Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Mar-Apr;129(2):148-55.
doi: 10.1177/003335491412900208.

Assessment of state- and territorial-level preparedness capacity for serving deaf and hard-of-hearing populations in disasters

Susan L Ivey  1 , Winston Tseng  2 , Donna Dahrouge  2 , Alina Engelman  2 , Linda Neuhauser  2 , Debbie Huang  2 , Sidhanta Gurung  2
Affiliations

Assessment of state- and territorial-level preparedness capacity for serving deaf and hard-of-hearing populations in disasters

Susan L Ivey et al. Public Health Rep. 2014 Mar-Apr.

Abstract

Objectives: Substantial evidence exists that emergency preparedness and response efforts are not effectively reaching populations with functional and access needs, especially barriers related to literacy, language, culture, or disabilities. More than 36 million Americans are Deaf or hard of hearing (Deaf/HH). These groups experienced higher risks of injury, death, and property loss in recent disasters than the general public. We conducted a participatory research study to examine national recommendations on preparedness communication for the Deaf/HH.

Methods: We assessed whether previous recommendations regarding the Deaf/HH have been incorporated into state- and territorial-level emergency operations plans (EOPs), interviewed state- and territorial-level preparedness directors about capacity to serve the Deaf/HH, and proposed strategies to benefit Deaf/HH populations during emergencies. We analyzed 55 EOPs and 50 key informant (KI) interviews with state directors.

Results: Fifty-five percent of EOPs mentioned vulnerable populations; however, only 31% specifically mentioned Deaf/HH populations in their plan. Study findings indicated significant relationships among the following factors: a state-level KI's familiarity with communication issues for the Deaf/HH, making relay calls (i.e., calls to services to relay communication between Deaf and hearing people), and whether the KI's department provides trainings about serving Deaf/HH populations in emergencies. We found significant associations between a state's percentage of Deaf/HH individuals and a KI's familiarity with Deaf/HH communication issues and provision by government of any disability services to Deaf/HH populations in emergencies. Further, we found significant relationships between KIs attending training on serving the Deaf/HH and familiarity with Deaf/HH communication issues, including how to make relay calls.

Conclusion: This study provides new knowledge that can help emergency agencies improve their preparedness training, planning, and capacity to serve Deaf/HH populations in emergencies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure
Figure
Analysis of state and territory emergency operations plans in 59 U.S. states and territories,a 2004–2009
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. National Institutes of Health (US), National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. Quick statistics (updated 2012 Jun 16) [cited 2012 Aug 30]. Available from: URL: http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/statistics/Pages/quick.aspx.
    1. Stout C, Brick K, Heppner CA. Fairfax (VA): Northern Virginia Resource Center for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Persons; 2004. Emergency preparedness and emergency communication access: lessons learned since 9/11 and recommendations.
    1. Department of Homeland Security (US) Nationwide plan review: phase 2 report. Washington: DHS; 2006.
    1. Institute of Medicine, Committee on Research Priorities in Emergency Preparedness and Response for Public Health Systems, Board on Health Sciences Policy. A letter report. Washington: National Academies Press; 2008. Research priorities in emergency preparedness and response for public health systems.
    1. Government Accountability Office (US) GAO-08-369. Washington: GAO; 2008. National disaster response-FEMA should take action to improve capacity and coordination between government and voluntary sectors.

Publication types

MeSH terms