CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT
FACILITATORS GUIDE
Andrew Gissing
Risk Frontiers
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT FACILITATORS GUIDE | REPORT NO. 681.2021
Version Release history Date
1.0 Initial release of document 29/07/2021
© 2021 Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC
All material in this document, except as identified below, is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International Licence.
Material not licensed under the Creative Commons licence:
• Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources logo
• Cooperative Research Centres Program logo
• Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC logo
• All other logos
• All photographs, graphics and figures
All content not licenced under the Creative Commons licence is all rights
reserved. Permission must be sought from the copyright owner to use this
material.
Disclaimer:
Risk Frontiers, the Department of Home Affairs Emergency Management Australia,
Macquarie University and the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC advise that the
information contained in this publication comprises general statements based on
scientific research. The reader is advised and needs to be aware that such
information may be incomplete or unable to be used in any specific situation. No
reliance or actions must therefore be made on that information without seeking
prior expert professional, scientific and technical advice. To the extent permitted
by law, Risk Frontiers, the Department of Home Affairs Emergency Management
Australia, Macquarie University and the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC
(including its employees and consultants) exclude all liability to any person for any
consequences, including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses
and any other compensation, arising directly or indirectly from using this
publication (in part or in whole) and any information or material contained in it.
Publisher:
Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC
July 2021
Citation: Gissing A (2021) Capability maturity assessment facilitators guide,
Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC, Melbourne.
Cover: Photo 122117359 © Vlad Teodor | Dreamstime.com
1
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT FACILITATORS GUIDE | REPORT NO. 681.2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 3
Purpose 3
Audience 3
WHAT ARE CAPABILITY AND CAPACITY? 4
Capability development 4
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT 5
Accountability and coordination 5
Communicate and consult 5
Identify and assess risks 6
Develop scenarios 6
Assess capabilities 6
Workshops 9
Analysis and reporting 9
Improve capability 10
ATTACHMENT 1 – SCENARIO EXAMPLE 11
Tsunami 11
2
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT FACILITATORS GUIDE | REPORT NO. 681.2021
INTRODUCTION
Catastrophic events pose unique challenges and are inevitable. Previous reviews
have highlighted gaps in Australia’s preparedness for catastrophic disasters.
Australia has no recent experience of a catastrophe that has truly overwhelmed
our society.
An essential component of planning for severe-to-catastrophic disasters is to
develop an understanding of capability maturity to deliver the desired effect.
Knowledge of capability gaps can then be used to enhance planning and
identify alternate sources of capability.
The Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements stated:
Jurisdictional approaches to capacity and capability development
have served fire and emergency services well in the past. However,
climate and demographic changes are likely to increase the
demand on fire and emergency services. The ability of individual
jurisdictions to meet this demand at peak times is likely to become
increasingly difficult, prompting a need for increased resource
sharing. There is a need to consider capabilities nationally, and for a
more consistent and connected approach to capability planning
across jurisdictions.
The Australian Disaster Preparedness Framework outlines a direction to improve
understanding of national capability in the context of severe-to-catastrophic
disasters.
PURPOSE
This guide provides instructions on how to conduct a first-pass capability maturity
assessment for a jurisdiction to identify capability gaps and development
priorities.
AUDIENCE
This guide is directed towards those who may manage or participate in the
capability maturity assessment process.
3
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT FACILITATORS GUIDE | REPORT NO. 681.2021
WHAT ARE CAPABILITY AND CAPACITY?
Planning can only be effective if it is linked to a sound appreciation of capability
and capacity. Capability and capacity are defined as:
Capability is the collective ability and power to deliver and sustain an affect
within a specific context and timeframe.
Capacity is the key determinant of how long capability can be sustained for a
particular level of ability.
Consistent with the Australian Disaster Preparedness Framework capability
consists of five elements:
People: All personnel involved in undertaking emergency management
activities including community, all levels of government, non- government
organisations, agencies, business and volunteers.
Includes people with appropriate knowledge and skills with a focus on
leadership skills, technical skills and a culture of working as one.
Resources: The physical equipment and assets needed to undertake
emergency management activities. For example, infrastructure, fleet, IT
equipment, radios, communications equipment, consumables and
personal protective clothing, equipment and lifecycle management.
