Record the exercise context
Begin with the exercise name, date, location, participating organizations, scenario, authority, exercise type, safety structure, UAS resources, communications plan, simulated or real systems used, and the objectives approved before conduct. Identify which events and data were exercise-only so the record cannot be mistaken for an actual incident.
List evaluators and the evidence available to them: observation notes, dispatch timestamps, radio or message logs, viewer status, flight logs, product delivery times, participant feedback, and controller injects. Keep protected credentials, operational access details, and unnecessary personal information out of the general after-action document.
- Approved exercise objectives
- Participating organizations and roles
- Scenario and exercise type
- Safety and control structure
- Systems and data actually exercised
- Evaluation sources and limitations
Evaluate the operating sequence
Review the full sequence: request and approval, alerting, pilot acknowledgment, dispatch information, arrival and check-in, incident integration, airspace and weather decision, launch setup, tasking, communications, remote-viewer access, product transfer, reassignment, demobilization, and reporting.
For each objective, state the expected behavior, what occurred, the evidence supporting the observation, the operational effect, and whether the issue belongs to policy, training, staffing, equipment, software, connectivity, security, documentation, or coordination. Avoid personal blame; describe the system behavior precisely enough to correct it.
Capture strengths and improvement needs
Record strengths that should be sustained, not just deficiencies. Examples may include a clear assignment, disciplined communications, useful map annotations, a smooth viewer handoff, correct denial of unauthorized access, rapid identification of an unobserved area, or a complete data-transfer record.
Improvement items should explain the consequence. “Video froze” is incomplete. A stronger observation states when the stall occurred, which connection and profile were in use, whether the player recovered, how far playback fell behind, what communication fallback was used, and how the interruption affected the objective.
- Observed strength
- Area for improvement
- Evidence
- Operational effect
- Immediate workaround
- Recommended corrective action
Build an improvement plan that closes
Each accepted corrective action needs one responsible organization or position, a measurable completion condition, a target date, dependencies, and a verification method. Separate immediate configuration changes from policy decisions, training needs, procurement, legal review, or multi-agency agreements.
Schedule a follow-up check. The final status should show whether the action was completed, changed, deferred with a reason, or carried into the next exercise. An improvement plan that is filed without ownership and follow-through does not improve readiness.
- Corrective action
- Responsible owner
- Completion measure
- Target date
- Dependencies
- Verification or retest
Questions agencies ask
Frequently asked questions
Should the after-action review include only problems?
No. It should preserve strengths, identify improvement areas, explain evidence and operational effects, and convert accepted recommendations into trackable corrective actions.
Who owns the final report?
The organization or exercise structure designated during planning. IRIS can contribute observations about the UAS assignment, but participating agencies control their policies, findings, distribution, and corrective actions.
Should access codes or operational links appear in the report?
No. Record that access control or a viewer pathway was exercised without placing reusable credentials, signed URLs, protected identifiers, or unnecessary operational details in a broadly distributed report.
Related planning resources
Continue within agency integration and exercises
These resources address the next decisions agencies commonly evaluate within the same planning area.
Fire service planning
Planning Supplemental UAS Support for a Fire Department
A practical planning framework for fire departments evaluating supplemental drone support, including incident command, assignments, thermal limitations, communications, and data handling.
Read the related resourceAgency integration
Integrating an Outside UAS Resource into an Incident or Mutual-Aid Plan
A planning checklist for agencies integrating nonprofit, contracted, or mutual-aid UAS resources into incident command, communications, airspace coordination, and data handling.
Read the related resourceRegional planning
Public-Safety UAS Support Planning in Western Washington
Regional considerations for fire, search, emergency-management, and disaster-response organizations evaluating supplemental UAS support in Western Washington.
Read the related resourcePlanning references
Authoritative sources used for this resource
These references support the planning framework. Agencies and operators should still apply current law, authorization, policy, incident direction, and location-specific requirements.
Apply the framework to your organization
Discuss the assignment types, operating limits, communications, remote access, deliverables, and participation structure that fit your agency.