Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Food System Preparedness and Response Plan, 2026

Print this page

Appendix A: Abbreviations

AAFC

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

AAR

After-action report

ADM

Assistant Deputy Minister

CFIA

Canadian Food Inspection Agency

DG

Director General

EM

Emergency Management

EMT

Emergency Management Team

EOC

Emergency Operation Centre

F/P/T

Federal, provincial, territorial

GOC

Government Operations Centre

IMS

Incident Management Structure

MISB

Market and Industry Services Branch

OGDs

Other government departments

PRP

Food System Preparedness and Response Plan

P/T

Province and/or territory

RO

Regional office(s)

ROEMD

Regional Operations and Emergency Management Directorate

SEOC

Sector Emergency Operations Centre

SERT

Sector Emergency Response Team

Appendix B: Glossary of definitions

After-action report

• A document that summarizes and evaluates key information related to an event and is used for continuous improvements to plans, policies, processes or procedures and to identify gaps or additional training needs
• Generally includes an overview of best practices, lessons learned and areas for improvement, as well as recommended actions

All-hazards approach

• Addresses vulnerabilities exposed by both natural and human-induced hazards and disasters
• Increases efficiency by recognizing and integrating common emergency management elements across all hazard types and supplementing them with hazard-specific components only where needed
• "All-hazards" does not mean preparing to address all potential hazards; rather, it emphasizes leveraging synergies across common hazards and maintaining a streamlined, robust emergency management system
• Improves the ability of emergency management activities to address unknown hazards or risks

Crisis

A situation that threatens public safety and security, the public's sense of tradition and values, or the integrity of the government

Cyber attack

The unintentional or unauthorized access to, use, manipulation, interruption, or destruction, via electronic means, of electronic information or the electronic devices or computer systems and networks used to process, transmit or store that information

Disaster

• A social phenomenon that results when a hazard intersects with a vulnerable community in a way that exceeds or overwhelms the community's ability to cope and may cause serious harm to the safety, health, welfare, property or environment of people
• May be triggered by a naturally occurring phenomenon originating within the geophysical or biological environment, or by human action or error (whether malicious or unintentional), including technological failures, accidents and terrorist acts

Emergency

• A present or imminent event that requires prompt coordination of actions concerning persons or property to protect the health, safety, or welfare of people, or to limit damage to property or the environment
• There are two categories of emergency events:
  • internal emergencies (for example, fire at an AAFC facility)
  • sectoral emergencies (for example supply chain disruption, animal disease, etc.)
• The PRP is primarily concerned with sectoral emergencies

Emergency operations centre

A designated facility established by an agency or jurisdiction to coordinate its overall response and support to an emergency

Evacuation

The planned and supervised movement of people, animals, and/or materials from dangerous or potentially dangerous areas to a safe place

Event

An incident caused by either human action or a natural phenomenon that requires a response to prevent or minimize loss of life or damage to property or the environment and reduce economic and social losses

Governance

The management structures and processes that support the development, implementation and enforcement of policies, programs, and activities

Hazard

A potentially damaging physical event, phenomenon or human activity that may cause the loss of life or injury, property damage, social and economic disruption, or environmental degradation

Hotwash

A debriefing session held immediately after an exercise or incident to identify the strengths and weaknesses of plans, policies, and procedures

Infrastructure

A system of facilities, equipment, and services needed for the operation of an organization

Incident Management Structure

• A standardized emergency management approach used across the Government of Canada and PTs to enable effective coordination and collaboration of event response activities
• Designed to be flexible, scalable, and quickly adaptable to meet the changing needs of a response given available capabilities/resources
• Built on the premise that similar core incident management functions and processes are required, regardless of the nature of the emergency, with resources being added or removed to tailor response efforts and specific functions depending on event scope and cadence

Mobilization

• The activation, assembly, and transport of personnel and/or assets that are required and may be requested to respond to or support an incident
• The temporary assignment of AAFC employees outside of their normal work function and/or location to support efforts event response; this may include external contracts

