS), a free program of the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Emergency Communications. GETS is intended to be used in an emergency when the landline network is congested. It provides priority access and processing in landline networks and increases probability of call completion. This service is provided at no cost to the court.
• WPS - The Wireless Priority Service (WPS) is a Federal program that authorizes cellular communications service providers to prioritize calls over wireless networks. Participating service providers typically deploy WPS in stages, beginning with top priority entities, until service is available in most coverage areas and functionality has reached full operating capability. This service is also provided at no cost to the court.
• Mobile Telecom Provider Priority Network - (e.g., Verizon First Responder Network, FirstNet) - A newly introduced emergency communications network for courts to consider includes the First Responder Network Authority (“FirstNet”), an independent authority established by Congress which will deliver a dedicated nationwide broadband network (Band 14) to emergency service providers. There may be nominal charges for courts to access the FirstNet equipment and network.

Table 2-11A on the following page denotes how to capture all the various communication modalities that can be used in an emergency and how those modalities will be used.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-11A in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

After identifying all the various modalities that the court can use, a communication strategy should be developed which includes the following:

• Protocols for situational awareness
• Communications with stakeholders and partners
• Last resort communications plan

A key element when considering protocols for situational awareness during an emergency is the development of a Common Operating Picture (COP). COP can be a tool that provides situational awareness allowing court officials to make accurate, informed decisions based on current or planned activities during an emergency incident. Data and real time sources used to support all court functions in a response are displayed onto a single platform. This platform can be as simple as a whiteboard that highlights key decisions, messages, actions, etc. inside a conference room where the CMT meets, or complex cloud-based tools (e.g., WebEOC) where court departments can electronically upload situation updates into a real-time virtual platform/chat room.

Communications with stakeholders and partners are critical during a disaster or emergency situation. The court should determine who will provide such communications to each stakeholder and partner, and at what frequency.  Setting up regular situation status briefings with the CMT and key management/stakeholders helps develop the court’s COOP plan. A sample situation status briefing agenda is shown below.

Topic 1: Emergency Management and Executive Opening

• COOP Coordinator provides situation assessment
• Presiding or Chief Judge and/or Court Administrator Concerns and Priorities
• Facilities
• Operations – Review all case types
• General Counsel
• HR
• IT
• Finance
• Security
• Review what contingency plans have been developed
• Judges/staff
• Jurors
• Justice Partners and Building Tenants
• Media/Rumor Control
• Public – verbal, physical signage, social media, website
• Local emergency management agency
• State AOC
• Assess any gaps in current resources/supplies
• Assess what resources need to be procured

Topic 2: Departmental Reports on Impact of Disaster and Current Response Efforts

Topic 3: Contingency Planning

Topic 4: Communication – Assess what communication has been sent or needs to be sent to the following stakeholders:

Topic 5: Resources

Topic 6: Determine when next briefing will occur

Lastly, even with multiple redundancies, it is helpful to identify a “last resort” plan of communication. If all technology is down, how will the CMT communicate with one another and with court judges/staff? The following Table 2-11B denotes a communication strategy for how the court will communicate with its stakeholders and partners.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-11B in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Contact Lists – As mentioned in the discussion regarding communications above (Step 2-11), keeping in contact with judges/staff is a priority in an emergency. Maintaining a contact roster of judges/staff, preferably electronic, is ideal. Investment in a mass notification system to send alerts (text and personal email) can greatly assist in quickly and efficiently contacting the court’s workforce. Having these contact lists available either in hard copy form, USB, or on a secure cloud website as a backup can prove helpful in an emergency. Contact rosters should include a mobile phone number, personal email, home address, and emergency contact at a minimum. The following Table 2-12A provides an example of guidance that may be useful for a court in regard to contact lists.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-12A in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Another key aspect of HR communications pertains to how major injuries, deaths, and other important notifications to next of kin or other designated contacts will occur and who will be responsible for those notifications. In addition, certain employee injuries and deaths must be reported to the local OSHA office.

Employee Welfare – During an emergency, it is important to remember that judges/staff are often the survivors of the disasters themselves. Although court staff are designated as essential workers, the desire to continue the administration of justice must always be balanced with employee morale and welfare. Procedures should be developed to ensure management is checking in on staff well-being (e.g., individual supervisor- employee meeting and/or larger town hall style meetings). Many, if not most courts, offer services such as Employee Assistance Programs (EAP). While developing COOP plans, courts should explore what existing employee health benefits are offered and any additional services or programs they may be able to offer during a crisis. Disaster fatigue can settle in when an emergency continues not just for a few days or weeks, but for many months. Thus, exploring opportunities to promote the welfare and well-being of judges/staff, as well as methods to periodically check in on staff, should be addressed in the plan.

