School Organized Locally Assisted Community Emergency‐Management - Revision history

Pinfold at 21:19, November 23, 2024

2024-11-23T21:19:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:19, November 23, 2024
Line 21:		Line 21:
	The 1921 Buckman Elementary School (Buckman for short, see Figure 1), located in the Buckman neighborhood community of southeast Portland, OR, is a publicly funded school district that educates children in Southeast School District (Portland School District 1j), Multnomah County and serves 448 students in grades K‐5. Enrollment by gender is Female 56%, Male 43%; and Minority enrollment is 32% of the student body (Black or African American 3.8%, American Indian/AK Native 0.5%, Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander 0.7%, Hispanic/Latino 13.7%, Multiple Race 13.7%, White 68%). Buckman was selected for this pilot project due to its various uniqueness including being an art magnet school embedded in a mixed‐use community neighborhood. Buckman is an example of a school in a highly diverse cultural community with the most diverse graduating class in its local geography.		The 1921 Buckman Elementary School (Buckman for short, see Figure 1), located in the Buckman neighborhood community of southeast Portland, OR, is a publicly funded school district that educates children in Southeast School District (Portland School District 1j), Multnomah County and serves 448 students in grades K‐5. Enrollment by gender is Female 56%, Male 43%; and Minority enrollment is 32% of the student body (Black or African American 3.8%, American Indian/AK Native 0.5%, Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander 0.7%, Hispanic/Latino 13.7%, Multiple Race 13.7%, White 68%). Buckman was selected for this pilot project due to its various uniqueness including being an art magnet school embedded in a mixed‐use community neighborhood. Buckman is an example of a school in a highly diverse cultural community with the most diverse graduating class in its local geography.

	[[File:Buckman Hazard maps.jpg\|thumb\|~~1200px~~\|Figure 2. Hazard maps of Wildfire, Earthquake, and Flood in the greater Portland, OR area, with a community‐led network of Community Resilience Hubs (in green our pilot CRH and other potential CRHs in the hazards zone in red).]]		[[File:Buckman Hazard maps.jpg\|thumb\|1250px\|Figure 2. Hazard maps of Wildfire, Earthquake, and Flood in the greater Portland, OR area, with a community‐led network of Community Resilience Hubs (in green our pilot CRH and other potential CRHs in the hazards zone in red).]]

	During an initial planning phase the project team implemented a preliminary multi‐hazard disaster risk and vulnerability assessment of the Multnomah County, Portland, OR (Figure 2) and conducted three main community resilience workshops to engage and unify stakeholders, understand resilience needs of the community and disaster scenarios, and assess implications of using digital twin technology. The initial CRH model for the school was a plausible `physical place’ to serve as a focal point for the community to share their knowledge, needs, and experience; (2) receive support, safety, and access to services; and (3) learn skills towards building stronger community resilience. To serve as a CRH, the school would generally require a series of upgrades to ensure that the facility is able to provide critical services in three operating states of normal, the event of a disruption (wildfire, flooding, earthquake), as well as recovery. Buckman is undergoing current and planned resilience renovations to increase the facilities’ capacity towards serving as a CRH (see the FEOR document). A dedicated team of community volunteers (youth and young parents) would be educated about disaster preparedness and trained in disasterresponse and management skills to serve the community within the school CRH (the SOLACE Team). However, through the initial Stage 1 engagements with the school community, emergency managers, and stakeholders, the project team learned that although the `physical place’ model would build resilience capacity towards disaster management and response, there remains a gap between capacity and utilization, identified as the ``communication” gap. Many community and stakeholder members pointed out that it is not until the whole community is connected and can effectively communicate, that a School CRH would become a place to convene and be practically utilized. Part of the problem of communication is prevalence of numerous community groups involved and lack of coordination with emergency management authority resulting in difference in nomenclature and the lack of a common baseline. Preparing a community for disaster relies heavily on the school CRH’s ability to communicate with the surrounding community.		During an initial planning phase the project team implemented a preliminary multi‐hazard disaster risk and vulnerability assessment of the Multnomah County, Portland, OR (Figure 2) and conducted three main community resilience workshops to engage and unify stakeholders, understand resilience needs of the community and disaster scenarios, and assess implications of using digital twin technology. The initial CRH model for the school was a plausible `physical place’ to serve as a focal point for the community to share their knowledge, needs, and experience; (2) receive support, safety, and access to services; and (3) learn skills towards building stronger community resilience. To serve as a CRH, the school would generally require a series of upgrades to ensure that the facility is able to provide critical services in three operating states of normal, the event of a disruption (wildfire, flooding, earthquake), as well as recovery. Buckman is undergoing current and planned resilience renovations to increase the facilities’ capacity towards serving as a CRH (see the FEOR document). A dedicated team of community volunteers (youth and young parents) would be educated about disaster preparedness and trained in disasterresponse and management skills to serve the community within the school CRH (the SOLACE Team). However, through the initial Stage 1 engagements with the school community, emergency managers, and stakeholders, the project team learned that although the `physical place’ model would build resilience capacity towards disaster management and response, there remains a gap between capacity and utilization, identified as the ``communication” gap. Many community and stakeholder members pointed out that it is not until the whole community is connected and can effectively communicate, that a School CRH would become a place to convene and be practically utilized. Part of the problem of communication is prevalence of numerous community groups involved and lack of coordination with emergency management authority resulting in difference in nomenclature and the lack of a common baseline. Preparing a community for disaster relies heavily on the school CRH’s ability to communicate with the surrounding community.

Pinfold at 02:11, January 24, 2024

2024-01-24T02:11:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:11, January 24, 2024
Line 18:		Line 18:
	#building resilience capacity and access to resources & services (Service Hub) while integrating resilience workforce development and training to enhance preparedness and empower community‐led response to disaster events (wildfire, earthquake, and floods).		#building resilience capacity and access to resources & services (Service Hub) while integrating resilience workforce development and training to enhance preparedness and empower community‐led response to disaster events (wildfire, earthquake, and floods).
	[[File:Buckman Location.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Figure 1. Buckman Elementary School Location]]		[[File:Buckman Location.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Figure 1. Buckman Elementary School Location]]

	The 1921 Buckman Elementary School (Buckman for short, see Figure 1), located in the Buckman neighborhood community of southeast Portland, OR, is a publicly funded school district that educates children in Southeast School District (Portland School District 1j), Multnomah County and serves 448 students in grades K‐5. Enrollment by gender is Female 56%, Male 43%; and Minority enrollment is 32% of the student body (Black or African American 3.8%, American Indian/AK Native 0.5%, Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander 0.7%, Hispanic/Latino 13.7%, Multiple Race 13.7%, White 68%). Buckman was selected for this pilot project due to its various uniqueness including being an art magnet school embedded in a mixed‐use community neighborhood. Buckman is an example of a school in a highly diverse cultural community with the most diverse graduating class in its local geography.		The 1921 Buckman Elementary School (Buckman for short, see Figure 1), located in the Buckman neighborhood community of southeast Portland, OR, is a publicly funded school district that educates children in Southeast School District (Portland School District 1j), Multnomah County and serves 448 students in grades K‐5. Enrollment by gender is Female 56%, Male 43%; and Minority enrollment is 32% of the student body (Black or African American 3.8%, American Indian/AK Native 0.5%, Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander 0.7%, Hispanic/Latino 13.7%, Multiple Race 13.7%, White 68%). Buckman was selected for this pilot project due to its various uniqueness including being an art magnet school embedded in a mixed‐use community neighborhood. Buckman is an example of a school in a highly diverse cultural community with the most diverse graduating class in its local geography.

Amarcus at 00:47, January 24, 2024

2024-01-24T00:47:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:47, January 24, 2024
Line 2:		Line 2:
	\|image=Buchman School.jpg		\|image=Buchman School.jpg
	\|imagecaption=Buckman School		\|imagecaption=Buckman School
	\|team-members=Georgia Tech~~, OpenCommons~~, Portland State University		\|team-members=Georgia Tech, Portland State University, OpenCommons, Marcus Consulting Group, WeAccel
	\|poc=Jiri Skopek		\|poc=Jiri Skopek, Ann Marcus, Deborah Acosta, Stan Curtis
	\|location_city=Portland OR		\|location_city=Portland OR
	\|status=Concept only Stage		\|status=Concept only Stage
	\|sector=Resilience		\|sector=Wellbeing, Resilience, Smart Buildings
	\|chapter=City Resilience		\|chapter=City Resilience
	\|summary=Community Resilience Hubs (CRHs)~~, are~~ community‐serving facilities augmented to support residents and coordinate resource distribution and services before, during, or after a natural hazard event~~. This project is focused~~ on developing a community‐led sociotechnical infrastructure framework for adapting a public school (Buckman Elementary School) ~~to become~~ a ~~Pilot School CRH~~.		\|summary=The School Organized Locally Assisted Community Emergency‐Management (SOLACE) project focused on the use of a community school as a community resilience hub for its surrounding community. Community Resilience Hubs (CRHs) can be defined as community‐serving facilities augmented to support residents and coordinate resource distribution of resources and services to the surrounding community. This project focused specifically on the use of a CRM to support community member needs before, during, or after a natural hazard event and on developing a community‐led sociotechnical infrastructure framework for adapting a public school (Buckman Elementary School) as the pilot CRH. In 2022, this project received a NSF Planning Grant.
	}}		}}
	__NOTOC__		__NOTOC__

Pinfold at 21:38, January 5, 2024

2024-01-05T21:38:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:38, January 5, 2024
Line 167:		Line 167:
	\|}		\|}

	==7 Scalability, Sustainability, and Transferability ==		==6 Scalability, Sustainability, and Transferability ==

	Our proposed plan for guiding Buckman Elementary School to become a community resilience hub is designed to be scalable, sustainable, and transferable to other schools and districts across the state of Oregon and the United States.		Our proposed plan for guiding Buckman Elementary School to become a community resilience hub is designed to be scalable, sustainable, and transferable to other schools and districts across the state of Oregon and the United States.

