| Summary |
Problem: Given the increasing frequency, intensity, and severity of disasters, and a gap in disaster research examining the interdependent systemic relationships between individuals and communities, we urgently need to establish local assessments of Household Emergency Preparedness (HEP) behaviors and perceived Community Disaster Resilience (CDR). Purpose & Methods: Guided by the All Hazards, All Agencies and All People Conceptual Framework, the primary objective of this descriptive study, using secondary analysis of data from the East Carolina University's Pitt County Community Prevention And COVID-19 Testing (ComPACT) Study, collected with the Household Emergency Preparedness Instrument survey (HEPI) and the Communities Advancing Resilience Toolkit (CART) Assessment Survey, was to understand the complex relationships between individuals and their communities in a local context, by assessing HEP behaviors and perceived CDR among residents living in Pitt County, North Carolina, a geographical vulnerable inner coastal plain community.Results: The mean score for the HEPI General Preparedness (GP) Scale was 18.34 (SD = 6.88) and only 5 out of 144 participants (3.5%) had GP total scores greater than 30, indicating most study participants were categorically unprepared for hazards in their community. There were a variety of HEP behaviors and the identification of four different subgroups among study participants related to resources-specific and action-specific preparedness behaviors. The mean HEPI GP score, of participants who reported having an emergency plan and a disaster kit, was significantly higher than the GP mean scores for those with no plan and no kit. Out of the five CART Core Community Resilience (CR) domains, Disaster Management had the highest mean score (M = 3.65, SD = .62) and the Transformative Potential domain had the lowest mean score (M = 3.36, SD = .62) The overall perceived CR mean score was 3.48 (SD = .62). The CART items with the highest percentage of positive responses were: (a) My community can provide emergency services during a disaster or community crises (77.1%) and (b) People in my community help each other (74.8%). CART items with the lowest percentage of positive responses were: (a) My community looks at its successes and failures to learn from the past (35.4%) and (b) People in my community trust local officials (24.3%). The highest level of community concern was related to health threats (73.6%), natural disasters (68.1%), and socio-economic issues (65.7%) and the lowest level of participant concern was related to unintentional disasters (20.1%). Socio-economic issues had a significant medium correlation with the CART CR domains: (a) Connection and Caring (r = -.32, p [less-than] .001), (b) Resources (r = -.41, p [less-than] .001), and (c) Transformative Potential (r = -.33, p [less-than] .001). There appears not be a relationship between individual HEP and perceived CDR with this study sample. It is possible that the specific elements of CDR that may be related to HEP are not sufficiently captured with the CART domains.Discussion: The findings from this study offer insight into factors that may be related to overall low levels of HEP and perceived CDR among residents of Pitt County, such as lack of trust in local officials, beliefs that not all people are treated fairly, concern about socioeconomic issues, and perceived lower transformative potential for community change. Critical analysis of collective community experiences, including disasters, is what community leaders and agencies need to design community-based interventions that effectively build CDR, increase disaster preparedness and reduce disaster risk. This study offers an example of how nurses can lead interprofessional disaster preparedness activities in their local communities, which will ultimately assist public health emergency preparedness and national health security efforts. |
