the road map to preparedness: a competency-based approach

Practice Articles

504 � Public Health Reports / September–October 2005 / Volume 120

aJohns Hopkins Center for Public Health Preparedness, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD

Address correspondence to: Daniel J. Barnett, MD, MPH, Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health Preparedness, 615 N. Wolfe St.,Rm. WB030, Baltimore, MD 21205; tel. 410-502-0591; fax 443-287-7075; e-mail <[email protected]>.

©2005 Association of Schools of Public Health

The Road Map to Preparedness:A Competency-Based Approach toAll-Hazards Emergency ReadinessTraining for the Public Health Workforce

Cindy L. Parker, MD, MPHa

Daniel J. Barnett, MD, MPHa

Ayanna L. Fews, MBAa

David Blodgett, MD, MPHa

Jonathan M. Links, PhDa

SYNOPSIS

Facing limited time and budgetary resources, state and local health departmentsneed a practical, competency-based training approach to meet the all-hazardsreadiness requirements of their employees. The Road Map to Preparedness is atraining tool designed to assist health departments in providing comprehensive,agency-tailored readiness instruction to their employees. This tool uses an incen-tive-based, game-like, experiential learning approach to meet the Centers forDisease Control and Prevention’s nine core competencies for all public healthworkers while facilitating public health employees’ understanding and acceptanceof their emergency response roles. A corresponding evaluation tool, the Road Mapto Preparedness Evaluation, yields metrically-driven assessments of public healthemployee readiness competencies.

Since its pilot in 2003, the Road Map to Preparedness has met with enthusiasticresponse from participating health departments in the mid-Atlantic region. Inaddition to its public health impact, the Road Map offers future promise as a toolto assist organizational emergency response training in private sector and non-public health first-responder agency settings.

ROAD MAP TO PREPAREDNESS � 505

Public Health Reports / September–October 2005 / Volume 120

Public health has adopted unprecedented roles and part-nerships in emergency preparedness and response since theterrorist attacks of 2001 in the United States. Consistent withthe federal government’s move toward an all-hazards modelof public health emergency preparedness, local health de-partment workers must embrace a culture of emergencyreadiness for a broad spectrum of intentional and naturallyoccurring emergencies.

Achieving this readiness culture requires establishing 24/7agency response capacity, developing employee awarenessof current and emerging large-scale community threats, andfostering a core sense of employees’ professional roles asvanguards of public safety and well-being. This mission posesa considerable challenge for a public health workforce his-torically accustomed to a 9-to-5 mode of operation and tradi-tionally unfamiliar with the all-hazards approach to readi-ness demanded in a post-9/11 world.

Faced with limited training budgets, time, and personnelbackfill resources, health department employees need anefficient and highly practical educational approach that ef-fectively addresses the Centers for Disease Control andPrevention’s (CDC) core readiness competencies for all pub-lic health workers.1 Within this competency-based frame-work, preparedness education should also be flexible enoughto accommodate the unique response demands and vulner-abilities of individual health departments.

Experience in previous public health emergencies anddiscussions with public health workers suggest that manypublic health workers are unlikely to report to duty in re-sponse to a mass casualty event. The reasons for this—real tothem—include a fear for personal and family safety in emer-gencies coupled with a lack of insight into how valuable theyare to the response effort in times of crisis.

These observations are consistent with research on emer-gency response perspectives among public health workers. A2002 study of school health nurses from the New York CityDepartment of Health revealed that 90% of these nursesreported at least one perceived barrier to reporting to workduring an emergency; in order of perceived importance, thetop three barriers for these nurses were child and elder careobligations, transportation, and personal health issues.2 Inaddition, research on bioterrorism response attitudes amongschool nurses and physicians reveals that as the perceptionof personal risk increases, these healthcare providers areless willing to place themselves at risk to care for patients.3,4

An effective public health preparedness training programmust address these perceived response barriers, respect thetime constraints of a busy public health workforce, and in-corporate an educational framework that reflects best prac-tices for adult learning.

ROAD MAP TO PREPAREDNESS: BACKGROUND

In 2003, Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health Prepared-ness5 began a collaborative training venture with the Mont-gomery County Department of Health and Human ServicesPublic Health Services (MCPHS) as part of the ProjectPublic Health Ready pilot program sponsored by the Na-tional Association of County and City Health Officials(NACCHO). MCPHS set an ambitious goal of training all

600 of their employees in emergency preparedness over a12-month period.

The Johns Hopkins team worked with MCPHS to developa training program that would include all nine core compe-tencies developed by the Columbia University School of Nurs-ing and adopted by the CDC for public health workers.1

The curriculum needed to accommodate the busy sched-ules of MCPHS employees through a blend of self-directedand group-oriented trainings. These trainings required anapproach that was upbeat, incentive-based, and applicableto daily public health tasks whenever possible to enhanceemployee acceptance of the training process.

The MCPHS leadership felt that its workforce would re-spond most successfully to training that incorporated expe-riential adult learning, a model that makes the student anactive participant in the educational process through a “learn-ing by doing” approach. This preference for experientiallearning methods is consistent with research on adult educa-tion revealing that students’ attitudes are significantly morepositive about the subject matter in experiential settingsthan traditional didactic settings.6

Besides meeting the nine core competencies, Hopkinsand MCPHS desired to implement a culture change of firstresponder-type emergency readiness for all health depart-ment employees. Firefighters and police officers, for ex-ample, are well aware that they may be called upon at anytime to help protect the public’s safety. Public health profes-sionals, on the other hand, are historically not as familiarwith the idea that they might be called in to work nontradi-tional hours in an emergency.

To meet these educational needs and challenges, JohnsHopkins Center for Public Health Preparedness piloted aRoad Map to Preparedness curriculum to assist MCPHS in cre-ating and implementing a training plan for all of their em-ployees. Because the work of a busy public health depart-ment must continue despite the need for all employees toreceive additional training, the complete training programconsists of a combination of agency-led activities and self-study activities using a game-like, incentive-based model.

ROAD MAP TO PREPAREDNESS:STRUCTURE AND CONTENT

The Road Map to Preparedness is a series of activities laid outon a game board, with a corresponding curriculum for eachactivity along the board.7 Each employee is given his or herown Road Map Game Board (Figure 1) and Road Map Key(Figure 2), along with a packet of supporting materials. Theactivities along the board are based on a combination of corepublic health competencies and the nine core CDC pre-paredness competencies. In addition to these core compe-tencies, some of the activities included in the Road Map aredesigned to influence the way public health employees thinkabout their jobs and feel about their role in the agency andabout disaster response. The curriculum is designed to re-quire participation in active learning processes while keepingtraditional didactic lecture time to a minimum. For example,the Road Map requires employees to map out three alternateroutes from home to their designated emergency responselocations, accounting for the possibility of unexpected road

506 � Practice Articles


Figure 1. Road Map to Preparedness Game Board

closures. The Road Map is intended to provide an agency-wide basic competency level of public health emergency pre-paredness in the context of ongoing health department-basedpreparedness trainings and exercises.

Consistent with its incentive-based approach, a series ofrewards are offered for employees who successfully com-plete incremental segments of the Road Map. These rewardsare determined by each participating health departmentand can range from coffee mugs to administrative leave,with larger incentives awarded for faster completion of theRoad Map activities.

The first two activities on the Road Map address essentialpreparedness competencies (Activity 1) and provide an in-troductory overview of intentional threats to the public’shealth (Activity 2). Activity 1 requires the participant tocomplete the Columbia University online preparednesscourse7 or an equivalent. Activity 2 requires participation inan online or live agency-sponsored training on weapons ofmass destruction. These initial activities provide the compe-tency framework and foundational knowledge that partici-

pants will need to embark successfully upon subsequentRoad Map activities.

Personal and family preparedness must figure centrallyin any effective public health workforce preparedness train-ing program. This training should focus on both physicaland psychological issues that workers and their families facein a variety of crisis settings, and provide employees withpractical tools to deal with these issues. Accordingly, theRoad Map places strong emphasis on personal and familysafety. Activity 7 requires participants to craft a personal/family emergency response plan. Health departments areprovided the opportunity to offer their participants an agency-sponsored lecture or online course on personal/family readi-ness to provide the necessary background for crafting apersonal/family emergency response plan. Personal readi-ness concepts must be emphasized at work as well as athome, and Activity 4 involves participating in the planningand implementation of a worksite plan to ensure safety andsecurity in an emergency.

An understanding of role-specific response requirements



Figure 2. Road Map to Preparedness Key

DatePreparedness Activity Completed

(1) Learn about the public health role in emergency response.Take the Columbia online course or equivalent. http://cds.osr.columbia.edu/bepcourse/test.asp

(2) Participate in a training about Weapons of Mass Destruction–Online or Agency Sponsoredhttp://www.jhsph.edu/CPHP/Training/Online%20Training/intro_to_wmd.html

(3) Participate in a training about what your specific primary and alternate roles would be duringan emergency and why it is important to the success of the effort. Identify the limits to yourown authority.