Governance: The enabling factors that emergency management
operates within including legislation, funding, authorising environment,
emergency management arrangements, doctrine and policy.
Systems: The systems, including data, that are used to deliver emergency
management outcomes such as learning and development, information
technology, financial, infrastructure and assets management, workforce
management, workplace health and safety, quality control and incident
management systems (such as AIIMS and ICCS+).
Processes: Documented or undocumented ways of delivering
emergency management such as capacity planning, risk management,
continuous improvement, information flow and planning 1.
CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT
The Australian Disaster Preparedness Framework (ADPF) provides a framework to
consider nationwide capability. The ADPF defines 21 national capabilities across
the disaster management phases of prevention, preparedness, response and
recovery. States and territories also maintain capability development
frameworks which identify capabilities required in the context of severe-to-
catastrophic disasters.
1 Australian Disaster Preparedness Framework
4
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT FACILITATORS GUIDE | REPORT NO. 681.2021
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT
The Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements
recommended that:
State and territory governments should have a structured process to
regularly assess the capacity and capability requirements of fire and
emergency services, in light of both current and future natural
disaster risk.
Through assessing the maturity of capability, we are able to identify strengths and
weaknesses across different capabilities and identify actions to enhance
capability and capacity.
Capability maturity assessment is a continual process and should be regularly
repeated to identify emerging gaps.
The process of conducting a capability maturity assessment is illustrated in Figure
1.
Figure 1: Capability maturity assessment process
The capability maturity assessment process comprises the following steps:
ACCOUNTABILITY AND COORDINATION
To manage the capability maturity assessment process a specific officer should
be identified as a project manager accountable for the project and overall
stakeholder engagement. Accountabilities for the ownership of specific
capabilities must be clear. Those with accountabilities for leading a capability
are referred to as capability owners and should be responsible for ensuring the
appropriate stakeholders are involved in the process.
To assist in the coordination of the process the project manager should develop,
in consultation with key stakeholders, a project management plan. It is also
advised to establish a steering committee to govern the process.
COMMUNICATE AND CONSULT
It is essential that all relevant stakeholders be involved in each aspect of the
capability maturity assessment process. Relevant stakeholders would include
lead and supporting agencies for each capability.
5
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT FACILITATORS GUIDE | REPORT NO. 681.2021
Communication and consultation can be planned through the development of
a stakeholder engagement strategy.
It is important, before commencing the process, to define key audiences for the
results of the capability maturity assessment process and how information will
inform their work.
IDENTIFY AND ASSESS RISKS
The assessment of capability is made against the risks that capabilities will be
deployed to manage. To identify and assess risks within the area of interest, the
steps described in the National Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines2 should
be followed.
DEVELOP SCENARIOS
The maturity of capabilities should be tested against severe-to-catastrophic
scenarios. To illustrate the likely impacts of such events, a series of realistic severe-
to-catastrophic disaster scenarios should be developed, which will test the
maturity of capabilities. These should be based upon the most significant risks
identified.
Scenarios might include single incident extreme events or compound disasters
comprising of multiple events occurring concurrently or in sequence. Future
scenarios can be utilised to test the maturity of capability within the context of a
warming climate and growing exposure to hazards.
An example of a scenario is provided in Attachment 1.
ASSESS CAPABILITIES
Capabilities can be assessed utilising the Capability Maturity Assessment Tool.
The tool consists of a series of criteria designed to measure the maturity of
individual capabilities across their component elements of people, resources,
governance, systems and processes.
6
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT FACILITATORS GUIDE | REPORT NO. 681.2021
Criteria are designed to measure maturity on a scale of one to four.