Prevention/mitigation

• Actions taken to eliminate or reduce the impact of disasters to protect lives, property, the environment, and economic disruption. Prevention/mitigation includes structural mitigative measures (for example, construction of floodways and dykes) and non-structural mitigative measures (for example, building codes, land-use planning, and insurance incentives)
• Prevention and mitigation may be considered independently, or one may include the other

Resilience

The capacity of a system, community, or society to adapt to disruptions resulting from hazards by persevering, recuperating, or changing to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning

Risk

The combination of the likelihood and the consequence of a specified hazard being realized; refers to the vulnerability, proximity, or exposure to hazards, which affects the likelihood of adverse impact

Situation report

A report that provides current information about an emergency, immediate and future response actions, an analysis of the impact of the emergency and issues identification

Surge capacity

The ability to draw upon additional resources to sustain operations and to increase the response as required

Threat

• The presence of a hazard and an exposure pathway
• Note: threats can be natural, human caused (intentional or non-intentional), or technological

Vulnerability

A condition or set of conditions determined by physical, social, economic, and environmental factors or processes that increases the susceptibility of a community to the impact of hazards

Executive summary

The Food System Preparedness and Response Plan (PRP) is issued under the authority of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food to support Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada's (AAFC) 2017 Emergency Management Program Plan, and, in part, to meet legislative requirements as outlined in the Emergency Management Act. It adheres to the Federal Policy for Emergency Management, and is fully interoperable with the Federal Emergency Response Plan.

It is aligned with the Emergency Management Framework for Agriculture in Canada that sets the strategic direction for federal, provincial, and territorial (F/P/T) partners to collaboratively prepare for and manage emergencies facing the agriculture sector and the food system in a predictable, cohesive, practical and forward-thinking manner. The Emergency Management Framework for Agriculture in Canada seeks to clarify roles and responsibilities and legislative authorities for provinces/territories (P/Ts) and industry, ensures alignment of plans, develops governance mechanisms for coordinating with P/Ts, industry, and food security stakeholders, and identifies resources available to help agricultural stakeholders strengthen resilience.

The PRP is an "all-hazards" operational plan enabling AAFC to prepare for and respond to significant events affecting Canada's entire food system while considering the food security of Canadians (for example, natural disasters, animal or plant disease outbreaks, supply chain disruptions, etc.). Alignment with the broader AAFC programs and policy design, including the Food Policy for Canada, supports the effective development of policies and response to priorities.

At the core of the PRP is a three-level response process designed to optimize the delivery of coordinated response activities. The levels are hierarchical in nature and recognize that modifications may be necessary before or during a significant event, depending on factors such as the nature, speed, severity and/or duration of the threats or hazards faced.

The PRP is not intended to be prescriptive but rather to serve as a "sherpa" to provide guidance for AAFC's preparedness and emergency response regime. The PRP defines the roles and responsibilities of key response entities, shapes AAFC's preparedness activities, and outlines AAFC's response levels. While specific response functions are stated in the PRP (such as, activities of the Sector Emergency Operations Centre (SEOC)), complete information on these functions can be found in subordinate internal processes and procedures.

Context

AAFC Scope and mandate

AAFC's mandate is based upon the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food Act. AAFC provides information, research and technology, and policies and programs to help Canada's agriculture and agri-food sectors compete in domestic and international markets, manage risk; and embrace innovation. The activities of the Department extend from the farmer to the consumer, and span all phases of sustainably producing, processing and marketing agriculture and agri-food products, from the farm to global markets.

Under the Federal Emergency Response Plan, both AAFC and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) share the role of primary department for Emergency Support Function #3. The scope of this function applies to agriculture and agri-food emergencies clearly falling under a federal mandate or those that exceed a P/T lead agency's capacity to deal with the situation and require support from local, P/T, federal and/or international stakeholders.

