Self-Assessment of Emergency Preparedness for People with Disability
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Self-assessment of emergency preparedness for people with disability
A report on the field application of the Individual Self-assessment Tool – Emergency Preparedness (ISAT-EP)
May, 2017
Professor Gwynnyth Llewellyn Associate Professor Dale Dominey-Howes Dr. Michelle Villeneuve Hayley Brooks
Contact Details
Centre for Disability Research and Policy, Faculty of Health Sciences: Hayley Brooks, Project Manager T409, Cumberland Campus C43 Ph. +61 2 9351 9152 e-mail [email protected]
Centre for Disability Research and Policy, Faculty of Health Sciences: Professor Gwynnyth Llewellyn T407, Cumberland Campus C43 Ph. +61 2 9351 9533 e-mail [email protected]
Natural Hazards Research Group Associate Professor Dale Dominey-Howes Room 448, F09 - Madsen Building Ph. +61 2 9351 6641 e-mail [email protected]
Centre for Disability Research and Policy, Faculty of Health Sciences Dr. Michelle Villeneuve J106, Cumberland Campus C42 Ph. +61 2 9356 7438 e-mail [email protected]
1 Acknowledgements The study team would like to acknowledge the joint State/Commonwealth Natural Disaster Resilience Program for funding this project through the Office of Emergency Management NSW Justice Community Resilience and Innovations Program.
The team would also like to thank all the participants who engaged in the field test.
Table of contents
2 Acronyms
ABS – Australian Bureau of Statistics ACOSS –Australian Council of Social Services (ACOSS) Auslan – Australian sign language CALD – Culturally and Linguistically Diverse CDRP – Centre for Disability Research and Policy at the University of Sydney CSO – Community Service Organisation DSO – Disability Support Organisation DiDR Tool – Disability Inclusive Disaster Resilience Tool DiDRR – Disability Inclusive Disaster Risk Reduction DRR – Disaster Risk Reduction DPO – Disabled People’s Organisation EMs – Emergency Managers FACS – NSW Family and Community Services ISAT-EP – Individual Self-Assessment Tool – Emergency Preparedness LEMC – Local Emergency Management Committee LEMO – Local Emergency Management Officer LGA – Local Government Area NDIS – National Disability Insurance Scheme NSW – New South Wales NSW SES – New South Wales State Emergency Services NSW RFS – New South Wales Rural Fire Service NSW VRA – New South Wales Volunteer Rescue Association RCO – Resilient Community Organisations toolkit developed by ACOSS
List of Tables
Table 1. Recruitment methods for the ISAT-EP field test Table 2. Engagement with participants reviewing the ISAT-EP Table 3. Participants in field testing of the ISAT-EP Table 4.1 Overall feedback and suggestions for improving the ISAT-EP Table 4.2. Feedback section by section and suggestions for improvement
List of Figures
Figure 1. DiDR Tool Framework
3 Figure 2. Participation by stakeholder group
4 Executive Summary
This report details the field testing of the Individual Self-Assessment Tool – Emergency Preparedness (ISAT-EP). This field test aimed to evaluate the utility of this tool from the perspective of people with disability and stakeholders in the disability, community and emergency management sectors as well as generate suggestions for improvement.
The project team adapted the Disability Inclusive Disaster Resilience (DiDR) Tool1 for Australian conditions and renamed this tool the ISAT-EP. The original DiDR tool was based on the evidence about capacity and risk in the face of natural hazards for the general population in the absence of an evidence base in relation to people with disability.
The aim of the ISAT-EP is for individuals with disability or their families and carers to identify areas of capacity and risk in the face of natural disaster emergencies. The ISAT-EP comprises four components which are known to be related to capacity and risk in natural disaster situations: functioning and capacity, participation in the community, physical vulnerability of the individual’s house, and risk indicators. The ISAT-EP has 10 sections: general information; socio-demographic and cultural information; functioning and disability questions; participation in the community; physical vulnerability of home; attachment to place; natural hazards risk perception; natural hazard emergencies responses; risk communication preferences; and lived experience of past natural hazard emergencies.
For this field test application of the ISAT-EP, multiple methods were used to recruit participants. Attendees at the project’s Phase Two Local Emergency Preparedness workshops2 reviewed the ISAT-EP as one component of the day. Disability specialists were also recruited from DPOs, peak disability organisations and disability-specific organisations to review the ISAT-EP. Participation was also invited via the project’s social media3. All participants were provided with copies of the ISAT-EP and review information in electronic/hard copy. In total, 60 people participated in this field test application, 29 of whom were people with disability. This was a particular heartening result in the face of many competing priorities in the disability sector in NSW including the transition to and roll-out of the National Disability Insurance Scheme.
Not surprisingly in this context, there were some barriers in the recruitment process. For some people with disability, having the time available to complete the review was problematic; for others, considering emergency preparedness at this stage was not a priority in their daily lives. As well, some organisations acted as ‘gatekeepers’ as they were not willing to share the ISAT-EP with the people they support. Their reasons included not wanting “to worry people unnecessarily” and thinking it unlikely people with disability could fill in a self-report questionnaire when typically their workers
1 Disability Inclusive Disaster Resilience (DiDR) Tool is available at http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/publications/technical- reports/Technical%20Report %20pdfs/Tech_Report_3_DiDR_Tool_Report_FINAL.pdf. 2 Report on Phase Two Workshops October 2016 is available at http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/projects/disasterdisab.shtml 3 Project Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/disabilitynaturaldisasterstudy/
5 would be the ones assessing the needs of people with disability. This highlights the importance of creating awareness that people with disability can and must be part of developing community resilience in the face of natural disaster emergencies. A critical component of this is self-assessment of capacity, need for support and resources available – as indeed is the case for everyone else in the community.
Analysis of the data generated in this field test application was underpinned by the findings from the Disability and Disaster Risk Reduction / Emergency Preparedness Report Two: Scoping Review prepared for this project4. The overall findings demonstrate that people with disability regarded the ISAT-EP as highly relevant, given the increasing frequency of natural disaster emergencies and their lack of involvement in community preparedness activities to date. A standout finding not anticipated by the project team was the very positive feedback from people with disability on the ISAT-EP as an educative tool: completing this tool prompted a great deal of interest in and learning about the variety of factors that affect preparedness and including emergency preparedness in their individualised support plans. Further, there was support for the ISAT-EP as a tool which gives people with disability a say in matters that effect their lives, in line with Australia’s commitment to people with disability as engaged and participating citizens in their own right.
The availability of a self-report assessment tool which focuses on capacity and resilience as well as areas of need for support was warmly welcomed by the disability, community and emergency management sectors. A standout finding from emergency manager sector participants was the ISAT-EP as a relevant and useful tool to assist their task of mapping resilience as well as locating specific sources of risk in the community. The standout finding from the disability and community sector participants was their desire to have the ISAT-EP readily available as an individual assessment and support planning tool. Although there are many disability assessment and planning tools, none except the ISAT-EP address assessment and planning for natural disaster emergencies.
As hoped, participants in this field test application of the ISAT-EP provided very useful suggestions for improvement of the ISAT-EP. These are detailed in Table 4.1 on pages 15-16 Specific suggestions for improvement section by section of the ISAT- EP are detailed in Table 4.2 on pages 17-22. Suggestions for the next, further refined version of the ISAT-EP include multiple paper and electronic formats that meet high standard accessibility guidelines to ensure all people with disability can use the tool, and appropriateness of the tool for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. A highly desirable requirement would be that each individual, on completion of the ISAT-EP, can benchmark their capacity and risk and assess changes to capacity and risk over time as they gain more information, gather resources, and become an integral part of building resilience in their community.
