2026 Annual Public/Private Crisis Innovation Summit Downloads

Below is the DRAFT Summary Report from the 2026 AHC Annual Summit on January 19-21, 2026.​

DRAFT SUMMIT REPORT 1/28/2026

2026 All Hazards Consortium Public/Private Crisis Innovation Summit

2026 All Hazards Consortium Public/Private Crisis Innovation Summit

Narrative Summary: January 19-21, 2026

Executive Overview

The 2026 All Hazards Consortium Public/Private Crisis Innovation Summit (aka ENDEAVOR Summit) convened approximately 60 emergency management professionals, private sector partners, and state directors at Cencora's facility in Conshohocken, Pennsylvania. This three-day event marked a pivotal moment in public-private partnership development, occurring against the backdrop of significant federal emergency management restructuring under a new presidential administration. The Summit emphasized innovation, practical problem-solving through use cases, and building trust between government and private sector stakeholders.

Day 0: Pre-Summit Meeting (January 19, 2026)

Setting the Stage for Innovation

The pre-summit session began with approximately 30 early arrivals gathering for relationship-building and agenda-setting. The opening emphasized a crucial theme that would resonate throughout the Summit: emergency management stands at a critical juncture requiring innovation and new approaches. As organizers reminded participants, "This business is going to be reinvented in front of your very eyes. It's already happening. And we have to innovate."

Key Messages and Expectations

Summit organizers encouraged attendees to approach the three days with intentionality. Participants were challenged to move beyond passive attendance and actively engage: "Have an intention of, I really want to understand this. I'm curious about this, or I want to explore this a little further. I want to meet this person. I want to understand this better."

The pre-summit session introduced the concept of "use cases"—a structured six-step problem-solving methodology that would become central to the Summit's work. This approach emphasizes documenting problems clearly, identifying impacts, involving the right stakeholders, managing sensitive information appropriately, and developing actionable solutions. As one organizer explained, "the goal is to move beyond vague discussions to concrete problem statements and solutions that can be shared without misinterpretation."

Building Relationships Through Conversation & Problem Solving

The afternoon featured table discussions where participants from different sectors learned about each other's challenges and capabilities. One particularly memorable exchange highlighted the complexity of operating across 50 different states with varying policies and regulations—a challenge that would surface repeatedly throughout the Summit.

A representative from the public sector emphasized the critical importance of "getting people back on their feet" as the most important goal post-disaster, noting how building relationships with various public and private partners enhances the ability to deliver food, medical supplies, and coordinate power restoration to families in need.

The session concluded with organizers reminding participants that innovation often requires looking beyond one's own expertise:

"My dad used to tell me, you know, son, looks like you only need one more good idea, right? And not in your head, it's in someone else's head. Go find them."

Day 1: Opening Sessions and Panel Discussions (January 20, 2026)

Welcome and Facility Introduction

Day 1 began at Cencora's Conshohocken facility, with host Bob Crow providing context about the pharmaceutical distribution company. Cencora operates in 60 countries through over 1,250 locations, including 51 U.S. distribution centers across 27 states and Puerto Rico. The scale of their operations proved relevant to later discussions: they pick, pack, and ship over 4 million units daily, making 7.7 million deliveries annually to hospitals, provider offices, and pharmacies—visiting over 67,000 community practitioners throughout the year.

The facility itself, with its pleasant valley setting (Conshohocken translates from the Lenape language as "Pleasant Valley"), became more than just a venue—it symbolized the private sector capacity that emergency management increasingly needs to leverage.

Framing the Challenge: Federal Transition and Opportunity

Maryland Secretary of Emergency Management Russ Strickland, joining remotely during legislative session, provided crucial context for the Summit's timing. He congratulated the All Hazards Consortium on its 20 years of work and thanked all sponsors, noting "this is one of these things, we can't do it alone and we need everybody to pitch in."

The Summit's timing proved particularly significant given recent federal changes. As one speaker noted, the new presidential administration had "removed this layer" of federal emergency management structure without yet explaining "the new layer of order" needed for effective action after large-scale disasters. This federal transition created both uncertainty and opportunity for states and private sector partners to innovate their relationships.