Pinfold at 21:26, January 5, 2024

2024-01-05T21:26:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:26, January 5, 2024
Line 32:		Line 32:

	Figure 4 illustrates schematically the team brought together to execute this proposed project. The proposal team members have a history of collaboration across disciplinary and institutional boundaries, technology domains, and community affiliations.		Figure 4 illustrates schematically the team brought together to execute this proposed project. The proposal team members have a history of collaboration across disciplinary and institutional boundaries, technology domains, and community affiliations.
	[[File:Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships.jpg\|thumb\|600px\|'''Figure 4'''. Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships and CRH sociotechnical infrastructure elements.]] At the core of the figure, is the Core Civic‐Academic Partners team. The second layer is comprised of the Stakeholder Partners at the emergency management‐, school‐, community‐, and technology‐level stakeholders. The effort is led by a set of core team members that are part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)’s Global Community Technology Challenge (GCTC) SuperClusters (in particular, the Smart Buildings and Mobility SuperCluster). '''[[Wilfred Pinfold]]''', Lead Civic Partner (Civic Partner) is an expert in leading industry, academic, government and community partnerships to deliver advanced technology solutions, who will lead the civic partners team and the civic partnerships and engagement activities taking place in the project site, Portland, OR; '''[[Jiri Skopek]]''', Project Manager (Civic Partner), is Chair of the Smart Buildings GCTC SuperCluster and he specializes in community climate action through the 2030 Districts network and smart buildings and cities. He is a high‐performance building districts expert and will lead community engagement with district infrastructure including energy and how this infrastructure responds to stress. He is joined in this core team leadership effort by '''[[Stan Curtis]]''', Civic Partnerships Lead (Civic Partner), an expert in introducing technology solutions to municipal governments and gaining community support; he will lead partnerships with Local & State governments, Emergency Managers and the School Administration; and '''[[Ann M. Marcus]]''', Community Communications Lead (Civic Partner), a Global Communications Strategy expert will lead community and school communications with focus on whole community response. '''[[Deborah Acosta]]''', Civic Engagement Lead (Civic Partner), is an expert in municipal technology deployment and public communications will lead public awareness and workforce development. Finally, '''[[Ken Montler]]''', Technology Partner on Mobility (Civic Partner) is an expert in vehicle Automation, Electrification, Connectivity and Sharing (ACES), and will lead all aspects of mobility including vehicle connectivity, battery management, Vehicle‐to‐grid (V2G) and V2 Everything. They will lead the major civic partnerships and engagement activities in Table 1, described later in this proposal, which focuses on building the community network and understanding the community’s needs and vulnerabilities. The core team leadership includes '''[[Gregory Durgin]]''', Co‐PI (Academic Partner) who specializes in digital twin networks and parallel intelligence and has expertise in wireless power transfer and harvesting, will lead digital twin platform development and network integrations listed in Table 2; and '''[[Neda Mohammadi]]''', PI (Academic Partner), who will provide overall leadership to the project and who has completed numerous projects on social and infrastructure networks, disaster dynamics, and has conducted experiments with partner communities in the state of Georgia (GA) on infrastructure utilizing digital twins. She specializes in disaster decision makings with smart city digital twins, city infrastructure data analytics, human‐infrastructure interactions, and virtualization. She will provide overall direction and oversight of all project components, including the research and civic partnerships and engagement activities, and will lead the design and implementation of the digital twin platform and the associated data analyses, simulations, and virtualizations. The core team/academic‐civic partners are described in Table 1.		[[File:Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships.jpg\|thumb\|600px\|'''Figure 4'''. Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships and CRH sociotechnical infrastructure elements.]] At the core of the figure, is the Core Civic‐Academic Partners team. The second layer is comprised of the Stakeholder Partners at the emergency management‐, school‐, community‐, and technology‐level stakeholders. The effort is led by a set of core team members that are part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)’s Global Community Technology Challenge (GCTC) SuperClusters (in particular, the Smart Buildings and Mobility SuperCluster). '''[[Wilfred Pinfold]]''', Lead Civic Partner (Civic Partner) is an expert in leading industry, academic, government and community partnerships to deliver advanced technology solutions, who will lead the civic partners team and the civic partnerships and engagement activities taking place in the project site, Portland, OR; '''[[Jiri Skopek]]''', Project Manager (Civic Partner), is Chair of the Smart Buildings GCTC SuperCluster and he specializes in community climate action through the 2030 Districts network and smart buildings and cities. He is a high‐performance building districts expert and will lead community engagement with district infrastructure including energy and how this infrastructure responds to stress. He is joined in this core team leadership effort by '''[[Stan Curtis]]''', Civic Partnerships Lead (Civic Partner), an expert in introducing technology solutions to municipal governments and gaining community support; he will lead partnerships with Local & State governments, Emergency Managers and the School Administration; and '''[[Ann Marcus]]''', Community Communications Lead (Civic Partner), a Global Communications Strategy expert will lead community and school communications with focus on whole community response. '''[[Deborah Acosta]]''', Civic Engagement Lead (Civic Partner), is an expert in municipal technology deployment and public communications will lead public awareness and workforce development. Finally, '''[[Ken Montler]]''', Technology Partner on Mobility (Civic Partner) is an expert in vehicle Automation, Electrification, Connectivity and Sharing (ACES), and will lead all aspects of mobility including vehicle connectivity, battery management, Vehicle‐to‐grid (V2G) and V2 Everything. They will lead the major civic partnerships and engagement activities in Table 1, described later in this proposal, which focuses on building the community network and understanding the community’s needs and vulnerabilities. The core team leadership includes '''Gregory Durgin''', Co‐PI (Academic Partner) who specializes in digital twin networks and parallel intelligence and has expertise in wireless power transfer and harvesting, will lead digital twin platform development and network integrations listed in Table 2; and '''[[Neda Mohammadi]]''', PI (Academic Partner), who will provide overall leadership to the project and who has completed numerous projects on social and infrastructure networks, disaster dynamics, and has conducted experiments with partner communities in the state of Georgia (GA) on infrastructure utilizing digital twins. She specializes in disaster decision makings with smart city digital twins, city infrastructure data analytics, human‐infrastructure interactions, and virtualization. She will provide overall direction and oversight of all project components, including the research and civic partnerships and engagement activities, and will lead the design and implementation of the digital twin platform and the associated data analyses, simulations, and virtualizations. The core team/academic‐civic partners are described in Table 1.

	[[File:Civic‐Academic Partners.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Table 1. Civic‐Academic Partners]]		[[File:Civic‐Academic Partners.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Table 1. Civic‐Academic Partners]]

Pinfold at 21:24, January 5, 2024

2024-01-05T21:24:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:24, January 5, 2024
Line 32:		Line 32:

	Figure 4 illustrates schematically the team brought together to execute this proposed project. The proposal team members have a history of collaboration across disciplinary and institutional boundaries, technology domains, and community affiliations.		Figure 4 illustrates schematically the team brought together to execute this proposed project. The proposal team members have a history of collaboration across disciplinary and institutional boundaries, technology domains, and community affiliations.
	[[File:Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships.jpg\|thumb\|600px\|'''Figure 4'''. Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships and CRH sociotechnical infrastructure elements.]] At the core of the figure, is the Core Civic‐Academic Partners team. The second layer is comprised of the Stakeholder Partners at the emergency management‐, school‐, community‐, and technology‐level stakeholders. The effort is led by a set of core team members that are part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)’s Global Community Technology Challenge (GCTC) SuperClusters (in particular, the Smart Buildings and Mobility SuperCluster). '''Wilfred Pinfold''', Lead Civic Partner (Civic Partner) is an expert in leading industry, academic, government and community partnerships to deliver advanced technology solutions, who will lead the civic partners team and the civic partnerships and engagement activities taking place in the project site, Portland, OR; '''Jiri Skopek''', Project Manager (Civic Partner), is Chair of the Smart Buildings GCTC SuperCluster and he specializes in community climate action through the 2030 Districts network and smart buildings and cities. He is a high‐performance building districts expert and will lead community engagement with district infrastructure including energy and how this infrastructure responds to stress. He is joined in this core team leadership effort by Stan Curtis, Civic Partnerships Lead (Civic Partner), an expert in introducing technology solutions to municipal governments and gaining community support; he will lead partnerships with Local & State governments, Emergency Managers and the School Administration; and '''Ann M. Marcus''', Community Communications Lead (Civic Partner), a Global Communications Strategy expert will lead community and school communications with focus on whole community response. '''Deborah Acosta''', Civic Engagement Lead (Civic Partner), is an expert in municipal technology deployment and public communications will lead public awareness and workforce development. Finally, '''Ken Montler''', Technology Partner on Mobility (Civic Partner) is an expert in vehicle Automation, Electrification, Connectivity and Sharing (ACES), and will lead all aspects of mobility including vehicle connectivity, battery management, Vehicle‐to‐grid (V2G) and V2 Everything. They will lead the major civic partnerships and engagement activities in Table 1, described later in this proposal, which focuses on building the community network and understanding the community’s needs and vulnerabilities. The core team leadership includes '''Gregory Durgin''', Co‐PI (Academic Partner) who specializes in digital twin networks and parallel intelligence and has expertise in wireless power transfer and harvesting, will lead digital twin platform development and network integrations listed in Table 2; and '''Neda Mohammadi''', PI (Academic Partner), who will provide overall leadership to the project and who has completed numerous projects on social and infrastructure networks, disaster dynamics, and has conducted experiments with partner communities in the state of Georgia (GA) on infrastructure utilizing digital twins. She specializes in disaster decision makings with smart city digital twins, city infrastructure data analytics, human‐infrastructure interactions, and virtualization. She will provide overall direction and oversight of all project components, including the research and civic partnerships and engagement activities, and will lead the design and implementation of the digital twin platform and the associated data analyses, simulations, and virtualizations. The core team/academic‐civic partners are described in Table 1.		[[File:Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships.jpg\|thumb\|600px\|'''Figure 4'''. Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships and CRH sociotechnical infrastructure elements.]] At the core of the figure, is the Core Civic‐Academic Partners team. The second layer is comprised of the Stakeholder Partners at the emergency management‐, school‐, community‐, and technology‐level stakeholders. The effort is led by a set of core team members that are part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)’s Global Community Technology Challenge (GCTC) SuperClusters (in particular, the Smart Buildings and Mobility SuperCluster). '''[[Wilfred Pinfold]]''', Lead Civic Partner (Civic Partner) is an expert in leading industry, academic, government and community partnerships to deliver advanced technology solutions, who will lead the civic partners team and the civic partnerships and engagement activities taking place in the project site, Portland, OR; '''[[Jiri Skopek]]''', Project Manager (Civic Partner), is Chair of the Smart Buildings GCTC SuperCluster and he specializes in community climate action through the 2030 Districts network and smart buildings and cities. He is a high‐performance building districts expert and will lead community engagement with district infrastructure including energy and how this infrastructure responds to stress. He is joined in this core team leadership effort by '''[[Stan Curtis]]''', Civic Partnerships Lead (Civic Partner), an expert in introducing technology solutions to municipal governments and gaining community support; he will lead partnerships with Local & State governments, Emergency Managers and the School Administration; and '''[[Ann M. Marcus]]''', Community Communications Lead (Civic Partner), a Global Communications Strategy expert will lead community and school communications with focus on whole community response. '''[[Deborah Acosta]]''', Civic Engagement Lead (Civic Partner), is an expert in municipal technology deployment and public communications will lead public awareness and workforce development. Finally, '''[[Ken Montler]]''', Technology Partner on Mobility (Civic Partner) is an expert in vehicle Automation, Electrification, Connectivity and Sharing (ACES), and will lead all aspects of mobility including vehicle connectivity, battery management, Vehicle‐to‐grid (V2G) and V2 Everything. They will lead the major civic partnerships and engagement activities in Table 1, described later in this proposal, which focuses on building the community network and understanding the community’s needs and vulnerabilities. The core team leadership includes '''[[Gregory Durgin]]''', Co‐PI (Academic Partner) who specializes in digital twin networks and parallel intelligence and has expertise in wireless power transfer and harvesting, will lead digital twin platform development and network integrations listed in Table 2; and '''[[Neda Mohammadi]]''', PI (Academic Partner), who will provide overall leadership to the project and who has completed numerous projects on social and infrastructure networks, disaster dynamics, and has conducted experiments with partner communities in the state of Georgia (GA) on infrastructure utilizing digital twins. She specializes in disaster decision makings with smart city digital twins, city infrastructure data analytics, human‐infrastructure interactions, and virtualization. She will provide overall direction and oversight of all project components, including the research and civic partnerships and engagement activities, and will lead the design and implementation of the digital twin platform and the associated data analyses, simulations, and virtualizations. The core team/academic‐civic partners are described in Table 1.

	[[File:Civic‐Academic Partners.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Table 1. Civic‐Academic Partners]]		[[File:Civic‐Academic Partners.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Table 1. Civic‐Academic Partners]]
Line 95:		Line 95:
	Global Impact. Through direct collaboration with the NIST GCTC group, this project has the opportunity to participate in NIST GCTC sponsored events, which bring together local governments, nonprofit organizations, academic institutions, technologists, social scientists, and corporations from around the world, who seek to develop smart cities and communities. These events include: (1) Global City Teams Challenge Expo: Usually co‐hosted by multiple U.S. federal agencies, the Expo is the largest U.S. Government‐hosted Smart City event for learning about smart city and community success stories and presenting findings of projects to leaders in industry, academia, and local, regional, and state government; (2) Global Tech Jam: Led by the Technology Association of Oregon, and recently held in Portland, Oregon in partnership with NIST, NTIA, Portland General Electric, ESRI, Google, Comcast Business, and Urban Systems, etc., The Global Tech Jam showcases potential technology solutions for cities and addresses key related issues (e.g., technology acquisition). Finally, this highly interdisciplinary and multi‐domain civic‐academic collaboration will enhance infrastructure for collaboration by establishing a research and pedagogical cooperation that crosses academic, community, government, and industry partnership boundaries.		Global Impact. Through direct collaboration with the NIST GCTC group, this project has the opportunity to participate in NIST GCTC sponsored events, which bring together local governments, nonprofit organizations, academic institutions, technologists, social scientists, and corporations from around the world, who seek to develop smart cities and communities. These events include: (1) Global City Teams Challenge Expo: Usually co‐hosted by multiple U.S. federal agencies, the Expo is the largest U.S. Government‐hosted Smart City event for learning about smart city and community success stories and presenting findings of projects to leaders in industry, academia, and local, regional, and state government; (2) Global Tech Jam: Led by the Technology Association of Oregon, and recently held in Portland, Oregon in partnership with NIST, NTIA, Portland General Electric, ESRI, Google, Comcast Business, and Urban Systems, etc., The Global Tech Jam showcases potential technology solutions for cities and addresses key related issues (e.g., technology acquisition). Finally, this highly interdisciplinary and multi‐domain civic‐academic collaboration will enhance infrastructure for collaboration by establishing a research and pedagogical cooperation that crosses academic, community, government, and industry partnership boundaries.

	~~==4 Results from Prior NSF Support ==~~

	'''PI Mohammadi''': (NSF award #2228679; $49,436.00; 10/2022‐3/2023) PI Mohammadi’s most closely related support is her current project entitled “CIVIC‐PG Track B Digital Twin‐based Framework for Development of Schools as Smart & Connected Community Resilience Hubs”. Intellectual Merit: This ongoing research takes critical steps towards a transformative sociotechnical infrastructure to enable and empower more resilient communities. The project has two primary goals: Goal 1 (PG): Understand the sociotechnical infrastructure of a community‐led Community Resilience Hub (CRH) by implementing a digital twin‐based framework for a Pilot School CRH that integrates evolving community needs and resources to facilitate emergency response; and Goal 2 (FA): Cultivate School CRHs by establishing a Community Resilience Network (CRN) that is based on updated city management and community‐led strategies towards expanding CRH resource resilience capacity, distributed disaster response (across vulnerable communities and CRHs), and data‐driven decision‐ making on disaster response. Broader Impacts: This research and demonstration project will improve community self‐sufficiency reaching more community members in need while also establishing the value of developing a network of community resilience hubs in conjunction with community and city leaders and first responders that can be replicated in other communities across the US. Outcomes will be disseminated in community workshops, academic conferences, and NIST‐sponsored Global community Technology Challenge (GCTC) sponsored events. The research will train a graduate student and engage undergraduate interns. Products: The project was recently awarded and therefore no new results exist. No publications is, thus far, produced under this current award.		==4 Management Plan ==

	'''Co‐PI Durgin (NSF award #2228679, $212,000; 09/01/2014‐12/31/2018) PI Durgin’s most relevant support is entitled “CCSS''': Collaborative Research: Science of Temporal Fading for RF‐Based Environment Monitoring,” Intellectual Merit: This work developed new techniques low‐powered sensing and RF radio tomography. Broader Impacts: include use by start‐up companies and industry to build RF safety and tracking systems, as well as YouTube™ lectures on wireless sensors. Products: this research has resulted in 10 peer‐ reviewed publications with corresponding citations denoted by “[GD##]” in the References section.

