Army Emergency Management Program - Federation of American ...

Controllers: control exercise flow through interaction with participants.
Evaluators: evaluate completion of exercise objectives based upon professional experience/expertise and use of
EEGs; do not interact with participants.
Observers: observe exercise flow; do not interact with participants.
Participants/players: members of the team(s) or agency being exercised based upon their actual roles, responsibilities,
and capabilities.
Simulators: personnel who act on behalf of an agency/organization unable to participate.
Actors: volunteers or paid personnel who act out a specific role based upon assignment, task, or mock injury.
15–8. Exercise evaluation
a. Performance-based evaluation. Per HSEEP, Volume II, facilitators and controllers guide exercise play in both
discussion- and operations-based exercises. During a discussion-based exercise, the facilitator is responsible for keeping
participant discussions on track with the exercise design objectives and making sure all issues and objectives are
explored as thoroughly as possible despite operating under time constraints. In an operations-based exercise, controllers
plan and manage exercise play, set up and operate the exercise incident site, and possibly take the roles of response
individuals and agencies not actually participating in the exercise. Controllers give key data to players and may prompt
or initiate certain player actions (as listed in the MSEL or procedural flow) to ensure that objectives are met and the
exercise maintains its anticipated pace or schedule. Controllers are the only participants who should provide information
or direction to the players. All controllers should be accountable to one senior controller. If conducting an exercise
requires more controllers or evaluators than are available, a controller may serve as an evaluator; however, this
typically is discouraged. Evaluators are selected from various agencies to evaluate and comment on designated
functional areas of the exercise. Evaluators are chosen based on their expertise in the functional areas they will review.
Evaluators have a passive role in the exercise and only note the actions/decisions of players; they do not interfere with
exercise flow. Evaluators should use the EEGs provided in HSEEP, Volume II to record observations and notes.
b. Installation exercise evaluation team. Each installation shall develop an IEET. The IEET shall have sufficient
personnel and resources to conduct evaluation of EM exercises and validate EM capabilities. The IEET should be a
multidisciplinary team consisting of representatives from DPTMS, DES, DPW, DOL, DFMWR, DPW environmental
office, ISO, installation IRACO, and PAIO. Realizing that most installations do not have three or four personnel in a
given specialty (2–3 for the actual team assignments plus one to evaluate), it is highly recommended that the IEET
include representatives from local civil jurisdictions (local EM, local fire chief), NGO/FBO partners (Red Cross,
Salvation Army), regional representatives, and/or local DOD or Federal installations (Navy, Air Force, DLA, U.S.
Coast Guard (USCG), DHS, federal law enforcement). The best practice includes exchange of IEETs with another
DOD installation in the local geographic area or the applicable IMCOM region for independent evaluation. External
evaluation is the goal for all Type I installations. External evaluation should be considered if resources are available at
Type II and Type III installations.
15–9. Exercise analysis
a. After action report. As detailed in HSEEP, Volume II, exercises provide a process for continuous improvement.
Evaluation is the cornerstone of exercises; it documents strengths and opportunities for improvement in an installation’s
EM capabilities and are the first step in the improvement process. The evaluation process for all exercises includes a
formal exercise evaluation, integrated analysis, and an AAR. After the exercise is completed, a hot-wash is conducted
with exercise participants in order to capture immediate feedback and comments related to the exercise. Often, the hotwash
is conducted by functional area and is facilitated by the lead controller for that functional area, but may be held
together for smaller exercises. A debrief is conducted post-exercise with facilitators, controllers, and evaluators to
provide feedback on the conduct and outcomes of the exercise and should be facilitated by the exercise director. As the
facilitators, controllers, and evaluators submit the EEGs and feedback forms, the information is consolidated into a
comprehensive AAR. The AAR is used to provide feedback to participating installations and jurisdictions on their
performance during the exercise. The AAR summarizes what happened and analyzes performance of the tasks
identified through the planning process as critical and the demonstrated capacity to accomplish the overall exercise
goal. The AAR includes recommendations for improvements based on the analysis, which will be addressed in the IP.
An AAR shall be prepared for each TTX, game, drill, FE, and FSE conducted under the EM program with a summary
report prepared for workshops and seminars. To prepare the report, the exercise evaluation team will analyze data
collected from the hot-wash and debrief, participant feedback forms, and other sources (for example, plans and
procedures) and compare the actual results with the intended outcome. The level of detail in an AAR reflects the
exercise type and size. AARs describe the exercise scenario, player activities, preliminary observations, major issues,
and recommendations for improvement. The AAR is approved by the installation commander for EM exercises and by
the designated authority for exercises completed by supporting functional areas.
Note. For all full-scale exercises and larger FE, an after action conference should be conducted with representatives from all
evaluated functional areas prior to approval of the draft AAR.
DA PAM 525–27 20 September 2012
149