Ice-Breaking Through Non-Verbal Communication

The morning's first activity challenged participants to line up by birthday (month and day) without speaking—a powerful demonstration that communication extends beyond words. As the facilitator Molly Dougherty (PEMA) explained: "We will communicate what we intend or not based on our words, our actions, our where we sit, how we sit. And it's also our perceptions and what we bring to that table. So today is also a reminder that it's not just about communicating, it's about engaging and listening."

This exercise set the tone for deeper engagement, after which participants were assigned to diverse tables to begin networking and forming working groups.

Session 1: Private Sector Panel - Unleashing Capability

The morning's centerpiece was a private sector panel that brought together representatives from critical infrastructure sectors of electric power, fuel, food, communications, retail, and pharmaceuticals. The session opened with a stark acknowledgment by the moderator Kelly McKinney (AHC Board Member) : "Here we have the private sector...we talk about the enormous capability, right? You have government on one side, slow moving creature of habit, and then you have these nimble, powerful organizations that are held back on the sidelines when they're most needed."

The panel featured:

  • Chris Eisenberg – Senior Director, Preparedness & Recovery Policy, Edison Electric Institute (EEI)
  • Lee Siler – Director of Readiness, Walmart
  • Sherri Stone – Vice President, Energy Marketers of America
  • Kent Kildow – AVP, Physical Security (Formerly BC/EM), Verizon
  • Bob Crow – Senior Director, Emergency Response & Crisis Management, Cencora
  • Carmela Hinderaker – Senior Director, Business Resilience & Corporate Compliance, C&S Wholesale Grocers

Key Themes from Private Sector Perspectives

Trust and Information Sharing: The panel emphasized that trust between sectors has improved significantly over the past decade, yet challenges remain. Private sector representatives expressed willingness to share more operational information but noted concerns about proprietary data and competitive disadvantages. One panelist observed: "I think we can all lean into a little more information sharing and a little more transparency that continues to improve."

Operational vs. Political Channels: A particularly insightful discussion addressed how businesses sometimes engage both operational emergency management channels and political channels (governors, legislators) simultaneously. Government representatives noted this creates "the perception of answer shopping" when businesses don't like initial responses and seek alternatives. The solution proposed: transparency about multi-channel engagement so emergency managers aren't blindsided.

Learning to Ask Better Questions: Everyone acknowledged the need to improve how they communicate needs and capabilities. Government representatives noted receiving "public statement answers" from industry when they need operational details, while private sector noted government questions sometimes miss the real issue. The solution involves both sides learning "how to ask the right question" and "better on how to listen to what that question is."

Understanding EOC Operations: Private sector representatives shouldn't assume they understand each state's Emergency Operations Center organization. As one panelist noted, "It's one to many relationships, and though there's more commonality than differences, every state is a little bit different."

The recommendation: provide clear orientation on how to engage with each state's EOC structure (e.g. the AHC's first public/private operational guide produced in 2013.

Blue Sky Day Engagement: Several panelists offered to host government officials at their facilities during non-emergency periods. This allows officials to see "with your own eyes how difficult it is and how much we push out within a day," including emerging technologies like robotic automation in distribution centers.

Session 2: State Directors Panel - Government Perspectives

The State Directors panel provided the government perspective on public-private partnerships, featuring emergency management directors from multiple states including:

Randy Padfield, Director, Pennsylvania Emergency Management

Chas Eby, Deputy Secretary, Maryland Emergency Management

Will Ray, Director, North Carolina Emergency Management

John Scrivani, Director, Virginia Emergency Management

A.J. Shall, Director, Delaware Emergency Management

Evolution and Future of Private Sector Engagement

Directors acknowledged significant progress in private sector relationships. One director reflected on their agency's journey: "When I first came to the agency, the business EOC was a discussion. And it was really the implementation of that...to see that grow and flourish over the years is really critical. We've come to understand that the private sector is really critical to community resiliency."