	==5 Management Plan ==

	Table 1, and Figure 3, indicate the affiliations and expertise, roles, and responsibilities of each member of the highly interdisciplinary project team. The project will be managed through three primary levels of engagement between civic and academic partners as described in Table 4 below. These partnerships will be managed through a series of (1) SemiMonthly Co‐ design workshop/meetings (Virtual) with Core Partners; (2) Monthly Participatory workshop/meetings (Hybrid) with Stakeholder Partners; and Quarterly workshop/events (In‐person/Hybrid) with Steering Committee Partners. The in‐person meeting with be led by the Core civic partner team in Portland, OR. The virtual components of these meetings as well as regular virtual project research progress meetings will be done through Zoom virtual meetings. This practice has been successfully accomplished during the NSF CIVIC‐PG project. The research team involves a postdoctoral scholar and graduate research assistants from different disciplinary backgrounds, who will be receiving experience in interdisciplinary collaboration in research and practice.		Table 1, and Figure 3, indicate the affiliations and expertise, roles, and responsibilities of each member of the highly interdisciplinary project team. The project will be managed through three primary levels of engagement between civic and academic partners as described in Table 4 below. These partnerships will be managed through a series of (1) SemiMonthly Co‐ design workshop/meetings (Virtual) with Core Partners; (2) Monthly Participatory workshop/meetings (Hybrid) with Stakeholder Partners; and Quarterly workshop/events (In‐person/Hybrid) with Steering Committee Partners. The in‐person meeting with be led by the Core civic partner team in Portland, OR. The virtual components of these meetings as well as regular virtual project research progress meetings will be done through Zoom virtual meetings. This practice has been successfully accomplished during the NSF CIVIC‐PG project. The research team involves a postdoctoral scholar and graduate research assistants from different disciplinary backgrounds, who will be receiving experience in interdisciplinary collaboration in research and practice.
Line 108:		Line 103:
	\|'''(1) Core Partners''': Active engagement in determining the needs, problems, and goals integrated with research questions, data collection, co‐design of and discover of the solution, implementation of the project, analysis of results, and dissemination of findings – ''Civic Partner leads (NIST GCTC)''		\|'''(1) Core Partners''': Active engagement in determining the needs, problems, and goals integrated with research questions, data collection, co‐design of and discover of the solution, implementation of the project, analysis of results, and dissemination of findings – ''Civic Partner leads (NIST GCTC)''
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''(2) Stakeholder Partners''': Participatory engagement in assisting with the implementation of the project, providing feedback on aspects of findings – ''Subject‐ matter experts (SME) and Subcontractors with defined set of responsibilities''. They may contribute specific questions or ideas that address community priorities and provide incentives for community recruitment and participation. These include, but not limited to: (1) Buckman Elementary School: to conduct an intervention within the school, (2) We All Rise: to engage with potential community participants, (3) 211info.org: to learn about the characteristics of the community and the emergency response they hope to receive, (4) Urban.Systems: to implement the School Mobile Unit, and (5) NASA: to strategize effective data collection, fusion, and sharing.		\|'''(2) Stakeholder Partners''': Participatory engagement in assisting with the implementation of the project, providing feedback on aspects of findings – ''Subject‐ matter experts (SME) and Subcontractors with defined set of responsibilities''. They may contribute specific questions or ideas that address community priorities and provide incentives for community recruitment and participation. These include, but not limited to: (1) [https://www.pps.net/buckman Buckman] Elementary School: to conduct an intervention within the school, (2) We All Rise: to engage with potential community participants, (3) [https://211info.org 211info.org]: to learn about the characteristics of the community and the emergency response they hope to receive, (4) [[Urban.Systems]]: to implement the School Mobile Unit, and (5) [[NASA]]: to strategize effective data collection, fusion, and sharing.
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''(3) Steering Committee Partners''': Supportive engagement – ''Steering Committee, and Survey Participants, Focus Group Interviewees''. They help the project team understand how the research best fits in a community setting, conduct process evaluation of protocol delivery, provide feedback from participants, generate important information for subsequent resilient projects and investments, and be involved in the dissemination of findings. Steering Committee partners can participate in the interpretation of results after they have been analyzed, which can create opportunities to generate guidance on future directions, scalability, sustainability, and transferability of the project.		\|'''(3) Steering Committee Partners''': Supportive engagement – ''Steering Committee, and Survey Participants, Focus Group Interviewees''. They help the project team understand how the research best fits in a community setting, conduct process evaluation of protocol delivery, provide feedback from participants, generate important information for subsequent resilient projects and investments, and be involved in the dissemination of findings. Steering Committee partners can participate in the interpretation of results after they have been analyzed, which can create opportunities to generate guidance on future directions, scalability, sustainability, and transferability of the project.
	\|}		\|}

	==6 Evaluation Plan==		==5 Evaluation Plan==

	Our evaluation plan expands across the three project goals in form of an experimentation and evaluation of each CRH component: (1) Information Hub, (2) Communication Hub, and (3) Service Hub. In addition, we will periodically evaluate the effectiveness of our partnerships and make adjustments to our management plan to ensure the success of our interdisciplinary, multi‐domain, civic‐academic collaborations. We plan to gather evaluative data (process and outcome) both during the project timeline and at the conclusion of the project on the following metrics:		Our evaluation plan expands across the three project goals in form of an experimentation and evaluation of each CRH component: (1) Information Hub, (2) Communication Hub, and (3) Service Hub. In addition, we will periodically evaluate the effectiveness of our partnerships and make adjustments to our management plan to ensure the success of our interdisciplinary, multi‐domain, civic‐academic collaborations. We plan to gather evaluative data (process and outcome) both during the project timeline and at the conclusion of the project on the following metrics:

Pinfold at 00:32, January 5, 2024

2024-01-05T00:32:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:32, January 5, 2024
Line 42:		Line 42:
	Innovation (PIN); Partnership for Inclusive Innovation (PIN).''		Innovation (PIN); Partnership for Inclusive Innovation (PIN).''

	===1~~.1.~~ Research Questions Schools ===		==1 Research Questions Schools ==

	have emerged as promising candidates for CRHs as they already hold an important community role as trusted hubs for students, parents, educators and other community members. By further integrating a school with the sociotechnical infrastructure of the community through emerging technologies (digital twins, etc.), and critical resources and services (connectivity, energy, mobility) they could be better prepared to liaise with first responders and retain connectivity to a larger network of resilience hubs. In this NSF CIVIC‐FA project, we seek to explore the following overarching research question: '''RQ''': How should communities close the gap between local essential needs, resources, and services to prepare for disaster events through a community‐led digital twin network of Community Resilience Hubs? To this end, the civic‐academic team will, cumulatively, address the following subset of research questions:		Schools have emerged as promising candidates for CRHs as they already hold an important community role as trusted hubs for students, parents, educators and other community members. By further integrating a school with the sociotechnical infrastructure of the community through emerging technologies (digital twins, etc.), and critical resources and services (connectivity, energy, mobility) they could be better prepared to liaise with first responders and retain connectivity to a larger network of resilience hubs. In this NSF CIVIC‐FA project, we seek to explore the following overarching research question: '''RQ''': How should communities close the gap between local essential needs, resources, and services to prepare for disaster events through a community‐led digital twin network of Community Resilience Hubs? To this end, the civic‐academic team will, cumulatively, address the following subset of research questions:

	{\|class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"		{\|class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
Line 54:		Line 54:
	\|}		\|}

	===1.2 Project Goals===		===1.1 Project Goals===

	The Core Civic‐Academic Team will meet as a group on a SemiMonthly basis. This is critical in a collaborative community‐university partnership of this kind. We will share context, and discuss possible outcomes, to complete the project Tasks described in Table 2.		The Core Civic‐Academic Team will meet as a group on a SemiMonthly basis. This is critical in a collaborative community‐university partnership of this kind. We will share context, and discuss possible outcomes, to complete the project Tasks described in Table 2.
Line 75:		Line 75:
	:'''Goal 3 Tasks (3.6‐3.8) Partner Community Development''': We will develop Blueprint content for Sustainability, Scalability, Transferability + Present out. These activities are described in the in section 7 of this proposal.		:'''Goal 3 Tasks (3.6‐3.8) Partner Community Development''': We will develop Blueprint content for Sustainability, Scalability, Transferability + Present out. These activities are described in the in section 7 of this proposal.

	===1.3 Intellectual Merit===		===1.2 Intellectual Merit===

	The proposed NSF CIVIC‐PG project is driven by current and emerging need for more advanced sociotechnical infrastructure to enable and empower more resilient communities. The Intellectual Merit responds to NSF strategic research directions encouraging proposals in areas related to IoT and Cyberphysical systems. The concept of digital twins for cities―smart, IoT‐enabled, data‐rich virtual platforms of a city that can be used to replicate and simulate changes at the human‐infrastructure interface that can improve resilience, sustainability, and livability in the real city―has attracted substantial attention in academic, industry and government circles. However, there appears to be little consensus in these circles as to the best path forward for research and community engagement. Capitalizing on vast reserves of data and deploying data in a meaningful way that enables closing the gap between local essential needs, resources, and services and advances community resilience, is only accomplished through integration of theory into practice. This project will take critical steps forward for this transformative vision to be achieved. The intellectual merit of the project is reflected in its potential to achieve two primary goals: Goal 1 (Stage 1 PG): Understand the sociotechnical infrastructure of a community‐led Community Resilience Hub (CRH) by closing the loop and implementing a digital twin‐based framework for a Pilot School CRH that integrates evolving community needs and resources (Connectivity, Energy, Mobility) to facilitate emergency response, communication, information sharing, and resource distribution and management in response to disaster events (Wildfire, Earthquake, Floods); and Goal 2 (Stage 2 FA): Cultivate School CRHs by establishing a Community Resilience Network (CRN) that is based on updated city management and community‐led strategies towards expanding CRH resource resilience capacity, distributed disaster response (across vulnerable communities and CRHs), and data‐driven decision‐making on disaster response). The Stage 2 project will pilot a digital twin‐based sociotechnical infrastructure of a community‐led School CRH through three primary goals: establishing and evaluating a pilot Community Resilience: Information Hub (Goal 1), Communication Hub (Goal 2), and Service Hub (Goal 3). It will then cultivate the capacities of School CRHs by establishing a CRN that is based on updated city management and community‐led strategies towards expanding CRH resource resilience capacity, distributed disaster response (across vulnerable communities and CRHs), and data‐driven decision‐making on disaster response. The digital twin platform and framework developed in this project will be available for use by other communities.		The proposed NSF CIVIC‐PG project is driven by current and emerging need for more advanced sociotechnical infrastructure to enable and empower more resilient communities. The Intellectual Merit responds to NSF strategic research directions encouraging proposals in areas related to IoT and Cyberphysical systems. The concept of digital twins for cities―smart, IoT‐enabled, data‐rich virtual platforms of a city that can be used to replicate and simulate changes at the human‐infrastructure interface that can improve resilience, sustainability, and livability in the real city―has attracted substantial attention in academic, industry and government circles. However, there appears to be little consensus in these circles as to the best path forward for research and community engagement. Capitalizing on vast reserves of data and deploying data in a meaningful way that enables closing the gap between local essential needs, resources, and services and advances community resilience, is only accomplished through integration of theory into practice. This project will take critical steps forward for this transformative vision to be achieved. The intellectual merit of the project is reflected in its potential to achieve two primary goals: Goal 1 (Stage 1 PG): Understand the sociotechnical infrastructure of a community‐led Community Resilience Hub (CRH) by closing the loop and implementing a digital twin‐based framework for a Pilot School CRH that integrates evolving community needs and resources (Connectivity, Energy, Mobility) to facilitate emergency response, communication, information sharing, and resource distribution and management in response to disaster events (Wildfire, Earthquake, Floods); and Goal 2 (Stage 2 FA): Cultivate School CRHs by establishing a Community Resilience Network (CRN) that is based on updated city management and community‐led strategies towards expanding CRH resource resilience capacity, distributed disaster response (across vulnerable communities and CRHs), and data‐driven decision‐making on disaster response). The Stage 2 project will pilot a digital twin‐based sociotechnical infrastructure of a community‐led School CRH through three primary goals: establishing and evaluating a pilot Community Resilience: Information Hub (Goal 1), Communication Hub (Goal 2), and Service Hub (Goal 3). It will then cultivate the capacities of School CRHs by establishing a CRN that is based on updated city management and community‐led strategies towards expanding CRH resource resilience capacity, distributed disaster response (across vulnerable communities and CRHs), and data‐driven decision‐making on disaster response. The digital twin platform and framework developed in this project will be available for use by other communities.