This field test application has demonstrated the value of the ISAT-EP as a self- assessment and an educative tool, with participants warmly welcoming future development along the lines suggested in their overall feedback and suggestions for specific parts of the ISAT-EP. The next steps in tool development include submitting 4
Disability and Disaster Risk Reduction / Emergency Preparedness Report Two: Scoping Review can be accessed at http://sydney.edu.au/health- sciences/cdrp/projects/disasterdisab.shtml
6 the findings from this field test application for international peer reviewed publication to meet scientific standards of transparency and knowledge sharing in tool development. Further testing of a revised ISAT-EP based on the findings is also required, with consideration given to developing a scoring or benchmarking component as foreshadowed in this report.
7 1. Introduction
The University of Sydney’s Hazards Research Group (HRG) and Centre for Disability Research and Policy (CDRP) partnered to lead a two-year project designed to enhance community resilience for emergency preparedness for natural hazard emergencies by developing knowledge and capacity for disability inclusion in disaster risk reduction (DIDRR). The focus of this project was enabling Community Service Organisations (CSOs), Disabled People’s Organisations (DPOs), Local Government and local businesses to work collaboratively with Emergency Managers (EMs) and involve people with disability in emergency preparedness. The project took place in three NSW local government areas: Sutherland, Hawkesbury, and Taree. The project was funded by the Community Resilience Innovation Program (CRIP), a scheme under the Natural Disaster Resilience Program, which involves the New South Wales and Commonwealth Governments through the National Partnership Agreement on Natural Disaster Resilience. To find out more about the project visit the project’s website at http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/projects/disasterdisab.shtml
1.1 Report description
This report details the field testing of the Individual Self-Assessment Tool-Emergency Preparedness (ISAT-EP). The ISAT-EP is the Australian version of the Disability Inclusive Disaster Resilience (DiDR) Tool.
The DiDR tool was developed by Llewellyn and colleagues as part of the Promoting the inclusion of people with disabilities in disaster management in Indonesia project, a Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade Australia Development and Research Award, 2013-2014. The full report and description of the Disability Inclusive Disaster Resilience (DiDR) Tool is available at http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/publications/technical- reports/Technical%20Report %20pdfs/Tech_Report_3_DiDR_Tool_Report_FINAL.pdf
As noted in the CRIP Agreement, Office of Emergency Management and University of Sydney, the project team proposed refining the DiDR tool to assist people with disability to identify their preparedness for natural hazard emergencies. 1.2 Specific aims of the field test of the ISAT- EP
The aims of the field testing of the ISAT-EP were to: Identify the usefulness of the ISAT-EP for people with disability to self-assess their preparedness for natural hazard emergencies; Engage people with disability and community service organisations working with people with disability in a process of learning more about emergency preparedness and self-reflection using the ISAT-EP; Develop suggestions for further refining the ISAT-EP to ensure maximum utility and acceptability for people with disability in the Australian context.
8 2. ISAT-EP
The ISAT-EP is the DiDR tool adapted for the Australian context. The development of the DiDR tool was informed by international guidelines on Disability-inclusive Disaster Risk Reduction (DiDRR) drawn from the work done following the Hyogo Framework (UNDISR, 2005) and the Sendai Framework for Action (UNDISR, 2015). The purpose of the DiDR tool was to identify the resilience and capabilities of people with disability to natural hazard emergencies in their family and community setting. The tool was available in two versions: one for people with disability, the other for family members or carers to complete together with of the person with disability. In Indonesia, people with disability and village kaders (health/ community workers) were trained to use the DiDR tool as a guided interview with people with disability or their family/carers living in the community.
In the absence of evidence about risk and resilience for people with disability in the face of natural hazard disasters, the framework for the DiDR tool was drawn from the best evidence on this topic for the broader population. The DiDR framework has four components: individual’s functioning and capacity, participation in the community, physical vulnerability of the individual’s house, and six risk indicators. The relationship of each component in this framework is graphically illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1. DiDR Tool Framework
More information on the development of the DiDR tool can be found at http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/publications/technical- reports/Technical%20Report %20pdfs/Tech_Report_3_DiDR_Tool_Report_FINAL.pdf
2.1 Adaptation of DiDR tool to form ISAT-EP
The project team reviewed the DiDR tool and adapted the language and content as needed for the Australian context. For example, in the section on socio-demographic and cultural information, job types were amended to be consistent with the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) (2013) classification of occupations. In the section that focuses on the physical vulnerability of the home, refinements were made to suit buildings and infrastructure in the Australian context (e.g. building materials, water and electricity supply).
9 Adaptations were also done based on the Disability and Disaster Risk Reduction/Emergency Preparedness Report Two: Scoping Review5. This revision required formatting the tool to become the ISAT-EP available for field application in the context of the Disability Inclusive Disaster Preparedness in NSW project which is included in Appendix 1.
The ISAT-EP has 10 sections: general information; socio-demographic and cultural information; functioning and disability questions; participation in the community; physical vulnerability of home; attachment to place; natural hazards risk perception; natural hazard emergencies responses; risk communication preferences; and lived experience of past natural hazard emergencies.
3. Field testing of the ISAT-EP 3.1 Recruitment of participants
The project team used three approaches to recruit people with disability, disability support organisations (DSOs), community support organisations (CSOs), Disabled People’s Organisations (DPOs), peak disability organisations, and disability-specific organisations to field test the ISAT-EP tool. These are summarised in Table 1 below:
Table 1. Recruitment methods for the ISAT-EP field test
Recruitment Notes Method 1. Phase Two The Phase Two Local Emergency Preparedness workshops in three Workshops were completed in October 2016 (Hawkesbury study location – 5 October, Taree 11 October and Sutherland 20 October). October 2016 Participants were invited to work through the ISAT-EP as detailed in the Report on Phase Two Workshops October 20166. Workshop participants were asked to invite other people with disability as additional reviewers.
Copies of the ISAT-EP (Appendix 1) and ISAT-EP review questions (Appendix 2) were sent to interested organisations to share with people with disability in their networks. 2. Disability Organisations approached by telephone with follow-up specialists in email included: SCIA (Spinal Cord Injuries Australia), DPOs, peak Vision Australia, Blind Citizens NSW, PDCN (Physical disability Disability Council of NSW), First Nations Disability organisations and Network, NSW CID (NSW Council for Intellectual disability-specific Disability), PWDA (People with Disability Australia), Brain organisations Injury Australia, Multiple Sclerosis Society of NSW, The
5 Disability and Disaster Risk Reduction / Emergency Preparedness Report Two: Scoping Review can be accessed at http://sydney.edu.au/health- sciences/cdrp/projects/disasterdisab.shtml 6 Report on Phase Two Workshops October 2016 can be accessed at: http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/projects/disasterdisab.shtml
10 Deaf Society of NSW.
Each organisation was invited to recruit up to 5 disability specialists to participate in the ISAT-EP review.
3. Via the Project’s Invitation to participate was shared on the project’s social media Facebook page7. account (Facebook)
Table 2 summarises the engagement with participants according to means by which the participants were recruited: at Phase Two workshops, post workshop, and directly to disability specialists at DPOs, peak organisations and disability specific organisations and via social media.