Staffing – In a major disaster, a court may face challenges due to staff/judicial absenteeism. Courts will need to determine how they will maintain essential functions with limited available staff, including possibly hiring temporary staff and/or rehiring retirees.

The following Table 2-12B provides an example of guidance that may be useful for a court in regard to employee welfare and staffing.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-12B in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

HR Policies – Having emergency policies in place prior to a disaster can greatly help the court mitigate the variety of HR concerns that arise during a disaster. Emergency leave policies, approved prior to a disaster, can assist the court in potentially obtaining FEMA Public Assistance grant monies after a disaster. The following policies should be addressed in either a master HR emergency policy or separate policies:

• Work schedules and compensation – Do current policies address whether nonessential staff is paid during COOP plan implementation? What will be the guidance given to nonessential staff? Are there criteria under which staff can obtain cash advances, if needed? Can the court require essential functions staff to work overtime or on a compressed schedule to ensure the court is operational within a 12-hour period? Do COOP staff receive overtime payment if the normal workday is extended? Is there a policy for administering payroll if normal processes and databases are unavailable?
• Flexible work hours and teleworking – Do policies provide guidance for granting staff flexible work schedules and/or permission to work from home?
• Obtaining additional staff support – If additional staff is needed, are there streamlined procedures/guidelines for hiring temporary staff and/or consultants during an emergency?
• Logistical support – What accommodations (e.g., day care) are available for essential staff members who have dependents and are required to work after normal business hours? What options are available for staff members who need transportation to the alternate facility or temporary housing near the facility? Are staff members reimbursed for these and related expenses?
• Discipline – What does the court do if an essential functions staff member refuses to report for work?
• Staff education and training – Does the court have a policy requiring education about the COOP plan, staff roles and responsibilities during a disaster, and helping staff members prepare their families for emergency conditions (e.g., stockpiling water and nonperishable food, keeping a list of emergency phone numbers)?

The following Table 2-12C provides an example of guidance that may be useful for a court in regard to emergency HR policies:

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-12C in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Disasters will often require courts to procure items and resources quickly. Normal government procurement protocols may not prove timely, and thus there needs to be a strategy to procure resources in an expedited manner. A disaster procurement strategy should incorporate how emergency purchases are made.

Resource management also entails working with existing service providers and vendors. Some of the most important vendors to coordinate with prior to a disaster are the court’s utility providers (e.g., power, water, gas). It is important to understand the redundancies in these systems and the court’s priority for restoration. Asking these vendors if the court is considered an essential provider for critical restoration is helpful to ensure the courthouse can remain operational. If the courthouse has generators, identifying how those generators will be refueled is critical to ensure the continuity of power.

Courts should consider purchasing emergency supplies to prepare for a disaster. These could include basic emergency kits, USB charging devices, or laptop power banks. The court should also identify if there are any specific emergency supplies that may be needed for unique hazards (e.g., PPP equipment for pandemic situations or air purifiers and dust masks for courthouses near wildfire prone regions).

FEMA’s Ready Business Resource Management website also provides some additional suggestions on resource management during disasters.

The following Table 2-13 provides an example of a completed resource management strategy.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-13 in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

The court’s devolution plan describes what to do if a catastrophic event renders leadership and essential staff incapacitated and/or renders the courthouse and alternate facilities nonfunctional. During devolution, the court would transfer authority and responsibility for essential functions to officials in another court. Devolution is something that should be coordinated with the State AOC as court jurisdiction could be limited to specific county or geographical boundaries. Efforts to move court operations out of normal jurisdictional boundaries should be coordinated with the State AOC as emergency orders may need to be generated to accommodate the legal transfer of jurisdiction. In some cases, a court may not realistically be able to devolve because of legal implications and/or restrictions. In other cases, a court may determine that some restrictions can be suspended during emergency conditions. A sample devolution plan can be found in Table 2-14 below:

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-14 in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

It is important to identify the conditions under which the COOP plan will become activated and who has the authority to activate the plan. COOP activation can sometimes be obvious (e.g., major earthquake strikes a locality, global pandemic, etc.). However, there may be other incidents that are very court specific that can have a significant impact on a court, but the surrounding locality is not impacted (e.g., targeted cyberattack, extended loss of utilities at a single courthouse, asbestos release in a courthouse). The COOP response should be flexible and scalable based on the specific emergency incident, and not every crisis is going to require the court to implement all aspects of the COOP plan. For example, in a cyberattack scenario, alternate facilities may not be needed. Other emergency events may not require any activation of the COOP. For example, a fire emergency may require a short-term evacuation of the court facility followed by the resumption of normal operations without the activation of the COOP.