Pinfold at 00:30, January 5, 2024

2024-01-05T00:30:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:30, January 5, 2024
Line 22:		Line 22:
	[[File:Buckman Hazard maps.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Figure 2. Hazard maps of Wildfire, Earthquake, and Flood in the greater Portland, OR area, with a community‐led network of Community Resilience Hubs (in green our pilot CRH and other potential CRHs in the hazards zone in red).]]		[[File:Buckman Hazard maps.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Figure 2. Hazard maps of Wildfire, Earthquake, and Flood in the greater Portland, OR area, with a community‐led network of Community Resilience Hubs (in green our pilot CRH and other potential CRHs in the hazards zone in red).]]

	During an initial planning phase the project team implemented a preliminary multi‐hazard disaster risk and vulnerability assessment of the Multnomah County, Portland, OR (Figure 2) and conducted three main community resilience workshops to engage and unify stakeholders, understand resilience needs of the community and disaster scenarios, and assess implications of using digital twin technology. The initial CRH model for the school was a plausible `physical place’ to serve as a focal point for the community to share their knowledge, needs, and experience; (2) receive support, safety, and access to services; and (3) learn skills towards building stronger community resilience. To serve as a CRH, the school would generally require a series of upgrades to ensure that the facility is able to provide critical services in three operating states of normal, the event of a disruption (wildfire, flooding, earthquake), as well as recovery. Buckman is undergoing current and planned resilience renovations to increase the facilities’ capacity towards serving as a CRH (see the FEOR document). A dedicated team of community volunteers (youth and young parents) would be educated about disaster preparedness and trained in disasterresponse and management skills to serve the community within the school CRH (the SOLACE Team). However, through the initial Stage 1 engagements with the school community, emergency managers, and stakeholders, the project team learned that although the `physical place’ model would build resilience capacity towards disaster management and response, there remains a gap between capacity and utilization, identified as the ``communication” gap. Many community and stakeholder members pointed out that it is not until the whole community is connected and can effectively communicate, that a School CRH would become a place to convene and be practically utilized. Part of the problem of communication is prevalence of numerous community groups involved and lack of coordination with emergency management authority resulting in difference in nomenclature and the lack of a common baseline. Preparing a community for disaster relies heavily on the school CRH’s ability to communicate with the surrounding community. This includes hearing the community’s voice, connecting the community to the response teams and support services, offering advice and access to resources, and raising awareness. Closing the gap between local essential needs, resources, and services and advancing community resilience, is only accomplished through integration of theory into practice;		During an initial planning phase the project team implemented a preliminary multi‐hazard disaster risk and vulnerability assessment of the Multnomah County, Portland, OR (Figure 2) and conducted three main community resilience workshops to engage and unify stakeholders, understand resilience needs of the community and disaster scenarios, and assess implications of using digital twin technology. The initial CRH model for the school was a plausible `physical place’ to serve as a focal point for the community to share their knowledge, needs, and experience; (2) receive support, safety, and access to services; and (3) learn skills towards building stronger community resilience. To serve as a CRH, the school would generally require a series of upgrades to ensure that the facility is able to provide critical services in three operating states of normal, the event of a disruption (wildfire, flooding, earthquake), as well as recovery. Buckman is undergoing current and planned resilience renovations to increase the facilities’ capacity towards serving as a CRH (see the FEOR document). A dedicated team of community volunteers (youth and young parents) would be educated about disaster preparedness and trained in disasterresponse and management skills to serve the community within the school CRH (the SOLACE Team). However, through the initial Stage 1 engagements with the school community, emergency managers, and stakeholders, the project team learned that although the `physical place’ model would build resilience capacity towards disaster management and response, there remains a gap between capacity and utilization, identified as the ``communication” gap. Many community and stakeholder members pointed out that it is not until the whole community is connected and can effectively communicate, that a School CRH would become a place to convene and be practically utilized. Part of the problem of communication is prevalence of numerous community groups involved and lack of coordination with emergency management authority resulting in difference in nomenclature and the lack of a common baseline. Preparing a community for disaster relies heavily on the school CRH’s ability to communicate with the surrounding community.
	~~[[File:Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform.jpg\|thumb\|500px\|'''Figure 3'''. Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform]]~~ A central depository and information dispatch platform, such as a `virtual place’ that could accompany the `physical place’ model of school CRH. This `virtual place’ would exist in parallel with the `physical place’ to capture and replicate the dynamics, while connecting the community to resources and to one another.		[[File:Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform.jpg\|thumb\|600px\|'''Figure 3'''. Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform]]This includes hearing the community’s voice, connecting the community to the response teams and support services, offering advice and access to resources, and raising awareness. Closing the gap between local essential needs, resources, and services and advancing community resilience, is only accomplished through integration of theory into practice; A central depository and information dispatch platform, such as a `virtual place’ that could accompany the `physical place’ model of school CRH. This `virtual place’ would exist in parallel with the `physical place’ to capture and replicate the dynamics, while connecting the community to resources and to one another.

	The emergence of ``digital twins” [1] , an endeavor to create intelligent adaptive machines by generating a parallel virtual version of the system along with the connectivity and analytical capabilities enabled by internet of things (IoT), constitutes the foundation for development of this `virtual place’ CRH infrastructure. In this project, we will investigate how to establish a community‐led CRH sociotechnical infrastructure that integrates evolving community needs, resources, and conditions to facilitate emergency response, broad and timely information‐sharing, resilient connectivity, and resource identification, location, and distribution across a digital twin network of schools as CRH in response to disaster events (wildfire, earthquake, and floods). This will be achieved through development and experimentation of a digital twin web‐based communication platform (Figure 3), capturing the impact (disaster developments and risks) of key emergencies such as earthquakes, wildfires (air quality effect), and flooding and the CRH services and accessibility to connect and enable the whole community (school community, emergency managers, and the SOLACE team) to interact pre‐, during, and post‐ disaster events. The project team will pilot a digital twin‐based sociotechnical infrastructure of a community‐led School CRH that integrates three key components of such CRH: (1) an Information Hub, (2) a Communication Hub, and (3) a Service Hub. It will then cultivate the capacities of School CRHs by establishing a CRN that is based on updated city management and community‐led strategies towards expanding CRH resource resilience capacity, distributed disaster response (across vulnerable communities and CRHs), and data‐driven decision‐making on disaster response. The pilot project will capture evolving community needs and resources to facilitate emergency response, communication, information sharing, and resource distribution and management in response to disaster events; through three primary goals:		The emergence of ``digital twins” [1] , an endeavor to create intelligent adaptive machines by generating a parallel virtual version of the system along with the connectivity and analytical capabilities enabled by internet of things (IoT), constitutes the foundation for development of this `virtual place’ CRH infrastructure. In this project, we will investigate how to establish a community‐led CRH sociotechnical infrastructure that integrates evolving community needs, resources, and conditions to facilitate emergency response, broad and timely information‐sharing, resilient connectivity, and resource identification, location, and distribution across a digital twin network of schools as CRH in response to disaster events (wildfire, earthquake, and floods). This will be achieved through development and experimentation of a digital twin web‐based communication platform (Figure 3), capturing the impact (disaster developments and risks) of key emergencies such as earthquakes, wildfires (air quality effect), and flooding and the CRH services and accessibility to connect and enable the whole community (school community, emergency managers, and the SOLACE team) to interact pre‐, during, and post‐ disaster events. The project team will pilot a digital twin‐based sociotechnical infrastructure of a community‐led School CRH that integrates three key components of such CRH: (1) an Information Hub, (2) a Communication Hub, and (3) a Service Hub. It will then cultivate the capacities of School CRHs by establishing a CRN that is based on updated city management and community‐led strategies towards expanding CRH resource resilience capacity, distributed disaster response (across vulnerable communities and CRHs), and data‐driven decision‐making on disaster response. The pilot project will capture evolving community needs and resources to facilitate emergency response, communication, information sharing, and resource distribution and management in response to disaster events; through three primary goals:

Pinfold at 00:28, January 5, 2024

2024-01-05T00:28:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:28, January 5, 2024
Line 22:		Line 22:
	[[File:Buckman Hazard maps.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Figure 2. Hazard maps of Wildfire, Earthquake, and Flood in the greater Portland, OR area, with a community‐led network of Community Resilience Hubs (in green our pilot CRH and other potential CRHs in the hazards zone in red).]]		[[File:Buckman Hazard maps.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Figure 2. Hazard maps of Wildfire, Earthquake, and Flood in the greater Portland, OR area, with a community‐led network of Community Resilience Hubs (in green our pilot CRH and other potential CRHs in the hazards zone in red).]]