(4) Describe how you are participating in the planning and implementation of a plan at yourworksite to ensure the safety and security of staff and clients in the event of an emergency.

(5) Incident CommandUsing the templates provided, write your name in the proper place in the chain of command.

(6) Identify and locate the Health Department’s emergency response plan or the sectionrelevant to your role.

(7) Write out your own personal, family emergency response plan using the template provided.Include enough detail that someone else looking at your plan would be able to follow itaccurately. Share the plan with your family and everyone involved in carrying out your plan.

(8) Draw a map showing how you would get from your home to your designated assignmentlocation. Plan 3 different routes in case unexpected street closures obstruct your way.

(9) Demonstrate use of communication equipment. See check-off list provided.

(10) Indicate the ways in which you will be notified in the event of an emergency.

(11) Attend an agency-sponsored lecture on How to Talk to People about Disasters.

continued on p. 508



is essential for effective and swift organizational reaction toa public health crisis. These role-specific learning needs areaddressed in Activity 3 (participating in a role-specific train-ing) and Activity 5 (identifying one’s place on the healthdepartment’s incident command chart). These two activitiesprovide each employee with a concrete understanding ofthe specific role(s) he or she might be asked to perform ina public health emergency. To facilitate universal employeeawareness of agency-wide response protocols, Activity 6 asksworkers to identify and locate their health department’semergency response plan.

Effective communication skills are at the heart of success-ful public health readiness and response. Public health work-ers must not only know how to use different types of com-munication equipment and how they would be notified torespond to an emergency, but also must understand how tocommunicate risk and emergency information effectively tothe public. Although the media does play an important rolein a crisis, every public health worker will likely have a com-munication role; these can range from answering telephonecalls from concerned citizens to talking with communitymembers at dispensing sites or shelters. These communica-

tion requirements are addressed in Activity 9 (demonstratethe use of communication equipment per a checklist), Activ-ity 10 (indicate ways in which you will be notified in theevent of an emergency), Activity 11 (attend an agency-spon-sored lecture on risk communication), and Activity 12 (par-ticipate in a communication practice session, describing yourcommunication roles).

From sanitarians to school health nurses, public healthworkers stand on the front lines of emergency recognition.Therefore, an understanding of individual response rolesand agency plans must be firmly coupled with rapid recogni-tion and creative problem-solving skills. Accordingly, Activity13 requires participation in an agency-led discussion onemergency recognition and appropriate responsive actions;Activity 14 asks employees to participate in a training exer-cise focusing on creative problem solving. Activities 13 and14 also serve as team-building activities while they developvital emergency recognition and response skills.

A culminating agency-sponsored exercise (Activity 15) isan experiential learning activity designed to incorporate theskills and knowledge developed in Activities 1–14. This exer-cise can range in complexity from a tabletop to a live, full-

Figure 2 (continued). Road Map to Preparedness Key

DatePreparedness Activity Completed

(12) Participate in a Communication Practice Session and practice the skills you learned duringthe lecture or make a presentation to others about how to talk to people about disasters.Describe the communication roles you have within the agency, with the media, with the generalpublic, and with your family and personal contacts.

(13) Participate in an agency led discussion to explore what kinds of unusual events or trendsmight indicate an emergency or disaster and describe appropriate actions.

(14) Participate in an exercise/training in which you demonstrate creative problem solving tounusual challenges.

(15) Participate in an agency-sponsored exercise to apply your knowledge of disasterpreparedness to a real or made-up scenario and test your performance.

name

has completed all Bioterrorism and Emergency Preparedness activities indicated in this Road Map, or an equivalent demonstratingmastery of the Bioterrorism and Emergency Preparedness competencies.

__________________ ______________________________________________________Date completed name of Health Officer certifying completion



To measure longer-term assessments of the Road Map toPreparedness’ employee-level and organizational-level impacts,health departments and their employees will be asked tocomplete the Road Map to Preparedness Evaluation at one-yearintervals for three years following initial completion of theRoad Map to Preparedness. An online survey tool calledSurveyMonkey could be used for these longer-term evalua-tions.9 These data will serve to direct future trainings withinorganizations that have already completed the Road Mapand will facilitate increased use of the Road Map itself.

NEXT STEPS AND APPLICATIONS

Since its pilot with MCPHS in 2003, the Road Map to Prepared-ness has become a centerpiece of Johns Hopkins Center forPublic Health Preparedness training efforts with local healthdepartments in Maryland, and has been met with great en-thusiasm and success. As of July 2005, Johns Hopkins Centerfor Public Health Preparedness has implemented the RoadMap to Preparedness for eight local health departments in themid-Atlantic region. At least 20 additional health depart-ments from across the nation have requested the Road Mapimplementation in 2005–2006.

