County Level Disaster Preparedness and Response for 课件.ppt

Research Questions 1: Have disasters facilitated change for people with mobility impairments? Table 1. Reasons for Modifying County Disaster Plans Using Chi-squared tests, none of these 2x2 relationships are statistically significant N=30 Revisions prompted by disaster? Revisions prompted by people with disabilities? Revisions prompted by federal mandates? Revisions prompted by other concerns? County disaster plan revised since disaster? Yes % No % Yes % No % Yes % No % Yes % No % Yes (n=29) 27.6 72.4 6.9 0.0 58.6 41.4 6.9 93.1 No (n=1) 0.0 100 0.0 100 0.0 100 0.0 100 精品文档 Research Questions 2: Were people with disabilities included in the planning process? Four of the six best practice sites had people included in the process. This question was only answered for six counties engaged in the planning process (Question #14) 精品文档 Research Question 3: Are sites able to assess prevalence based upon adequate surveillance? Table 2. Reported Surveillance of Counties Experiencing Disasters 精品文档 # Counties Frequencies Data Validity Measure Category Count # people with mobility impairments in county 13 75 4(13%) Census -3 Database-5 Estimate -5 Fair Good Poor 300-400 2 (7%) 3,000-10,000 6(20%) 10,000 1(3%) # persons injured in disaster 30 None 27(90%) 100 1(3%) 100-300 1(3%) 10,000 1(3%) # persons killed in disaster 30 None 26(87%) 1-5 3(10%) 2,749 1(3%) # persons with mobility impairments killed 30 None 28(93%) 1 1(3%) Unknown 1(3%) # persons with mobility impairments rescued 30 None 17(57%) 2-15 4(13%) 25-100 4(13%) 100 5(16%) Unknown 1(3%) 精品文档 Research Questions 45: Surveillance that allows estimates of prevalence of people with mobility impairments at risk in a disaster?  No way to determine prevalence rates based upon surveillance systems in place. However, we may want to test this further with our site in Coffey County. Where there are accurate data registries, this measure could be possible. 精品文档 Research Question 6: Surveillanc