7 Project Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/disabilitynaturaldisasterstudy/
11 Table 2. Engagement with participants reviewing the ISAT-EP
Phase Two Post workshop recruitment – Disability Social media workshops workshop participants who agreed specialists at to recruit people with disability in DPOs, peak their networks organisations and disability specific organisations Invitation Participants – 33 Stakeholders contacted: 5 (4 Organisations Stakeholders contacted: 1 to DSOs/1 LGA/EM/) contacted: 11 (EM) participate ISAT-EPs and ISAT- Phone conversations - 2 Phone Phone conversations: 1 EP review question Voicemails/messages left: 5 conversations – Voicemails/messages left – sheets completed at Emails (including request to call 11 2 the Phase Two and sending review docs) - 8 Voicemails/mess Emails (including request to workshops were Face to face meeting - 1 ages left – 7 call/sending review docs) – collected on No response: 1 stakeholder Emails (including 1 completion of the request to workshop. Some call/sending participants wrote Recruited:4 review docs)– 12 directly on their copy No response: 2 of the ISAT-EP and stakeholders these were also Recruited: 1 collected (workshop feedback is summarised at Appendix 3). Recruited: 9 Engageme Stakeholders agreeing to recruit Organisations Stakeholders engaged in
12 nt to people with disability for review: 4 agreeing to be review: 1 arrange involved in Email: 1 follow ups Phone conversations – 2 review: 9 Emails – 7 Phone conversations – 6 Emails – 17 Voicemails/mess ages left – 7 No response – 2 organisations
13 Follow Reviews completed by people with Reviews Reviews completed:1 ups and disability: 8 completed:18 (16 Email feedback: 1 feedback people with Posted hard copy feedback: 5 disability, 2 people without Email feedback: 2 disability)
Telephone feedback: 1 (1 hour Posted hard copy conversation) feedback: 4
Face to face meetings – 1duration: Additional Email 45 minutes feedback:1
Telephone feedback: 4 (average length of time: 30 minutes)
Face to face meetings: 1 (meeting duration 1 hour)
Focus group:1 (for 8 participants) – duration 1.5 hours
14 3.2 Field testing process
Time was allocated during the morning of the Phase Two workshops8 for attendees to review the ISAT-EP. All participants were provided with a copy of the ISAT-EP and also the ISAT-EP review questions (see Appendix 2). The 10 sections of the ISAT- EP were referred to in the presentation as components. The ISAT-EP review questions were based on three steps: appraisal of the utility of the ISAT-EP; critique of the acceptability of the ISAT-EP for people with disability; and, planning to formulate recommendations on improving the utility and acceptability of the ISAT-EP for the NSW context (Raban et al., 2005; Ward and McCotter, 2004). Each attendee reviewed the ISAT-EP individually, before then engaging in a whole group discussion providing feedback.
In conjunction with the workshops, review participants were offered the opportunity to review the ISAT-EP and complete the ISAT-EP review questions in hard copy or electronic format. The electronic formats of the ISAT-EP and review questions included captioning of images and was assessed to ensure accessibility with screen reader technology. This was done by a peak organisation representative who has a vision impairment. Participants were invited to review the ISAT-EP at a convenient time. Participants were followed up between November 2016 and February 2017. Follow up methods included face to face meetings, focus groups, telephone conversations and emailed feedback. 3.3 Data collection
Table 3 provides details of the participants who took part in the field testing of the ISAT-EP tool. Participants were individuals with disability from three sources: those attending the Phase Two workshops, others who responded to invitations, and personnel from DPOs, peak disability organisations and disability-specific organisations. Peak disability organisations valued the opportunity to contribute to the new and emerging evidence base on DiDRR. As one peak organisation stated ‘often the voices of people with disability are not included in preparedness activities for natural hazards – this is our opportunity for our voices to be heard, to really discuss what is important’. Nearly half (49%) of the participants in the ISAT-EP field testing were people with disability (illustrated in Figure 2).
Table 3: Participants in field testing of the ISAT-EP
N=60 Stakeholder Groups
Hawkesbur 12 3 - People with disability y workshop 4 – DSO representatives – 5 October 1 - Local Government Area representative 2016 2 - Emergency Management representatives 1 - State Government agencies 1 - Local business (local GP) Taree 15 2 - People with disability and their family workshop – members and carers
8 Report on Phase Two Workshops October 2016 can be accessed at: http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/projects/disasterdisab.shtml
15 11 October 6 – DSO representatives 2016 2 - CSOs 1- Local Government Area representative 2 - Emergency Management representative from NSW SES 2- State Government agencies including NSW Health
Sutherland 6 1 - CSOs (including peak organisations) workshop – 2 – DSO representatives 20 October 1 – Local Government Area 2016 representative 2 - Emergency Management representative People with 8 8- People with disability recruited via disability participants at the Phase Two workshops recruited by workshop Participant s
Peak 18 (16 Spinal Cord Injuries Australia (SCIA) disability people with Physical Disability Council of NSW and disability, 2 (PDCN) disability- without People with Disability Australia (PWDA) specific disability) The Deaf Society of NSW organisatio Multicultural Disability Advocacy ns Association (MDAA) Brain Injury Australia Blind Citizens of NSW Social 1 Emergency Management representative Media
Total 60 29 people with disability 17 CSO/DSO 3 Local Government Area representatives 3 State Government representatives 7 Emergency Management representatives 1 local business (GP)
Figure 2. Participation by stakeholder group
There were some barriers encountered in the data collection phase of this field testing application of the ISAT-EP. It was not possible to speak directly to a number of individuals with disability who completed the ISAT-EP where DSOs had arranged
16 their participation and returned the forms directly to the Project Manager. The Project Manager had some difficulties following up a number of people who had agreed to participate and timing with the festive season occurring contributing to this. Finally, while the Project Manager made every attempt to capture the detail of all telephone conversations, this is always challenging compared to workshop discussions, face to face meetings and focus groups which can be audio-recorded. 3.4 Data analysis
At the three Phase Two workshops, the completed copies of the ISAT-EP and ISAT- EP review question sheets were collected on completion. Notes of whole group discussions were also taken by the project team. All comments, notes and feedback were transcribed into MS Word documents.
Where the ISAT-EP was reviewed by individuals or small groups (telephone, and face to face meetings) the completed copies of the ISAT-EP and ISAT-EP review question sheets were returned to the Project Manager and transcribed into MS Word documents. All communications were documented from initial engagement to final follow up with participants (via telephone calls, emails, face to face meetings) as identified in Table 2. The communications were entered into an MS Excel file and later transcribed into MS Word documents. At the focus group, notes made on a whiteboard, comments on completed copies of the ISAT-EP and ISAT-EP review question sheets, and an audio recording were transcribed into MS Word documents. NVivo 11 was used to store and separate the sources of data as identified in Table 3 that is, from Phase 2 workshops, people with disability recruited by participants, peak organisation and disability specific organisations and social media participation.
The data was initially reviewed reflecting on the aims of the field test, coding data that identified the utility and engagement of people with disability using the ISAT-EP, overall feedback, and feedback on each section of the ISAT-EP, as well as suggestions for improvement. A research journal and data annotations were used throughout the analysis process to capture observations at each stage. Notes were made in relation to any findings which were consistent with the materials reviewed for the Disability and Disaster Risk Reduction/Emergency Preparedness Report Two: Scoping Review9.
4. Findings
This findings section is organised into two sections: overall feedback and feedback by section.
Participants reported that engaging in the ISAT-EP field test review process supported their learning about the variety of factors to be considered for people with disability preparing for natural hazard emergencies. In the following sections, participant reflections on their insights gained in completing the ISAT-EP are discussed in terms of the potential educative value of the ISAT-EP and may support future modifications of the tool for use in NSW, Australia.
9 Disability and Disaster Risk Reduction / Emergency Preparedness Report Two: Scoping Review can be accessed at http://sydney.edu.au/health- sciences/cdrp/projects/disasterdisab.shtml
17 18 4.1 Overall feedback
Table 4.1 summarises participant feedback and suggestions for improvement on each of the components of the ISAT-EP. Details of all feedback summarised by workshops is available on request.
Table 4.1 Overall feedback and suggestions for improving the ISAT-EP
Overall feedback Participant feedback on the challenges of Suggestions for improvement competing the ISAT-EP Length of ISAT-EP Concern that ISAT-EP is too long particularly Reduce the length of the ISAT-EP by for those who have lower levels of reducing number of questions concentration
Language ISAT-EP requires literacy skills to complete Rewrite using Plain English and Language focused more on deficits rather than include visuals skills/resilience Reframe language to include strengths based language with more focus on ‘With the language used ‘disability’ is referred skills, resilience and capabilities rather to as a health condition. This is not in line with than deficits the social model of disability and is more Amend questions to avoid need to aligned with the previous medical model which think of abstract concepts in responses puts the responsibility for managing the disabling elements of society back on the individual, rather than recognising that the barriers society puts up create the disability’…………… asking individuals to rate their level of challenge against a perceived level of difficulty experienced by the rest of society’(peak organisation representative) Questions where responses require ability to think of abstract concepts are not suitable for
19 people with cognitive limitations o People may not be able to perceive/be unaware of barriers/issues/risks o Comparing yourself to other people in the community – who would the person with disability be benchmarking against?