The Road Map’s versatility in meeting the needs of healthdepartments of varying size, location, and resources makes ita widely applicable model for competency-based public healthworkforce training for all-hazards readiness. Participatinghealth departments have also successfully used the RoadMap as a team-building tool by posting a large Road MapGame Board in a central location and keeping track of anagency division’s progress, often in friendly competition withother sections or departments. Longer-term evaluation willprovide new insights into additional best practice applica-tions of the Road Map to Preparedness.

Ongoing training needs, including staff turnover, willcreate further opportunities to modify the Road Map. Spe-cific training for more specialized emergency response ac-tivities—such as communicable disease epidemiologic re-sponse or Strategic National Stockpile management—caneasily be added to the Road Map requirements or be ad-dressed as the “Road Beyond” for specific groups of depart-ment employees. Other uses of the Road Map, includingreadiness training for non-public health first responders andfor employees in large and small businesses, are currentlyunder development. To the extent that the training needs oflocal agencies in states beyond Maryland differ significantly,further modifications and extensions are possible. A formalneeds assessment in collaboration with practice partners isthe best way to identify all opportunities and needs.

The Road Map offers a readiness training approach that iscomprehensive, well-received, predictable, and measurable.Through its stepwise, incentive-based, experiential learningmethods, employees are able to gain a common languageand skill set to aid their participation in readiness drills andtheir response to actual emergencies.

The development of this manuscript by Johns Hopkins Center forPublic Health Preparedness has been supported in part through acooperative agreement with the Centers for Disease Control andPrevention.

scale exercise, depending on the resources and needs ofindividual health departments.

The format and content of each activity can be tailoredto meet the unique needs of any health department, whilestill ensuring that each employee successfully completingthe Road Map has achieved all nine CDC-adopted “Emer-gency Preparedness Core Competencies for All Public HealthWorkers.”1 For the most part, the activities on the Road Mapto Preparedness can be completed in any order. However, thefundamental competency-based framework and knowledgebase developed in Activities 1 and 2 provide an ideal startingpoint, and Activity 15 should be the final activity in theprocess to develop employees’ confidence in their abilitiesto handle a simulated emergency using the knowledge andskills developed in the preceding 14 activities of the RoadMap.

EVALUATION OF THEROAD MAP TO PREPAREDNESS

Evaluation of the Road Map, training plan, and curriculumoccurs in two ways: (1) each agency-led activity is evaluatedby each participant immediately following the activity; (2)the health department completes (and returns to the Cen-ter) an evaluation of how the Road Map to Preparedness train-ing plan and curriculum helped the department to preparefor either a real disaster response or an exercise, along withsuggestions for improvements to the process.

Evaluation must be an integral part of any training pro-gram; to meet this need, the Johns Hopkins Center forPublic Health Preparedness has developed a companionRoad Map to Preparedness Evaluation tool. As does the RoadMap to Preparedness itself, the Road Map to Preparedness Evalua-tion is competency-based, quantifiable, stepwise, and outcome-oriented.

The Road Map to Preparedness Evaluation generates metri-cally driven impact assessments—at both the individual em-ployee and organizational levels—for each of the 15 mile-stones on the Road Map to Preparedness and for the overalleffect of the completed Road Map (Figure 3).

These evaluative activities focus on the impact of theRoad Map to Preparedness along four major axes: (1) em-ployee knowledge of preparedness concepts; (2) employeefamiliarity with individual emergency response roles; (3)employee attitudes toward emergency readiness; and (4)organizational efficiency and effectiveness of health depart-ment readiness and response as assessed through emergencypreparedness exercises.

The Road Map to Preparedness Evaluation uses informationobtained from participants immediately after each activityand upon Road Map completion, and from an organiza-tional context once the Road Map is completed. These im-pact assessments include group baseline performance onpre-tests that are compared to post-test scores immediatelyafter trainings, and subsequently at one-, two-, and three-year annual intervals. Audience interactive software8 allowsfor onsite electronic administration of pre-tests and post-tests on the date of training, as well as for anonymous quali-tative feedback on the effectiveness of trainers and relevanceof content.