Score Level Scale
1 Informal Least mature
2 Developing
3 Established
4 Self-sustaining Most mature
Criteria include:
Trained, exercised and skilled personnel
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Insufficient trained, exercised
Insufficient trained, exercised and skilled personnel
Sufficient trained, exercised Number of trained, exercised
and skilled personnel. available, however capability
and skilled personnel readily and skilled personnel readily
Capability targets are not targets are established and
available when compared with available exceeds capability
understood understood with pathways in
capability targets targets.
place to achieve sufficient
capacity
Consideration of personnel surge capacity arrangements
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Arrangements for surge
Arrangements for surge Arrangements for surge
Arrangements for surge capacity are documented in
capacity are informal, reactive capacity are documented in
capacity have not been plans, regularly exercised and
and untested for major plans but untested for major
considered operate effectively during
emergencies emergencies major emergencies when
Personal capacity building pathways
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Collective capacity building
Collective capacity building
pathways are strategic
Capacity building pathways Capacity building pathways pathways exist but are
proactive and operating
are informal are organisation specific reactive. Culture of working as
effectively. Culture of working
one is maturing.
as one is embedded.
Sufficiency of physical resources
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Insufficient resources
available, however, capability
Sufficient resources readily
targets are established and Available resources readily
Insufficient resources available when compared with
understood with pathways in exceed capability targets
capability targets
place to achieve sufficient
capacity
Consideration of physical resource surge capacity arrangements
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Arrangements for surge
Arrangements for surge Arrangements for surge capacity are documented in
Arrangements for surge
capacity are informal, reactive capacity are documented in plans, regularly exercised and
capacity have not been
and untested for major plans but untested for major operate effectively during
considered
emergencies emergencies major emergencies when
tested
7
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT FACILITATORS GUIDE | REPORT NO. 681.2021
Physical resource capacity building pathways
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Collective resource capacity
Resource capacity building Collective resource capacity
Resource capacity building building pathways are
pathways are organisation building pathways exist but
pathways are informal strategic, risk based, proactive
specific are reactive
and/or operating effectively
Definition of roles and responsibilities
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Roles and responsibilities are Roles and responsibilities are Roles and responsibilities are Roles and responsibilities are
not defined inconsistently defined mostly well defined consistently well defined
Governance, strategy, monitoring, risk management and reporting
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Specific project / single
Collective governance,
agency-based governance,
monitoring, risk management,
capability planning, Collective governance, risk
capability planning and
No systematic governance, monitoring, risk management management, capability
reporting is actively connected
strategy, monitoring, risk and reporting. Collective planning, monitoring and
and exercised. Governance
management, and reporting governance largely reporting processes are
enables flexibility, adaptability
inconsistent and established
and transformational change.
disconnected.
Assurance and lessons learnt
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Assurance activities are Assurance activities are sector
Assurance activities are limited Independent sector wide risk-
organisation specific and lack wide and collaborative though
and inconsistent based assurance is provided
independence lack independence
Lessons learnt culture is Lessons learnt culture and Strong lessons learnt culture
Poor lessons learnt culture
emerging systems exist and management system
Systems
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Systems are user friendly, fit
Systems are user friendly, fit
Systems are one-off, project for collective purpose and are
for collective purpose and are
specific or not well embedded. interoperable across
interoperable across
Systems are insufficient, Systems might be connected organisations. Active
organisations. Limited ongoing
operate in isolation and have and interoperable at an connection with system users
resourcing for systems
suffered from previous failures organisation level, but not to enhance systems with
enhancement to meet
across organisations sustainable ongoing
changing purpose
resourcing
Business continuity
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Business continuity and IT
Business continuity and IT Business continuity and IT
Business continuity and IT recovery plans are
recovery plans are not recovery plans are being
recovery plans are established established, tested and
developed or well outdated developed or reviewed
proven to be robust
8
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT FACILITATORS GUIDE | REPORT NO. 681.2021
Process maturity
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Collective processes fully
Collective processes exist but
Collective processes embedded, tested and
with limited collective adoption
documented and clearly regularly updated with
Processes are informal, across
visible. Limited appetite or feedback loops across
organisation and hazard agencies/organisations.
capacity to refine in proactive organisations. Proactive
specific Reactive refinement when
manner anticipation and resolution of
problem emerges
problems not yet established
Process understanding
1 = Informal 2 = Developing 3 = Established 4 = Self-sustaining
Processes are partially Processes are well
Processes are not well understood by personnel, Processes are understood by understood by personnel and
understood by personnel though efforts are underway personnel have been exercised/tested
to improve understanding and proven to be robust
The use of the tool’s criteria enables a consistent first pass evaluation of
capability. The tool does not replace detailed models of capability maturity
assessment: instead, it allows for a faster approach to the appreciation of
capability maturity.
