Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA)
Minnesota is among the state’s leading in the national effort to identify and prioritize risk to hometowns and determine the resources that jurisdiction has to reduce that risk.
The Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) process helps communities understand the normal set of risks it faces. By identifying and prioritizing those threats, a community can then make smarter decisions. Leaders need to manage the risks through
- Appropriate planning
- Mitigation strategies
- Developing needed capabilities
Risk is the potential for an unwanted outcome resulting from an incident, event, or occurrence, as determined by its likelihood and the associated consequences. By considering changes to these elements, a community can understand how to best manage and plan for its greatest risks across the full range of the threats and hazards it faces.
The THIRA Process:
- Identify Threats and Hazards of Concern: Based on a combination of experience, forecasting, subject matter expertise, and other available resources, identify a list of the threats and hazards of primary concern to the community.
- Give the Threats and Hazards Context: Describe the threats and hazards of concern, showing how they may affect the community.
- Establish Capability Targets: Assess each threat and hazard in context to develop a specific capability target for each core capability identified in the National Preparedness Goal. The capability target defines success for the capability.
- Apply the Results: For each core capability, estimate the resources required to achieve the capability targets through the use of community assets and mutual aid, while also considering preparedness activities, including mitigation opportunities.
State Preparedness Report:
The State Preparedness Report SPR is a self-assessment of a jurisdiction’s current capability levels against the capability targets it identified in the Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment. The report supports the National Preparedness System by helping to identify state and territory preparedness capability gaps. States, territories, and the Federal Government use this information to help make programmatic decisions to build and sustain capabilities, plan to deliver capabilities, and validate capabilities.
For each core capability, jurisdictions assess their preparedness levels in each of these five solution areas: planning, organization, equipment, training, and exercises. States and territories use a five-point scale for each assessment, where one (1) indicates little-to-no capability, and five (5) indicates that they have all or nearly all of the capability required to meet their targets. States and territories also provide context for their assessments.
Respondents assign a low, medium, or high relative priority level to each core capability based on its impact on preparedness, and the degree to which respondents plan to build and/or sustain the capability in the near-term. In cases where their current preparedness levels fall short of their targets, states and territories explain the specific improvements they would need to address the capability gaps in their jurisdictions. In addition, states and territories provide their perceptions of the Federal Government’s role for filling capability gaps in the future.
The outputs of this process inform a variety of emergency management efforts, including: emergency operations planning, mutual aid agreements, and hazard mitigation planning.
Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 201: Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment, Second Edition
CPG 201, Second Edition expands the THIRA process to include estimation of resources needed to meet the capability targets. The Second Edition also reflects other changes to the THIRA process based on stakeholder feedback and supersedes the First Edition of CPG 201.