Fig

ure

3. R

oad

Map

to

Pre

par

edne

ss E

valu

atio

n K

ey

Dat

ePr

epar

edne

ss A

ctiv

ityO

utp

uts

Eval

uatio

n M

easu

res

Shor

t-an

d L

ong

-Ter

m O

utco

mes

Com

ple

ted

Take

Co

lum

bia

onl

ine

cour

se o

r eq

uiva

lent

1.K

now

led

ge

ofC

omp

eten

cies

2. T

rain

ing

Eva

luat

ion

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-tes

t sc

ores

2. C

olum

bia

eva

luat

ion

form

(onl

ine)

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-tes

ta.

Bef

ore

and

aft

er c

ours

e co

mp

letio

n/ (S

hort

term

)b

. A

nnua

l rep

eat

of

“pos

t-te

st”

at o

ne,

two,

and

thr

ee y

ears

fol

low

ing

initi

al o

nlin

eco

urse

com

ple

tion/

(Lon

g T

erm

)2.

Col

umb

ia E

valu

atio

n fo

rma.

Up

on in

itial

cou

rse

com

ple

tion /

(Sho

rt t

erm

)

Par

tici

pat

e in

a t

rain

ing

abo

ut W

eap

ons

of

Mas

sD

estr

ucti

on—

Onl

ine

or

Ag

ency

Sp

ons

ore

d

1.B

asic

kno

wle

dg

e of

WM

D c

ateg

orie

s an

dco

ncep

ts2.

Trai

ning

eva

luat

ions

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-tes

t sc

ores

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-tes

t sc

ores

a. B

efor

e an

d a

fter

initi

al In

tro

to W

MD

trai

ning

/(Sh

ort

Term

)b

. Re

pea

t “p

ost-

test

” an

nual

ly a

t on

e, t

wo,

and

thr

ee y

ears

fol

low

ing

initi

al In

tro

toW

MD

tra

inin

g/

(Lon

g t

erm

)

Par

tici

pat

e in

ro

le-s

pec

ific

trai

ning

1. K

now

led

ge

of r

oles

2. T

rain

ing

Eva

luat

ions

3. E

xerc

ise

per

form

ance

on r

ole-

spec

ific

func

tions

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-tes

t sc

ores

2. S

tud

ent

eval

uatio

n of

trai

ning

s sc

ore

3. E

xerc

ise

per

form

ance

self-

asse

ssm

ent

scor

es

1. P

re-t

est/

pos

t-te

sta.

Bef

ore

and

aft

er in

itial

rol

e-sp

ecifi

ctr

aini

ngs/

(Sho

rt T

erm

)b

. B

efor

e an

d a

fter

any

fol

low

-up

rol

e-sp

ecifi

ctr

aini

ngs /

(Sho

rt T

erm

)c.

Rep

eat

“pos

t-te

st”

at o

ne,

two,

and

thr

eeye

ars

follo

win

g c

ours

e co

mp

letio

n / (L

ong

Term

)2.

Tra

inin

g E

valu

atio

nsa.

Imm

edia

tely

up

on c

omp

letio

n of

tra

inin

g/

(Sho

rt T

erm

)3.

Exe

rcis

e Pe

rfor

man

ce R

esul

ts (s

elf-

asse

ssm

ent)/

( Sho

rt T

erm

)

Par

tici

pat

ion

in p

lann

ing

and

im

ple

men

tati

on

of

wo

rksi

te p

lan

to e

nsur

esa

fety

/sec

urit

y in

eve

nt o

fem

erg

ency

.

1. K

now

led

ge

of r

ole-

spec

ific

activ

ities

to

ensu

re s

afet

y/se

curit

y of

staf

f an

d c

lient

s.

1. S

core

s on

“p

op q

uizz

es”

1. E

xerc

ise

Perf

orm

ance

sse

lf-as

sess

men

t sc

ores

1. S

core

s on

“p

op q

uizz

es”

a. a

t 3-

mon

th in

terv

als

x 3

year

s (S

hort

and

Long

Ter

m)

1. E

xerc

ise

per

form

ance

sco

res

(sel

f-as

sess

men

t)—(S

hort

ter

m)

cont

inue

d o

n p

. 51

1



Fig

ure

3 (c

ont

inue

d).

Ro

ad M

ap t

o P

rep

ared

ness

Eva

luat

ion

Key

Dat

ePr

epar

edne

ss A

ctiv

ityO

utp

uts

Eval

uatio

n M

easu

res

Shor

t-an

d L

ong

-Ter

m O

utco

mes

Com

ple

ted

Iden

tify

pla

ce o

n in

cid

ent

com

man

d c

hart

1. K

now

led

ge

of IC

Sco

ncep

ts2.

Kno

wle

dg

e of

one

’sp

lace

on

ag

ency

’sin

cid

ent

com

man

d c

hart

1, 2

. Pr

e-te

st/P

ost-

test

scor

es1,

2.