However, directors also grappled with future challenges, particularly given federal changes. The critical question posed: "What changes do we need to make in the private sector relationship with emergency management to be able to continue to move that forward? How do we start to focus on things, there's more of you than there are of us?"

Persistent Operational Challenges

Several operational issues emerged as recurring themes:

  • Hours of Service Waivers: Directors expressed frustration that certain issues keep resurfacing: "How do we get past hours of service waiver discussions, right? What do we need to be able to fix that? Because it seems like we keep coming back to some of those situations."
  • Small Business Considerations: One director raised the important equity question of ensuring smaller businesses benefit from emergency management relationships, not just large corporations: "Nobody wants to be in a situation where big box stores are open, but we're shutting down smaller businesses, and that is not a defensible space to be in."
  • Resource Constraints: With federal role evolution, states face the prospect of taking on functions previously handled federally—individual assistance programs, for example—without corresponding resources. As one director noted: "We don't have an IA program at the state level right now. We got to try and build that on the fly. Now, building the plane in flight is never good."
  • Insurance and Mitigation: Directors identified the evolving role of private insurance and reinsurance markets as critical to future community resilience, particularly given that "NFIP is not sustainable the way it is currently structured."

The "If Not Now, When" Moment

The panel concluded with recognition that current circumstances create an opportune moment for innovation. With six state directors actively engaged and federal structures in flux, there's potential to bring meaningful structure to Private Sector Liaison (PSL) programs from both private and public perspectives. As organizers noted: "If we can't figure out a way to help bring structure to the PSL program from private and public sector perspective...this is an opportune time to do it."

Session 3: First Use Case Workshop - Supply Chain Coordination

The afternoon introduced the first practical use case: coordinating supply chains during large-scale disasters. The scenario presented: "A large scale disaster. 10,000 survivors overwhelms local supplies. Regional, public-private partners must rapidly surge and coordinate supply chains to deliver water, food, medical supplies and pharmaceuticals. What are the barriers facing government and private sector for getting commodities to survivors quickly?"

Use Case Methodology Explained

Representatives from Pennsylvania Emergency Management (Molly Dougherty, PEMA) and food distribution (Katie Murphy, C&S Wholesale Grocers) introduced the structured six-step use case approach:

1. Define the Problem: Getting specific about what exactly needs solving

2. Document the Impacts: Why this matters and to whom

3. Identify Stakeholders: Who needs to be involved

4. Information Sharing: What information needs to be shared and its sensitivity

5. Information Sensitivity: What information can and cannot be shared.

6. Solution Development: What solutions or approaches might work

Implementation Planning: How to operationalize solutions

The presenters emphasized learning from past experiences. They shared a story about a water treatment plant during Hurricane Helene that highlighted the importance of properly defining problems before jumping to solutions.

Workshop Process

Participants worked at their tables through the first three phases: individual reflection on the problem statement, table discussion to identify different perspectives on the problem, and documenting various elements that define the challenge.

The facilitator Jonathan Spector (Converge Strategic Partners) emphasized noticing whether tables reached consensus: "Is there overwhelming agreement on this is the several big issues? It'll just be interesting to notice in your conversations, how aligned were you even understanding what the problem is."

This structured approach represented a significant evolution from earlier, less focused discussions—demonstrating how the All Hazards Consortium had learned that "you got to get small, you got to get really defined" when working with private sector on operational problems.

Day 2: Use Case Deep Dives and Path Forward (January 21, 2026)

Morning Session: State Private Sector Liaison Panel

Day 2 began with administrative updates, including Bob Crow's offer to provide tours of Cencora's global operations center for interested participants in small groups during breaks. The morning then featured a critical panel discussion that brought together State Private Sector Liaisons (PSLs) from across the country—a session that organizers noted came at the request of previous day's participants who wanted to hear directly from these frontline coordinators.

Growth of the PSL Network

The session opened with context about the PSL Working Group's remarkable growth. Started in 2018 with just six states (Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, and Texas), the network has expanded to 41 states with 58 members on their communication channel. This growth reflects increasing recognition of PSLs' critical role in emergency management.

