1 / 27

Project Management Committee Meeting Washington, D.C. September 21, 2004

Independent Study to Assess Future Savings from Mitigation, Track B Telephone Interview Data Preliminary Analysis. Project Management Committee Meeting Washington, D.C. September 21, 2004. Track B Progress - I. Insert Table of progress on critical milestones and products, Part I.

irisa
Download Presentation

Project Management Committee Meeting Washington, D.C. September 21, 2004

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. Independent Study to Assess Future Savings from Mitigation, Track B Telephone Interview Data Preliminary Analysis Project Management Committee Meeting Washington, D.C. September 21, 2004

  2. Track B Progress - I Insert Table of progress on critical milestones and products, Part I

  3. Track B Progress - II Insert Table of progress on critical milestones and products, Part II

  4. Informant Participation Status

  5. Informant Participation Status by Community # Individuals

  6. Reasons Not Approached (n=21)

  7. Informant Referrals by Community FAKE DATA

  8. Total Number of Contacts Needed to Complete Interviews(Includes Telephone, Mail, Fax, Email)

  9. Flow Chart of Interview Network in Hayward City Manager, Originally agreed Then REFUSED 1/30/04 1 Division Head of Water Facility INTERVIEWED 2/19/04 Assistant Director of Public Works INTERVIEWED 1/27/04 1 Dir. Public Works INTERVIEWED 2/9/04 Emergency Operations REFUSED 2/9/04 Fire Chief REFUSED 2/5/04 Acting Assistant City Manager REFUSED 2/3/04 FEMA Senior Planner REFUSED 2/5/04 HAZMAT Program Coordinator INTERVIEWED 2/18/04 Chief Building Inspector REFUSED 2/5/04 Director, Community & Economic Development INTERVIEWED 3/12/04 2 Deputy Publicity Dir. for Utilities Not Approached Associate Civil Engineer INTERVIEWED 2/11/04 Public Information Officer INTERVIEWED 3/12/04 2 Cal State Hayward Not Approached 1 Index Informant 2 Independent Network

  10. Flow Chart of Interview Network in Jefferson Co. Director, fh Land Development Interviewed 3/4/04 County GIS Manager Not Approached jh Fire Chief, City of Tarrant Not Approached bh County Commissioner Interviewed 1 3/4/04 mb Land Development e Interviewed 2/24/04 Dir., Local Land Trust Interviewed 3/4/04 j Auburn University Not Approached gl County Commissioner Refused 3/8/04 ss Land Development pr Interviewed 2/17/04 USGS Not Approached jr County EMA Not Approached ak President, Local df Engineering Company Interviewed 3/10/04 FEMA Former City Planner, Consultant jl Interviewed 2/23/04 Director, County EMA Interviewed 1 3/1/04 wo Hydrologist, Local dh Engineering Company Interviewed 3/10/04 County EMA Not Approached mh Admin. Assistant, County EMA dk Interviewed 2/24/04 Dir. of County Inspection Services Not Approached bm City NFIP Not Approached er State Hazard Mitigation Officer Not Approached dp Director, Inspection Services Not Approached bm 1 Index Informant

  11. Flow Chart of Interview Network in Horry Co. Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Clemson University Interviewed 2/23/04 tr Head Building Official, City of Conway Not Approached RB Public Safety Director, County EMD Interviewed 2/25/04 pw FEMA National Weather Service Not Approached TM Meteorologist, Local Television Station Interviewed 3/1/04 ep Emergency Planner, County EMD Interviewed 1 2/18/04 TS Property Manager, County EMD Interviewed 3/2/04 tl Director, County Storm Water Management Not Approached TG Fire Chief, County Fire Department Refused 3/8/04 ga Director, Emergency Services County Red Cross Chapter Interviewed 3/19/04 ka 1 Index Informant

  12. Flow Chart of Interview Network in Freeport Manager, Public Works Interviewed 3/16/04 ld Business Owner, Local Restaurant JC Refused 5/27/04 FEMA Floodplain Manager, Superintendent of Buildings, Mitigation Coordinator Interviewed 3/18/04 jm Coordinator, Emergency Management Team Interviewed 5/25/04 DR Grant Administrator, Public Works Interviewed 1 3/23/04 NS Village Engineer, Department of Public Works Not Approached RF Village Trustee; Owner, Local Insurance Agency Interviewed 3/23/04 bw Director, Emergency Management Interviewed 4/21/04 RH Business Owner, Local Marine Storage Interviewed 4/14/04 dg Village Trustee DM Refused 5/21/04 1 Index Informant

