1 / 20

Emergency Preparedness Project

Emergency Preparedness Project. Bridge Meeting Okemah, OK 4-13-09. Summary of Previous Meetings. Meeting 1: Okemah Emergency Management Personnel 3/13/09 Personnel from health department, EMS, city and county emergency management, Creek Nation, Creoks , churches

culbertsonr
Download Presentation

Emergency Preparedness Project

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Emergency Preparedness Project Bridge Meeting Okemah, OK 4-13-09

  2. Summary of Previous Meetings • Meeting 1: Okemah Emergency Management Personnel • 3/13/09 • Personnel from health department, EMS, city and county emergency management, Creek Nation, Creoks, churches • Meeting 2: Boley citizens • 3/24/09 • Expressing their opinions on past emergencies and sharing their experiences Both groups answered same list of questions

  3. Items Discussed • Recent Experiences with Natural Disasters • How well community responded / preparation level • Least prepared for disasters • Assistance available • Existing Resources • Local organizations involved in helping community prepare • Other organizations who could be involved • Assessing the EPD Project • Are the steps reasonable / appropriate? • Value of “community coach” • Is the vulnerability assessment process useful?

  4. Today’s Agenda • Session 1: Some Areas of Agreement • Session 2: Some Areas of Differences • Session 3: Opinions on the EPD Project Responses / comments from first two meetings will be shown, then break into discussion groups for more in-depth conversation

  5. Some Areas of Agreement Issues / topics that were consistent in both meetings

  6. What Type of Natural Disasters Did You Experience? • Ice Storms (Winter 2009, 2008, 2007, 2005, 2001) • Fires (Nov 2006, Spring 2007) • Droughts / Fires • Floods • Tornadoes

  7. What Type of Damage Did Your Community Suffer? • Most Common • Loss of electricity • Fences / hay / livestock lost in fires • Less Frequent • Trees lost • Paden gymnasium collapsed • Street / road damage • Weleetka businesses lost

  8. Who in Your Community Was Least Able to Prepare?Why? • Elderly • Lack of planning • Lack of mobility • Poor communication • Those with small children • Lack of mobility

  9. Did You Get Information About the Natural Disaster Ahead of Time? • Mostly Yes • But, sources of information used were varied (next section) • Acknowledged strength of community • Personal contacts • Need for improved outside communication noted

  10. What organizations could be valuable (but may not have been involved up until now)? • Some disagreement about which ones are currently involved (next section) • Those who could help: • Ministerial alliance • Local businesses • Fire dept auxiliaries

  11. Some Areas of Differences Issues / topics where there were inconsistencies between groups

  12. How Well Did Your Community Respond? • Some thought the community responded quite well • Well-trained combination of entire community • People know their roles • Some felt the community did not respond well • Lack of a plan / lack of generators / equipment • Some were very aware of Emergency Operations Management (EOM) plans, others were not • Some knew immediately who to call / where to go, for others the information was not obvious

  13. How Well Did Your Plan Work? • Some were very aware of Emergency Operations Management (EOM) plans, others were not • Some saw the plan as a success for obtaining / staging resources, others knew little about the plan • Most agreed that educating the public about these plans is problematic

  14. Sources of Information • Some indicated that most of their information came from TV – which had very little coverage for their specific community • Weather radios were also used • Others mentioned contact from the emergency management team within Okfuskee county • Local contacts also seen as very important

  15. What Local Organizations Were Involved in Helping Your Community? • Some saw very few local organizations that were involved • Red Cross • Fire Department • Police • Others saw a lot more • Health Dept • Department of Human Services • Schools • Hospitals • State Gov’t • Salvation Army

  16. What are the Best Sources of Information for Needs of At Risk People? • Some listed large organizations • DHS • Health Department • Schools • Others listed local individuals or organizations • Volunteer Fire Department • Local leaders • Church members

  17. The EPD Project Feedback on the steps involved and the community coach

  18. Overall Assessment of EPD Project Process • Most were fairly optimistic • Felt it represented a good starting point • Having an organized plan would help keep people from panicking • Very inclusive • Good to look at areas that are at risk • Useful for future planning • Involvement of new people is useful, but challenging • Helps agencies who think about “what if” to be better prepared • Will encourage participation from larger community groups

  19. Overall Assessment of EPD Project Process • But some had a few problems with it • Getting community involvement will be difficult • Having enough volunteers to develop and implement the plan would be challenging • Would require some technical expertise to implement • Education needed before process even begins (particularly for surrounding communities to learn about each other) • How does it get updated? • Need for person-to-person recruitment will be time consuming

  20. Thoughts on the “Community Coach” • Most generally thought it was a good idea • Must be someone from outside the community, with experience • Would be necessary to have this person • Good for motivation, and experience from other sites • But there were a few problems noted • Community coach can’t do it all • Difficult for the coach to relate to community • Trust is an issue • Can’t have an overbearing personality • How would they be funded?!

More Related