The tool is supported by an Excel workbook to record and capture results,
available from bnhcrc.com.au/capability-maturity-assessment-tool.
WORKSHOPS
It is recommended that the tool be utilised in a workshop format to promote
discussion about each capability element before it is scored. Discussion assists to
build a shared understanding of capability maturity amongst stakeholders and
to identify specific strengths and weaknesses, including improvement
opportunities. A workshop should be undertaken for each capability to be
assessed.
It is preferable that facilitation is consistent across all workshops to maintain
consistent expectations and directions. The workshop process can be
conducted via video conferencing or face-to-face. Where there are a large
number of capabilities to assess it its recommended to prioritise capabilities and
undertake workshops in stages to minimise stakeholder fatigue.
Stakeholders can be provided a copy of the criteria for review and consideration
prior to the relevant workshop.
ANALYSIS AND REPORTING
The outcomes of the assessment should be analysed. This will include:
• Analysis of discussions regarding each capability to identify strengths and
weaknesses
9
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT FACILITATORS GUIDE | REPORT NO. 681.2021
• Analysis of criteria scoring to identify overall maturity of capabilities as well
as capability elements. Scores can be graphed for visual impact.
No standard reporting format is specifically recommended. Reporting should be
based upon stakeholder needs.
Relevant recommendations should be made regarding the improvement of
capability.
IMPROVE CAPABILITY
Based upon the outcomes of the assessment, capability gaps and
recommendations should be prioritized. Capabilities can be improved via:
• Partnerships and arrangements with other states/territories and the
Commonwealth
• Development of partnerships with the commercial and community
organisations
• Development of arrangements and relationships to incorporate emergent
volunteer efforts
• Additional investment to grow existing capabilities (e.g. purchase of
resources or recruitment of personnel)
• Invest in innovation to enhance the productivity of capabilities.
In some instances, further detailed modelling of specific priority capabilities may
be required to identify the specific extent of gaps to inform business cases.
Outcome
Capbility is improved.
10
CAPABILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT FACILITATORS GUIDE | REPORT NO. 681.2021
ATTACHMENT 1 – SCENARIO EXAMPLE
TSUNAMI
During a February heatwave, a 3.9 magnitude earthquake occurred offshore of
Wollongong, triggering a landslide on the edge of the continental shelf. The
landslide resulted in a large localised tsunami which impacted upon the Illawarra
Region with no warning. Reports indicated that there have been at least four
waves separated by 30 minutes, the first striking the area at 11am.
Severe damage has occurred from Austinmer to Sussex Inlet with moderate
impacts (strong rips, inundation of beaches and low-lying infrastructure and
sinking of small vessels) being experienced north to Gosford and south to
Batemans Bay. There are over 6000 collapsed homes and other structures initially
identified. There are reports of at least 2500 fatalities, with thousands of people
now missing feared dead. Over 3500 injured persons have presented at local
hospitals. Many people remain in the upper sections of buildings or have fled to
higher ground.
At the time of the disaster, beaches were full and a local surf carnival was being
held at North Wollongong beach. Many people are feared to have been
washed into nearby lagoons and streams.
Several large ships moored off Port Kembla and other smaller watercraft are
missing.
Several fires are burning in residential areas. A ship is also on fire in Port Kembla
after sustaining damage and bunker fuel is leaking, threatening the local marine
environment.
Infrastructure (roads, rail, power, telecommunications) in coastal areas have
been destroyed, with communication and power outages impacting much of
the region. Three sewage plants have been destroyed and are now discharging
raw sewage into the ocean. The Albion Park airport is inoperable due to tsunami
debris on the runway.
There are thousands of dead and injured animals. Thousands of cows along the
lower reaches of the Shoalhaven River were washed into the sea. Many are now
left injured along beaches.
Severe thunderstorms are now moving through the area and Sydney Airport has
been closed due to large hail and lightning. Forecast temperatures are close to
40 degrees for the next several days.
An Australian USAR team, AUSMAT and defence resources are currently on
deployment following a major cyclone that struck Fiji several days ago. Other
international resources are also assisting the government of Fiji. Terror threat levels
have recently been escalated following a foiled terror plot in Perth.
11