Incidents can occur both during and after work hours. Thus, identifying trigger points during these timeframes can also assist in knowing when to activate a COOP.

The following Table 2-15A provides a list of considerations for when to activate the COOP plan and a list of questions to help assess activation trigger points.

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 2-15A above into the corresponding Table 2-15A  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Table 2-15B is a generic activation checklist to utilize when activating the COOP.

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 2-15B above into the corresponding Table 2-15B  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

The following Table 2-16 provides a high-level overview of the general responsibilities that various court departments have during a COOP event. Many of these could be considered essential functions or could be supporting activities to essential functions. The table is presented in the form of a checklist to ensure the key roles/responsibilities of court departments are not overlooked in a continuity event. COOP planners should customize this checklist based on their individual court’s specific operations and responsibilities.

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 2-16 above into the corresponding Table 2-16  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Reconstitution includes procedures to terminate alternate operations and resume normal operations. The court should identify and outline a plan to return to normal operations once the CMT determines the disaster or emergency no longer poses a threat. In addition to facilities-related challenges, there will likely be challenges related to workload, depending on the nature of the disaster. For example, following a major storm with catastrophic damages, there may be an influx of certain case types including family, probate, property, and insurance cases. The public may need help in showing title to property to qualify for expedited assistance from FEMA. Family law cases may see issues with relocating children outside a jurisdiction, establishing guardianships, determining custody, and issuing emergency protection orders.

Reconstitution is not a single event but rather a planning process that involves consideration of how to restore operations at the courthouse. Bringing a court’s operations back online cannot be accomplished through one individual; therefore, the court should adopt a team approach to restore operations. A cross functional team made of the units below helps create a well-rounded Reconstitution Team:

• Facilities
• IT
• Courtroom Operations
• Human Resources
• Representative of legal owner of the courthouse (e.g., This could be the State AOC)

The following Table 2-17A provides a basic checklist of action items the Reconstitution Team will implement to help bring the court back into normal operations.

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 2-17A above into the corresponding Table 2-17A  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

The following Table 2-17B outlines how reconstitution logistics can be managed at the court.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-17B in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Court COOP plans have not traditionally included a cost recovery section. However, the lessons learned from recent disasters have indicated that, at least for some courts, it is an important topic and should be addressed in either a supplemental annex or embedded within the court’s COOP. The decision to include a cost recovery section may depend on first Identifying what entity is responsible for cost recovery (e.g., the local court, State AOC, county executive branch, or state executive branch).

Cost recovery generally pertains to grant programs run through the federal government and state governments to assist government entities to make repairs to buildings and pay for some expenses incurred as a result of the disaster. For courts that may have a part in cost recovery processes following a disaster, it is critical to understand what programs are available, how the application processes work, and how to manage awarded grant funds. Typically for court organizations, the roles and responsibilities vary significantly by state depending on variables such as court organizational structure and facility ownership/responsibility.  To determine if cost recovery should be included in the court’s COOP plan, the COOP Planner should meet with the State AOC as well as state and/or local emergency management entities to understand cost recovery processes, roles and responsibilities for his or her court.

The largest cost recovery program in the nation is the Public Assistance (PA) grant program, administered by FEMA, which provides federal assistance to government organizations and certain private nonprofit organizations following a Presidential disaster declaration. Through the PA grant program, FEMA provides supplemental assistance for debris removal, life-saving emergency protective measures, and the repair, replacement, or restoration of publicly owned facilities that have been damaged in a natural disaster. The PA program also seeks to protect facilities from future damage by funding hazard mitigation measures during the recovery process. It is important to note that FEMA follows federal procurement standards, and often courts will need to follow the FEMA guidelines if they are to seek reimbursement. More information about the FEMA PA and rules surrounding emergency procurement can be found on the FEMA website.

Cost Recovery, like Reconstitution, is a team project. Although there may be one person who will take the lead, often it takes a team to complete the extensive work often required to complete a PA application to obtain reimbursement. Suggestions of who should be on the court’s Cost Recovery Team include:

• Grants Manager
• Accounting
• Procurement
• Facilities

It is helpful to identify a person who will take the lead in cost recovery grant applications. This person will often require training to understand the application process, procurement rules, and state/local emergency management coordination issues. To help keep track of eligible costs, it is recommended courts set up a job code in advance to track not only supplies but personnel costs associated with a disaster.

The following Table 2-18 identifies who will be part of the Cost Recovery Team and provides direction on how the process will be implemented following a disaster.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 2-18 in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

No matter how prepared a court is for an emergency, there will always be lessons learned once a disaster strikes. Elements in the COOP plan which were initially thought to be sufficient may not work out either in an exercise or a real incident. Hence, it is important to document significant actions, decisions, and steps taken during an emergency to develop an after-action report.