20 Accessibility Concern if ISAT-EP not available in accessible formats that Provide ISAT-EP in multiple o this would act as a barrier for people to complete the ISAT-EP accessible formats o staff may complete the ISAT-EP on an individual’s behalf, without their Ensure electronic format of ISAT-EP participation is in interactive pdf/word formats Responses require use of pen – allow for alternative methods to provide response. ‘It is assumed, that people will be answering the questions using a pen’ (peak organisation representative). This causes difficulties for people who have lower fine motor skills and people who are blind who use screen reader technology to complete ISAT-EP Electronic copy not interactive resulting in the need to print to complete
Appropriateness for Multiple language formats required for people from different CALD backgrounds Ensure comprehensive people from CALD dissemination strategies are backgrounds employed to ensure CALD communities are aware of this resource Provide opportunity for local community leaders taking roles in interpreting and sharing information within their community
Educative value of Completing the ISAT-EP prompted and raised awareness in individuals to consider Capitalise on the educative value completing the ISAT- their preparedness for natural hazards ‘completing the ISAT-EP “plants the seeds”. I of the ISAT-EP and use to inform EP had never thought about natural hazard preparedness before’ (person with disability) people with disability and their o Awareness was prompted not only for individuals, but also prompted networks participants to think about people in their network Inclusion of more definitions, Completing the ISAT-EP is an opportunity to begin conversations with others about a practical tips and information person’s individual natural hazard preparedness which may not otherwise be initiated The awareness of support needs identified can be communicated with those a person chooses to include in their individual natural hazard preparedness plan (e.g. family, friends, neighbours, disability support provider etc.)
21 Individuals with less experience in preparedness would benefit from more definitions, practical tips and information Benchmarking Currently no scoring matrix for person completing ISAT-EP to benchmark their level Include a scoring matrix preparedness level of preparedness;
4.2 Feedback section by section and suggestions for improvement
Table 4.2 summarises participant feedback and suggestions for improvement on each of the components of the ISAT-EP.
Table 4.2. Feedback section by section and suggestions for improvement
Section Participant feedback on the ISAT-EP content areas Suggestions for improvement 1. General No comments No comments information 2. Socio- Sharing personal information. People with disability may not want to share ISAT-EP needs clear privacy demographic personal information and be concerned about who would have access to and confidentiality clauses and cultural this information Add ‘other’ as an option for information Gender variables do not allow a response for those who do not identify as those who do not identify as male or female ‘male’ or female’ Question the relevance of asking marital status. ‘It’s a bit insulting to pry Include explanation of into relationship status. Someone may be single but have a good support rationale for marital status network of others to respond. It is important to instead consider the Add ‘other’ as an option for networks available to people’ (peak organisation representative) those who have different job Job type and employment types and employment as o Variables for responses need to be broader – e.g. to acknowledge listed voluntary roles Include rationale for current job o Response variables do not acknowledge previously held roles type and employment (including before acquiring disability) Add questions relating to Questions relating to ethnicity – important to collect information about ethnicity and migrant ethnicity to assist with preparedness planning e.g. women from some background
22 different religions/ethnicities may not feel comfortable receiving assistance from males Where a person comes from. People may not have experienced natural hazard emergencies that occur in Australia; o People may not have been exposed to modern ways of living e.g. from small villages 3. Functioning Awareness of capabilities and support needs most valued component of Reword to include focus on and disability ISAT-EP strengths and abilities Language focuses on deficits rather than strengths and capabilities Allow for open answers Variables for responses too limited to cover the range of disability Include question that consider People with disability may not identify as having a disability. People also if a disability/condition is may choose not to respond due to stigma associated episodic/transient Questions do not consider episodic/transient conditions e.g. mental health Remove term ‘help’ when Assistive devices – question use of term ‘help’. ‘Assistive technology is discussing assistive devices used to empower me to do things independently, not to ‘help’ me’ (peak Include question if assistive organisation representative) device is used for its purpose o People may have assistive devices, this does not necessary mean they are used Question the relevance of questions that focus on self-care (q 3.5) ‘what does this have to do with preparing for a natural hazard?’(workshop participant)
4. Participation A person’s social and support networks viewed as extremely important in Include questions that allow a in community emergency preparedness. These networks will be crucial in the event of a person to reflect on the ability natural hazard emergency and willingness of identified o Important to consider the willingness and ability of people identified networks to respond within networks to respond Explore using a mapping Questions which require ability to think of abstract concepts are not activity as an alternative to the suitable for some people with disability participation scale, where o Comparing yourself to other people in the community – question of people could map where they who the person would be benchmarking against? went in the community,
23 o Identifying level of ‘problem’ – a person may be unaware of barriers identifying who they may be to their participation in the community with in these places Response variables are deficits based identifying ‘problems’. This was Reword response variables to considered to relate to medical model understandings of disability be less deficits based ‘Connectedness’ within a community is important particularly for people Include questions that allow a from CALD communities ‘I don’t know, I guess it’s just a cultural difference person to reflect on their that makes me feel less connected’ (focus group with peak organisation ‘connectedness’ within a representing CALD communities) community
5. Where you Reference to the term ‘house’ does not consider alternative housing types Replace term ‘house’ with live e.g. apartments etc. home Question the need to consider shape of house Include questions that reflect o Related question to the need to consider exits and evacuation on the local area a person routes ‘the only way I could escape is through a window, which lives would be hard to do with my disability’ Review questions to ensure Focus on a person’s home reinforces negative stereotypes ‘questions that they are appropriate to both focus on a person’s home, only reinforce negative attitudes that people metropolitan and rural regions with disability just stay at home all day. I don’t’ (peak organisation representative) Important to also consider the local area, particularly if affected by ‘one way in, one way out routes’. ‘I live in a flood zone, whilst my house would not be affected. I would be affected how I could move around my suburb, some parts may be closed off’ (peak organisation representative) Questions are very ‘metropolitan’ and lack considerations for people living in rural/regional areas’ 6. Your house Focus of questions are on a person’s immediate family Reword so less emphasis on and o Assumes that people with disability do not move from their family ‘immediate family’, instead household home focus on a person’s o A person’s family may not necessarily be their social/support social/support networks network Include reference to living with o For migrants immediate family may be overseas ‘extended family’
24 o People may live with extended family Q.6.2 response variable for . Participants from CALD backgrounds discussed this as children to be broadened to extremely important identify infant as well as child Q.6.2 Response variable for children not broad enough to consider child and infant
7. Natural People may not know what the natural hazards are Include images and hazards - Response variables that ask you to rank risk descriptions of the different perception of o Require ability to think abstractly which may be hard to do for some natural hazards risk people Explore using response o Harder if a person does not take natural hazard emergencies variables that rate level of risk, seriously/aware of the risk they pose rather than rank each hazard o Concerns of EMs as there should be focus on all hazard for risk approaches, not just hazards a person perceives as a risk Include more emphasis on ‘all hazard’ approaches to preparedness 8. Natural Responses are dependent on the natural hazard ‘what I would do in the Allow multiple responses for hazard event of a flood, may be different to what I would do in a heat wave’ each question emergencies (person with disability) Include considerations of a – what you o Choosing one option for responses seen as limiting as people may person’s response based on would do in a respond in a number of ways the timing of the event natural o Timing of the event would affect their response, for example one Reframe language using hazard emergency manager stated, ‘a heat wave can last days, you may strengths based language emergency? respond differently during the onset, to during the event’ Include questions that allow a (Emergency Manager at workshop) person to consider their Language focuses on deficits e.g. ‘who would help/would you rely on’ emotional/behavioural Important to consider the emotional or behavioural responses people may responses during a natural exhibit in the event of a natural hazard hazard event Sentimental items are important in emergency kits Include consideration of o People may need to get sentimental items before leaving sentimental items and o Visa/registration documents/passports are important for new important documents as part of emergency kits
