IBFCSM CEDP Practice Test Questions Answers

The position ofAssistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR)within the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) was formally established by thePandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act (PAHPA)of 2006. This landmark legislation was enacted in response to the lessons learned from the 2004 flu vaccine shortage and the catastrophic response to Hurricane Katrina. The goal was to centralize the leadership for public health and medical preparedness and response within a single federal office.

The ASPR (now known as theAdministration for Strategic Preparedness and Response) serves as the Secretary’s principal advisor on all matters related to Federal public health and medical preparedness and response for "all-hazard" events. This includes managing theNational Disaster Medical System (NDMS)and overseeing theStrategic National Stockpile (SNS)of medicines and medical supplies. Before PAHPA, these responsibilities were fragmented across various agencies, leading to coordination gaps during national crises.

For aCertified Emergency and Disaster Professional (CEDP), PAHPA is a foundational legal document because it also created theBiomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), which funds the development of medical countermeasures against CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear) threats. PAHPA mandates that the ASPR coordinate with state and local health departments through theHospital Preparedness Program (HPP), providing the funding and standards that hospitals must meet to manage a surge of patients during a pandemic or mass casualty event. This legislative shift ensured that public health was integrated into the broader national security framework, treating a virus or a dirty bomb as a threat equal to conventional warfare.

TheCenters for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in collaboration with the American Water Works Association (AWWA), is the primary agency that publishes technical guidelines for hospital emergency water management.1Their seminal document, theEmergency Water Supply Planning Guide for Hospitals and Healthcare Facilities, provides a comprehensive roadmap for healthcare institutions to prepare for and respond to water supply interruptions.2

While CMS (Option C) mandates that hospitals have an emergency preparedness plan to maintain accreditation, they do not provide the granular technical guidance found in the CDC materials. The CDC guidelines focus on the public health implications of water loss, emphasizing the "four-step process" for developing an Emergency Water Supply Plan (EWSP): performing a water use audit, analyzing alternatives, developing the plan, and exercising it. These guidelines help hospitals calculate the minimum amount of water needed for patient care, sanitation, HVAC (chillers), and laundry during a crisis.

For the CEDP professional, the CDC’s water management guidelines are critical because a hospital cannot function without water for more than a few hours. The guidance includes specific advice on "Short-term" versus "Long-term" alternatives, such as using municipal backup lines, private wells, or tankered water. It also details the chemical and microbiological monitoring required when transitioning between water sources to prevent outbreaks of waterborne illnesses likeLegionella. By following CDC standards, disaster professionals ensure that even when the municipal grid fails, the clinical and life-support systems of the facility remain safe for patients and staff.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations are divided into different "Parts" based on the industry type.29 CFR 1910contains theGeneral Industry Standards, which are the primary rules governing the safety of the majority of disaster workers, including those in healthcare, manufacturing, and general emergency response. While other parts may apply—such as 29 CFR 1926 for construction workers involved in debris removal or rebuilding—1910 is the "foundation" for occupational safety in the United States.

Within 29 CFR 1910, several specific subparts are critical for disaster professionals:

1910.120 (HAZWOPER):Governs the safety of workers responding to hazardous substance releases.

1910.134 (Respiratory Protection):Mandates fit testing and medical evaluations for workers using respirators.10

1910.38 (Emergency Action Plans):Requires employers to have written plans for evacuation and fire safety.11

1910.1030 (Bloodborne Pathogens):Protects responders from exposure to infectious materials.

Option A (1904) refers specifically to theRecording and Reporting of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses, and Option C (1926) refers toConstruction. For theCEDPcandidate, 1910 is the "bible" of workplace safety. OSHA’s "General Duty Clause" (Section 5(a)(1) of the OSH Act) also mandates that even if a specific disaster-related hazard isn't mentioned in a standard, the employer must still provide a place of employment that is free from recognized hazards. During a disaster, OSHA often transitions to a "Technical Assistance" role, helping incident commanders identify risks to their personnel, but the underlying legal requirement to follow the 1910 standards remains in effect to ensure that the responders do not become victims themselves.

The concept ofVertical Integrationrefers to the "meshing" or synchronization of emergency plans and actions across the different levels of government—from the local level up to the state, and finally to the federal level. According toFEMA's CPG 101, vertical integration is based on the principle ofTiered Response, which recognizes that all disasters start locally and only scale up when local resources are exceeded. For this system to work, the local Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) must be compatible with the State EOP, which must in turn be compatible with the National Response Framework (NRF).

Vertical integration ensures that there is a "Common Operational Focus" regardless of which level of government is providing the resources. For example, if a local plan uses theIncident Command System (ICS)and specificResource Typing, the state and federal levels must use those same standards to ensure that their support "meshes" with the local activities. This prevents jurisdictional conflict and ensures that state and federal assets can be "plugged in" to the local incident structure seamlessly.

In contrast,Horizontal Integration(Option A) refers to the coordination between different agencies or departments at thesamelevel of government (e.g., the local fire department planning with the local police department).Modular planning(Option C) refers to the technical ability of a plan to expand or contract based on incident size, but it does not describe the inter-governmental relationship. For aCEDPprofessional, achieving vertical integration is one of the most difficult but essential tasks of thePreparedness Phase. It requires constant communication and "co-planning" with higher-level jurisdictions to ensure that when the "big one" hits, the community is not isolated, but is instead the foundation of a vertically integrated national response system that can rapidly surge resources to the point of need.

TheHomeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP)is built on aCapability-basedplanning philosophy. This approach shifts the focus from preparing for specific scenarios (like "Hurricane Katrina") to building a set ofCore Capabilitiesthat are applicable across any disaster type. This ensures that a community is prepared for "all hazards" by possessing the essential tools, skills, and resources needed to respond to any event.

Under theNational Preparedness Goal, FEMA identifies 32 Core Capabilities, such as "Operational Communications," "Mass Care Services," and "Public Information and Warning." The HSEEP philosophy mandates that exercises are designed to test these specific capabilities. For example, rather than just running a "fire drill," a capability-based exercise would specifically evaluate the "Search and Rescue" and "Fire Management" capabilities. If an exercise identifies a gap in "On-Scene Security," the jurisdiction then knows exactly where to direct its funding and training.

This differs from a "Function" philosophy (Option A), which is more about the internal organizational structure (like the ICS sections), and a "Response" philosophy (Option B), which is purely reactive. Capability-based planning is proactive and measurable. For theCEDPprofessional, HSEEP provides the standardized methodology to "measure" readiness. By using Capability-based planning, emergency managers can justify grant requests by demonstrating that they are building a specific, federally recognized capability that is currently missing or deficient in their community.