 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Recent Events
Announcement and Invitation to Join Working Groups on the Voluntary Business Preparedness Accreditation & Certification Program
February 19, 2008 4:33 PM
Background
On August 3, President Bush signed into law, ‘‘Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007’’, H.R. 1 (Public Law 110-53.) Title IX of this Act calls for the creation of a voluntary private sector preparedness accreditation and certification program. The purpose of this program is to enable the assessment of business preparedness and facilitate potential benefits to these businesses as a result.
In subsequent months, stakeholders began to mobilize and seek additional information about the program. Several efforts were undertaken including the following:
• Online Forums: A series of thirteen online forums were held both to provide a platform for exchange of information on the evolving platform and to begin to solicit input from key stakeholders on how the program should be developed. ,Each of these forums addressed a different facet of the prospective program.. InterCEP hosted these forums and subsequently summarized their findings and communicated them to key stakeholders including the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) which is responsible for initiating the program.
• Sloan Stakeholder Meeting & Subsequent Report on a Framework for Voluntary Preparedness: The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, a leader in supporting preparedness initiatives and a primary funder of InterCEP, convened a forum of key stakeholders on October 23, 2007 to discuss the evolving program and investigate cooperative approaches. InterCEP collaborated in this effort. Consensus was reached at this forum that “flexibility within a framework” of existing preparedness guidance should be promoted and that there was substantial commonality of core elements among existing preparedness standards and guidance. The forum members included representatives from four major industry associations (ASIS, DRII, NFPA, and RIMS), who collaborated to develop a framework to identify relationships between existing private sector preparedness approaches. A report outlining their findings was released entitled “Framework for Voluntary Preparedness.”
• Sloan National Stakeholder Forum on December 10-11, 2007, more than fifty representatives from government agencies, industry associations and private sector firms participated in this forum on the National Voluntary Private Sector Certification Program, facilitated by InterCEP at NYU. A summary of proceedings was developed which identified several key points of wide agreement around the design and operation of a certification program, the designation of an accreditation body, the selection of preparedness standards, and the business case for preparedness. A key next step identified in this regard was the development of working groups dedicated to specific incentive areas, such as insurance, supply chain, rating agencies, etc., that could assemble key stakeholders around each incentive area and act to promote the advancement of that incentive through the certification program.
Currently, DHS staff members are engaged in a planning process to fulfill their charge under the law to initiate the national voluntary certification program. During this time phase, stakeholders continue to seek ways to gather information about the program as well as get involved with the design and implementation of the program.
Objectives
At this juncture, InterCEP seeks to serve as a catalyst and collaborator and plans to continue to work with other organizations to promote both awareness of the program and input into its development. To that end, the Center will be hosting a series of working groups in order to expand and focus stakeholder involvement in the ongoing development of the program. These working groups will build on the momentum established in various forums last year but will promote more focused discussion and input around targeted topic. The overall objectives guiding these groups have been initially set at:
1. To identify existing practices and principles in specific topical areas relevant to private sector preparedness;
2. In view of these practices and principles, to identify issues, opportunities and potential strategies relevant to the design and implementation of the voluntary business preparedness certification program; and,
3. To gather these outputs generated by working group participants and communicate them to program stakeholders including where appropriate DHS, accrediting and certifying bodies.
Topics
InterCEP’s research suggests that the success of the accreditation and certification program will depend largely on the extent to which the program addresses operational needs of organizations and to which bottom-line incentives can be forwarded through the program. Working groups are therefore being organized around topics that correspond to key elements of the business case for preparedness certification, including:
• The Legal Working Group
Specific questions to be addressed by this working group include: How can voluntary compliance with industry best practice standards potentially mitigate legal liability in the aftermath of a crisis? How should corporations document their preparedness programs to mitigate risk of post-event litigation? What are current best practices? What are current obstacles? How should the preparedness certification process be designed and implemented to draw from and reinforce the documentation of preparedness programs?
• The Supply Chain Working Group
Specific questions to be addressed by this working group include: How do firms in supply chain relationships already assess and audit each other’s preparedness? How should the preparedness certification program be designed and implemented in order to build on current practices in supply chain resilience and the assessment thereof?
• The Insurance Working Group
Specific questions to be addressed by this working group include: How do insurance underwriters currently take account of preparedness efforts undertaken by firms: in business interruption policies; in directors’ and officers’ (D&O) liability policies; and in property and casualty policies? How should the preparedness certification program be designed and implemented in order to provide insurance underwriters with relevant information?