  13. Flow Chart of Interview Network in Tuscola Engineer, Local Eng. Group Refused 4/6/04 rh FEMA Prog. Admin., Intercounty Drains Interviewed 5/25/04 kh County Drain sp Commissioner Interviewed 1 4/5/04 Lieutenant, State Police Dept. Interviewed 4/5/04 hp Preliminary Research Engineer, Local Eng. Group Interviewed 4/1/04 hc Local Construction Co. Interviewed 1 3/22/04 js Township Mgr., Tittabawassee Interviewed 4/1/04 bk Manager, City of Vassar Interviewed 1 3/25/04sa Engineer, Local Company Interviewed 3/25/04 jw Environmental Engineer, State Dept. Environmental Quality Interviewed 5/24/04 bm Director, Public Works City of Frankenmuth Interviewed 1 4/2/04 rb Flood Specialist, City of Vassar ww Interviewed 4/2/04 State Hazard Mitigation Officer ms Not Approached Engineer, Canadian Company Not Approached gh President, Local Business Not Approached al 1 Index Informant

  14. Flow Chart of Interview Network in Jamestown City Engineer wk Interviewed 6/4/04 State Department of Emergency Management Not Approached lh Director, State Dept. of Emergency Mgmt. Refused 7/6/04 df Consultant rp Interviewed 6/7/04 City Administrator Interviewed 7/1/04 jf Local Red Cross Chapter Interviewed 6/18/04 bd FEMA County Emergency Manager Interviewed 6/21/04 jb Asst. City Engineer Refused 7/6/04 lh Mayor Interviewed 1 6/1/04 CK Parks and Recreation dh Interviewed 6/30/04 State House of Reps. jk Interviewed 7/9/04 President, Amateur Radio Association wt Interviewed 6/17/04 Weather Spotter Refused 6/4/04jh Training Office, Fire Dept. Refused 6/8/04jr City Fire Chief bg Interviewed 6/8/04 Police Chief Not Approached dd Local Cable Services rs Interviewed ??/??/04 1 Index Informant

  15. Interview Informant Job Titles (N=52) FAKE DATA

  16. Informant Perceptions of Community Risk (N=52) FAKE DATA Very High Very Low

  17. Percent of Informants who Believe the Community Has a Natural Hazard Mitigation Program (N=47) % Yes In your opinion, does the community have a natural hazard mitigation program?

  18. Informants’ Knowledge of the Community’s Natural Hazard Mitigation Program (N=52)FAKE DATA Average Knowledge How much do you know about the community’s natural hazard mitigation program?

  19. Informants’ assessment of the community’s natural hazard mitigation program? (Elected Officials) • Insert Sample quotes. What is your assessment of the community’s natural hazard mitigation program?

  20. Informants’ assessment of the community’s natural hazard mitigation program? (Appointed Officials) • Insert Sample quotes. What is your assessment of the community’s natural hazard mitigation program?

  21. Informants’ assessment of the community’s natural hazard mitigation program? (NGO/Partners) • Insert Sample quotes. What is your assessment of the community’s natural hazard mitigation program?

  22. How appropriate/effective do you consider these [natural hazard mitigation] efforts? (N=52) FAKE DATA

  23. How does the community’s natural hazard mitigation program compare to natural hazard mitigation programs in other communities? (N=38)

  24. Informants’ Perceptions of Benefits Provided by Mitigation Activities Which of the following benefits were provided by [this mitigation activity]?

  25. Informants’ Perceptions of Primary Objectives/Benefits of Mitigation Activities What was the major objective of this activity?

  26. Informants’ Perceptions Success Meeting Major Objectives with VS. without Mitigation Activities How would you rate the community’s success in meeting this [major] objective with/without this activity?

  27. Spin-Offs: Total Number Mentioned Vs. Total Number ConfirmedFAKE DATA # Spin-Offs

More Related