Illustrative sample data, not live counts.
Map data adapted from Simple World Map (Al MacDonald / Fritz Lekschas), CC BY-SA 3.0.
Location
FBI organizes by 56 individual field offices covering specific counties, not by regional zones — the regions above are a general reference, not FBI's actual structure.
USACE organizes into 8–9 divisions defined by watershed boundaries, not state lines — they don't align with the regions above, which are a general reference, not USACE's actual structure.
CIFFC coordinates through direct province/territory member agencies (13 in total) rather than a fixed regional map — the regions above are a general reference, not CIFFC's actual structure.
The Canadian Centre for Cyber Security operates as a single centralized national body with no regional tier — the regions above are a general reference, not its actual structure.
CNSC's regional presence follows nuclear facility locations (Ontario, Quebec, Alberta, plus site offices at each power plant), not a population-based regional map — the regions above are a general reference, not CNSC's actual structure.
CENAPRED is a single centralized technical/research body headquartered in Mexico City with no regional office network — the zones above are a general reference, not CENAPRED's actual structure.
CNSNS is centralized with no regional office structure — the zones above are a general reference, not CNSNS's actual structure.
CONAFOR coordinates through its own network of regional and state forestry management offices, not the Consejo Nacional de Protección Civil's 5 zones — the zones above are a general reference, not CONAFOR's actual structure.
SEMARNAT maintains one federal representative office in each of Mexico's 32 states rather than grouping into 5 zones — the zones above are a general reference, not SEMARNAT's actual structure.
Health delivery is organized into local "jurisdicciones sanitarias" within each state, and the national health council separately groups states into 4 regions for its own purposes — neither matches the 5 zones above, which are a general reference only.
Emergency scenario
Regulatory scenario
Shown once a country and an emergency scenario are selected above — only that country's own agencies appear. Select all three countries for the full continental roster.
Response scenario
Shown once a coverage area is selected above.
Coverage shown here is illustrative of network structure across all three countries, not a live partner count — actual matches depend on your account, country, and the specific request. Agencies listed are examples of who may be involved, not a guarantee of jurisdiction or activation for any specific event.
Small operators first, large partners at scale — across all three countries.
ERNA doesn't lock a government customer into one size of partner. As a cross-border response moves from immediate impact to a sustained, multi-month emergency, the network shifts who it draws equipment and crews from — giving the requesting agency more dynamic control and a better cost profile at every stage.
Immediate response
Stabilizing response
Sustained response
The sourcing mix shown is illustrative of the model, not a live allocation — actual sourcing depends on the specific request, available capacity in each country, and the requesting agency's own procurement rules.
Want to see this in numbers instead? The Impact Calculator sizes ambulances, shelter space, and crew to a hypothetical scenario.
Open calculatorWhen one country isn't enough, all three respond together.
Each country page on this site shows a single national response network. This page is the other half of ERNA: what the United States, Canada, and Mexico can do when their capacity is combined into one response.
The network as a whole, not three separate ones.
Every listed piece of equipment and every staged asset in any of the three countries is visible to the same dispatch system — combination isn't a special mode, it's the default view.
Four steps, the same for any border.
Combination isn't limited to one border — the same process applies whether the gap is on the US–Mexico line, the US–Canada line, or a request that needs capacity from both.
Demand exceeds local capacity
A national declaration creates demand — ambulances, ALS/BLS equipment, generators — beyond what's staged in that country alone.
Network-wide match
Dispatch checks availability across all three countries' staged and partner-listed equipment, not just the requesting country's inventory.
Cross-border dispatch
Assets move to the affected jurisdiction, coordinated with the receiving country's response authority.
Combined field operation
Resources from more than one country operate under a single coordinated response until the declared emergency closes.
Two examples of combined response.
These are illustrative scenarios, not live incidents — they show the kind of combination the network is built to handle.
Combined ambulance response
A short-term flood declaration in a northern Mexican state exceeds local ambulance capacity. ERNA routes partner ambulances from South Texas across the border into the same coordinated response.
Shared generator staging
Generators staged near the US–Canada border ahead of a forecasted storm serve whichever side the storm actually hits, cutting the time between declaration and delivery.
Long-term biological response
A sustained biological emergency draws on standing partner allocations from all three countries at once, rotated over the life of the response rather than dispatched as a single event.
Every dashboard sees the combined network.
Whether you're a requesting agency in Nuevo León, a partner in Texas, or a provincial office in British Columbia, your dashboard's inventory and matching draw from all three countries — not just your own.
See cross-border assets alongside domestic ones on every request.
Get matched to deployment offers from any country your equipment can reach.