25 migrants Include consideration of Importance of preparedness for pets, assistance animals and livestock importance of preparedness (farm animals) was discussed by participants for pets, assistance animals o Animals could be a contributing factor to not leaving a property and livestock (farm animals)
9. Learning Long Term – learning about natural hazards Broaden response variable for about natural “the people you trust may not necessarily be the people with the receiving warnings and hazards in information, and vice versa’ (DSO representative at workshop) updates to include mobile your CALD communities feel left out from awareness and preparedness phone apps and social media community in planning and information sharing, citing language as one of the biggest Include a trigger warning the future barriers. ‘We simply are not getting the information’ (peak organisation highlighting the potential representative) emotional response of o Empower and train local community members in preparedness. recalling previous natural ‘Invest in money for this continual training – best to spend the hazard experiences money to keep people safe. Lives cost more than money’ (focus Include emphasis on the need group with peak organisation representing CALD communities) for all hazard approaches to o Community Leaders are bilingual they could share important preparedness messages from Emergency Managers within their community. They could also tailor community awareness specific to their community
Short-term - receiving warnings and updates Sources for warnings and updates should be expanded to also include mobile phone apps, and also social media o ‘Just because a person has a phone, it doesn’t mean that it is charged, has credit or data which can be used in the event of a natural hazard’ (workshop participant) o Relating to social media, emergency managers held caution in relying on social media, advising it would be important that people were checking reliable sources (e.g. NSW Police Facebook page), not relying on ‘hearsay’ from comments from public
26 o Apps are not accessible for all people e.g. some people do not have web enabled phones. Apps also are unavailable in multiple languages Not all people use/listen to radios o Not all people listen to ABC radio o Not all people are aware ABC Radio is the official broadcaster o Default language for ABC radio is English and so not accessible for people from CALD backgrounds
Lived experience of natural hazards Critique of lack of ‘trigger’ warnings before questions that asked about people’s experiences of natural hazards (q.9.6). stated ‘you are asking people to recall traumatic events without providing sufficient support for managing feelings and emotions stirred up as a result of this’ (peak organisation representative) Emergency Managers held caution focusing on just the ‘most dangerous’ event a person had experienced. Discussing the potential danger any hazard can have at any time
10. Lived Some wording ‘vague’ and open to interpretation. For example, 10.16 Amend questions to be experience of refers to ‘significant damage’ concise; past natural Emergency Managers highlighted importance of wording that focuses on Replace reference to ‘saving’ hazard ‘protecting’ rather than saving with ‘protecting’ emergencies Importance of considering emotional responses to natural hazards, and if Include consideration of a actions they took were indeed what they had planned person’s emotional responses ‘People from CALD may not be comfortable with people attempting to and if these affected their respond. People who want to help may have difficulty communicating due planned actions to language barriers’ (focus group with peak organisation representing CALD communities)
27 5. Discussion
The review of the ISAT-EP yielded participant’s reflections and insights about the utility of the ISAT-EP and the experience of engaging in self-assessing emergency preparedness. Field test participants specifically commented on the capacity of the ISAT-EP to educate people completing the tool about DiDRR and in particular, providing awareness of capacity and needs and in relation to their local disaster context.
Nearly half (49%) of the field test participants were people with disability. The remainder were Emergency Managers, disability support organisations, and local government representatives. These stakeholders in disability inclusive disaster risk reduction also commented on the educative value of the ISAT-EP as well as its potential to provide specific local and potentially benchmarked data about capacity and need for support for people with disability in emergency preparedness.
It was of particular value to have multiple stakeholders engaged in this field test application of the ISAT-EP. As an example, during workshop discussions about the ISAT-EP Emergency Managers were in a prime position to provide feedback relating to the roles and responsibilities of emergency management agencies as well as providing important feedback on the local contexts and natural hazards. DSOs and CSOs were able to provide practical feedback on how the ISAT-EP could be used within organisations. The value of this input recognised the collaboration that needs to occur between sectors, each sector with its own expertise and knowledge to contributing to disability inclusive disaster preparedness. Incorporation of feedback from individuals with disability, and these other stakeholder groups allowed the team to understand the benefits of the ISAT-EP at individual, organisational and also community levels.
In the Australian context, the findings suggest any tools designed for use by people with disability to self-assess their resilience/vulnerabilities to natural hazards should be framed in ways that focus on a person’s capabilities and resilience, rather than focus on their deficits or vulnerabilities. This is consistent with the shift in paradigm from people with disability being viewed as vulnerable and dependent to being recognised as active participants in all phases of disaster management. The framework underpinning the ISAT-EP comes from the human rights and capability approach embedded within the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This is critical in the Australian context with Australia as an early signatory and ratifier of this Convention in 2007 and 2008 respectively. All participants in this field test application commented on the strengths-based approach underpinning the ISAT-EP including Emergency Managers who noted that their sector was more likely to respond positively when materials are strengths and resilience based. This finding aligns with Priestly and Hemingway (2007), who suggested that if people with disability are framed as ‘vulnerable’ and lacking in capacity, disaster management response measures will fail. Valued sections of the ISAT-EP were also those on functioning, disability and participation in the community. This aligns with the social and economic participation of people with disability clearly expressed in Australia’s National Disability Strategy 2010-2020 and more recently in the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (revised 2016).
As can be seen from tables 4.1 and 4.2, participants welcomed the development of the ISAT-EP both as an educative tool and as a tool to self-assess emergency
28 preparedness. The overall feedback and the comments on each section with suggestions for improvement provide very useful data to commence the next phase of development of the ISAT-EP. Further development will be contingent on international peer-reviewed publication of the process so far and funding to ensure rigour in the tool development process of the ISAT-EP. In its current written text format the ISAT-EP is not accessible for all people with disability. The formats provided in future must comply with accessible guidelines for example the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)10 and the Centre for Disability Research and Policy’s CDRP Accessible Events Practice Points: A Tool for Organising Events that are Accessible for People with Disabilities11.
In this field test application of the ISAT-EP there were some barriers for individuals with disability to engage in the process. The time available to complete the ISAT-EP was one limiting factor. This applied to having enough time in the workshop setting as well as for those who participated outside the workshops to think about and reflect on all the sections of the ISAT-EP. When the content matter is new and information may have to be gathered for complete and accurate completion of the ISAT-EP, it is possible that an initial draft filling in of the ISAT-EP followed by completion once all the information is gathered may be a more beneficial process. This may be a more appropriate process too when family members or carers or disability support workers are assisting the person with disability to complete the ISAT-EP or filling in this tool for those they assist (when the person is not able to do so independently).
Another barrier was whether currently emergency preparedness was a priority in the lives of individuals with disability. One peak organisation noted for example that ‘for many of my members preparing for natural hazards simply is not their priority … some people may have just acquired a disability, and so planning for disasters is not their priority when they are adapting their lives around their new support needs’. This reflects the time pressures and demands on people with disability and balancing these demands. This was particularly noticeable in one of the field test locations where the transition to the NDIS was in its early phases. This instance is a timely reminder of the importance of utilising individual and person-centred approaches to all aspects of the lives of people with disability to ensure that their particular strengths, needs for support, and their individual circumstances and context are taken into account.
A third and related barrier was the lack of multiple versions applicable for particular individuals with disability. So for example, the peak organisation for people with intellectual disability were not willing to be involved unless an Easy English version was available. This organisation quite appropriately now charges fee for service for their Easy English translation service and it was not possible with the resources available to access this service. Accessibilty is not limited to format however. The ISAT-EP needs to be formally reviewed by the relevant organisations and individuals representing people from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. This was beyond the scope of the adaptation of the ISAT-EP for the purposes of this project, however is required at the next phase of tool development.