Emergency management (EM) at AAFC

Based on the four pillars of the EM continuum, AAFC strives to provide leadership in the agriculture sector's preparedness and response to emergency events through:

• Mitigation/Prevention: Prevent and mitigate potential impacts of an emergency by reducing the risks of hazards to AAFC's areas of responsibility.
• Preparedness: Develop plans, processes, networks, activities, and training to ensure an effective response and strengthen AAFC's emergency preparedness.
• Response: Ensure effective actions in response to an emergency situation; including support and coordination with internal and external stakeholders.
• Recovery: Help coordinate recovery activities; and support program and policy areas to implement corrective measures.

The PRP is subordinate to the Emergency Management Framework for Agriculture in Canada that sets the strategic direction for FPT partners to collaboratively prepare for and manage emergencies facing the agriculture sector in a predictable, cohesive, practical and forward-thinking manner.

Together, the Emergency Management Framework for Agriculture in Canada and the PRP seek to address lessons learned from past events impacting the food system, most notably the COVID-19 pandemic, where the following gaps were identified through a "What We Heard Report":

• Lack of ongoing, government-industry collaboration on emergency preparedness
• Unclear roles, responsibilities, and legislative authorities of F/P/T governments
• Expanding AAFC mandate led to unclear authorities
• Inadequate access to timely, relevant data to support decision-making

A focus on these gaps and continued alignment with broader AAFC program and policy design, including the Food Policy for Canada, will help inform the effective development of policies and response to food security priorities across all areas of the food system to bolster the resilience of the agriculture and food sectors.

AAFC continues to explore lessons learned and best practices identified through various consultation sessions and exercises. Analyses of these lessons learned, and the integration of updated best practices are ongoing.

The broader federal EM landscape is also changing, with Public Safety Canada and other implicated federal entities striving to renew Canada's EM policy framework, including updates to the Federal Emergency Response Plan and its supporting Emergency Support Functions. As such, the PRP will continue to reflect the evolving measures through a cyclical planning process as these initiatives progress.

To better understand the PRP context and intent, it is recommended that users also have prior understanding and familiarity with:

• EM in the Canadian context as outlined in An Emergency Management Framework for Canada
• the Federal Emergency Response Plan and whole-of-government federal emergency response coordination
• AAFC's roles and responsibilities in the shared jurisdiction with P/Ts for emergency management, as defined in the Emergency Management Framework for Agriculture in Canada

Plan maintenance

The PRP will be reviewed and updated regularly by AAFC's Emergency Management Team (EMT), within the Market and Industry Services Branch (MISB) to reflect changes in legislation, policy, and priorities and to address any gaps identified during its implementation.

Suggested amendments, comments or inquiries related to this plan should be forwarded to the attention of:

Emergency Management Team
Regional Operations and Emergency Management Directorate
Market and Industry Services Branch
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
1341 Baseline Road
Ottawa ON K1A 0C5

Email: aafc.agem-guag.aac@agr.gc.ca

Authority

This plan has been developed under the authority of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food to support AAFC's 2017 Emergency Management Program Plan and, in part, to meet legislative requirements under the Emergency Management Act.

It is effective upon approval by the Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

Deputy Minister
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
January 2026

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose

The PRP provides guidance to AAFC on its federally mandated responsibility to effectively coordinate the delivery of preparedness and emergency response support functions to food system partners, including the provinces and territories (P/Ts), the agricultural sector, other government departments (OGDs), and international counterparts, during significant events affecting the food system.

It aims to guide decision-making on how AAFC transitions from a preparedness stance to response operations and ultimately to de-escalation when normal operations can resume. Simply put, this plan's purpose is to coordinate and integrate AAFC activities for any risk-based event requiring an escalated response beyond normal daily operations.

The PRP is not intended to be followed as a step-by-step manual but instead provides AAFC employees and decision-makers with an overview of key concepts that should be considered for any response (for example, governance, information flows, analyzing risks, defining objectives). All AAFC employees – not just those with EM roles and responsibilities – should be familiar with its contents.