Diverse PSL Structures and Approaches

The panel showcased the variety of organizational structures states use for their PSL functions:

  • Persia Payne-Hurley (North Carolina) joined remotely as co-chair of the State PSL Working Group. After nearly 12 years with North Carolina Emergency Management, she now leads all partnership-related groups in the agency, including the Business Emergency Operations Center (BEOC). Persia represents one of the founding states of the PSL Working Group and helped pioneer the concept of dedicated private sector coordination starting in 2018.
  • Molly Dougherty (Pennsylvania) serves as co-chair of the State PSL Working Group and Director for External Affairs at Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency. Her role encompasses multiple titles—Private Sector Liaison, BEOC Coordinator, and ESF-14 (Cross Sector Integration) Lead—reflecting how agencies are still defining these evolving positions. Reporting directly to the agency director allows her to "touch all the different parts of the agency" rather than being siloed in one functional area. Pennsylvania was one of the original six founding states of the PSL network.
  • Heather Freeman (Mississippi) serves as Director of the Mississippi Business Emergency Operations Center, representing a state with a dedicated business-focused EOC structure.
  • April Wilson (South Carolina) works from the Department of Commerce rather than the emergency management agency, giving her unique access to business resources that she leverages for emergency management purposes. As she explained, being in Commerce allows connection to business development teams and resources that complement emergency response. Notably, she operates as "a team of one," handling all PSL responsibilities solo.
  • John Hanian (Idaho) described himself as fortunate to have "a visionary director" who created a dedicated PSL position focused entirely on private sector needs. After seven years in the role, he noted the advantage of singular focus: "When you have all of those other job titles, you become the jack of all trades and the masters of none." Idaho's approach, operating within the military division with quasi-direct reporting to the director, demonstrates how concentrated attention on private sector partnerships can yield results. Idaho emphasizes moving "at the speed of business."
  • Gary Lehman (Ohio) represents a unique organizational structure—he sits in Ohio Homeland Security rather than the Emergency Management Agency, making him "a partner to the EMA." As the sixth person to hold this position (which has existed for over 10 years), he's focused on developing capabilities that previous holders didn't fully utilize. He also serves dual roles, commanding volunteers in the state defense force who provide logistics, mass care, and public health support during emergencies like COVID-19.
  • Ethan Paul (Arizona) serves as both State Voluntary Agency Liaison and Private Sector Liaison for Arizona's Department of Emergency and Military Affairs, Division of Emergency Management (which operates under the state's National Guard). His dual role means he works with "literally the whole community"—government, nonprofits, community and faith-based groups, as well as private sector. He leads ESF-14 (Cross Sector Integration) and reports directly to the agency director, allowing him to engage across all functional areas without being confined to a single branch.
  • Cory Edwards (Maryland) is the Business Engagement Program Manager for the Maryland Department of Emergency Management. He noted Maryland's structural advantage: under Secretary Russ Strickland's leadership, the department elevated from an agency under the Military Department to a cabinet-level position reporting directly to the governor. This elevation enhanced Maryland's PSL program's access and authority.
  • Ira Tannenbaum (New York City) participated in the discussions, representing New York City's unique perspective as what one participant called "a separate state in itself within New York." His participation highlighted the importance of engaging major metropolitan areas alongside state-level programs.

Common Themes and Challenges

Several critical themes emerged from the PSL panel:

  • Access and Authority: PSLs discussed the importance of having direct lines to decision-makers, whether directors or policy staff who can make real-time decisions. The degree of access varies significantly by state.
  • Communication Burden: The workload on PSLs during incidents is tremendous. States expressed need for greater redundancy and depth of capability, particularly larger states managing extensive private sector networks.
  • Whole Community Approach: PSLs work across diverse constituencies—not just traditional private sector but also nonprofits, community groups, faith-based organizations, and various government entities.
  • Operational vs. Political Engagement: Panel reinforced earlier discussions about businesses, sometimes engaging both operational (PSL) and political (governor/legislature) channels. Transparency about these parallel engagements helps PSLs manage perceptions and maintain effectiveness.
  • Training and Development: The need for PSL training on EOC operations, organizational structures, and effective liaison functions was emphasized. Many PSLs noted they're still learning daily despite years of experience.
  • Resource Constraints: Several panelists noted operating with minimal staff. The "team of one" reality means PSLs must prioritize ruthlessly and leverage every available relationship.