• The Rating Agency Working Group
Specific questions to be addressed by this working group include: How do rating agencies currently acknowledge preparedness activities by corporations that they rate? How does the decision by S&P to consider including enterprise risk management (ERM) in the ratings process for all firms potentially change the landscape? How should the preparedness certification program be designed and implemented in order to provide ratings analysts with relevant information?
• The Business Reporting Working Group
Specific questions to be addressed by this working group include: What existing business reporting requirements (incl., voluntary and regulatory frameworks) address elements of preparedness? How should the preparedness certification program be designed and implemented in order to accommodate/acknowledge existing preparedness reporting efforts and avoid any duplication?
N.B. InterCEP acknowledges that the business case for preparedness certification may additionally depend on a wide range of other issues, including especially: the importance of sector-specific program elements (e.g., for critical infrastructure sectors); the unique considerations pertaining to small- and medium-sized enterprises; etc. We encourage individuals interested in forming a working group around a topic other than those identified above to contact InterCEP if it is felt that the Center can potentially assist to addressing these issues.
InterCEP’s Role
InterCEP’s role in the working groups will have three components:
• First, we will provide a forum by hosting and facilitating the working group discussions using a web-based seminar platform and/or physical location for convening stakeholders;
• Second, we will gather knowledge generated through these discussions (current practices, insights, potential strategies going forward, etc.);
• Third, as appropriate, we will communicate that knowledge through research output as well as other output developed in collaboration with working group participants to share insights, strategies and other knowledge with the broader community of stakeholders, including: relevant government agencies, accreditation and certification bodies, and private-sector firms and other organizations.
Activities
Working group participants can expect to engage in some or all of the following activities:
• Review of an initial briefing document to be provided by InterCEP
• Participation in a forum hosted and facilitated by InterCEP (see sample agenda and logistics information below)
• Review of discussion proceedings to be produced and distributed by InterCEP after initial forum
• Ongoing communication with working group members as appropriate
• Best efforts to identify relevant documentation and share with other stakeholders via InterCEP’s online information clearinghouse
• Participation in subsequent forum(s) hosted and facilitated by InterCEP as necessary
• Review and comment as requested on any research to be authored by InterCEP
• Review and comment on any findings or recommendations potentially to be developed with InterCEP in collaboration with working group members.
Additional working group activities may take shape around specific agenda issues, and in response to the ongoing evolution of the program.
Anticipated Outcomes
Anticipated outcomes of activities undertaken by InterCEP in collaboration with working group participants include the following:
• Greater awareness within the general business community of the voluntary business preparedness certification program;
• Research output that presents knowledge generated by the working group relevant to the design and implementation of the voluntary business preparedness accreditation and certification program;
• An online clearinghouse of documentation relevant to the voluntary business preparedness accreditation and certification program.
Depending on the levels of engagement and agreement among working group participants, additional outcomes may include: recommendations to government; recommendations to the accreditation body; recommendations to certification bodies; and direct outreach to key members of the stakeholder community.
Participants
Any and all stakeholders with a demonstrable professional interest in the program are encouraged to join and participate in the working groups. DHS representatives may participate in working group meetings as observers, providing clarification as necessary. Prospective working group participants should contact InterCEP to join the effort.
Schedule
Initial working group meetings are scheduled for the following dates:
• March 7, 2008: Legal Working Group Register
• March 14, 2008: Supply Chain Working Group Register
• March 18, 2008: Insurance Working Group Register
• March 27, 2008: Rating Agency Working Group Register
• March 28, 2008: Business Reporting Working Group Register
Additional working group meetings will be scheduled based on the outcomes of the initial discussion and participant availability.
Logistics
InterCEP will host and facilitate working group meetings using GoToMeeting, a forum that integrates an online interface with a telephone conference bridge. Working group participants will receive dial-in information from InterCEP staff prior to each meeting.
Sample Working Group Meeting Agenda
Welcome and participant self-introduction (10 min)
Review of legislation (5 min)
Overview of generic accreditation/certification program (5 min)
Framing remarks on topic by 1-3 group members (5-15 min)
Open discussion of topic (30 min)
Focus on design and implementation of program (15 min)
Setting the working group agenda (15 min)