While the PRP is the overarching foundational preparedness and response plan for AAFC related to sectoral emergencies, it is further supported by other processes and procedures that address the unique requirements of specific functions or hazards. These subordinate plans share the same preparedness and response approach as the PRP.

1.2 Strategic objectives

The PRP's key objectives are to:

• provide a standardized preparedness and response plan for AAFC, by formalizing a scalable process that clearly defines situational awareness, risks, capabilities, goals, objectives, and resource commitments and ensures they are coordinated and effectively communicated to guide decision-makers
• increase alignment with broader AAFC program and policy design to help inform the effective development of policies and responses to food security priorities across all areas of the food system
• establish a cyclical planning approach whereby preparedness and response activities are assessed to identify successes, challenges, gaps, opportunities, and other lessons learned, with resulting recommendations used to guide future planning, exercises, and response activities
• optimize the engagement of key partners and resources from across the food system to support preparedness and response

1.3 Scope

The PRP is AAFC's scalable all-hazards preparedness and response plan for sectoral emergencies. It is intended for use by AAFC staff and decision-makers to guide the transition from normal day-to-day programming to response operations, and back to routine operations. It also offers guidance on when the scope and/or intensity of an event exceeds programmatic operational capacities, necessitating a coordinated AAFC response supported by the Incident Management Structure (IMS).

A coordinated AAFC response will likely be required when a significant hazard or threat impacts the agricultural sector (such as, natural disasters, cyclical events, plant and animal health disease outbreaks, significant national supply chain disruptions, etc.), and when:

• a P/T authority requests significant federal support to assess and manage food system consequences resulting from an event
• an event occurs that may have direct implications for AAFC legislative and/or program mandates
• there is a high potential for cross-jurisdictional impacts, multiple requests for assistance or a need to coordinate mutual aid agreements for affected P/Ts
• the event impacts a priority within AAFC's mandate and/or there is significant public interest requiring enhanced internal and external coordination and communication

Out of scope

Emergencies focusing on the safety of employees, assets, and facilities are out of scope. Examples of these emergencies could be: a fire at an AAFC facility, an employee injury or a lockdown situation because of a security concern. Business continuity management is also out of scope. For these situations, AAFC's Corporate Management Branch is responsible for restoring critical functions and promoting the continuation or resumption of AAFC operations.

1.4 Alignment and engagement with other government departments

Government Operations Centre

The Government Operations Centre (GOC), housed at Public Safety Canada, is a Government of Canada asset that operates 24/7 and supports response coordination across the federal government in collaboration with provinces and territories and other key players for emerging or ongoing events of national significance. During an emergency event, MISB's EMT at AAFC works closely with the GOC to share information on event impacts to the agricultural and agri-food sector.

GOC activities focus on

• bringing all partners into a common environment to harmonize and synchronize collective actions of those partners providing watch, warning, analysis, planning, logistics support and coordination across the federal government and with its partners, including provincial and territorial governments, non-governmental organizations, the private sector, and international partners

AAFC activities focus on

• providing information and analyses on impacts to the agriculture and agri-food sector stemming from emergency events, usually shared in the format of a Situation Report
• attending and/or providing updates through Emergency Management Committee meetings

Canadian Food Inspection Agency

AAFC and the CFIA have complementary mandates related to the agriculture sector. During an emergency event, AAFC and CFIA work collaboratively to assist the sector and provide an integrated federal response. While AAFC's response actions address market access and economic impacts, CFIA leads the response within its regulatory purview (reportable diseases, pests, etc.). More specifically:

• AAFC activities focus on
  • communicating information to the sector
  • providing sector expertise and gathering sector information
  • assisting industry through policy and programs following the direct impacts of an event
  • negotiating the regaining of market access (using the science-based technical information provided by the CFIA)
• CFIA activities focus on
  • investigating and developing a threat assessment for the event (for example, food contamination, foreign animal disease outbreak, alien invasive species)
  • determining and implementing regulatory response strategies to manage the event (for example, food recall, declaring a control zone, quarantine, controlling and eradicating the disease)
• AAFC and CFIA coordinate activities and work jointly in several areas including
  • briefings (for example, Minister, Central Agencies, the GOC, and other relevant departments)
  • engagement and communications (for example, Provincial governments, trading partners, industry stakeholders and the public)
  • decision-making and negotiations (for example, Provincial governments, trading partners and relevant international bodies)

1.5 Alignment and relationship to other plans

The Emergency Management Framework for Agriculture in Canada provides the policy and governance framework to guide strategic EM activities across the food system and focuses on all four phases of the EM continuum: prevention/mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. The PRP is aligned with it.

The PRP is interoperable with the Federal Emergency Response Plan, the Government of Canada's all-hazards plan, to ensure that AAFC can contribute when requested to an integrated Government of Canada response. The Federal Emergency Response Plan is the core plan for coordinating a response to emergencies where support is required from multiple federal institutions, while the PRP provides direction for managing events within AAFC's area of responsibility. When this plan is used within the context of the Federal Emergency Response Plan being activated, AAFC authorities and responsibilities will be respected. The PRP will integrate with the coordinating structures, governance, processes and protocols prescribed in the Federal Emergency Response Plan.

The PRP, like all other AAFC EM plans, is required to integrate and be interoperable with P/T agricultural plans, as well as with other Government of Canada EM plans such as the Federal Nuclear Emergency Plan.

2.0 Concept of operations

The PRP concept of operations describes how various parts of the organization will work together to ensure a coherent response. It covers significant event types, key roles, and responsibilities, IMS activation levels, notifications, and polycrisis.

Figure 1. Overview of the EM Policy Environment

Description of Figure 1: Overview of the EM Policy Environment

There are five levels in the EM Policy Environment:

• Level 1: Emergency Management Act
• Level 2: Federal policy for emergency management
• Level 3: Federal emergency response plan (FERP) (PS) – emergency support function #3
• Level 4: Emergency Management Framework for agriculture in Canada
• Level 5: AAFC Food System Preparedness and Response Plan

2.1 Key roles and responsibilities

Accountable Executive

The Accountable Executive is designated during Level 2 (partial) and Level 3 (full) IMS activations, and is responsible for event response leadership, management, coordination, and oversight, including providing information and advice to the Operations Committee. For Level 3 (full) activation, the Accountable Executive would be at the Director General (DG) level whose regular role is best suited to handle the significant event (for example, for an African swine fever response, the Accountable Executive would be the DG of the Sector Development and Analysis Directorate in MISB). For Level 2 (partial) activation, the Accountable Executive is typically the DG of Regional Operations and Emergency Management Directorate (ROEMD) or the Director of the MISB EMT.

Communications

The Public Affairs Branch is responsible for external and internal communications. Their event responsibilities include integrating risk communications activities within the overall risk management to ensure appropriate preparedness; developing and implementing strategic and operational communications planning, including social media and web strategies; promoting clear, common messaging across relevant spokespersons; responding to media inquiries; leading crisis communications response; and evaluating communications plans and responses.

Emergency management team

The EMT, within MISB, is the departmental lead for sector-related external emergency preparedness and response activities and ensures effective coordination and information management within the department and with federal partners.

The EMT's responsibilities also include, but are not limited to:

• coordinating the initial notification of an event
• bringing together all necessary divisions within the department who are or may be implicated in the event, including the establishment of the SERT
• facilitating information sharing and producing/disseminating situational awareness products to support decision-making (for example situation reports, etc.)
• fostering an Emergency Management Supply Chain Community of Practice to strengthen emergency management capacity, training and awareness

The EMT also develops, updates, and tests all-hazard plans and processes, leads EM exercises and facilitates continuous improvement through lessons learned.

