Introduction

You’re sitting in the Emergency Operations Center (EOC), grappling with a major disaster. The Community Lifeline Status System is designed to put you in the best position to be successful. But now, in the heat of the moment, the plan feels more aspirational than actionable. Sound familiar? You’re not alone. 

The idea that everyone is using Community Lifelines perfectly, in complete synchronization, is a myth. The reality is far messier. Adoption varies widely, and every agency faces unique challenges, successes, and frustrations when implementing lifeline concepts. That’s normal. Trust us—we’ve spoken to over 500 of your peers, and they’re all saying the same thing. The Community Lifeline Status System (CLSS) isn’t a silver bullet that will solve every issue with lifelines. However, we think it marks a new and better starting line, bringing a metrics-based approach to better framing and quantifying your community lifelines. Allowing a “one size fits most” common scaffolding, to simplify a deeper communication process for shared situational awareness, while maximizing customization and flexibility.  

Practice vs. Reality: The Messy Middle

When FEMA introduced the Community Lifeline framework, it was a powerful concept—a way to connect data, decisions, and impacts. But the reality of implementation looks more like a checkerboard than a seamless system. Some agencies have fully embraced lifelines, while others are just beginning. And that’s okay. Success with lifelines isn’t about perfection—it’s about making progress, one step at a time.

When we are looking at the messy middle, the wide range of adoption tools, strategies, successes, and headaches we’ve had the opportunity to build a tool that is EOC structure agnostic. We’ve seen the variety of different structures, from pure ESF, or ISM or different versions of hybrid approaches, to department modeling. This is the reality that each locality, municipality, state, or county organizes information and facilitates coordination differently. These structures have different challenges and strengths when it comes to thinking about data integration and communication. The overarching requirement is for tools that are simple enough to crosscut, and powerful enough to be worth the effort.  

Some of the feedback that we have received over the last 2 years on the CLSS project is that these tools and systems are not designed for smaller county agencies. That expensive GIS staff and technical implementation is for large cities or states only. There are two pilot user groups that would disagree. 

In our pilot testing process for the CLSS prototype Doña Ana, New Mexico, and Humbolt County Nevada, stand out as strong county partners. Both are starting to rethink how they approach data, information sharing, and situational awareness when it comes to Community Lifelines. They’ve realized that for lifelines to work, the tools need to be simple enough to integrate into their day-to-day operations. It’s not about adding complexity; it’s about building systems that support clarity. These agencies do not have integrated robust GIS teams, or the resources to support such teams. However, geospatial data and awareness still can be built into their workflows. Doña Ana, New Mexico is pushing for regional and state integrated approaches to the Community Lifelines. Humbolt County, Nevada is building a new department from scratch utilizing Lifelines as a core organizing principal, helping to connect impacts, organization, response, and responsibilities.  

Adoption: The Key to Success 

For CLSS, the ultimate goal isn’t just simplicity, flexibility, or data security—its usefulness. A tool is only as valuable as the decisions it can support. With that in mind, we’ve focused on a few critical elements to ensure CLSS meets the needs of every agency. 

Operationalizing lifelines requires emergency management agencies to own their data, code, and indicators. This isn’t about building something for an outsider; it’s about creating systems that belong to the communities they serve. Lifelines must reflect local (or state) realities, not one-size-fits-all metrics, or platitudes. While there’s a strong emphasis on regional collaboration, agencies retain autonomy over how and with whom they share information. 

CLSS is also designed to live in the grey areas. In emergencies, we’re often (always) working with imperfect information to make decisions of least regret. By building flexibility into the framework, CLSS helps agencies sift through uncertainty to find actionable truths. The system recommends a lifeline color based on the metrics provided but will always allow for human decision-making and executive information to determine the right status to share.  

CLSS also serves as both an on-ramp and a bridge. Agencies with minimal data resources can use CLSS as a no-cost entry point to geospatial tools. Agencies with mature GIS systems can integrate CLSS with existing tools to assess lifeline impacts, and plug in data to dashboard, maps, and experience builders already in production. It connects agencies at all levels of GIS maturity, enabling seamless collaboration between those with and without advanced geospatial capabilities. 

Turning Plans into Action 

One of the biggest challenges in emergency management is turning plans into action. That’s where templates and indicators come into play. Transforming plans into lifeline connected templates, does require some time and thoughtfulness. There is no “easy button” here. It may take a couple of hours to develop lifeline connected, community grounded templates, that reflect the priorities for understanding community impacts within your jurisdiction. But once created these templates are flexible, can be shared, and passed to neighbors, and act as an artifact to help build, learn, and grow for the next season of hazards. In taking the time to plan, brining plans to life with lifelines there are other consequences that the Idaho Office of Emergency Management discovered during the 2023 Cascadia Rising exercise.  

During the exercise planning, within the template creation process, EOC staff discovered something surprising: they had more data available than they initially planned for. Emergency Support Function (ESF) liaisons when presented with the how data-based indicators were used to judge community impacts, they voluntarily provided even more information than before. The EOC didn’t know to ask for it, and the ESF liaisons didn’t know that the EOC could use it! By using CLSS templates, the EOC and ESF staff were able to come together to identify information gaps and critical data points to connect them to operational decisions, leading to more robust templates moving forward. 

This systematic approach—visualizing connections between data and decisions—is a critical step in operationalizing lifelines. With a consistent, repeatable framework, agencies can move from theory to practice, making informed decisions in real time. 

What's Next?

As we move forward, the question isn’t just about adopting tools like CLSS—it’s about making data truly available, actionable, and automatic. The next steps involve pushing the boundaries of how emergency management agencies use data for decision-making. 

In future posts, we’ll dive into how CLSS can integrate with emerging technologies like artificial intelligence, machine learning, and predictive analytics. These advancements will help agencies move from reactive to proactive decision-making, anticipate cascading impacts, and build resilience into their operations before a disaster strikes. 

The possibilities are vast. By bridging the gap between plans and reality, CLSS is already transforming how agencies think about lifelines. But we’re just getting started. Stay tuned as we explore what’s next in the evolution of emergency management.