The Problem of Measuring Emergency Preparedness

The Need for Assessing ''Response Reliability'' as Part of Homeland Security Planning

by Brian A. Jackson

View related products

Download

Download eBook for Free

Full Document

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.3 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 7.0 or higher for the best experience.

Summary Only

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 7.0 or higher for the best experience.

Purchase

Purchase Print Copy

 FormatList Price Price
Add to Cart Paperback32 pages $20.00 $16.00 20% Web Discount

Abstract

Decisionmakers today largely assess emergency preparedness and homeland security “in the rear view mirror,” looking at performance in actual events and responding to perceived failures. While learning from real-world experience is important, better ways to assess preparedness prospectively will lead to better choices as to how and where to strengthen it. This paper frames a broad set of questions about how preparedness can be meaningfully measured and lays out some of the ingredients needed to answer them. To simplify the discussion, it focuses on response activities — the near-term actions taken by responder organizations when a disaster or terrorist incident is occurring or in its immediate aftermath that are intended to limit its consequences. It also provides some background on the national preparedness system and on current approaches for assessing emergency preparedness, and it introduces the concept of response reliability, an alternative way of thinking about measuring preparedness that can answer the public's and policy makers' fundamental question: How certain should we as a nation be that the systems we have put in place to respond to damaging events will be able to deliver when called upon?

Table of Contents

  • Chapter One

    Framing the Issue

  • Chapter Two

    Background

  • Chapter Three

    Potential Options and Solutions

  • Chapter Four

    How Might the Impact of This Approach Be Evaluated?

This Occasional Paper results from the RAND Corporation's continuing program of self-initiated research. Support for such research is provided, in part, by the generosity of RAND's donors and by the fees earned on client-funded research.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation occasional paper series. RAND occasional papers may include an informed perspective on a timely policy issue, a discussion of new research methodologies, essays, a paper presented at a conference, or a summary of work in progress. All RAND occasional papers undergo rigorous peer review to help ensure that they meet high standards for research quality and objectivity.

Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.