Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness...
Transcript of Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness...
![Page 1: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
BUILDING RESILIENT COMMUNITIES:
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS INITIATIVE
![Page 2: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT
Gain clarity on how to help vulnerable
populations prepare for disasters
Examine the effectiveness of the
Emergency Preparedness
Project (EPD) Process
![Page 3: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
FEDERAL PARTNERS
Cooperative State
Research, Education, and
Extension Service, USDA
Federal Emergency
Management Agency
![Page 4: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
SITE SELECTION PROCESS: TWO FACETS
Presidential Disaster
Declarations
1998-2008
Total number of disasters
and
Total variety of disasters
Social Vulnerability Index
(SoVI)
Created by:
S.L. Cutter
B.J. Boruff
W.L Shirley
Social Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards
Social Science Quarterly, June 2003
![Page 5: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
PRESIDENTIALLY DECLARED DISASTERS
Coastal storms
Drought
Earthquake
Fire
Fish loss
Flood
Freeze
Hurricane
Ice storm
Severe storm
Snow
Tornado
Volcano
Miscellaneous*
*Misc. = dam/levee break, human cause (including terrorism),
mud/landslide, toxic substances, typhoon, and other.
![Page 6: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
SOCIAL VULNERABILITY INDEX: KEY COMPONENTS
Age
Density of the built
environment
Ethnicity
Housing stock and
tenancy
Infrastructure
dependence
Personal wealth
Race
Single-sector economic
dependence
![Page 7: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
PRESIDENTIALLY DECLARED DISASTERS
![Page 8: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
SOCIAL VULNERABILITY
![Page 9: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
DETERMINING POTENTIAL SITES:
THE USE OF QUARTILES
Declared Disasters Social Vulnerability
Top Tier Top Quartile Top Quartile
Second Tier
(either of the following
combinations)
Top Quartile Second Quartile
Second Quartile Top Quartile
Residual All other combinations
![Page 10: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
COMBINED VULNERABILITY
![Page 11: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
PARTNERING STATES: ARKANSAS
Project Team:
• Deborah Tootle
• Bobby Hall
![Page 12: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
PARTNERING STATES: FLORIDA
Project Team:
• Mark Brennan
• Hank Cothran
• Molly Moon
![Page 13: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
PARTNERING STATES: LOUISIANA
Project Team:
• Kay Lynn Tettleton
• James Barnes
• Glenn Dixon
• Dora Ann Hatch
• Cynthia Pilcher
![Page 14: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
PARTNERING STATES: MISSOURI
Project Team:
• Mary Leuci
• Shelly Bush-Rowe
• B.J. Eavy
• Eric Evans
![Page 15: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
PARTNERING STATES: OKLAHOMA
Project Team:
• Brian Whitacre
• Claude Bess
![Page 16: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
COMMUNITY PROCESS
Community
Representatives
Traditional
Emergency
Management
Organizations
Bridge
MeetingCommunity
RecommendationsRoundtable Discussions
![Page 17: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
ROUNDTABLE OVERVIEW
1. Examining recent experiences with natural
disasters
2. Assessing existing resources
3. Assessing the EPD process
![Page 18: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
BRIDGE MEETING OVERVIEW
1. Community similarities
2. Community differences
3. Responses to the EPD process
4. Final recommendations
![Page 19: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
DISADVANTAGED GROUPS
Elderly, especially in rural areas*
Families with small children, especially single parents
Homebound
Homeless
Illegal immigrants
Isolation*: social, cultural, and or physical/geographical Lacking transportation
Low education / illiterate
Low income*
Non-English speaking
Those that refuse to take action
Those with physical and or mental disabilities*, including those with medical dependence (i.e. on oxygen, dialysis, etc.)
*Indicates groups most often identified as “disadvantaged”
![Page 20: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
WHAT WORKED WELL IN PAST DISASTERS
Having a place where “trusted” people are present.
Communications among agencies.
Good coordination of formal Emergency Management
organizations.
Advanced warning systems.
Mock exercises and drills.
Increased tracking of vulnerable populations.
BRACE example
![Page 21: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
WHAT NEEDS IMPROVEMENT
Communicating to the public; using existing social networks
Integrating formal (city & county) and informal organizations
Coordination between local and national organizations (maintain local
leadership)
Coordinating donations and volunteers
Addressing needs of pets and livestock
Keeping an up-to-date registry of special needs populations
Fostering more open attitudes & skills of Emergency Managers
Streamlining assistance process and paperwork
Increasing training and education of individuals
![Page 22: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
RURAL VS URBAN
More social capital –
“neighbor helping
neighbor”
Heavy equipment
available
Attitude of “doing for
myself
More physical and
financial resources
More formal
organizations to share
the work
![Page 23: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
RURAL VS URBAN
Less attention given to rural areas; neglected
Lack financial resources
Limited rural tax base
Distance and poorer infrastructure inhibits response
Same people play multiple roles
Plans created regionally w/o local input
Individuals more socially isolated (do not know neighbors)
Many demands in a small area
Attitude of “Who is going to do for me?”