	During an initial planning phase the project team implemented a preliminary multi‐hazard disaster risk and vulnerability assessment of the Multnomah County, Portland, OR (Figure 2) and conducted three main community resilience workshops to engage and unify stakeholders, understand resilience needs of the community and disaster scenarios, and assess implications of using digital twin technology. The initial CRH model for the school was a plausible `physical place’ to serve as a focal point for the community to share their knowledge, needs, and experience; (2) receive support, safety, and access to services; and (3) learn skills towards building stronger community resilience. To serve as a CRH, the school would generally require a series of upgrades to ensure that the facility is able to provide critical services in three operating states of normal, the event of a disruption (wildfire, flooding, earthquake), as well as recovery. Buckman is undergoing current and planned resilience renovations to increase the facilities’ capacity towards serving as a CRH (see the FEOR document). A dedicated team of community volunteers (youth and young parents) would be educated about disaster preparedness and trained in disasterresponse and management skills to serve the community within the school CRH (the SOLACE Team). However, through the initial Stage 1 engagements with the school community, emergency managers, and stakeholders, the project team learned that although the `physical place’ model would build resilience capacity towards disaster management and response, there remains a gap between capacity and utilization, identified as the ``communication” gap. Many community and stakeholder members pointed out that it is not until the whole community is connected and can effectively communicate, that a School CRH would become a place to convene and be practically utilized. Part of the problem of communication is prevalence of numerous community groups involved and lack of coordination with emergency management authority resulting in difference in nomenclature and the lack of a common baseline. Preparing a community for disaster relies heavily on the school CRH’s ability to communicate with the surrounding community. This includes hearing the community’s voice, connecting the community to the response teams and support services, offering advice and access to resources, and raising awareness. Closing the gap between local essential needs, resources, and services and advancing community resilience, is only accomplished through integration of theory into practice; A central depository and information dispatch platform, such as a `virtual place’ that could accompany the `physical place’ model of school CRH. This `virtual place’ would exist in parallel with the `physical place’ to capture and replicate the dynamics, while connecting the community to resources and to one another.		During an initial planning phase the project team implemented a preliminary multi‐hazard disaster risk and vulnerability assessment of the Multnomah County, Portland, OR (Figure 2) and conducted three main community resilience workshops to engage and unify stakeholders, understand resilience needs of the community and disaster scenarios, and assess implications of using digital twin technology. The initial CRH model for the school was a plausible `physical place’ to serve as a focal point for the community to share their knowledge, needs, and experience; (2) receive support, safety, and access to services; and (3) learn skills towards building stronger community resilience. To serve as a CRH, the school would generally require a series of upgrades to ensure that the facility is able to provide critical services in three operating states of normal, the event of a disruption (wildfire, flooding, earthquake), as well as recovery. Buckman is undergoing current and planned resilience renovations to increase the facilities’ capacity towards serving as a CRH (see the FEOR document). A dedicated team of community volunteers (youth and young parents) would be educated about disaster preparedness and trained in disasterresponse and management skills to serve the community within the school CRH (the SOLACE Team). However, through the initial Stage 1 engagements with the school community, emergency managers, and stakeholders, the project team learned that although the `physical place’ model would build resilience capacity towards disaster management and response, there remains a gap between capacity and utilization, identified as the ``communication” gap. Many community and stakeholder members pointed out that it is not until the whole community is connected and can effectively communicate, that a School CRH would become a place to convene and be practically utilized. Part of the problem of communication is prevalence of numerous community groups involved and lack of coordination with emergency management authority resulting in difference in nomenclature and the lack of a common baseline. Preparing a community for disaster relies heavily on the school CRH’s ability to communicate with the surrounding community. This includes hearing the community’s voice, connecting the community to the response teams and support services, offering advice and access to resources, and raising awareness. Closing the gap between local essential needs, resources, and services and advancing community resilience, is only accomplished through integration of theory into practice;
			[[File:Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform.jpg\|thumb\|500px\|'''Figure 3'''. Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform]] A central depository and information dispatch platform, such as a `virtual place’ that could accompany the `physical place’ model of school CRH. This `virtual place’ would exist in parallel with the `physical place’ to capture and replicate the dynamics, while connecting the community to resources and to one another.
	~~[[File:Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform.jpg\|thumb\|500px\|'''Figure 3'''. Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform]]~~

	The emergence of ``digital twins” [1] , an endeavor to create intelligent adaptive machines by generating a parallel virtual version of the system along with the connectivity and analytical capabilities enabled by internet of things (IoT), constitutes the foundation for development of this `virtual place’ CRH infrastructure. In this project, we will investigate how to establish a community‐led CRH sociotechnical infrastructure that integrates evolving community needs, resources, and conditions to facilitate emergency response, broad and timely information‐sharing, resilient connectivity, and resource identification, location, and distribution across a digital twin network of schools as CRH in response to disaster events (wildfire, earthquake, and floods). This will be achieved through development and experimentation of a digital twin web‐based communication platform (Figure 3), capturing the impact (disaster developments and risks) of key emergencies such as earthquakes, wildfires (air quality effect), and flooding and the CRH services and accessibility to connect and enable the whole community (school community, emergency managers, and the SOLACE team) to interact pre‐, during, and post‐ disaster events. The project team will pilot a digital twin‐based sociotechnical infrastructure of a community‐led School CRH that integrates three key components of such CRH: (1) an Information Hub, (2) a Communication Hub, and (3) a Service Hub. It will then cultivate the capacities of School CRHs by establishing a CRN that is based on updated city management and community‐led strategies towards expanding CRH resource resilience capacity, distributed disaster response (across vulnerable communities and CRHs), and data‐driven decision‐making on disaster response. The pilot project will capture evolving community needs and resources to facilitate emergency response, communication, information sharing, and resource distribution and management in response to disaster events; through three primary goals:		The emergence of ``digital twins” [1] , an endeavor to create intelligent adaptive machines by generating a parallel virtual version of the system along with the connectivity and analytical capabilities enabled by internet of things (IoT), constitutes the foundation for development of this `virtual place’ CRH infrastructure. In this project, we will investigate how to establish a community‐led CRH sociotechnical infrastructure that integrates evolving community needs, resources, and conditions to facilitate emergency response, broad and timely information‐sharing, resilient connectivity, and resource identification, location, and distribution across a digital twin network of schools as CRH in response to disaster events (wildfire, earthquake, and floods). This will be achieved through development and experimentation of a digital twin web‐based communication platform (Figure 3), capturing the impact (disaster developments and risks) of key emergencies such as earthquakes, wildfires (air quality effect), and flooding and the CRH services and accessibility to connect and enable the whole community (school community, emergency managers, and the SOLACE team) to interact pre‐, during, and post‐ disaster events. The project team will pilot a digital twin‐based sociotechnical infrastructure of a community‐led School CRH that integrates three key components of such CRH: (1) an Information Hub, (2) a Communication Hub, and (3) a Service Hub. It will then cultivate the capacities of School CRHs by establishing a CRN that is based on updated city management and community‐led strategies towards expanding CRH resource resilience capacity, distributed disaster response (across vulnerable communities and CRHs), and data‐driven decision‐making on disaster response. The pilot project will capture evolving community needs and resources to facilitate emergency response, communication, information sharing, and resource distribution and management in response to disaster events; through three primary goals:
Line 32:		Line 31:
	:'''Goal 3'''. Establish and evaluate a pilot Community Resilience Service Hub		:'''Goal 3'''. Establish and evaluate a pilot Community Resilience Service Hub

