Page 39 - Smart public health emergency management and ICT implementations - A U4SSC deliverable on city platforms

• (The two previous steps are repeated in the same sequence with each new decision).
• The decision-making is followed by an evaluation of the available intervention options.
Simultaneously, the decision-makers shall evaluate the means to unlock the implementation
of their decision as soon as possible. In the example of water contamination, the decision to
stop water supply via the conventional network based on health concerns cannot be done
immediately without an alternative means to supply water, according to the member of the
crisis cell of the municipality of Tours, France. Because of this concern, it is necessary to put in
place the means to counter the potentially harmful consequences of a decision at the earliest.
• The selected interventions are monitored and evaluated. It is sometimes presented at the same
time as the previous one, but the decision-maker makes a quick assessment of the appropriate
course of action. This is the purpose of the previous step. But, at best, this assessment is done
at the same time as the decision is being made.
• Finally, a retraction of the system (positive outcome) or to a new series of destabilizations are
performed. The crisis, at this stage, may result in the following:

– In terms of training, a resolution with the acquisition of new skills to deal with crises in
general.
– Inadequate adaptation, with poor resolution of the causes that led to the crisis in the first
place and the reactivation of past crises.

– Finally, a major disorganization

In these last cases, the organization is trapped in a looping process.

U4SSC: Smart public health emergency management and ICT implementations 29