FEMA recommends using the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) to conduct after-action reviews and reports. The HSEEP process is a very detailed approach to critically assess the court’s response to a crisis. Even if the court does not utilize the full HSEEP process, simply having a meeting where the CMT discusses what went well, what didn’t go well, and action steps to help address deficiencies can serve to help capture this critical information. It is helpful to look beyond just the CMT to ensure lessons learned are gathered from all key stakeholders. This could include meetings or surveys with justice partners, line staff, and various judges to obtain a holistic picture of the response. To ensure the process is completed, the responsibility of developing an after-action report must be assigned to a specific individual. Whatever process a court uses, it is important to set aside time for this assessment once the crisis ends, and to document it in writing. Any lessons learned should also be incorporated into the COOP plan and other emergency plans.

The following Table 2-19 is an example of how after-action reporting can occur:

Link to Template (Fill out Table 2-19 in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Section III: Further COOP Considerations

Once a base COOP plan has been substantially completed as outlined in Section II, it is important for courts to consider additional steps to ensure the COOP plan remains a living and actionable document. Two primary activities that will foster this objective are the development of training and exercise programs, and the development of specific hazard annexes to supplement the COOP plan. These are detailed individually in the following steps and examples provided in Section III.

The information contained in the COOP plan will be of limited value if it is not accompanied and supported by a rigorous regimen of formal training, testing, and exercising. These activities should be identified, and programs should be set to a regular schedule.

Training is a valuable tool for helping principal stakeholders to understand their specific roles/responsibilities in the COOP plan. Conducting a series of orientation workshops/trainings to familiarize individuals with the plan is a good start. Developing a marketing campaign, strategy, or even a slogan can assist in getting the word out and building up the importance of the plan. Combining training sessions and exercises can be used as an adult learning strategy to more effectively teach COOP concepts (e.g., seminar, workshop, drill, tabletop, functional, or full-scale exercise).

Ideally, whoever serves as the COOP Coordinator or COOP Planner for the court will be the person to ensure training and exercises are taking place. This person will need the support of the Presiding or Chief Judge and Court Administrator to ensure all levels of the organization are involved in training and exercise activities.

It may be helpful to initially train the Crisis Management Team (CMT) members to ensure they are aware of the plan and their role within it. As a subsequent step, developing additional trainings for specific teams (e.g., Cost Recovery Team, Reconstitution Team) can be helpful so that the team members gain familiarity with each other and are aware of the specific preparation steps they can take prior to a disaster. Moving forward, the CMT and applicable stakeholders should be made aware of any updates as they are made to the COOP plan.

Quick Reference Guides - The sheer volume of information contained within many COOP plans can be overwhelming and it is important to identify the specific COOP topics that staff of different departments need to be trained on. The court may consider developing quick reference guides to assist court management in their COOP roles/responsibilities.

Tabletop Exercises - Conducting simulated tabletop exercises for your CMT is a no-cost method for teaching COOP plan protocols and procedures. It allows staff to internalize key COOP plan elements and serves as a tool for testing and assessing the COOP plan for ongoing refinement. In addition, exercises can facilitate the court’s efforts to get plan buy-in from staff and other stakeholders.

Additional Resources for Training and Exercises - The court may want to explore reaching out to the local FEMA Regional Continuity Manager and/or local emergency management office for assistance in developing their training program. These entities can often provide training materials and technical resources, or can even help facilitate workshops and/or exercises. Typically, local emergency management offices conduct their own COOP exercises and may be open to inviting court participation in those exercises where feasible and beneficial. Exercises can require a significant amount of work to plan and conduct; therefore, reaching out to partners like FEMA and the local emergency management office for assistance can be helpful. In addition, FEMA provides a variety of exercise support resources through its National Exercise Division, offers a series of Virtual Tabletop Exercises through its Emergency Management Institute, and offers a Sample Tabletop Exercise on its website. FEMA training and exercise support resources are provided at no cost to the court.

The following Table 3-1 is an example of how to formalize a training and exercise program:

Link to Template(Fill out Table 3-1 in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

As mentioned previously in this Guide, the COOP plan forms the foundation for determining how the court will respond to a disaster or emergency and continue its essential functions. A court’s Emergency Operations Plan/Occupant Emergency Plan is established to determine the policies and procedures dictating the response to short-term emergencies (e.g., fire alarm activation, bomb threat, medical emergency, or brief power outage). These two documents form the bedrock of its emergency management program. Looking beyond these two foundational plans, it is helpful for the court to evaluate if there are specific hazards that the court faces that present an elevated threat and that should be addressed through an Annex to the court’s COOP plan. The core elements in the COOP plan (e.g., essential functions, communication, CMT, etc.) should remain applicable regardless of the hazard, but some disasters may require additional planning efforts and response.

