Are your Risk & Life Safety Plans gathering dust? When an incident occurs, are you prepared to communicate critical information to occupants, managers and first responders? Refresh your crisis communication and pre-emergency planning! Presented by: David Howarka Register to view presentations On-Demand: http://be.buildingengines.com/Webinar-Managing-Risk-Life-Safety-Effective-Pre-Plans.html

1. Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes
Presented by David Howarka
Executive Vice President, Real View, LLC 02.25.10

2. INTRO
Good Afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen!
On behalf of RealView, I would like to first thank
Building Engines for inviting us to participate in
today’s webinar, and second, thank the “record
number” of audience members who took time away
from busy schedules to log in.
2.25.10 Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes

3. My name is Dave Howorka, I am Executive Vice President of RealView, LLC
based in Chicago.
RealView LLC is a Chicago based mobile software development company. Two
of our primary programs utilized by Real Estate Management to reduce risk:
-REALVIEW MOBILE INSPECTIONS
-COMMANDSCOPE EMERGENCY PRE-PLANS
2.25.10 Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes

4. Emergencies: it’s no longer “if” - it’s “when”
Many of us spend our days focusing on commercial real estate operations.
Trying to create value for ownership; either through increasing income,
reducing expenses, repositioning our assets as LEED properties, or cleaning
up the mess that a leasing agent left for us with all their lease “give-aways”.
Minimal time is spent planning for Emergency’s. In today’s world, it’s no
longer an “if” – it’s a “when”!
• When is a tunnel going to collapse under our city’s river and flood the
basements of our commercial business district?
• When is a toxic agent going to be released in our public transportation
system?
• When is some depressed, tax delinquent individual going to fly his airplane
into the side of our office building?
2.25.10 Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes

5. Preparation is the Best Prevention
We can not prevent all emergency’s, but we can certainly be prepared to
assist the professionals that are called in for help.
Management needs to:
• Stay current on the property “condition” to effectively repair, maintain, or
replace.
• Keep current pre-incident plans to help minimize risks and improve tenant
safety. These pre-plans provide First Responders with immediate building
knowledge. This prevents responding by guesswork.
Inadequate preparation can be costly and deadly…..
2.25.10 Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes

6. Case Study: Cook County Fire
2.25.10 Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes

7. Case Study: Cook County Fire
Award
Six people died; 14 + people injured
$100,000,000.00 Award
 $50,000,000 paid by City of Chicago
 $24,000,000 paid by Building Management
 $9,000,000 paid by Building Owner
2.25.10 Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes

8. Case Study: Cook County Fire
After the Fire
The Governor of IL retained James Lee Witt
Associates to conduct an independent
review, in order to discover:
• the facts associated with this fire that
led to the death and injuries
• to address the lessons learned
• to make recommendations to improve
high-rise safety throughout the state
2.25.10 Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes

9. Case Study: Cook County Fire
The Witt Review
Defendants: Cook County (Building Owner), Building Management, City of
Chicago- Fire Department, and State of Illinois
Numerous deficiencies and mistakes were tied to the above
defendants. For the purpose of today’s presentation, we
will focus on the recommendations for the
Building Management Team which can help reduce risk
and improve safety in all of our properties.
2.25.10 Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes

10. Case Study: Cook County Fire
The Witt Review
The Witt’s review found more than 80 examples of failures, inconsistencies,
ineffectiveness and / or non-compliance on the part of several agencies, organizations
and individuals, several of which directly contributed to injuries and loss of life.
However, beyond all of the findings, it is our opinion that four key factors directly
contributed to fatalities:
1) Lack of automatic fire sprinklers that would have controlled or extinguished the fire
in its early stages;
2) Failure by Chicago Fire Department to adequately search and account for occupants
in the stairways prior to and during fire fighting operations;
3) Opening of the 12th floor southeast stairway door by the Chicago Fire Department
that allowed smoke and heat into the stairway containing occupants; and,
4) Locked stairway doors that did not allow the trapped occupants to escape from the
stairway.
2.25.10 Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes

11. Case Study: Cook County Fire
The Witt Review
Properly addressing any one of the four key factors would have changed the outcome of
this incident and prevented loss of life from occurring. In addition, other important
findings included:
• Failures or inconsistencies on the part of City of Chicago and its fire department,
Cook County and the State of Illinois;
• Inadequate evacuation training of building staff and occupants;
• Ineffective communication among police department and fire department 9-1-1
dispatchers and between the 9-1-1 communications center and fire commanders on the
scene;
• Inadequate incident command procedures that did not allow for effective fire ground
management and poor allocation of resources to address life safety demands;
2.25.10 Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes

12. Case Study: Cook County Fire
Building Management’s Liability
1. Lack of an automatic fire sprinkler system. The building was not equipped with an
automatic fire sprinkler system that would have controlled or extinguished the fire in its
incipient stage.
2. Locked stairway doors. Locked stairway doors in the southeast stairway prevented occupants
from gaining re-entry into the building in order to find refuge from the smoky and
hazardous conditions.
3. Ineffective occupant training / awareness regarding evacuation procedures. A survey of
building occupants and staff revealed that 80% of respondents were unaware of the building’s
evacuation plan and 48% were unaware that stairway doors would lock behind them.
4. Ineffective building staff training. Building staff (management, security and housekeeping)
did not have a unified and clear understanding of the existing evacuations plans and
procedures or how to execute them properly.
5. Fire safety personnel. At the time of the fire, the building’s Fire Safety Director (FSD) was
not in the building resulting in inadequate situation assessment and evacuation supervision.
In addition at the time of the fire, the FSD’s certification had lapsed. Furthermore, Building
Management had not appointed a Deputy Fire Safety Director(s) as required by the Municipal
Code of Chicago.
2.25.10 Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes

13. Case Study: Cook County Fire
City of Chicago’s Liability
Non-compliant Municipal Code.
City of Chicago — Fire Department
1. Ineffective search and rescue / occupant accountability operations. CFD did not initiate
an effective search and rescue operation to account for, or ensure for, the accountability and
safety of all occupants that were evacuating through the southeast stairway prior to forcibly
opening the stairway door on to the fire floor.
2. Inadequate Incident Management / Command System and Operating Orders / Procedures.
In many cases priority was placed on firefighting operations over considerations for occupant safety and
search/ rescue activities. In addition, there is no evidence suggesting that those charged with on-scene fire
incident management responsibilities have been provided even the most basic training in regards to their own
standards, pointing to significant concerns regarding professional leadership development
within CFD.
3. Lack of knowledge and coordination in regards to building resources and information. CFD
did not properly coordinate with building management staff or security officers when initially
arriving on the scene where they would have received vital information about the building’s
configuration or actions taken prior to their arrival.
Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes
2.25.10

14. Case Study: Cook County Fire
City of Chicago’s Fire Department
Adopt and implement nationally recognized incident management / command system (IMS).
CFD should immediately adopt and implement a nationally recognized Incident
Management System (IMS). The complete implementation of an IMS, department-wide,
will address many of the specific issues identified in this report relating to fire ground
operations and leadership. A nationally recognized IMS will also address professional
leadership development by establishment of clear standards and expectations for members
of the department.
Increase comprehensiveness of inspections and review of building emergency plans.
All inspections should be completely documented and rigorous compliance efforts should focus
on follow-up to ensure that violations are corrected in a timely manner. CFD should also
actively market their subject matter expertise in support of the City’s high-rise residential and
commercial structures and to enhance their relationships with building managers and safety
personnel. CFD should also periodically review the quality and quantity of training provided
to building occupants while ensuring that plans adequately address the needs of individuals
with limitations and clearly articulate protocols for the proper coordination and
hand-off between building management, security, and fire department personnel.
Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes
2.25.10

15. Case Study: Cook County Fire
Recommendations
Cook County & Building Management
1. Install automatic fire sprinklers. An automatic fire sprinkler system should be installed as
quickly as possible in the Cook County Administrative Building.
2. Ensure that stairway doors are unlocked during emergencies. A failsafe system for automatically
unlocking stairway doors during emergencies should be installed as quickly as possible
at the Cook County Administrative Building.
3. Develop a building emergency action plan and incident management system. Cook County, as the building’s
owner, together with Building Management and the building tenants should develop both a Building
Emergency Action Plan and an Incident Management System to provide the framework for coordinated
response to emergencies. The plan should include an accountability mechanism and address the roles and
responsibilities of tenants, security and fire department personnel taking into consideration the needs of those
with physical disabilities and language barriers.
4. Management Oversight. Cook County should ensure that proper and adequate oversight is
maintained over the companies, individuals or entities contracted to provide management,
security, emergency planning and operational functions in the Cook County Administrative
Building.
Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes
2.25.10

16. Case Study: Cook County Fire
Index of Findings
• Building Management Failed to Produce Uniform Emergency Management
Documents.
• Building Management Failed to Fully Develop Emergency Protocols for occupants
with disabilities and limitations.
• Building Management Failed to Identify All Critical fire department Concerns in
Pre-Fire Plan.
• Building Management Failed to Provide Adequate Oversight of Security Operations
Related to Fire Emergencies.
• Security Company Failed to Provide Adequate Training to Security Officers
• CFD Personnel Failed to Obtain Copy of Pre-Fire Plan at Lobby Security Console.
• CFD Personnel Failed to Secure / Develop a Floor Plan and Locate Stairways to be
Utilized.
• Security Company personnel and Building Management personnel failed to
provide copy of pre-fire plan at lobby security console to CFD
Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes
2.25.10

17. REDUCE RISK AND LIABILITY
The key ingredients that improve building
safety are property inspections, emergency pre-
plans that can be accessed by the First
Responders, and adequate emergency training
for building staff and tenants
With the technology available in the market today, there is no reason
buildings should not be regularly inspected to identify potentially hazardous
situations and code concerns.
Additionally, electronic pre-plans have advanced to eliminate paper binders
and even provide building data to First Responders mobile computers.
Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes
2.25.10

18. Common Inspection Issues
 Most current inspections are paper-based
 Slow process, cumbersome
 Can be Inaccurate and subject to alterations (Security/Compliance Issues)
 Inspections are very expensive and involve multiple steps/personnel
 Current inspection processes are inflexible and do not keep up with
trends, codes, or internal standards
 Lack of management visibility across property portfolio
Managing Risk & Life Safety Processes
2.25.10

19. Inspections: Avoiding Mistakes
 Streamline your Process- avoid too many “cooks in the kitchen” and
communication pipelines (data entry, faxing, mailing,etc.). Store
documents permanently and securely- and don’t allow changes!
 Be Flexible – i.e. Customize inspection forms to meet your specific
needs
 Be Alert – Alert managers & maintenance staff immediately to
emergency situations from inspection site. Create a work order on
the spot to address the issue
Efficient and effective inspections mean safer buildings.
Safer buildings mean reduced liability and satisfied tenants.
Reduced Liability means lower insurance premiums.

20. The Importance of Pre-Plans
A “PRE-PLAN” IS A SUMMARY OF ALL THE CRITICAL BUILDING INFORMATION,
REQUIRED BY FIRST RESPONDERS IN THE EVENT OF A FIRE OR EMERGENCY IN YOUR
BUILDING!
What is the RISK of not having a Pre-Plan?
• First Responders don’t have information they need to safely respond to
emergency’s at your property; thereby forcing them to act on trial and error
vs. action with knowledge
• Increased liability and potential litigation costs
• Higher potential for property loss - $$$
• Higher potential for loss of life - 

21. Effective Pre-Plans
At a minimum, First Responders will need to have instantaneous access to
critical, life saving information including:
 Building/Structure Information
 Fire Protection Details including Haz Mat
 Emergency/Contact Lists
 Floor Plans, etc

22. Effective Pre-Plans
Portfolio Pre-Plans should be standardized, accurate and secure

23. Effective Pre-Plans
Additionally, your pre-plan should provide the following information in advance to
all emergency responders:
- Floor plans and large scale maps showing evacuation routes and service conduits
(such as gas and water lines)
- Number of building occupants, how that varies per shift and any special evacuation
needs
- Length of challenging hose stretches to various points in building
- Limitations on ground/aerial ladder access
- Details on protection/detection features (fire and carbon monoxide detectors, hose
connections, water supplies, fire alarm panels, etc.)
- Means to ventilate the building
- Elevator locations and how to control/access them
- Location of hazardous materials
- Where a spill in or around the building would drain
- Information on confined spaces in the building
- Location of potential medevac landing zones and triage areas
- Door swing directions and other important "access" information

24. New Technology:
Electronic Inspections & Pre-Plans
Mobile Web-based Inspection and pre-plan programs:
 One Step-Programs designed for immediate reporting
 Eliminate need for Manual/Paper Processes
 Utilizes customers inspection points and Standardizes Inspection forms, emergency data and reports
throughout a portfolio
 Creates and Sends Reports Electronically from Inspection Site
 Interfaces with existing electronic Work Order systems
 Single building or large portfolios
 Improves Efficiency while Saving Time & Money - GO GREEN
 Easily Manage, Update, and Share Property’s Emergency Building Data
 Interoperable Between all Computers-Management Office, Laptop, Security Desk, etc.
 Redundant data back up
 Help reduce Insurance Premiums

25. Questions?
For More Information:
RealView LLC Building Engines
414 N. Orleans, Suite 310 275 Wyman Street, Ste. 111
Chicago, IL 60654 Waltham, MA 02451
312.284.2030 (Office) 781.290. 5300 (Office)
312.284.2031 (Fax) 781.290.5305 (Fax)
http://www.realviewllc.com http://www.buildingengines.com
David J. Howorka Sarah Fisher