10 Web Content Accessibility Guidelines can be accessed at: https://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag 11 CDRP Accessible Events Practice Points: A Tool for Organising Events that are Accessible for People with Disabilities can be accessed at: http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/
29 6. Conclusion
The findings from this field test application of the ISAT-EP strongly support this self- assessment and potential planning tool on emergency preparedness for people with disability would be welcomed by all stakeholders in the disability and in the emergency management sector. The findings add to the growing literature which demonstrates the capacity, skills and resilience of people with disability in the face of natural hazard disasters.
7. References
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2013). 1220.0 - ANZSCO -- Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations, 2013, Version 1.2. Retrieved 6 May 2017 from http://www.abs.gov.au/anzsco
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2016). 4450.0 - Supplementary Disability Survey, 2016. Retrieved from 6 May 2017 from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/4450.0
Centre for Disability Research and Policy (2015). CDRP Accessible Events Practice Points: A Tool for Organising Events. University of Sydney. Retrieved 6 May 2017 from http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/
Centre for Disability Research and Policy, University of Sydney and Arbeiter- Samariter-Bund Indonesia (2015). Technical Report 3. The Disability Inclusive Disaster Resilience (DiDR) Tool: Development and Field-Testing. University of Sydney, NSW 2006. Retrieved 6 May from http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/projects/pipddmi.shtml
Commonwealth of Australia (2016). National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Revised 2016). Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Retrieved 6 May from https://www.legislation.gov.au/Series/C2013A00020
Commonwealth of Australia (2011). 2010–2020 National Disability Strategy. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Retrieved 6 May from https :// www.dss.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/05_2012/national_ disability_strategy_2010_2020.pdf
Llewellyn, G., Villeneuve, M., Dominey-Howes, D., & Brooks, H. (2016). ISAT-EP. Centre for Disability Research and Policy and Natural Hazards Research Group, University of Sydney.
Llewellyn, G., Villeneuve, M, Dominey-Howes., & Gargett, A. (2016). Disability and Disaster Risk Reduction / Emergency Preparedness - Scoping Review. Centre for Disability Research and Policy and Natural Hazards Research Group, University of Sydney.
Priestley, M. and Hemingway, L. (2007) Disability and disaster recovery: a tale of two cities? Journal of Social Work in Disability & Rehabilitation, 5 (3-4). pp. 23-42. Retrieved 6 May from: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/1969/
30 UNISDR (2005). Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters. Retrieved 6 May 2017 from http://www.unisdr.org/2005/wcdr/intergover/official-doc/L-docs/Hyogo- framework-for-action-english.pdf
UNISDR (2015). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. United Nations Headquarters. Retrieved 6 May 2017 from http://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/43291
United Nations (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. New York. Retrieved 8 May from https:// www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the- rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html
Ward, J.R. & McCotter, S. (2004). Reflection as a visible outcome for preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20 (3), 243-257
Web Accessibility Initiative (2017). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Overview. Retrieved 8 May from https:// www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag.php
8. Appendices
Appendix 1 - Draft ISAT-EP for external review – September 2016 Appendix 2 - ISAT-EP review question sheet
9. Project reports
This report forms one of a series of reports from this project.
Report one: Knowledge base workshops in the LGAs: A report outlining the process and outcomes of the disability inclusive emergency preparedness workshops
Report two: Disability and Disaster Risk Reduction / Emergency Preparedness: Scoping Review
Report three: Report on Phase Two Workshops October 2016
Report four: Identifying organisational emergency preparedness: A field test report on the application of the Australian Council of Social Services, Resilient Community Organisations toolkit.
Report five: Self-assessment of emergency preparedness in people with disability: A report on the field test review of the Individual Self-Assessment Tool – Emergency Preparedness (ISAT-EP) in the study locations.
You can access project reports by visiting our website at: http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/projects/disasterdisab.shtml, or contact the project team via email [email protected] or by telephone at +612 9351 2222.
31 32 Appendix 1 – Draft ISAT-EP for external review – September 2016
ISAT- EP (Individual Self- Assessment Questionnaire – Emergency Preparedness) External Review
September 2016
33 PLEASE READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE YOU START THE QUESTIONNAIRE
WHO IS THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR?
This is a self-assessment questionnaire about emergency preparedness for people with disability. It means that you will complete the questionnaire on your own, or with support if needed.
ABOUT THE QUESTIONS:
The questions are numbered and written in bold.
All questions have closed answers. You will check the answer(s) that, in your opinion, is more appropriate.
There are no right or wrong answers. We are interested in what you know and think.
Each question has instructions. Instructions are written in blue italics. Please read the instructions before answering the questions.
WHAT SHOULD YOU DO IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION?
If you do not understand the question– write clearly next to the question: “I did not understand the question” and move to the next question.
DO YOU HAVE TO ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS?
No. You can refuse to answer a question. If this happens write clearly against the question: “I did not want to answer this question”
HOW DO YOU MAKE A CHANGE ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE FORM?
If you make a mistake on the form, or if you change your mind, double cross out the mistake and check the correct box. Please make this very clear to help us understand your corrected answer.
34 1. General Information
Please insert your best contact information
1.1 First Name: Last Name:
1.2 Address:
Address:
Suburb:
State:
Post Code:
1.3 Email:
1.4 Phone: Mobile
Landline
35 2. Socio-Demographic and Cultural Information
2.1 Age last birthday in years: ______
2.2 Gender: ☐ Male ☐ Female
2.3 Marital Status: ☐ Never married ☐Married or De Facto ☐Separated but not divorced ☐Divorced ☐ Widowed
2.4 Education: ☐ Primary ☐ Secondary ☐ Diploma/ Certificate ☐ Graduate degree/ graduate certificate ☐ Post graduate
2.5 Employment: ☐ Student ☐ Employed full-time ☐ Employed part-time ☐ Unemployed ☐ Never employed ☐ Retired
2.6 Job type (if employed): ☐ Manager ☐ Professional ☐ Technician and Trades Workers ☐ Community and Personal Service Worker ☐ Clerical and Administrative Worker
☐ Sales Workers
36 ☐ Machinery Operators and Drivers ☐ Labourer
37 3. Functioning and disability questions*
THESE QUESTIONS ASK ABOUT DIFFICULTIES YOU MAY HAVE DOING CERTAIN ACTIVITIES BECAUSE OF A HEALTH PROBLEM.
YOU WILL HAVE FOUR RESPONSE OPTIONS:
1. No Difficulty 2. Some Difficulty 3. A Lot of Difficulty 4. Cannot Do At All
Check one box only per each question – you must check one box only in each row
Questions No Some A lot of Cannot difficulty difficulty difficulty do at all
3.1. Do you have difficulty seeing, even if wearing glasses? □ □ □ □
3.2 Do you have difficulty hearing, even if using a hearing aid? □ □ □ □
3.3 Do you have difficulty walking or climbing steps? □ □ □ □ 3.4 Do you have difficulty remembering or concentrating? □ □ □ □ 3.5 Do you have difficulty with self-care, such as washing all over or dressing □ □ □ □ yourself? 3.6 Using your usual (customary) language, do you have difficulty communicating? (for example, understanding or being □ □ □ □ understood by others)?
3.7 Do you have an assistive device to help you with your disability?
Check each one that applies ☐ Yes, for seeing ☐ Yes, for hearing ☐ Yes, for walking ☐ Yes, for communicating ☐ No assistive device 4. Participation in community**
38 THIS SECTION IS ABOUT YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THE COMMUNITY. YOU WILL BE ASKED TO COMPARE YOURSELF TO OTHER PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY. EACH QUESTION HAS FIVE OPTIONS. YOU CAN ONLY CHOOSE ONE OF THESE OPTIONS. Check one box per row – you must check one box only in each row
Participation Scale Irrelevant, or I don’t No Small Medium Large Compare yourself to the other want to, or problem problem problem problem people in the community I don’t have to 4.1 Compared to other people, finding any type of paid work □ □ □ □ □ (formal or informal) is…..?