The panel concluded with organizers noting the discussion's timing: "If not now, when right? If we can't figure out a way to help bring structure to the PSL program from private and public sector perspective...this is an opportune time to do it." With six state directors now actively engaged and federal structures evolving, the moment presented unique opportunities to formalize and strengthen PSL programs nationwide.

The following session focused on a use case that had been "worked for quite some time"—one brought forward years earlier and continuously refined by the AHC's Multi-State Fleet Response Working Group, formed in 2013 by multiple companies from electric, communications, finance, retail, transportation, and food.

The Power Restoration Challenge

The session opened with recognition of the previous day's progress: "That was phenomenal. It's not easy, it gets sticky, but we got a couple of really good ideas that came out of that last panel." The focus then turned to expediting power restoration—a foundational challenge affecting every other aspect of disaster recovery.

Three speakers presented different perspectives on the power restoration coordination use case entitled: Regional Fleet Mustering Points for Crisis Response: Develop pre-approved staging locations across multiple states to support power and supply chain restoration efforts during hurricanes and disasters.

Dave Vanderbloemen (retired, Dominion Energy, AHC Fleet Response Work Group) - Utility Perspective: Explained why rapid power restoration matters from the electric sector's viewpoint and how it affects every other sector in an impacted state. Creating predictable mustering or rest points along the interstate routes for electric sector resources to stop and refuel/refresh along their traveling through 3 to 8 states to get to the impacted states is critical to the power restoration process. This reduces delays and increases employee/contractor safety. The fundamental reality: "You got to get the power on first." Reducing any delays along the way means people can arrive on time and start work sooner than if they are delayed because they were hunting for fuel, food, lodging, etc.. in a state they are just passing through and not familiar with.

Persia Payne-Hurley (NCEM) - State Testing and Evolution: Discussed how this concept was originally tested in 2018 during Hurricane Florence and subsequently evolved, bringing it back to life in 2025 with new approaches, technologies, and partnerships.

Lee Siler - Walmart Partnership: Provided the retail perspective on why this partnership works from a private sector standpoint and the current implementation status.

The Inbound Route Problem

The core challenge addressed: Mutual aid crews travel from distant states (Canada, Michigan, Maine) toward disaster zones (like Florida during hurricane season). These crews often have never been to the states they're traveling through, creating significant logistical challenges:

• Difficulty finding places to rest and refuel

• Lack of familiarity with local infrastructure

• Time wasted searching for appropriate stops

• Coordination challenges across multiple jurisdictions

The solution being developed: Pre-positioning staging areas and coordination points along known inbound routes, with private sector partners (like Walmart) providing facilities and support services to expedite crew movement.

Adaptive Agenda and Responsive Planning

A notable feature of Day 2 was the organizers' willingness to adapt the agenda in real-time based on participant needs and emerging discussions. As one organizer explained: "We'll just change the agenda." This flexibility reflected a lesson learned: "I've learned over time, they're great until the battle starts, right?"

The decision to modify the agenda came from recognizing that extended workshop time wasn't needed if the concept was well-developed enough to present solutions directly. This demonstrated the maturity of the use case process—some issues were ready for broader dissemination rather than further problem definition.

Afternoon Session: Synthesis and Path Forward

The final session focused on synthesizing lessons learned and charting the path forward for public-private innovation. Several critical insights emerged:

Standardization vs. State Flexibility

A tension surfaced between the need for standardized approaches that work across state lines (important for private sector operations) and states' desires for flexibility. As one participant noted: "I worry that without FEMA or some federal kind of standard that the states are going to go do whatever they feel like doing, and then it essentially just breaks my supply chain and makes it harder to work."