	[[File:Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships.jpg\|thumb\|~~500px~~\|'''Figure 4'''. Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships and CRH sociotechnical infrastructure elements.]]		Figure 4 illustrates schematically the team brought together to execute this proposed project. The proposal team members have a history of collaboration across disciplinary and institutional boundaries, technology domains, and community affiliations.
			[[File:Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships.jpg\|thumb\|600px\|'''Figure 4'''. Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships and CRH sociotechnical infrastructure elements.]] At the core of the figure, is the Core Civic‐Academic Partners team. The second layer is comprised of the Stakeholder Partners at the emergency management‐, school‐, community‐, and technology‐level stakeholders. The effort is led by a set of core team members that are part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)’s Global Community Technology Challenge (GCTC) SuperClusters (in particular, the Smart Buildings and Mobility SuperCluster). '''Wilfred Pinfold''', Lead Civic Partner (Civic Partner) is an expert in leading industry, academic, government and community partnerships to deliver advanced technology solutions, who will lead the civic partners team and the civic partnerships and engagement activities taking place in the project site, Portland, OR; '''Jiri Skopek''', Project Manager (Civic Partner), is Chair of the Smart Buildings GCTC SuperCluster and he specializes in community climate action through the 2030 Districts network and smart buildings and cities. He is a high‐performance building districts expert and will lead community engagement with district infrastructure including energy and how this infrastructure responds to stress. He is joined in this core team leadership effort by Stan Curtis, Civic Partnerships Lead (Civic Partner), an expert in introducing technology solutions to municipal governments and gaining community support; he will lead partnerships with Local & State governments, Emergency Managers and the School Administration; and '''Ann M. Marcus''', Community Communications Lead (Civic Partner), a Global Communications Strategy expert will lead community and school communications with focus on whole community response. '''Deborah Acosta''', Civic Engagement Lead (Civic Partner), is an expert in municipal technology deployment and public communications will lead public awareness and workforce development. Finally, '''Ken Montler''', Technology Partner on Mobility (Civic Partner) is an expert in vehicle Automation, Electrification, Connectivity and Sharing (ACES), and will lead all aspects of mobility including vehicle connectivity, battery management, Vehicle‐to‐grid (V2G) and V2 Everything. They will lead the major civic partnerships and engagement activities in Table 1, described later in this proposal, which focuses on building the community network and understanding the community’s needs and vulnerabilities. The core team leadership includes '''Gregory Durgin''', Co‐PI (Academic Partner) who specializes in digital twin networks and parallel intelligence and has expertise in wireless power transfer and harvesting, will lead digital twin platform development and network integrations listed in Table 2; and '''Neda Mohammadi''', PI (Academic Partner), who will provide overall leadership to the project and who has completed numerous projects on social and infrastructure networks, disaster dynamics, and has conducted experiments with partner communities in the state of Georgia (GA) on infrastructure utilizing digital twins. She specializes in disaster decision makings with smart city digital twins, city infrastructure data analytics, human‐infrastructure interactions, and virtualization. She will provide overall direction and oversight of all project components, including the research and civic partnerships and engagement activities, and will lead the design and implementation of the digital twin platform and the associated data analyses, simulations, and virtualizations. The core team/academic‐civic partners are described in Table 1.
	Figure 4 illustrates schematically the team brought together to execute this proposed project. The proposal team members have a history of collaboration across disciplinary and institutional boundaries, technology domains, and community affiliations. At the core of the figure, is the Core Civic‐Academic Partners team. The second layer is comprised of the Stakeholder Partners at the emergency management‐, school‐, community‐, and technology‐level stakeholders. The effort is led by a set of core team members that are part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)’s Global Community Technology Challenge (GCTC) SuperClusters (in particular, the Smart Buildings and Mobility SuperCluster). '''Wilfred Pinfold''', Lead Civic Partner (Civic Partner) is an expert in leading industry, academic, government and community partnerships to deliver advanced technology solutions, who will lead the civic partners team and the civic partnerships and engagement activities taking place in the project site, Portland, OR; '''Jiri Skopek''', Project Manager (Civic Partner), is Chair of the Smart Buildings GCTC SuperCluster and he specializes in community climate action through the 2030 Districts network and smart buildings and cities. He is a high‐performance building districts expert and will lead community engagement with district infrastructure including energy and how this infrastructure responds to stress. He is joined in this core team leadership effort by Stan Curtis, Civic Partnerships Lead (Civic Partner), an expert in introducing technology solutions to municipal governments and gaining community support; he will lead partnerships with Local & State governments, Emergency Managers and the School Administration; and '''Ann M. Marcus''', Community Communications Lead (Civic Partner), a Global Communications Strategy expert will lead community and school communications with focus on whole community response. '''Deborah Acosta''', Civic Engagement Lead (Civic Partner), is an expert in municipal technology deployment and public communications will lead public awareness and workforce development. Finally, '''Ken Montler''', Technology Partner on Mobility (Civic Partner) is an expert in vehicle Automation, Electrification, Connectivity and Sharing (ACES), and will lead all aspects of mobility including vehicle connectivity, battery management, Vehicle‐to‐grid (V2G) and V2 Everything. They will lead the major civic partnerships and engagement activities in Table 1, described later in this proposal, which focuses on building the community network and understanding the community’s needs and vulnerabilities. The core team leadership includes '''Gregory Durgin''', Co‐PI (Academic Partner) who specializes in digital twin networks and parallel intelligence and has expertise in wireless power transfer and harvesting, will lead digital twin platform development and network integrations listed in Table 2; and '''Neda Mohammadi''', PI (Academic Partner), who will provide overall leadership to the project and who has completed numerous projects on social and infrastructure networks, disaster dynamics, and has conducted experiments with partner communities in the state of Georgia (GA) on infrastructure utilizing digital twins. She specializes in disaster decision makings with smart city digital twins, city infrastructure data analytics, human‐infrastructure interactions, and virtualization. She will provide overall direction and oversight of all project components, including the research and civic partnerships and engagement activities, and will lead the design and implementation of the digital twin platform and the associated data analyses, simulations, and virtualizations. The core team/academic‐civic partners are described in Table 1.

	[[File:Civic‐Academic Partners.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Table 1. Civic‐Academic Partners]]		[[File:Civic‐Academic Partners.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Table 1. Civic‐Academic Partners]]

Pinfold at 00:27, January 5, 2024

2024-01-05T00:27:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:27, January 5, 2024
Line 24:		Line 24:
	During an initial planning phase the project team implemented a preliminary multi‐hazard disaster risk and vulnerability assessment of the Multnomah County, Portland, OR (Figure 2) and conducted three main community resilience workshops to engage and unify stakeholders, understand resilience needs of the community and disaster scenarios, and assess implications of using digital twin technology. The initial CRH model for the school was a plausible `physical place’ to serve as a focal point for the community to share their knowledge, needs, and experience; (2) receive support, safety, and access to services; and (3) learn skills towards building stronger community resilience. To serve as a CRH, the school would generally require a series of upgrades to ensure that the facility is able to provide critical services in three operating states of normal, the event of a disruption (wildfire, flooding, earthquake), as well as recovery. Buckman is undergoing current and planned resilience renovations to increase the facilities’ capacity towards serving as a CRH (see the FEOR document). A dedicated team of community volunteers (youth and young parents) would be educated about disaster preparedness and trained in disasterresponse and management skills to serve the community within the school CRH (the SOLACE Team). However, through the initial Stage 1 engagements with the school community, emergency managers, and stakeholders, the project team learned that although the `physical place’ model would build resilience capacity towards disaster management and response, there remains a gap between capacity and utilization, identified as the ``communication” gap. Many community and stakeholder members pointed out that it is not until the whole community is connected and can effectively communicate, that a School CRH would become a place to convene and be practically utilized. Part of the problem of communication is prevalence of numerous community groups involved and lack of coordination with emergency management authority resulting in difference in nomenclature and the lack of a common baseline. Preparing a community for disaster relies heavily on the school CRH’s ability to communicate with the surrounding community. This includes hearing the community’s voice, connecting the community to the response teams and support services, offering advice and access to resources, and raising awareness. Closing the gap between local essential needs, resources, and services and advancing community resilience, is only accomplished through integration of theory into practice; A central depository and information dispatch platform, such as a `virtual place’ that could accompany the `physical place’ model of school CRH. This `virtual place’ would exist in parallel with the `physical place’ to capture and replicate the dynamics, while connecting the community to resources and to one another.		During an initial planning phase the project team implemented a preliminary multi‐hazard disaster risk and vulnerability assessment of the Multnomah County, Portland, OR (Figure 2) and conducted three main community resilience workshops to engage and unify stakeholders, understand resilience needs of the community and disaster scenarios, and assess implications of using digital twin technology. The initial CRH model for the school was a plausible `physical place’ to serve as a focal point for the community to share their knowledge, needs, and experience; (2) receive support, safety, and access to services; and (3) learn skills towards building stronger community resilience. To serve as a CRH, the school would generally require a series of upgrades to ensure that the facility is able to provide critical services in three operating states of normal, the event of a disruption (wildfire, flooding, earthquake), as well as recovery. Buckman is undergoing current and planned resilience renovations to increase the facilities’ capacity towards serving as a CRH (see the FEOR document). A dedicated team of community volunteers (youth and young parents) would be educated about disaster preparedness and trained in disasterresponse and management skills to serve the community within the school CRH (the SOLACE Team). However, through the initial Stage 1 engagements with the school community, emergency managers, and stakeholders, the project team learned that although the `physical place’ model would build resilience capacity towards disaster management and response, there remains a gap between capacity and utilization, identified as the ``communication” gap. Many community and stakeholder members pointed out that it is not until the whole community is connected and can effectively communicate, that a School CRH would become a place to convene and be practically utilized. Part of the problem of communication is prevalence of numerous community groups involved and lack of coordination with emergency management authority resulting in difference in nomenclature and the lack of a common baseline. Preparing a community for disaster relies heavily on the school CRH’s ability to communicate with the surrounding community. This includes hearing the community’s voice, connecting the community to the response teams and support services, offering advice and access to resources, and raising awareness. Closing the gap between local essential needs, resources, and services and advancing community resilience, is only accomplished through integration of theory into practice; A central depository and information dispatch platform, such as a `virtual place’ that could accompany the `physical place’ model of school CRH. This `virtual place’ would exist in parallel with the `physical place’ to capture and replicate the dynamics, while connecting the community to resources and to one another.

