discussion

Anonymous
timer Asked: Oct 19th, 2018
account_balance_wallet $9.99

Question Description

1) What are the difficulties encountered in communication from the Public information officers point of view durning a disaster? Put yourself into the PIO role and discuss what you find to be the top 3 issues.

journal articles


Unformatted Attachment Preview

PUBLIC HEALTH WORKBOOK To Define, Locate, and Reach Special, Vulnerable, and At-risk Populations in an Emergency Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 The Categories. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Economic Disadvantage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Language and Literacy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Medical Issues and Disability (physical, mental, cognitive, or sensory) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Isolation (cultural, geographic, or social). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6 6 6 7 Creating a Coin In Your Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Phase 1: Defining At-risk Populations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Step 1 – Collect Population Information and Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Step 2 – Estimate the Number of People in At-risk Populations Living in Your Community. . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Step 3 – Identify Overarching Organizations/Agencies and the Key Contacts That Can Help You. . . . . 9 Step 4 – Facilitate Discussions with Key Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Step 5 – Stay in Touch. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 How to Use the Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Phase 2: Locating At-risk Populations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Step 1- Assess Existing Processes to Locate At-risk Populations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Step 2 - Choose Digital Mapping or Alternate Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Step 3- Locate and Map Gathering Places for the At-risk Populations You Have Identified . . . . . . . . . . 12 Step 4- Identify and Map Trusted Sources in the At-risk Communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Step 5- Facilitate Discussions With Representatives From Community Organizations Connected With At-risk Populations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Step 6 - Expand Your COIN to Include Service Providers, Businesses and Others Who Work With, Represent and Belong to At-risk Populations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 How to Use the Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Phase 3: Reaching At-risk Populations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Step 1 - Survey Agencies and Organizations to Learn About Their Successes and Failures . . . . . . . . . 15 Step 2 - Conduct Focus Groups or Community Roundtables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Step 3 - Analyze Data Gathered From the Surveys, Focus Groups, and Your Previous Assessment Efforts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Step 4 - Collaborate With Community Organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Step 5 - Identify Appropriate, Trusted Messengers to Deliver Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 How to Use the Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Next Steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Resource Guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Diversity in the United States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Principles of Community Engagement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Developing and Testing Messages for Cultural and Linguistic Competence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Culturally CAPABLE: A Mnemonic for Developing Culturally Capable Materials™. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Planning for Language Interpretation/Translation Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Community Health Workers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Delivery Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Regional Councils and Metropolitan Planning Organizations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 The Categories Checklist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 National Information Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 State Information Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Category Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Resource Dictionary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Templates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Database Template to Develop Your COIN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Sample Telephone Survey Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Build a Digital Map for Your COIN: Using Free Online Software. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Questionnaire Template/Phone Script. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Memorandum of Understanding Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Collaboration Agreement Letter Template. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Focus Group, Interview, or Roundtable Discussion Template. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Interview/Survey Template: Learning From Other Organizations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 E-mail Test Template. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Inserts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 INTRODUCTION The capacity to reach every person in a community is one of the major goals for emergency preparedness and response. The goal of emergency health communication is to rapidly get the right information to the entire population so that they are able to make the right choices for their health and safety. To do this, a community must know what subgroups make up its population, where the people in these groups live and work, and how they best receive information. Although knowing this type of information might seem obvious, many jurisdictions have not yet begun the process to define or locate their at-risk populations. To maintain consistency with the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act (PAHPA), this workbook uses the term “at-risk populations” to describe individuals or groups whose needs are not fully addressed by traditional service providers or who feel they cannot comfortably or safely use the standard resources offered during preparedness, response, and recovery efforts. These groups include people who are physically or mentally disabled (e.g., blind, deaf, hard-of-hearing, have learning disabilities, mental illness or mobility limitations), people with limited English language skills, geographically or culturally isolated people, homeless people, senior citizens, and children. Regardless of terminology, trust plays a critical role in reaching at-risk populations. Reaching people through trusted channels has shown to be much more effective than through mainstream channels. For some people, trusted information comes more readily from within their communities than from external sources. This document describes a process that will help planners to define, locate, and reach at-risk populations in an emergency. Additional tools are included to provide resources for more inclusive communication planning that will offer time-saving assistance for state, local, tribal, and territorial public health and emergency management planners in their efforts to reach at-risk populations in day-to-day communication and during emergency situations. If you follow the process outlined in this document, you will begin to develop a Community Outreach Information Network (COIN)—a grassroots network of people and trusted leaders who can help with emergency response planning and delivering information to at-risk populations in emergencies. Building a strong network of individuals who are invested in their community’s well-being, who are