![Page 24: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
EPD PROCESS: STRENGTHS
Good sequence of events/process
Liked mapping process
Good if connected to the whole plan
Community input helpful
Mobilizes more people; it is inclusive.
Increases awareness of both vulnerabilities and resources
Addresses some of the weaknesses of the current plans
Alleviates conflicts ahead of time
Coordination saves time and increases efficiency
Increases horizontal linkages, especially at the county level.
![Page 25: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
EPD PROCESS: WEAKNESSES
Step-by-step guide and training needed
Communities need technical assistance for mapping.
Funding is an issue
Keeping maps updated may be a challenge
Challenge in getting community involvement
Concern for how local leadership will accept the process
Challenge of ensuring the right people are involved
Potential turf issues
Distribution/communication of plans may still be challenging
Time consuming
May disrupt state plans intended to work together
Must be part of a total plan to work
![Page 26: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
COACHING: STRENGTHS
Liked having a guide to keep the process on track
Facilitator/Mediator is good
Appropriate education and experience is a strength
Compassion to understand community concerns
Neutral – the lack of political “baggage”
Ideal: team approach w/outside coach and inside
facilitator
Trust is essential to success
Urban: more receptive to coach as an outsider, but
expressed concern that there was already a plans in place
Rural: Helpful because of limited resources and the ability
to draw people together
![Page 27: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
COACHING: WEAKNESSES
Need clear definition of the role and qualifications.
Concern for selecting a local coach vs. an outsider.
Funding – bigger concern in rural settings.
May be a need to provide coach training
Some Emergency Managers may be hesitant
Concern for political agendas.
Must be able to establish trust within the community.
Can’t be expected to do it all.
![Page 28: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS
EPD Process is valuable and should be pursued:
Develop comprehensive training curricula.
Clearly define the role and core competencies of the coach
Implement a competitive grants process to encourage community “buy-in” upfront.
Invest in an outside evaluation of the original pilot sites from EPD
Catalogue available resources to assist with GIS mapping and coaching needs. (i.e. universities, community colleges, etc.)
Refine vulnerability assessments; explore low tech options.
Address ways to involve and encourage local buy-in and participation
![Page 29: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
RECOMMENDATIONS: FEMA
Provide feedback to participating states and communities.
Explore partnerships with other like-minded entities.• Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Centers with RRDC &
EDEN
• Philanthropies
• Formal and informal organizations
Expand current SRDC process to raises awareness of the needs of disadvantaged populations
Focus on the significant needs of rural areas
Emphasize collaborative planning at all levels.
Address the skills, commitment, and competency of the Emergency Managers.
![Page 30: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
RECOMMENDATIONS: EXTENSION
Has the knowledge and trust of the community; available in
every county/parish.
Should become more actively involved in disaster
management. What would it take?
• Is it a priority for CES? In counties? Nationally?
• Administrative approval and support
• Programmatic alignment (CD, ANR, FCS, 4H?)
Can serve on boards and advisory committees.
Can assist in response.
Can assist in education and information dissemination.
Promotes state and county level involvement.
![Page 31: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
RECOMMENDATIONS: EXTENSION, CONT.
Can network with EDEN.
Provides training/facilitation/coaching.
Provides technical assistance or access to (i.e. GIS, recovery)
Builds capacity in communities and has a history of facilitating community change, bringing all stakeholders to the table; can provide coordination
Can provide links to networks and connections to stakeholders; has diverse audiences
Is an unbiased, non-political organization that has a reputation of bringing groups together.
Has the ability to help communities identify assets and improve decision-making.
![Page 32: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
RECOMMENDATIONS: OTHER AVENUES
NACDEP
Journal of Extension
Emergency Management
EDEN – (Smith-Lever)
Summary Report Similar to “Voices of the
People”
![Page 33: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
OVERARCHING RECOMMENDATIONS
Planning needs to involve the community.
Plans need to be clearly communicated to the
community.
Personal education and responsibility are vital.
Formal and informal organizations need to co-plan.
Rural areas are especially in need of planning
resources.
Formal leaders need skills to facilitate community
involvement .
![Page 34: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
SOUTHERN RURAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER
P.O. Box 9656
Mississippi State, MS 39762
Phone: 662-325-3207
Website: http://srdc.msstate.edu
Dr. Bo Beaulieu, PI: [email protected]
Dr. Deborah Tootle, Co-PI: [email protected]
![Page 35: Building Resilient communities: emergency preparedness initiativesrdc.msstate.edu/epi/files/findings.pdf · 2010. 6. 9. · RECOMMENDATIONS: EPD PROCESS EPD Process is valuable and](https://reader037.fdocuments.net/reader037/viewer/2022090604/6057951014da1656f24d5479/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
BUILDING RESILIENT COMMUNITIES:
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS INITIATIVE