Scor

es o

n “P

opq

uizz

es”

1, 2

. Pr

e-te

st/P

ost-

test

sco

res

a. B

efor

e an

d a

fter

initi

al IC

S tr

aini

ng/(

Shor

tTe

rm)

b.

Rep

eat

“pos

t-te

st”

annu

ally

at

one,

tw

o, a

ndth

ree

year

s fo

llow

ing

initi

al IC

S tr

aini

ng/(

Long

term

)1,

2.

Scor

es o

n “P

op Q

uizz

es”

a. A

t 3-

mon

th in

terv

als

follo

win

g in

itial

trai

ning

X 3

yea

rs/(

Shor

t an

d L

ong

Ter

m)

Iden

tify

and

lo

cate

PH

Sem

erg

ency

res

po

nse

pla

n1.

Kno

wle

dg

e2.

Acc

essi

bili

ty o

fre

spon

se p

lan

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-tes

t sc

ores

1. S

core

s on

“p

opq

uizz

es”

2. E

mp

loye

e as

sess

men

tof

acc

essi

bili

ty o

fre

spon

se p

lan

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-tes

t sc

ores

a. B

efor

e an

d a

fter

initi

al t

rain

ing

on

agen

cyre

spon

se p

lan/

(Sho

rt T

erm

)b

. Re

pea

t “p

ost-

test

” an

nual

ly a

t on

e, t

wo,

and

thr

ee y

ear

inte

rval

s fo

llow

ing

initi

altr

aini

ng/(

Long

Ter

m)

1. S

core

s on

“Po

p Q

uizz

es”

a. A

t 3-

mon

th in

terv

als

follo

win

g in

itial

trai

ning

on

emer

gen

cy r

esp

onse

pla

n X

3ye

ars/

(Sho

rt a

nd L

ong

Ter

m)

2. E

mp

loye

e as

sess

men

t of

res

pon

se p

lan

acce

ssib

ility

a. U

pon

com

ple

tion

of in

itial

em

erg

ency

resp

onse

pla

n tr

aini

ng/(

Shor

t Te

rm)

b.

At

annu

al in

terv

als

at o

ne,

two,

and

thr

eeye

ars

follo

win

g c

omp

letio

n of

initi

altr

aini

ng/(

Long

Ter

m)

Att

end

an

agen

cy-

spo

nso

red

lec

ture

on

Per

sona

l an

d F

amily

Em

erg

ency

Pre

par

edne

ss;

then

wri

te o

ut p

erso

nal

fam

ily r

esp

ons

e p

lan

1.K

now

led

ge

of f

amily

pre

par

edne

ss c

once

pts

2.C

onsi

sten

cy o

f fa

mily

resp

onse

pla

n w

ith R

edC

ross

Gui

del

ines

1.Pr

e-te

st/P

ost-

test

sco

res

2.C

omp

atib

ility

with

Red

Cro

ss f

amily

pre

par

edne

ss c

heck

list

1.Pr

e-te

st/P

ost-

test

sco

res

a.B

efor

e an

d a

fter

com

ple

tion

of P

erso

nal/

Fam

ily P

rep

ared

ness

Tra

inin

g/

(Sho

rt T

erm

)b

.Rep

eat

“pos

t-te

st”

annu

ally

at

one,

tw

o,an

d t

hree

yea

r in

terv

als

follo

win

g in

itial

trai

ning

/(Lo

ng T

erm

)2.

Com

pat

ibili

ty w

ith R

ed C

ross

fam

ilyp

rep

ared

ness

che

cklis

ta.

Up

on c

omp

letio

n of

initi

al t

rain

ing

/ (S

hort

Term

)b

. Re

view

ed a

nnua

lly a

t on

e, t

wo,

and

thr

eeye

ars

follo

win

g in

itial

tra

inin

g/

(Lon

g T

erm

)

cont

inue

d o

n p

. 51

2



Fig

ure

3 (c

ont

inue

d).

Ro

ad M

ap t

o P

rep

ared

ness

Eva

luat

ion

Key

Dat

ePr

epar

edne

ss A

ctiv

ityO

utp

uts

Eval

uatio

n M

easu

res

Shor

t-an

d L

ong

-Ter

m O

utco

mes

Com

ple

ted

Dra

w m

ap f

rom

ho

me

toem

erg

ency

ass

ignm

ent

loca

tio

n

1.K

now

led

ge

of h

ome-

to-

wor

k ro

utes

for

emer

gen

cy r

esp

onse

1.Sc

ores

on

“Pop

qui

zzes

”1.

