1 / 22

Key Elements and Issues in AT Reuse as a Component in Emergency Management

Sara Sack, Ph.D. Assistive Technology for Kansans. Key Elements and Issues in AT Reuse as a Component in Emergency Management. National Summit on Emergency Management and Assistive Technology Reutilization February 23-24, 2010. Sharing the Experiences of One State.

rylee-whitehead
Download Presentation

Key Elements and Issues in AT Reuse as a Component in Emergency Management

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. Sara Sack, Ph.D. Assistive Technology for Kansans Key Elements and Issues in AT Reuse as a Component in Emergency Management National Summit on Emergency Management and Assistive Technology Reutilization February 23-24, 2010

  2. Sharing the Experiences of One State • ATK is the Statewide AT Program for Kansas • ATK’s goal was to become a part of our state’s emergency management plan • Small N to date: Experience in responding to 7 disasters (1 Level 5 tornado, 2 Level 3 tornadoes, 1 fire, and 3 floods)

  3. Getting Prepared to Participate in Emergency Management Planning • ATK had much to contribute but wasn’t “ready” to participate • Needed to learn from the experts • Needed the experience of preparing as an organization and as an individual • Needed to conduct a program analysis to determine what we had to contribute and how we could manage these resources

  4. What Could Our Program Contribute to Disaster Planning and Response? • Knowledge about assistive technology, durable medical equipment, and disability • Direct source of equipment for shelters and individuals • Indirect source of equipment—we know who else has equipment in the state (vendors, loan closets, etc.) • Statewide presence and connections

  5. What Could Our Program Contribute to Disaster Planning and Response? — cont. • System already in place for moving equipment • Connected to the national AT/DME reutilization network to respond to large disasters

  6. What Equipment Could Our Program Provide? • What inventory would we have ready to deploy? • All categories of AT/DME collected within our reutilization program • How would we know what equipment we had at any given point in time? • Real time online equipment inventory (hosted out of state and backed up daily) • Where would the equipment be located? • At 6 AT Access Sites located across the state

  7. Equipment: Continued • How quickly could we reasonably collect the equipment? • 24 hours • What additional equipment might be available? • Network of 31 loan closets across the state. Know general categories of equipment that they have and ATK has a disaster response plan in place with them.

  8. Equipment: Continued • How could we get the equipment to the disaster site? • Use the delivery system of our Reutilization Program, coordinate with Red Cross, use commercial carriers (Over-the-road carriers, UPS, Fed Ex, etc.)

  9. How Could We Match Equipment to The Individual’s Needs? • How do others know what we have and how do we know what individuals need? • View on-line inventory or share PDF of available equipment pulled from on-line inventory • Obtain equipment needed list from SRS services, Red Cross, and other coordinating entities

  10. Matching Equipment: Continued • How can agencies share this information without violating Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)? • Reutilization program has a Business Associate Agreement with state agency and is bound by regulations and protection standards • Individual can authorize the sharing of needed information

  11. Matching Equipment: Continued • Who assumes responsibility for matching equipment and arranging for transportation? • Follow chain of command: Reutilization Coordinator, if unavailable then Program Director, management staff, AT Access Site Reutilization Coordinator from unaffected area

  12. How Do We Budget for Disaster Response? • Who pays for transportation of equipment? • No good answer • To date we have used volunteers and associated staff to transport equipment within the state • When expenses were incurred, billed as reutilization program expenses but not sustainable

  13. What Did We Learn From Responding to Seven Disasters? • What is the scope? • Will individuals be in the area or will they be scattered to various shelters, relatives, etc? • What specific equipment is needed and how do you know? • Used lists and when people were dispersed ran Public Service Announcements (PSAs) to locate persons who needed technology • What sources of equipment are nearby?

  14. What Did We Learn From Responding to Seven Disasters? — continued • Where should the equipment go? • Learned that access to the area will be controlled and that the number of entries would be limited • How can we get the equipment there? • Who will be onsite to help with reassignment of the equipment? • Who will receive and sign for the equipment?

  15. Summary • Statewide AT program and reutilization program staff have knowledge about AT/DME and disability • Reutilization programs may have access to lightly used, high quality assistive technology and DME • Programs may need assistance with inventory tracking to respond rapidly • Programs have connections within their states but would need to expand partnerships to respond in a comprehensive manner

  16. Summary: Continued • Programs currently have a plan for moving equipment but would need assistance and further development to respond rapidly • Responding to disasters beyond the state/territory boundaries presents additional challenges

  17. Questions? • Contact information: • Sara Sack, Ph.D. Senior Professor, University of Kansas Director, Assistive Technology for Kansans 2601 Gabriel Ave. Parsons, KS 67357 620-421-8367 ssack@ku.edu

  18. Response In the Real WorldGeorge Heake • National Response Framework(http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/) • The National Response Framework presents the guiding principles that enable all response partners to prepare for and provide a unified national response to disasters and emergencies – from the smallest incident to the largest catastrophe. The Framework establishes a comprehensive, national, all-hazards approach to domestic incident response.

  19. Response In the Real World • Emergency Support Functions • ESF 1-TransportationESF 2-CommunicationsESF 3-Public WorksESF 4-FirefightingESF 5-Information and PlanningESF 6-Mass CareESF 7-Resource SupportESF 8-Health and MedicalESF 9-Search and Rescue

  20. Response In the Real World • Emergency Support Functions • ESF 10-Hazardous MaterialsESF 11-Food and WaterESF 12-EnergyESF 13-Military SupportESF 14-Public InformationESF 15-Volunteers and DonationsESF 16-Law EnforcementESF 17-Animal Services

  21. Response In the Real World • Where do AT, AT Reuse and other related organizations fit in? • University Centers of Excellence, DD Councils, Disability Rights Networks etc. • They must be considered as in-kind agencies and included in the National Response Framework and the Long Term Recovery Plan. • Response cannot be added onto existing responsibilities without additional funding.

More Related