4.2 Working as hard as other people is…..? (same hours, type □ □ □ □ □ of work etc) 4.3 Earning money/producing goods for the family in a similar □ □ □ □ □ way to other people is…….? 4.4 Travelling outside the city/neighbourhood as much as other people do is,,,,,,,? (except □ □ □ □ □ for health-related treatment) 4.5 Taking part in activities as much as other people do is…….? (e.g. sports, chatting, meetings □ □ □ □ □ etc.) 4.6 Taking part in community or religious affairs as much as other □ □ □ □ □ people do is ……? 4.7 Gaining or maintaining the same respect as other people in □ □ □ □ □ the community is ,,,,,,,? 4.8 Taking care of yourself (appearance, nutrition, health, etc) as well as other people is □ □ □ □ □ ……? 4.9 Visiting other people in the community as often as other □ □ □ □ □ people is……? 4.10 Compared to other people, entering into or maintaining a long-term relationship with a life □ □ □ □ □ partner is ……?
39 4.11 Visiting public places in the neighbourhood like schools, shops, offices, market and □ □ □ □ □ tea/coffee shops as often as other people is ……?
4.12 Doing household work in your home as other people do is □ □ □ □ □ …..? 4.13 Helping other people (e.g. neighbours, friends or relatives) is □ □ □ □ □ ……?
4.14 Feeling comfortable to meet new people is ……? □ □ □ □ □
4.15 Feeling confident to try to learn new things is ……? □ □ □ □ □
40 5. Where you live
THIS SECTION IS ABOUT THE BUILDING WHERE YOU LIVE – YOUR HOME.
5.1 What is the main construction material of the building where you live?
Check one box only Wood or fibro ☐ Brick ☐ Steel and concrete ☐ Other (please specify………..) ☐
5.2 How many floors does your house have?
Check one box only One ☐ Two ☐ More than two ☐
5.3 Is the first floor of your house elevated above the ground?
Check one box only No, same level as the ground ☐ Yes, there are a few steps or a ramp to get into the ☐ building Yes, the entrance is at the second floor (the first floor is ☐ used for pets, tools, bikes, storage or other non- residential purpose)
5.4 What is the shape of the roof?
Check one box only
41 Flat or almost flat ☐ Examples:
Figure 2 and 2: :images of houses with flat roof Pitched and simple ☐ Example:
Figure 3: Image of house with pitched/pointed roof Pitched and complex shape ☐ Examples:
Figure 4: Image of roofs that are a complex shape with multiple pitches
5.5 What is the roof material?
Check one box only Wood ☐ Tin or metal sheeting ☐ Tiles or concrete ☐ Not visible/ not sure ☐
42 5.6 Which one of the following shapes best describes the shape of your house?
Check one box only Square or rectangular ☐ Examples:
Figure 5: Image of Square and rectangular shaped house Round or oval ☐ Example:
Figure 6: Image of oval shaped house
43 Complex shape, with many sides and corners ☐ Examples:
Figure 7: Images of complex shaped buildings which have many sides and corners
44 6. Your house and household
IN THIS SECTION, YOU WILL BE ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS HOUSE AND YOUR HOUSEHOLD.
6.1 In regards to the house you live in, do you or your immediate family:
Check one box only Rent this house ☐ Own this house ☐ Pay to live in this accommodation with other people ☐ Other ☐
6.2 Who lives in this house with you?
Check each one that applies – you must check one box in each row
Child/ children under 18 years old ☐ Yes ☐ No
Adults over 18 ☐ Yes ☐ No
Older person/ persons over 60 ☐ Yes ☐ No
Other people with a disability ☐ Yes ☐ No
Pets ☐ Yes ☐ No
I live alone ☐ Yes ☐ No Other ☐
6.3 How many years have you lived in this house?
Check one box only
Most or all of your life
Only in the past few years
45 7. Natural hazards
IN THIS SECTION, YOU WILL BE ASKED ABOUT NATURAL HAZARDS THAT YOU THINK COULD AFFECT YOU IN THE FUTURE. THIS IS NOT ABOUT WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO YOU IN THE PAST - THAT COMES LATER IN ANOTHER SECTION.
7.1 Which of these events do you think could be a danger to you and your household in the future?
Check each one that applies – you must check either ‘yes’ or ‘no’ box
Column A: Question 7.1 Column B: Question 7.2: Rank
Earthquake ☐ Yes ☐ No
River Flood ☐Yes ☐No
Storm ☐Yes ☐ No
Drought ☐ Yes ☐ No
Tsunami ☐ Yes ☐ No
Epidemic or ☐Yes ☐ No pandemic
Erosion ☐ Yes ☐ No
Landslide ☐Yes ☐ No
Bushfire ☐ Yes ☐ No
Heat wave ☐Yes ☐ No
Tornado ☐ Yes ☐ No
Hail ☐ Yes ☐ No
Meteorite strike ☐Yes ☐No
Which of the events you answered “yes” to in Question 7.1 do you think are the greatest danger to you?
Rank only the top 3: 1 = most dangerous - 3 = least dangerous.
Please complete Column B in the Table above.
46 8. Natural hazard emergencies
THIS SECTION IS ABOUT WHAT YOU WOULD DO IN A NATURAL HAZARD EMERGENCY IN THE FUTURE, AND YOUR PREPAREDNESS.
8.1 If you needed help, who would you rely on during a natural hazard emergency?
Check one box only
A member of the household
Friend
Neighbour
Emergency Service Provider
Disability service organisation
Community service organisation
Religious leader/Community leader
No one
Your faith/prayer
Other
8.2 Is there an emergency service that would help you during a natural hazard emergency?
Check one box only
Yes
No
I don’t know
If yes to 8.2 which of the following would help you during a natural hazard emergency?
Check each one that applies – you can check more than one
Police
Ambulance
Fire brigade
47 Rural Fire Service
State Emergency Service
NSW Volunteer Rescue
Marine Rescue Service
Other
8.3 Do you have an emergency kit ready at this moment? An emergency kit contains for example medications, water and food for a couple of days, a battery-operated radio, a torch, a mobile phone.
Check one box only
Yes
No
I don’t know
8.4 Is your house connected to an electricity supply (including solar or own generator)
Yes
No
8.5 Is your house connected to a water supply?
Yes
No
8.6 Where do you spend most of your time in your house?
Check one box only First floor ☐ Second floor ☐ Third floor or higher ☐
48 8.7 Have you and the people in your house agreed on a plan on what to do in a natural hazard emergency?
Check one box only
Yes
No
I don't know
8.8 What would you do in a natural hazard emergency?
Check one box only Go with my gut instinct ☐ Follow the plan agreed with other people in the house ☐ I would wait to be told by someone what to do, or I ☐ would ask someone I would pray but not take any other action ☐ I would do nothing ☐
8.9 What reasoning could prevent you from leaving your house in a natural hazard emergency?
Check one box only
I do not think I would be able to reach a safe place ☐ I wouldn’t leave my family/animals ☐ I wouldn’t leave my house and belongings ☐ Nothing would stop me ☐ Being told by someone in my family/household to stay ☐ home
49 I would not want to go to the evacuation point / ☐ emergency shelters No one would help me / I would be left behind ☐ My faith that I will be OK ☐ Other ☐
50 9. Learning about the natural hazards in your community in the future
THIS SECTION IS ABOUT YOU RECEIVING INFORMATION ABOUT NATURAL HAZARDS IN THE FUTURE.