At

thre

e m

onth

inte

rval

s fo

llow

ing

initi

alre

leva

nt t

rain

ing

X 3

yea

rs/

(Sho

r t T

erm

and

Long

Ter

m

Ind

icat

e w

ays

in w

hich

yo

uw

ill b

e no

tifi

ed i

n ev

ent

of

an e

mer

gen

cy

1.K

now

led

ge

ofem

erg

ency

not

ifica

tion

pro

ced

ures

1.Sc

ores

on

“pop

qui

zzes

”1.

Scor

es o

n “p

op q

uizz

es”

a.A

t th

ree-

mon

th in

terv

als

X 3

yea

rsfo

llow

ing

initi

al t

rain

ing

/(Sh

ort

and

Lon

gTe

rm)

Att

end

an

agen

cy-

spo

nso

red

lec

ture

on

Ho

wto

Tal

k to

Peo

ple

ab

out

Dis

aste

rs

1. K

now

led

ge

of r

isk

com

mun

icat

ion

conc

epts

2. T

rain

ing

Eva

luat

ions

3. E

xerc

ise

per

form

ance

1. P

re-t

est/

pos

t-te

stsc

ores

1. S

core

s on

“p

opq

uizz

es”

2. S

tud

ent

eval

uatio

n of

trai

ning

s3.

Exe

rcis

e p

erfo

rman

cese

lf-as

sess

men

t sc

ores

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-Tes

t Sc

ores

a. B

efor

e an

d a

fter

lect

ure

on “

How

to

Talk

to

Peop

le a

bou

t D

isas

ters

”/ (S

hort

Ter

m)

b.

Rep

eat

“pos

t-te

st”

annu

ally

at

one,

tw

o,an

d t

hree

yea

r in

terv

als

follo

win

g in

itial

trai

ning

/(Lo

ng T

erm

)1.

Sco

res

on “

pop

qui

zzes

”a.

At

thre

e m

onth

inte

rval

s X

3 y

ears

fol

low

ing

initi

al le

ctur

e/(S

hort

and

Lon

g T

erm

)2.

Tra

inin

g E

valu

atio

nsa.

Up

on c

omp

letio

n of

tra

inin

g/

(Sho

rt T

erm

)3.

Exe

rcis

e Pe

rfor

man

ce S

core

s (s

elf-

asse

ssm

ent)

a. U

pon

com

ple

tion

of e

xerc

ise/

(Sho

rt T

erm

)

Par

tici

pat

e in

aC

om

mun

icat

ion

Pra

ctic

eSe

ssio

n; d

escr

ibe

your

emer

gen

cyco

mm

unic

atio

n ro

les

1. K

now

led

ge

ofco

mm

unic

atio

n ro

les

2. T

rain

ing

Eva

luat

ions

3. E

xerc

ise

per

form

ance

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-tes

t sc

ores

1. S

core

s on

“p

op q

uizz

es”

2. S

tud

ent

eval

uatio

n of

trai

ning

s3.

Exe

rcis

e p

erfo

rman

cese

lf-as

sess

men

t sc

ores

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-tes

t sc

ores

a. B

efor

e an

d a

fter

initi

al C

omm

unic

atio

nPr

actic

e Se

ssio

nb

. Re

pea

t “p

ost-

test

” an

nual

ly a

t on

e, t

wo,

and

thr

ee y

ear

inte

rval

s fo

llow

ing

initi

altr

aini

ng/(

Long

Ter

m)

1. S

core

s on

“p

op q

uizz

es”

a. A

t th

ree-

mon

th in

terv

als

follo

win

gco

mp

letio

n of

Com

mun

icat

ion

Prac

tice

Sess

ion

x 3

year

s (S

hort

and

Lon

g T

erm

)2.

Tra

inin

g e

valu

atio

nsa.

Up

on c

omp

letio

n of

tra

inin

gs/

(Sho

rt T

erm

)3.

Exe

rcis

e p

erfo

rman

ce s

core

s (s

elf-

asse

ssm

ent)

a. U

pon

com

ple

tion

of e

xerc

ise/

(Sho

rt T

erm

) cont

inue

d o

n p

. 51

3



Fig

ure

3 (c

ont

inue

d).

Ro

ad M

ap t

o P

rep

ared

ness

Eva

luat

ion

Key

Dat

ePr

epar

edne

ss A

ctiv

ityO

utp

uts

Eval

uatio

n M

easu

res

Shor

t-an

d L

ong

-Ter

m O

utco

mes

Com

ple

ted

Par

tici

pat

e in

ag

ency

-led

dis

cuss

ion

on

emer

gen

cyre

cog

niti

on

and

des

crib

eap

pro

pri

ate

acti

ons

1. K

now

led

ge

of h

ow t

ore

cog

nize

em

erg

enci

es2.