	[[File:Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform.jpg\|thumb\|~~600px~~\|'''Figure 3'''. Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform]]		[[File:Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform.jpg\|thumb\|500px\|'''Figure 3'''. Digital Twin Web‐Based Communication Platform]]

	The emergence of ``digital twins” [1] , an endeavor to create intelligent adaptive machines by generating a parallel virtual version of the system along with the connectivity and analytical capabilities enabled by internet of things (IoT), constitutes the foundation for development of this `virtual place’ CRH infrastructure. In this project, we will investigate how to establish a community‐led CRH sociotechnical infrastructure that integrates evolving community needs, resources, and conditions to facilitate emergency response, broad and timely information‐sharing, resilient connectivity, and resource identification, location, and distribution across a digital twin network of schools as CRH in response to disaster events (wildfire, earthquake, and floods). This will be achieved through development and experimentation of a digital twin web‐based communication platform (Figure 3), capturing the impact (disaster developments and risks) of key emergencies such as earthquakes, wildfires (air quality effect), and flooding and the CRH services and accessibility to connect and enable the whole community (school community, emergency managers, and the SOLACE team) to interact pre‐, during, and post‐ disaster events. The project team will pilot a digital twin‐based sociotechnical infrastructure of a community‐led School CRH that integrates three key components of such CRH: (1) an Information Hub, (2) a Communication Hub, and (3) a Service Hub. It will then cultivate the capacities of School CRHs by establishing a CRN that is based on updated city management and community‐led strategies towards expanding CRH resource resilience capacity, distributed disaster response (across vulnerable communities and CRHs), and data‐driven decision‐making on disaster response. The pilot project will capture evolving community needs and resources to facilitate emergency response, communication, information sharing, and resource distribution and management in response to disaster events; through three primary goals:		The emergence of ``digital twins” [1] , an endeavor to create intelligent adaptive machines by generating a parallel virtual version of the system along with the connectivity and analytical capabilities enabled by internet of things (IoT), constitutes the foundation for development of this `virtual place’ CRH infrastructure. In this project, we will investigate how to establish a community‐led CRH sociotechnical infrastructure that integrates evolving community needs, resources, and conditions to facilitate emergency response, broad and timely information‐sharing, resilient connectivity, and resource identification, location, and distribution across a digital twin network of schools as CRH in response to disaster events (wildfire, earthquake, and floods). This will be achieved through development and experimentation of a digital twin web‐based communication platform (Figure 3), capturing the impact (disaster developments and risks) of key emergencies such as earthquakes, wildfires (air quality effect), and flooding and the CRH services and accessibility to connect and enable the whole community (school community, emergency managers, and the SOLACE team) to interact pre‐, during, and post‐ disaster events. The project team will pilot a digital twin‐based sociotechnical infrastructure of a community‐led School CRH that integrates three key components of such CRH: (1) an Information Hub, (2) a Communication Hub, and (3) a Service Hub. It will then cultivate the capacities of School CRHs by establishing a CRN that is based on updated city management and community‐led strategies towards expanding CRH resource resilience capacity, distributed disaster response (across vulnerable communities and CRHs), and data‐driven decision‐making on disaster response. The pilot project will capture evolving community needs and resources to facilitate emergency response, communication, information sharing, and resource distribution and management in response to disaster events; through three primary goals:
Line 32:		Line 32:
	:'''Goal 3'''. Establish and evaluate a pilot Community Resilience Service Hub		:'''Goal 3'''. Establish and evaluate a pilot Community Resilience Service Hub

	[[File:Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships.jpg\|thumb\|~~600px~~\|'''Figure 4'''. Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships and CRH sociotechnical infrastructure elements.]]		[[File:Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships.jpg\|thumb\|500px\|'''Figure 4'''. Layered integration of civic‐academic partnerships and CRH sociotechnical infrastructure elements.]]

	Figure 4 illustrates schematically the team brought together to execute this proposed project. The proposal team members have a history of collaboration across disciplinary and institutional boundaries, technology domains, and community affiliations. At the core of the figure, is the Core Civic‐Academic Partners team. The second layer is comprised of the Stakeholder Partners at the emergency management‐, school‐, community‐, and technology‐level stakeholders. The effort is led by a set of core team members that are part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)’s Global Community Technology Challenge (GCTC) SuperClusters (in particular, the Smart Buildings and Mobility SuperCluster). Wilfred Pinfold, Lead Civic Partner (Civic Partner) is an expert in leading industry, academic, government and community partnerships to deliver advanced technology solutions, who will lead the civic partners team and the civic partnerships and engagement activities taking place in the project site, Portland, OR; Jiri Skopek, Project Manager (Civic Partner), is Chair of the Smart Buildings GCTC SuperCluster and he specializes in community climate action through the 2030 Districts network and smart buildings and cities. He is a high‐performance building districts expert and will lead community engagement with district infrastructure including energy and how this infrastructure responds to stress. He is joined in this core team leadership effort by Stan Curtis, Civic Partnerships Lead (Civic Partner), an expert in introducing technology solutions to municipal governments and gaining community support; he will lead partnerships with Local & State governments, Emergency Managers and the School Administration; and Ann M. Marcus, Community Communications Lead (Civic Partner), a Global Communications Strategy expert will lead community and school communications with focus on whole community response. Deborah Acosta, Civic Engagement Lead (Civic Partner), is an expert in municipal technology deployment and public communications will lead public awareness and workforce development. Finally, Ken Montler, Technology Partner on Mobility (Civic Partner) is an expert in vehicle Automation, Electrification, Connectivity and Sharing (ACES), and will lead all aspects of mobility including vehicle connectivity, battery management, Vehicle‐to‐grid (V2G) and V2 Everything. They will lead the major civic partnerships and engagement activities in Table 1, described later in this proposal, which focuses on building the community network and understanding the community’s needs and vulnerabilities. The core team leadership includes Gregory Durgin, Co‐PI (Academic Partner) who specializes in digital twin networks and parallel intelligence and has expertise in wireless power transfer and harvesting, will lead digital twin platform development and network integrations listed in Table 2; and Neda Mohammadi, PI (Academic Partner), who will provide overall leadership to the project and who has completed numerous projects on social and infrastructure networks, disaster dynamics, and has conducted experiments with partner communities in the state of Georgia (GA) on infrastructure utilizing digital twins. She specializes in disaster decision makings with smart city digital twins, city infrastructure data analytics, human‐infrastructure interactions, and virtualization. She will provide overall direction and oversight of all project components, including the research and civic partnerships and engagement activities, and will lead the design and implementation of the digital twin platform and the associated data analyses, simulations, and virtualizations. The core team/academic‐civic partners are described in Table 1.		Figure 4 illustrates schematically the team brought together to execute this proposed project. The proposal team members have a history of collaboration across disciplinary and institutional boundaries, technology domains, and community affiliations. At the core of the figure, is the Core Civic‐Academic Partners team. The second layer is comprised of the Stakeholder Partners at the emergency management‐, school‐, community‐, and technology‐level stakeholders. The effort is led by a set of core team members that are part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)’s Global Community Technology Challenge (GCTC) SuperClusters (in particular, the Smart Buildings and Mobility SuperCluster). '''Wilfred Pinfold''', Lead Civic Partner (Civic Partner) is an expert in leading industry, academic, government and community partnerships to deliver advanced technology solutions, who will lead the civic partners team and the civic partnerships and engagement activities taking place in the project site, Portland, OR; '''Jiri Skopek''', Project Manager (Civic Partner), is Chair of the Smart Buildings GCTC SuperCluster and he specializes in community climate action through the 2030 Districts network and smart buildings and cities. He is a high‐performance building districts expert and will lead community engagement with district infrastructure including energy and how this infrastructure responds to stress. He is joined in this core team leadership effort by Stan Curtis, Civic Partnerships Lead (Civic Partner), an expert in introducing technology solutions to municipal governments and gaining community support; he will lead partnerships with Local & State governments, Emergency Managers and the School Administration; and '''Ann M. Marcus''', Community Communications Lead (Civic Partner), a Global Communications Strategy expert will lead community and school communications with focus on whole community response. '''Deborah Acosta''', Civic Engagement Lead (Civic Partner), is an expert in municipal technology deployment and public communications will lead public awareness and workforce development. Finally, '''Ken Montler''', Technology Partner on Mobility (Civic Partner) is an expert in vehicle Automation, Electrification, Connectivity and Sharing (ACES), and will lead all aspects of mobility including vehicle connectivity, battery management, Vehicle‐to‐grid (V2G) and V2 Everything. They will lead the major civic partnerships and engagement activities in Table 1, described later in this proposal, which focuses on building the community network and understanding the community’s needs and vulnerabilities. The core team leadership includes '''Gregory Durgin''', Co‐PI (Academic Partner) who specializes in digital twin networks and parallel intelligence and has expertise in wireless power transfer and harvesting, will lead digital twin platform development and network integrations listed in Table 2; and '''Neda Mohammadi''', PI (Academic Partner), who will provide overall leadership to the project and who has completed numerous projects on social and infrastructure networks, disaster dynamics, and has conducted experiments with partner communities in the state of Georgia (GA) on infrastructure utilizing digital twins. She specializes in disaster decision makings with smart city digital twins, city infrastructure data analytics, human‐infrastructure interactions, and virtualization. She will provide overall direction and oversight of all project components, including the research and civic partnerships and engagement activities, and will lead the design and implementation of the digital twin platform and the associated data analyses, simulations, and virtualizations. The core team/academic‐civic partners are described in Table 1.

	[[File:Civic‐Academic Partners.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Table 1. Civic‐Academic Partners]]		[[File:Civic‐Academic Partners.jpg\|thumb\|1200px\|Table 1. Civic‐Academic Partners]]