9.1 What sources of information would you trust to learn about natural hazards?
Check each one that applies – you must check one box in each row
Emergency service provider ☐Yes ☐No
Disability service organisation ☐Yes ☐No
Community service organisation ☐Yes ☐No
Religious leader/Community leader ☐Yes ☐No
Television ☐Yes ☐No
Radio ☐Yes ☐No
Internet ☐Yes ☐No
Newspaper ☐Yes ☐No
Other, please specify ☐Yes ☐No
9.2 Do you have a personal mobile phone?
Yes
No
9.3 During a natural hazard emergency, how would you like to receive emergency messages such as warnings or evacuation orders?
51 Check one box only
A member of the household ☐ Friend ☐ Neighbour ☐ Emergency service provider ☐ Disability service organisation ☐ Community service organisation ☐ Religious leader/Community leader ☐
9.4 During a natural hazard emergency, how would you prefer to get emergency messages such as warnings or evacuation orders?
Check one box only
Being told in person ☐ Receiving a phone call ☐ Receiving a SMS ☐ Television ☐ Radio ☐ Internet ☐ Other ☐ 9.5 Have you ever attended any educational or information sessions about natural hazard emergencies?
Check one box only
Yes
No
I don’t know/I don’t remember
52 9.6 Have you experienced any natural hazard emergencies in the last ten years?
Check one box only
Yes (go to next question, 9.7)
No (go to question 11 on the last page of the
survey)
I don’t know (go to question 11 on the last page of
the survey)
9.7 Which of the following natural hazard emergencies have you experienced in the last ten years?
Check each one that applies – you must check one box in each row
Column A: Question 9.7 Column B: Question 9.7 Rank
Earthquake ☐ Yes ☐ No
River Flood ☐ Yes ☐ No
Storm ☐ Yes ☐ No
Drought ☐ Yes ☐ No
Tsunami ☐ Yes ☐ No
Epidemic or ☐ Yes ☐ No pandemic
Erosion ☐ Yes ☐ No
Landslide ☐ Yes ☐ No
Bushfire ☐ Yes ☐ No
Heat wave ☐ Yes ☐ No
Tornado ☐ Yes ☐ No
Hail ☐ Yes ☐ No
53 Meteorite strike ☐ Yes ☐ No
9.8 Which of the events you answered “yes” to in Question 9.7 do you think pose the greatest danger to you?
Rank only the top 3: 1 = most dangerous - 3 = least dangerous.
Please complete Column B in the Table above.
9.9 Approximately, how long ago did the natural hazard emergency that you ranked as 1 =most dangerous happen?
Check one box only 1-2 years ago ☐ 3-5 years ago ☐ 6-10 years ago ☐ More than ten years ago ☐
10. Lived experience of the past natural hazard emergency
IN THIS SECTION YOU WILL BE ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NATURAL HAZARD EMERGENCY THAT YOU SAID IN QUESTION 9.8 AFFECTED YOU THE MOST. WE WILL REFER TO IT AS “THE EVENT”.
THE FIRST FEW QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT THE WEEKS OR MONTHS BEFORE THE EVENT.
10.1 In the weeks or months before the event, did you already have an emergency plan prepared?
54 Check one box only
Yes
No
I don’t know
10.2 Did you already have an emergency kit prepared?
Check one box only
Yes
No
I don’t know
10.3 Did you already have your house prepared to resist the event?
Check one box only
Yes
No
I don’t know
10.4 In the weeks or months before the event, did you receive any help in preparing yourself or your home?
Check one box only
Yes (go to next question, 10.5)
No (go to question 10.6)
I don’t know (go to question 10.6)
10.5 If yes, did you receive help from?
Check each one that applies – you must check one box in each row
A member of the household ☐ Yes ☐ No
55 Friend ☐ Yes ☐ No
Neighbour ☐ Yes ☐ No
Emergency service provider ☐ Yes ☐ No
Disability service organisation ☐ Yes ☐ No
Community service organisation ☐ Yes ☐ No
Religious leader/Community leader ☐ Yes ☐ No
Other ☐ Yes ☐ No
THE NEXT QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT THE DAY OF THE EVENT
10.6 Did you receive any emergency message about the event such as alerts, warnings or evacuation orders?
Check one box only
Yes (go to next question, 10.7)
No (go to question 10.9)
I don’t know (go to question 10.9)
10.7 If yes, who were the emergency messages from?
Check one box only A member of the household ☐ Friend ☐ Neighbour ☐ Emergency service provider ☐ Disability service organisation ☐ Community service organisation ☐ Religious leader/Community leader ☐ I don’t know ☐
56 10.8 How did you receive the emergency messages?
Check one box only Communicated in person ☐ Phone call received ☐ SMS received ☐ Television ☐ Radio ☐ Internet ☐ I don’t know ☐ Other, please specify ☐
NOW YOU WILL BE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT YOU DID DURING THE EVENT
10.9 What did you do during the event?
Check one box only I went with my gut instinct ☐ I followed the plan agreed with other people in the ☐ house I waited to be told what to do or I asked what to do ☐ I prayed ☐ I did nothing ☐
57 I don’t know ☐
10.10 What did you do to save yourself at the moment when the event happened?
Check one box only I evacuated to a evacuation point/safe place ☐ independently I evacuated to a evacuation point/safe place with some ☐ help I was rescued by an official and transported to a safe ☐ place I stayed home ☐ I did not manage to reach a safe place but survived ☐ I don’t know ☐
10.11 Did you go to an evacuation shelter?
Check one box only
Yes
No
I don’t know
NOW YOU WILL BE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS IN RELATION TO YOUR DISABILITY AND THE EVENT
10.12 This question is about your disability and the event:
Check one box only
Yours disability was caused by the events (If you checked this box, go to question 10.14)
Your disability was made worse by the event
58 Your disability was not affected by the event
10.13 Did you acquire a new type of disability as a consequence of the event?
Yes
No
10.14 In the long-term, were you affected mentally or emotionally by the event?
Yes
No
10.15 Were the important people in your life seriously affected by the event?
Yes
No
10.16 Did your house, land and your possessions sustain any significant damage from the event?
Check one box only
Yes
No
I don’t know
10.17 Did you or your household get help to recover over the long term?
Check one box only
Yes (go to next question, 10.18)
59 No (go to question 10.19)
I don’t know (go to question 10.19)
10.18 If yes, who did you get help from?
Check one box only A member of the household ☐ Friend ☐ Neighbour ☐ Emergency service provider ☐ Disability service organisation ☐ Community service organisation ☐ Religious leader/Community leader ☐ I don’t know ☐ Other, please specify ☐
10.19 Compared to before the event, your life is now generally:
Check one box only Pretty much the same as before ☐ Better than before ☐
Worse than before ☐
THIS IS THE END OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE. THIS INFORMATION WILL HELP US UNDERSTAND THE RESILIENCE AND VULNERABILITY OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES IN NATURAL HAZARD EMERGENCIES.
PLEASE FOLD THE QUESTIONNAIRE AND INSERT IN THE REPLY PAID ENVELOPE AND RETURN TO:
60 *Functioning and Disability questions used from: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/4450.0 ** Participation in community questions used from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51712960_Testing_and_validating_a_simplified_scale_ to_measure_social_participation_of_people_with_disabilities_in_Indonesia
61 Appendix 2 – ISAT-EP review question sheet Facilitated discussion - Preparing yourself for natural hazards
My thoughts about myself/a person I know with disability using the ISAT-EP
1. The most important components of the ISAT-EP are (see list of 10 components above):
I think this because:
Completing the ISAT-EP would allow me to identify I have skills and readiness for natural hazards in..
2. The questions that I did not understand or felt would not apply in this community are…
3. Some of the challenges that people with disability may face completing the ISAT-EP may be……..
62 4. I would recommend the following improvements to ISAT- EP….
If you would like to be a part of the review of the ISAT or are willing to invite 2 people with disability to participate, please put your details here (reviews will take place in November):
Name: Contact Number
Email address:
Address:
63 END OF REPORT
The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSW Government, unless the views expressed in the project materials have been publicly supported by the Government, or Government Agency.
64