Exe

rcis

e Pe

rfor

man

ce

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-tes

t sc

ores

1. S

core

s on

“p

opq

uizz

es”

2. E

xerc

ise

per

form

ance

self-

asse

ssm

ent

scor

es

1. P

re-t

est/

Post

-tes

t sc

ores

a. B

efor

e an

d a

fter

ag

ency

-led

dis

cuss

ion

onem

erg

ency

rec

ogni

tion/

(Sho

rt T

erm

)b

. Re

pea

t “p

ost-

test

” an

nual

ly a

t on

e, t

wo,

and

thr

ee y

ear

inte

rval

s fo

llow

ing

initi

altr

aini

ng/(

Long

Ter

m)

1. S

core

s on

“p

op q

uizz

es”

a.A

t th

ree

mon

th in

terv

als

X 3

yea

rsfo

llow

ing

com

ple

tion

of a

gen

cy-le

dd

iscu

ssio

n on

em

erg

ency

rec

ogni

tion

(Sho

rt a

nd L

ong

Ter

m)

2. E

xerc

ise

per

form

ance

sco

res

(sel

f-as

sess

men

t)/(S

hort

Ter

m)

a. U

pon

com

ple

tion

of e

xerc

ise/

(Sho

rt T

erm

)

Par

tici

pat

e in

an

exer

cise

/tr

aini

ng i

n w

hich

yo

ud

emo

nstr

ate

crea

tive

pro

ble

m s

olv

ing

1.Tr

aini

ng E

valu

atio

ns2.

Exer

cise

per

form

ance

1.St

uden

t ev

alua

tion

oftr

aini

ngs

2.Ex

erci

se p

erfo

rman

cese

lf-as

sess

men

t sc

ores

1.Tr

aini

ng E

valu

atio

nsa.

Up

on c

omp

letio

n of

exe

rcis

e tr

aini

ng/

(Sho

rt T

erm

)2.

Exer

cise

Per

form

ance

Res

ults

(sel

f-as

sess

men

t)a.

Up

on c

omp

letio

n of

exe

rcis

e/(S

hort

Ter

m)

Par

tici

pat

e in

an

agen

cy-

spo

nso

red

exe

rcis

e to

app

ly y

our

kno

wle

dg

e o

fd

isas

ter

pre

par

edne

ss t

o a

real

or

mad

e-up

sce

nari

oan

d t

est

your

per

form

ance

.

1.Tr

aini

ng E

valu

atio

ns2.

Exer

cise

per

form

ance

1.Ex

erci

se p

erfo

rman

cese

lf-as

sess

men

t sc

ores

1.Ex

erci

se P

erfo

rman

ce R

esul

ts (s

elf-

asse

ssm

ent)

a.U

pon

com

ple

tion

of e

xerc

ise/

(Sho

rt T

erm

)



REFERENCES

1. Columbia University School of Nursing Center for Health Policy.Emergency response: core competencies for all public health work-ers (April 2001) [cited 2005 Jun 8]. Available from: URL: http://www.cumc.columbia.edu/dept/nursing/institutes-centers/chphsr/btcomps.pdf

2. Qureshi KA, Merrill JA, Gershon RR, Calero-Breckheimer A. Emer-gency preparedness training for public health nurses: a pilot study.J Urban Health 2002;79(3):415-6.

3. Gullion JS. School nurses as volunteers in a bioterrorism event.Biosecurity and Bioterror 2004;2:112-7.

4. Alexander GC, Wynia MK. Ready and willing? Physicians’ sense ofpreparedness for bioterrorism. Health Aff (Millwood) 2003;22(5):189-97.

5. Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health Preparedness [cited 2004Aug 19]. Available from: URL: http://www.jhsph.edu/preparedness/

6. Pugsley KE, Clayton LH. Traditional lecture or experiential learn-ing: changing student attitudes. J Nurs Educ 2003;42:520-3.

7. Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health. Basic emer-gency preparedness for all public health workers [cited 2005 Jul12]. Available from: URL: http://cds.osr.columbia.edu/bepcourse/test.asp

8. eInstruction Corporation. Classroom Performance System: Version3.5.1.1002. Denton (TX): eInstruction; 2004.

9. SurveyMonkey [cited 2004 Aug 19]. Available from: URL: http://www.surveymonkey.com/

the road map to preparedness: a competency-based approach

Documents