Contact Information and Relationship Continuity

Multiple participants emphasized the practical importance of maintaining current contact information as personnel change roles: "I don't know who's who in the zoo, and you guys' kind of move around. So, I think that's helpful." This seemingly simple issue has profound operational implications during crisis response.

Scale of Events

The discussion expanded beyond major disasters to include smaller events like the World Cup, noting: "It doesn't have to be a hurricane when you're talking to us." This recognition that public-private coordination can benefit from exercising on smaller-scale events helps build relationships and test processes before catastrophic incidents.

Cost Questions

Perhaps the most challenging topic, saved for final discussion, was funding: "You have the operational questions to deal with. And you have the cost questions, who the hell's for all this? And that's the big one that nobody wants to touch in this room, but where else are we going to go?" The group acknowledged this fundamental challenge without resolving it—recognizing that sustainable public-private partnerships ultimately require addressing financial mechanisms.

Closing Reflections on Trust

The Summit concluded by returning to its foundational theme: trust. Bud Nertz (AHC Board) provided comments regarding the importance and connecting people and building trust through solving problems together. Multiple participants reflected on progress made: "Over the last 10 years, the trust has improved between the sectors and between the private and public sectors. So, kudos to everyone in this room for the work you've been doing to help with that."

Yet they also acknowledged ongoing work needed: "There's still some opportunities to help improve that." The path forward involves:

  • Continued information sharing and transparency
  • Better mutual understanding of organizational structures and constraints
  • Regular blue-sky day engagement to build relationships before crises
  • Structured problem-solving through use cases
  • Honest acknowledgment of both capabilities and limitations

Summit Outcomes and Continuing Impact

Tangible Progress

The 2026 Summit produced several concrete outcomes:

  • Advanced Use Cases: Three specific use cases (supply chain surge/coordination and expediting power restoration via mustering points on major interstate corridors moved from problem identification toward actionable solutions.
  • Strengthened Relationships: Approximately 60 participants from diverse sectors built or deepened professional relationships that will facilitate crisis coordination.
  • Shared Understanding: Both government and private sector gained clearer insight into each other's constraints, capabilities, and decision-making processes.
  • Methodology Refinement: The six-step use case process demonstrated its value as a framework for structured problem-solving across sectors.

Persistent Challenges Identified

The Summit also clearly identified challenges requiring ongoing attention:

  • Federal Role Uncertainty: Continued evolution of federal emergency management structures creates uncertainty for state and private sector planning.
  • Resource Constraints: States face potential new responsibilities without corresponding funding or personnel.
  • Information Sharing Barriers: Both sectors struggle with balancing transparency needs against legitimate confidentiality concerns.
  • Small Business Inclusion: Ensuring smaller companies can participate in and benefit from public-private partnerships.
  • Funding Mechanisms: Developing sustainable approaches to financing public-private emergency management collaboration.

The Innovation Imperative

The 2026 Summit's overarching message resonated throughout: emergency management cannot continue operating as it has in the past. Innovation isn't optional—it's essential. As the opening remarks emphasized: "We have to innovate. We have to do more with less, but more importantly, we got to do something different. And most of the time those things are different and involve other people."

Summary

The All Hazards Consortium's 2026 Public/Private Crisis Innovation Summit represented not an endpoint but a continuation of evolving public-private partnerships. By bringing together diverse perspectives, using structured problem-solving methodologies, and fostering honest dialogue about both progress and persistent challenges, the Summit advanced the critical work of building resilient communities through genuine collaboration.

The three days in Conshohocken, PA demonstrated that despite significant challenges—federal transitions, resource constraints, trust gaps, and operational complexities—the emergency management community possesses both the relationships and the methodologies needed to innovate. The question, as participants noted, isn't whether change is needed but whether stakeholders will seize this "opportune time" to implement it: "If not now, when?"

Sponsor / Stakeholder Thank You

Document prepared from All Hazards Consortium 2026 Public/Private Innovation Summit transcripts

2026 All Hazards Consortium. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Statement
All Hazards Consortium