Operations Committee

Once the IMS has been fully activated, AAFC's Operations Committee may convene to provide overall strategic decision-making and oversight regarding AAFC's response activities. As part of the IMS, the Operations Committee is the senior executive-level forum (Deputy Minister, Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM), DG levels) that considers the complex issues around programmatic, policy, legal, financial, and communications considerations.

Regional operations

AAFC's five ROs, under the ROEMD and within MISB, develop and strengthen new and existing relationships with key regional stakeholders, industry associations, academia and P/Ts across the country. ROs serve as a vital source of insight by providing unique and timely regional perspectives, strategic advice, and intelligence to advance departmental priorities, including policy and program design, market development, and EM. ROs also provide a unique regional information and analysis function by monitoring risks to agricultural production, supply chain disruptions and other regional issues that could impact the sector and the food system.

Sector Emergency Operations Centre

As an integral function of the IMS, the SEOC is the focal point for sectoral EM activities designed to support the department when the scope of a sector event extends beyond regular responsibilities or capacities. The SEOC acts as both a physical location as well as a coordination group within the IMS, with specific functional units playing a crucial role as the hub in managing information for significant events affecting the food system. SEOC membership likely includes many SERT members. This primarily includes the synthesis of data from a wide variety of sources into briefing products intended to support departmental strategic decision-making. These products provide a comprehensive overview of the significant event and are shared as a single window of information.

Sector Emergency Response Team

Multiple branches play a role in AAFC's response to a significant event, with activities focused on distinct aspects ranging from policy and programs to situational awareness, intelligence gathering, advice, analysis, and communications. The MISB EMT leads the creation of AAFC's SERT, ensuring appropriate representation and expertise are considered. This is a scalable task team, with subject-matter experts from across the department based on the areas of work and expertise needed to address a specific significant event.

2.2 Key terms

The Food System refers to the entire range of players and their interlinked value-adding activities engaged in primary production; food and beverage processing; food retailing and wholesaling; and foodservice provision. While considered outside the value chain, the system is influenced by any disruptions in primary input supply and associated transportation and logistics.

Incident Management Structure

Significant events impacting the food system can require broad support from within AAFC, and coordination with multiple external partners. The IMS is a standardized EM approach used to enable effective coordination and collaboration of event response activities within a common organizational structure. It is designed to be flexible, scalable, and quickly adapted to meet the changing needs of a response and available capabilities and resources. The authority to fully activate the IMS resides with the Deputy Minister of AAFC and the ADM MISB. The authority to partially activate the IMS resides with the DG, ROEMD and/or the Director of the EMT.

2.3 Significant sector event types

The PRP supports a comprehensive and coordinated approach to significant event planning and response for the following (but not limited to) types of significant events that could affect the food system:

• Natural hazards: Natural hazards include extreme weather events such as wildfires, heat waves, floods, droughts, hurricanes, storm surges, tsunamis, blizzards, landslides, tornadoes and, earthquakes
• Disease outbreaks: Plant and animal health diseases in the food system that occur at levels exceeding what would normally be expected
• Human-induced disasters: Human-induced disasters have an element of human intent, negligence, or error involving a failure of a human-made system, and may include:
  • cyber attacks
  • civil disorder
  • terrorism
  • war
  • biological or chemical threat
  • other human-induced disasters
• Supply chain disruptions: A significant interruption in the flow of production, sales, and distribution of specific goods or services
• Pandemics: A public health crisis that poses a serious threat to the food system's ability to maintain business continuity

2.4 Notification

Regardless of how the information on a significant event enters the department, those receiving it should quickly notify MISB EMT by emailing the Agriculture Emergency Management inbox at AAFC.AgEM-GUAg.AAC@agr.gc.ca.

