Developing a Culturally Specific Emergency Communications Plan for the Disability Community
Executive Summary
The goal of this project was to conduct a preliminary, culturally relevant assessment of emergency preparedness in the disability community. The research, funded by the Multnomah County Health Department (MCHD) through a grant from the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), was conducted by researchers affiliated with the Women with Disabilities Health Equity Coalition (WowDHEC), a project of the Center of Excellence in Women’s Health at Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU). Between July 16, 2008 and August 31, 2008, 55 people with disabilities completed an online survey, and 22 people with disabilities participated in one of six focus groups. Nearly 42% of survey respondents lived in Multnomah County and 69.8% lived in the larger Portland metro area. All respondents lived in a house or apartment; none indicated living in an institutional setting.
Summary of Research Questions and ResponsesResearch question #1: How do people with disabilities (PWD) prefer to receive important communications? The choice of communication modes changes by the type of impairment (or disability). While TV was identified as the method of choice for receiving information in the event of an emergency, this was not true for everyone. Those who self-identified as Deaf, for example, ranked family and friends higher than TV as a preferred source for receiving important health information. When asked whom they were more likely to listen to or follow instructions from, respondents ranked TV and Fire/EMS personnel highest. Respondents identified friends, family and neighbors as the people they would most want to contact in the event of an emergency, and the phone (landline or cell) as the way they would want to contact them. Neighbors and neighborhood associations emerged as a potentially important asset to consider in developing a culturally-specific communications plan in the disability community.
Research question #2: What is the nature of the communication channels frequently used in the disability community? Many of the communication channels favored by people with disabilities, particularly those with hearing loss, are now "high tech," and require power (e.g. PDAs, text phones, and internet). Community leaders and disability organizations may be underutilized in providing information relating to emergencies.
Research question #3: How are people with disabilities (PWD) likely to respond in the event of a natural disaster or a public health emergency resulting from a highly contagious infection or disease? Transportation emerged from all of the focus groups as crucial to people’s ability to respond appropriately to a disaster. This issue is not limited to those with physical or mobility disabilities, but applies to those with other disabilities. Service animals also emerged as very important in facilitating people’s ability to follow instructions.
Research question #4.
To what extent are participants prepared for an emergency? Most participants reported feeling a little prepared or not prepared at all for a emergency. This includes not having a comprehensive plan or go-kit. Nearly 70% of the online survey respondents did not know where an accessible shelter is located. Half of the Multnomah County respondents did not know about the Voluntary Emergency Registry (VER).Research question #5. What are the important components needed for the development of a culturally specific plan for the disability community? There is clear support for having culturally-specific Community Connectors in the disability community. Having a point person or Community Connector was viewed as helpful for a variety reasons, including having a shared language and understanding about specific disabilities.
Less than a quarter of online survey respondents answered "yes" to the question: "Is there someone/some organization in your disability community you would go to/contact in case of an emergency?" This suggests that, for some people with disabilities, focusing on disability organizations will not be sufficient in developing an effective communications plan. Training emerged as a prominent need on three levels: for traditional first responders, for Community Connectors in the disability community, and for other people with disabilities.
Recommendations
Continue assessment of communication channels
to reach people in the disability sub-communities that were not well represented in the focus groups.Develop a communications plan that builds a
unified, accessible system, conveys respect, and that does not patronize people with disabilities.Take a
cross-disability approach and ensure that the communications plan is inclusive of all people with disabilities.Develop and "grow"
Community Connectors from the disability community.Involve these Community Connectors and other leaders from the disability community as
equal partners with other first responders.Plan in advance
to ensure an effective, organized, community-wide system.Outreach
broadly, in an accessible and systematic manner.Bring together members of
neighborhood associations and members of the disability community to maximize the strengths and resources of both communities.Involve
service providers (individuals and organizations).Involve a broad range of social service and care provision organizations, such as Portland Rescue Mission and Jewish Family Services, and other "mainstream" organizations that serve people with disabilities.
Provide ongoing training for three populations
: traditional first responders, future Community Connectors in the disability community, and other people with disabilities. Training needs to be available in more than one medium (e.g. written, audio, visual). Cross-disability training will be important to ensure inclusiveness.To download a copy of the full report, please go to: www.WowDHEC.org. For more information or to obtain information in alternative formats, please call Marjorie McGee at 503-494-2685.