prepared and willing to help, and who have the ability to respond in an emergency is just the start. You must also include network members in your emergency preparedness planning, test the capacity of your COIN to disseminate information through preparedness exercises, and make changes to your preparedness plans based on the evaluation of those exercises. PURPOSE One lesson learned from events since 2001, especially Hurricane Katrina in 2005, is that traditional methods of communicating health and emergency information often fall short of the goal of reaching everyone in a community. Although a great deal of work has been done, public engagement for emergency response planning remains low. Other reports and legislation have also acknowledged this challenge as indicated below. In December 2008, the Trust for America’s Health released its sixth annual Ready or Not? Protecting the Public’s Health from Diseases, Disasters, and Bioterrorism report.1 This report recommends that “risk communication and emergency planning activities need to include all segments of the population to ensure their voices are heard and incorporated.” The 2008 report further recommends that “federal, state, and local officials must design culturally competent risk communication campaigns that use respected, trusted, and culturally competent messengers.” When enacted in December 2006, Pandemic and All Hands Preparedness Act required the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) “to integrate the needs of at-risk individuals on all levels of emergency planning, ensuring the effective incorporation of at-risk populations into existing and future policy, planning, and programmatic documents.”2 PAHPA singled out risk communication and public preparedness as essential public health security capabilities, and it made state and local preparedness awards contingent upon an explicit mechanism, such as an advisory committee to obtain public comment and input on emergency plans and their implementation. Trust for America’s Health. February 2, 2009. Ready or Not? Protecting the Public’s Health from Diseases, Disasters, Bioterrorism. December 2007. http://healthyamericans.org/reports/bioterror07/PAHPAProgressReport.pdf 2 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act Progress Report. Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response. November 2007. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. November 2, 2007. http://www.phe.gov/preparedness/planning/authority/pahpa/Documents/pahpa-at-risk-report0901.pdf 1 4 PUBLIC HEALTH WORKBOOK | AT-RISK POPULATIONS IN AN EMERGENCY Furthermore, Homeland Security Presidential Directive 21 (HSPD-21), signed in October 2007, establishes the National Strategy for Public Health and Medical Preparedness including, community resilience as a critical component along with bio-surveillance, countermeasure distribution, and mass casualty care.3 Community resilience is how community and personal characteristics facilitate the ability to “bounce back’’ from adversity. This resource assists the inclusion of at-risk populations communication needs to promote their resiliency. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), with the assistance of many state/local government and non-governmental agencies, has responded by compiling and disseminating information and materials for public health and emergency preparedness planners to better communicate health and emergency information to at-risk populations for all-hazard events. The process outlined in this document and the additional tools, templates, and materials included in the toolkit are some results of this effort. THE CATEGORIES As planners and communities embark on the process of defining, locating, and reaching their at-risk populations, there are advantages to beginning with very broad categories. Working in broad categories can be an effective and manageable starting point. The key advantage of this approach is that it allows you to examine the nature of the vulnerability that might put someone at higher risk in an emergency. For example, a plan to identify every language other than English spoken in a community will produce a very long list. On the other hand, a plan to identify demographically significant groups of individuals with no or limited English proficiency or those with very low literacy levels will yield one category: Language and Literacy. Many sub-groups that make up broader categories of populations experience some of the same communication barriers. For instance, whether the intended audience speaks Spanish or Chinese or simply does not read or understand English well, the communication barrier is a language or literacy issue and many of the strategies for message adaptation can be the same. Instead of translating emergency messages into 126 languages spoken in a community, public health departments have initiated pilot efforts to convey crucial information in simple, picture-based messages that are easily understood by everyone. As you start to define, locate, and reach at-risk populations, five broad, descriptive categories will help you group people who are at risk: • Economic Disadvantage • Language and Literacy • Medical Issues and Disability (physical, mental, cognitive, or sensory) Categories Checklist Look in the Resource Guide for a checklist of people and groups that might fall into each category. • Isolation (cultural, geographic, or social) • Age Many individuals do not typically fall neatly into one category or population group or they might fall into more than one. In some cases, an individual might not fall into one of these categories but could have a family member who does. When this occurs, efforts to provide emergency services can be thwarted because family members do not want to be separated. After a widespread emergency, people might find themselves stranded, displaced, destitute, homeless, or sick. They might experience challenges that leave them newly vulnerable or suddenly outside of mainstream communications in ways they did not experience before the emergency. These factors can create new at-risk populations. 3 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 21. October 18, 2007. http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/laws/gc_1219263961449.shtm#1 Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response (OPHPR) 5 Economic Disadvantage Start with economic disadvantage. If resources permit a community to address only one at-risk population characteristic, using poverty as a criteria may help reach a large number of people. Economic disadvantage does not necessarily impair the ability of an individual to receive information, but it can significantly affect his/her ability to follow a public health directive if the individual does not have the resources or means to do what is being asked (e.g., stockpile food, stay home from work and lose a day’s pay, evacuate and leave their home, or go to a point of dispensing). Economic disadvantage is so broad because many people ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

Kishnewt2017
School: Cornell University

Attached.

Running head: DISCUSSION

1

Discussion
Name
Institution.

DISCUSSION

2

The first challenge that faces a public information officer is the provision of excess
information. In this case, those in crisis are given too much information which at times ends
up creating more chaos rather than helping those who are needed. Additionally, some of the
information that is being disseminated to the public might not be true. This means that the
quality of the information the is reaching the victims is not up to par. Furthermore, those in
crises will have a hard time differentiat...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Tutor went the extra mile to help me with this essay. Citations were a bit shaky but I appreciated how well he handled APA styles and how ok he was to change them even though I didnt specify. Got a B+ which is believable and acceptable.

Similar Questions
Related Tags

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors