Access and Functional Needs Planning: Aligning Facilities, HR, and Emergency Management Before an Incident
An access and functional needs (AFN) annex can be thorough and still fall short if the people and processes it depends on are not coordinated. Facilities may be responsible for accessible routes, HR or student affairs may know who has requested assistance, IT may control alert systems, and emergency management may maintain the plan. But when those teams work separately, important details can fall between departments.
Effective access and functional needs planning connects those responsibilities before an incident. For companies, colleges, universities, and public health organizations, that means agreeing on who owns key tasks, how information will be handled, and how the plan will be tested.
AFN needs can relate to more than mobility. They may involve receiving and understanding information, maintaining health or access to medication, transportation, supervision or personal assistance, and support for a service animal. The relevant need may be permanent, temporary, or specific to an incident. Planning should focus on what assistance or access a person may need, not assumptions based on appearance or diagnosis.
FEMA’s Office of Disability Integration and Coordination offers additional context for integrating disability-related access and functional needs into emergency management.
Why an AFN plan can fail on paper
A plan may describe a general intention to assist people who need support without answering the operational questions that make that support possible:
Who maintains the notification or assistance-request process?
Is the accessible transportation agreement current, and who activates it?
Who is assigned to offer assistance if a person needs help evacuating?
Which shelter locations have been checked for accessible routes and restrooms?
If one alert channel fails, what is the backup?
If the answers are unclear, staff may be forced to improvise when time is limited. A plan becomes usable when responsibilities, contacts, resources, and backup procedures are assigned and reviewed, not simply written down.
Give each department a defined role
AFN readiness is shared work, but shared responsibility should not mean that no one owns the details. Each function should know what it maintains, what it provides to other teams, and who acts when the usual lead is unavailable.
Facilities: make the environment usable
Facilities teams can identify accessible egress routes, assembly points, shelter locations, and alternate routes if an exit or elevator is unavailable. They can also assess whether designated shelter areas offer accessible access to essential spaces, including restrooms.
Power planning is another important link. Some people rely on powered medical devices, mobility equipment, or communication devices. Facilities should know what backup-power arrangements exist, how they are maintained, and which spaces can support charging or other essential power needs. Plans should also describe what to do if the usual power source or location is unavailable.
HR and student affairs: understand assistance needs and protect information
HR and student affairs can establish a clear, confidential way for employees or students to request assistance before an incident. They can help determine how to maintain contact information, how a request reaches the response team, and how to share only the information needed to support a response.
No list should be treated as a complete picture of everyone who may need help. People may not register, their needs can change, and visitors or contractors may also require assistance. Staff need procedures for offering help respectfully and asking what support is useful rather than making assumptions.
IT and communications: make alerts accessible and redundant
An alert is only useful if people can receive and understand it. IT and communications teams should review whether emergency messages can reach people through more than one channel and in accessible formats. Depending on the organization and audience, that may include text, email, app notifications, audible announcements, visual alerts, captions, or sign language interpretation.
Messages should be clear about what is happening, what action people should take, and where they can get further information or assistance. FEMA’s guidance on alerting people with disabilities and people with access and functional needs is a useful reference when reviewing alerting practices.
Emergency management: connect the pieces
Emergency management should integrate AFN procedures into the organization’s emergency operations plan (EOP), exercises, and after-action reviews. That includes confirming who makes decisions, how departments exchange updates, how assistance is coordinated, and how response teams will account for people after an incident.
A useful handoff is specific: who contacts whom, using what method, by when, and what happens if there is no response? Cross-department planning is strengthened when those questions are answered together.
Set a regular alignment routine
A practical starting point is an annual AFN working-group review with representatives from facilities, HR or student affairs, IT and communications, and emergency management. Include other relevant functions, such as security, health services, transportation, or campus operations, when they have a role in the plan.
The meeting should produce updates and assigned follow-up, not just discussion. Review contact lists, accessible routes and shelter locations, transportation arrangements, alert channels, assistance procedures, and any unresolved exercise findings.
Organizations should also decide how people can request assistance before an incident. A pre-incident registration or opt-in process can help response teams plan for known needs and make direct follow-up possible. But it may not reach everyone, and people may be reluctant or unable to enroll. A process that relies only on registration can leave gaps.
A broader approach makes assistance available even to people who have not registered. Staff can be trained to offer support, explain available options, and ask what the person needs. Whichever approach an organization uses, it should explain how information is protected and shared, keep collection limited to what is needed, and establish a secure process for access and updates.
Review sheltering and transportation arrangements
Accessible mass care and sheltering means checking the whole path of access, not only the entrance. Review routes to sleeping areas, restrooms, dining and registration spaces, and confirm that communication and assistance are available. Consider how people can charge essential devices, access medication or health-related support, and remain with a service animal.
If the organization may need to move people, identify accessible transportation options in advance. Confirm who activates the arrangement, what the service can accommodate, and what the backup is if the primary provider is unavailable. Mutual aid or other partner arrangements can help address gaps, but they should be discussed and documented before they are needed. FEMA’s ADA Checklist for Emergency Shelters can support a shelter access review.
Decide how status will be reported
An incident creates pressure to understand who is safe, who needs help, and which locations have been checked. Establish a simple reporting process: who gathers updates, what information is needed, how it reaches the response lead, and how missing or unconfirmed status is handled. Make sure the process covers relevant groups such as employees or students, visitors, and people at alternate or off-site locations.
Test the handoffs with realistic exercise injects
A short tabletop exercise can reveal whether departments can work together when the plan meets a practical problem. Use injects that require coordination, not just awareness.
Try these examples:
Power outage: An outage affects people who use powered medical or mobility devices. Ask facilities what backup power is available, HR or student affairs how assistance requests are handled, and emergency management how the response team tracks needs and updates.
Shelter access problem: A designated shelter has no usable accessible restroom. Ask who identifies an alternative, who coordinates transport, how people are informed, and how the new location’s access is confirmed.
Single-channel alert: An emergency message is sent through one channel, but some people do not receive it. Ask IT and communications how the gap is detected, what alternate channels are activated, and who confirms that updated instructions are reaching the intended audience.
After the exercise, record findings in practical terms: what was unclear or unavailable, why it matters, who will address it, and when the action will be completed. Review those actions at the next working-group meeting and test significant changes in a later exercise. For more on inclusive preparedness, see Alpha Research Group’s AFN planning checklist for corporate and campus emergency plans.
Build alignment before it is urgent
Access and functional needs planning works best when facilities, HR or student affairs, IT and communications, and emergency management understand their individual responsibilities and practice the handoffs between them. An annual review, clear procedures for requesting assistance, accessible shelter and transportation arrangements, and targeted exercises can help identify gaps while there is still time to address them.
To explore Alpha Research Group’s emergency management training programs, including self-paced online courses and CEU-eligible offerings, visit alpharesearchgrp.com.
Comments