Upon notification of a significant event, a rapid determination is made by MISB's EMT based on an initial risk analysis. MISB's EMT will seek advice internally and/or from other decision-makers from key areas of the food system. During an event, implicated program, policy, and regional area(s) will proactively contact appropriate partners, maintain communication, monitor the situation, and execute mandated activities.

Notification process

Given the dynamic nature of significant events, AAFC's notification process has been designed to be malleable and adaptable, allowing variations in the sequence of actions and audiences required to ensure accurate and timely information flow. For ease of understanding, the following process map has been generated to demonstrate a linear notification pathway during a significant event. When in doubt, consultation and information sharing with MISB's EMT is recommended.

Figure 2. Significant event notification process

Description of Figure 2: Significant event notification process

When AAFC is notified of a significant event, an EM risk analysis is done to decide if the event is significant and needs immediate action.

• If the answer is no, then no notification is sent

• If the answer is yes, then AAFC initiates the Incident Management Structure and Governance Structure
• If the Incident Management Structure and Governance Structure isn't initiated:
  • no notification is sent
  • situational awareness products could still be developed (example: wildfires) and dissemination may occur
• If the Incident Management Structure and Governance Structure is initiated, then the response posture would be elevated to either:
  • Level 2 (partial activation)
    • Notification may be sent
      • Situational awareness products could be developed (example: wildfires) and disseminated
  • Level 3 (full activation)
    • Flash notification sent to Operations Committee
      • Situational Awareness Products developed and dissemination occurs

Event reporting done via SEOC and dissemination occurs to: AAFC, SERT, GOC, PTs, OGDs, and Industry Stakeholders Then Situational Awareness Products are developed and dissemination occurs.

2.5 Incident Management Structure and governance framework

The IMS is the fundamental EM approach used to enable effective coordination and collaboration of event response activities within a common organizational structure. It is designed to be flexible, scalable, and quickly adaptable to meet the changing needs of a response based on available capabilities and resources. The IMS is built on the premise that similar core incident management functions and processes are required, regardless of the nature of a significant event, with resources being added or removed to tailor response efforts and specific functions depending on event scope and cadence.

The IMS establishes a formalized event coordination hierarchy, unifying reporting and management for all response functions and optimizing information flow by defining consistent and standardized terminology, roles, responsibilities, and processes. AAFC's IMS is detailed in the figure below.

During event response, the IMS also acts as the department's emergency event governance framework, outlining decision-making and communication structures and processes that support the development, implementation and enforcement of policies, programs, and activities. Decision-making and communication flows follow the same pattern as detailed in Figure 3.

Figure 3. AAFC's emergency event incident management structure

Description of Figure 3: AAFC's Emergency Event Incident Management Structure

The figure outlines the four key functions within the Emergency Event Incident Management Structure (IMS) and related roles and responsibilities.

This structure follows the principles of the IMS and incorporates operational activities, other requirements of a policy response, as well as strategic-level collaboration. The purpose of the structure is to demonstrate information flow and coordination across multiple areas of work in addressing a complex emergency event.

Level 1 is Operations Committee, AAFC's senior management decision-making forum providing overall strategic decision-making and direction regarding departmental response activities.

Level 2 Accountable Executive, this position is responsible for the "big picture", and serves as the point person for internal and external response coordination, and establishes strategic response objectives.

Level 3 is SEOC Director, this position is responsible for AAFC's SEOC.

Level 4 is SEOC (scalable based on event). The SEOC is AAFC's hub of coordination of effective responses to emergencies through the synthesization of information from multiple sources. The following groups compose the SEOC:

• Logistics Section
• Operations Section
• Planning Section
• Finance Section
• Communications Section

Level 1 is the most strategic decision-making level and level 4 is the most tactical/operational level.

2.6 Polycrisis

In the event that two (or more) significant events occur simultaneously, a risk analysis based on scope and severity will be performed to determine the warranted response requirements. Should a second IMS activation be required, resources would be added to tailor the response efforts and specific functions depending on the second event's scope and cadence. If the primary SEOC location cannot handle the resourcing needs of the second event, the SEOC's alternate site would be used. This situation would be exceedingly rare and would occur only for a brief period.