Some of the potential hazards that all courts across the nation face include acts of terrorism, cyberattack, ransomware,  extended civil unrest, and extended power loss, to name a few. However, based on geographic location, a court may also face unique threats such as earthquakes, tornadoes, wildfires, flooding, and/or hurricanes. These hazards each present unique emergency planning and response considerations. For example, in an earthquake scenario, it is important to identify the person(s) who have the responsibility to determine a building is safe for entry after the shaking subsides. In a hurricane scenario, it is important to identify the person(s) who have the responsibility to determine which phase of the storm would be considered a trigger for closing the courts.  For a cyberattack scenario, it is important to identify the person(s) who have the responsibility to determine what protocols are in place in the event the court’s public webpage gets hacked?

Conducting a hazard analysis, like the example shown below, can help the court prioritize the development of COOP plan annexes. To complete this basic analysis, a planner would input all the types of hazards that could impact the court (human or natural caused). Once listed, the hazards are assessed according to their probability and severity. They are then ranked according to their total risk. Hazards with the highest risks are the ones the court should consider developing annexes for. Table 3-2 below illustrates a sample hazard analysis.

Link to Template(Fill out Table 3-2 in the COOP template with the appropriate information for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Below are additional resources for courts considering implementation of a more detailed hazard analysis:

• FEMA risk/hazard assessment guide
• California Hospital Foundation hazard vulnerability analysis

COOP annexes, in effect, are supplemental COOP plans that address the unique planning and response considerations for a given hazard. Developing annexes should be the responsibility of the COOP Planner or emergency management lead. Similar to the process of developing the base COOP plan, the process may necessitate convening a representative planning team to provide input into the development of the annex as the roles and responsibilities assigned to the CMT, department heads, and court staff may vary considerably based on the hazard type. Planners would be wise to remember that COOP plans and annexes should never be written in a silo, but rather should be developed through a cross-functional, collaborative process.

Annexes will vary considerably based on the hazard type. The sample annex provided in the following pages is specific to the COVID-19 pandemic and includes possible language that a court could consider for use in its own pandemic annex where applicable. It should be noted that annexes for different non-pandemic events may contain different components as dictated by the hazard type.

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 3-3A above into the corresponding Table 3-3A  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 3-3B above into the corresponding Table 3-3B  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 3-3C above into the corresponding Table 3-3C  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 3-3D above into the corresponding Table 3-3D  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 3-3E above into the corresponding Table 3-3E  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 3-3F above into the corresponding Table 3-3F  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 3-3G above into the corresponding Table 3-3G  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Link to Template(Copy and paste the text from Table 3-3H above into the corresponding Table 3-3H  in the Template and then edit/complete the language in the Template table as appropriate for your court. Use link to toggle back and forth between the tables in Section II of the Guide and the corresponding tables in the Template.)

Additional Resources

National Center for State Courts (NCSC)

• Emergency Planning and Security
• Exercises
• Emergency Management Institute
• National Continuity Programs
• Continuity Resources and Technical Assistance
• Continuity Resource Toolkit
• COOP Training
• Ready Business
• Government Emergency Telecommunications Service
• Wireless Priority Service
• Telecommunications Service Priority
• FirstNet

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

Communication Resources

COOP Template - Part A: Readiness and Preparedness

Purpose

Applicability and Scope

Distribution and Maintenance of Plan

Crisis Management Team (CMT)

Court Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and Meeting Locations

Court Essential Functions

Technology Considerations – Essential Records, Court Applications, Network

Orders of Succession and Delegations of Authority

Alternate Facilities and Go Kits

Emergency Communications

Human Resources Considerations

Resource Management

Devolution

COOP Template - Part B: Activating COOP in a Disaster

COOP Activation

COOP Template - Part C: Ongoing COOP Operations During Emergencies

Key roles/responsibilities of court departments during a continuity event

COOP Template - Part D: Reconstitution and Cost Recovery

Reconstitution

Cost Recovery

After-Action Reviews

COOP Training and Exercise Program Identification Worksheet

COOP Hazard Analysis Worksheet

COOP Hazard Annex Template

Pandemic Annex Part A: Readiness and Preparedness

Pandemic Annex Part B: Activation

Pandemic Annex Part C: Ongoing COOP Operations

Pandemic Annex Part D: Reconstitution to Normal Operations