3.0 Incident Management Structure activation process and levels

Based on the principles of the EM continuum - mitigation/prevention, preparedness, response and recovery - AAFC will follow a three-level response process. There are no prescriptive criteria for the start and end of a level and, depending on the event, levels may overlap or merge.

4.0 De-escalation and demobilization

The need for de-escalation or demobilization is continually reassessed throughout the action planning cycle and, once de-escalation triggers or demobilization criteria are met:

• AAFC programs return to normal operations
• the IMS is de-activated
• an After-action report (AAR) is completed

For IMS de-activation, refer to the authorities outlined in section 3.0 Incident Management Structure activation process and levels.

Key activity: IMS demobilization

Criteria: Demobilization criteria should be specific to the event but may include:

• Stability of the food system situation and/or significant improvement to conditions
• Incidents associated with the response are at a level that can be managed at the municipal/P/T level
• Positioning of key OGDs and government partners
• A reduction in governance structure size due to decreased demand for coordinated F/P/T products or issue management
• Planning and situational awareness functions occurring less frequently
• Communications section reporting a decrease in media and public interest in the situation

Key activity: Decompression

The most important AAFC resource during event response is our staff. In addition to developing surge-capacity strategies for significant events, a special focus on the mental and physical health of staff who supported the response is required. To ensure a smooth transition back to their regular work, the following considerations should be taken:

• Debriefings for continual improvement
• Access to any required well-being supports
• Appropriate recognition for their efforts

An example of a well-being support could include the Health Canada Decompression Program.

Key activity: Recovery

Recovery consists of activities aimed at restoring normal conditions after a significant event. Agricultural recovery may range from hours to years depending on many factors such as hazard persistence, event magnitude, the size and vulnerability of the affected infrastructure, and the coping capabilities of the jurisdictions concerned.

While recovery activities are outside the scope of the PRP, it is recognized that activities such as financial support, scientific/analytical advice, and guidance to the food sector are examples of support that may require ongoing support from AAFC programs following an event to help address the long-term impacts.

5.0 After-action report

Following an event, an AAR process may be conducted to:

• document best practices and opportunities for improvement
• identify recommendations for specific, actionable improvements and corrective actions

An AAR is a critical part of the EM continuum, outlining a process for continuous improvement in response to exercises, incidents, planned or unplanned events. It is intended to facilitate the identification and the development of corrective actions and best practices for issues internal to AAFC and those affecting our direct relations with key stakeholders. It helps ensure that AAFC develops the most appropriate solutions.

The key to success is to foster a culture that is comfortable sharing observations, motivated to learn from others, and willing to make changes. This, in turn, will produce reliable data that supports risk and evidence-based planning and decision-making.

AAR Process

1. Collect
   Immediately following the de-escalation of AAFC's response, MISB's EMT will convene a hotwash with AAFC personnel who participated in response activities. For extended responses (such as, over 2 months), hotwashes may occur while the event is still ongoing to allow for potential corrective actions, ensuring continuous improvement.
2. Analyze
   Analysis allows hotwash observations to progress into lessons identified. This requires determining the root cause(s) of the observation and recommending corrective actions.
3. Report
   An AAR should include an event summary, an overview of the event, observations, general takeaways and concrete action items intended to resolve inefficiencies and capture lessons learned.
4. Endorse
   Action items in the AAR must be validated and endorsed by the implicated program(s)/region(s)/branch(es). Prioritization of corrective action items may be required to allow implementation with existing resources.
5. Implement
   Implementation of corrective actions is the responsibility of the identified program(s)/region(s)/branch(es). This step includes validating whether each corrective action has addressed the lesson identified.
6. Disseminate
   At this step, the AAR can be finalized and disseminated. MISB's EMT will manage a repository of lessons learned information and action items that may carry over to a future event, as applicable.