Jenifer RhoadesMES-EC

October 18, 2011

AgendaOverviewBaseline Survey ResultsProposal for Future TrackingNext Steps

2

OverviewNTHMP Strategic Plan mandated baseline

measures would be determined for 9 specific metrics

Fall 2010 – Survey conducted to create baselinesMay 2011 – Survey Results Report FinalizedSeptember 2011 – MES-EC Sub-Team formed

Determine baselines Propose annual update methodology

October 2011 – Presented to MES-EC February 2012 – Present to NTHMP-CC

3

Baseline Survey Results

Reviewed Survey Results to establish baseline metrics starting in 2010529 communities targeted155 responded

Results displayed Total number for the NTHMP Metric

Survey question referencedTotal number of responses by StateAdditional relevant survey results included

4

Metric 1: Increase percentages of communities in tsunami-threatened areas which include tsunamis in their emergency response plan by 30% annually (SIIIQ1)

Survey Result = 13.8% in 201070% (N = 73) indicated they have a completed

plan16% (N = 17) are in the development stage of

developing a plan11% (N=11) have intentions to develop a plan4% (N = 4) do not have and do not plan to

develop a plan

5

Metric 1: Increase percentages of communities in tsunami-threatened areas which include tsunamis in their emergency response plan by 30% annually (SIIIQ1)

State Results (Number)Alaska 7 New Hampshire 1Alabama 1 New Jersey 1California 29 Oregon 4Delaware 1 Puerto Rico 2Georgia 1 Texas 2Hawaii 3 Washington 18Maine 1

6

Metric 2: Annually update the number of tsunami threatened communities which include tsunami in their hazard mitigation plan (SVQ1 and SVQ4)

Survey Result = 16% for FY201087 reported their communities have hazard

mitigation plans that include tsunami response16 indicated they have initiated planning16 indicated they plan to start drafting a plan13 do not plan to develop a plan

7

Metric 2: Annually update the number of tsunami threatened communities which include tsunami in their hazard mitigation plan (SVQ1 and SVQ4)

State Results (Number)Alaska 7 New Jersey 1California 25 Oregon 4Georgia 1 South Carolina 1Guam 1 Texas 3Hawaii 5 Virginia 2New Hampshire 1 Washington 21

8

Metric 3: Increase the number of tsunami evacuation maps by 10% of the 2010 Baseline (SIIQ5)

55 reported their communities have published and disseminated evacuation route maps that direct residents/visitors to tsunami safe areas.

9

Metric 3: Increase the number of tsunami evacuation maps by 10% of the 2010 Baseline (SIIQ5)

State Results (Number)Alaska 5 New Jersey 1Alabama 1 Oregon 5California 18 Puerto Rico 3Delaware 1 South Carolina 2Georgia 1 Texas 2Hawaii 2 Virginia 1

Washington 13

10

Metric 4: Annually update the number of communities that include tsunami in their community planning, zoning and building code deliberations from the 2010 Baseline (SIQ9)

108 reported their communities include tsunami in their community planning activities

47 reported their communities do not include tsunami in their community planning activities

11

Metric 4: Annually update the number of communities that include tsunami in their community planning, zoning and building code deliberations from the 2010 Baseline (SIQ9)

State Results (Number)Alaska 11 New Hampshire 1Alabama 2 New Jersey 1California 43 Oregon 4Delaware 2 Puerto Rico 3Georgia 1 South Carolina 3Guam 1 Texas 5Hawaii 3 Virginia 1Maryland 1 Washington 24Maine 1

12

Metric 5: Increase percentage of states and local community conducted educational tsunami events by 10% annually (SIIQ3_cb_3 and SII3_cb_8)

Survey Result = 17.4% in 201058% (N = 92) utilize public workshops, meetings,

schools and/or seminars to promote tsunami education

Responses including mailings, newspaper, literature displays, kiosks, telephone books and signage were not included.

13

Metric 5: Increase percentage of states and local community conducted educational tsunami events by 10% annually (SIIQ3_cb_3 and SII3_cb_8)

State Results (Number)Alaska 9 New Hampshire 1Alabama 2 New Jersey 1California 31 Oregon 3Delaware 3 Puerto Rico 6Georgia 1 South Carolina 2Guam 2 Texas 2Hawaii 3 Virginia 1Maryland 1 Washington 23

14

Metric 6 (MMS): Complete inundation maps for all threatened communities in Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and U.S. Virgin Islands by 2013 (SIIIQ7, SIIIQ8_cb_2, and SIIIQ9_cb_1 - 5)

Survey did not specifically as if the community had a completed inundation map.83 reported their organization has used or will use

inundation maps in their tsunami planning58 reported the most common source of the

inundation maps they use for tsunami planning is a state agency

15

Metric 6 (MMS): Complete inundation maps for all threatened communities in Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and U.S. Virgin Islands by 2013

State Results (Number) – Need to establishCaliforniaHawaii OregonPuerto RicoWashingtonU.S. Virgin Islands

16

Metric 7 (MMS): Complete inundation maps for 33% of threatened communities in Alaska, the U.S. Pacific Island Territories, and U.S. East and Gulf Coast States by 2013

Survey did not specifically as if the community had a completed inundation map.Alaska ?Guam ?CNMI ?American Samoa ?

17

Metric 8 (WCS): Annually increase local warning dissemination capabilities by 10%, based on baseline established in 2010 (SVIQ1 and SVIQ2_cb_1-5_other)

51 reported their organization does not have tsunami signaling devices or sirens 0r use existing signaling devices for tsunami warnings. Of those:The majority (70%, N = 35) reported they did not

feel signaling devices were need, and30% (N = 15) reported that signaling devices are

too expensive

18

Metric 8 (WCS): Annually increase local warning point dissemination capabilities by 10%, based on baseline established in 2010 (SVIQ1)

State Results (Number) – Yes ResponsesAlaska 8 New Hampshire 1Alabama 2 New Jersey 1California 9 Oregon

4Delaware 1 Puerto Rico 2Hawaii 3 Washington 12

19

Metric 9 (WCS): Annually increase local warning point reception capabilities by 10%, based on baseline established in 2010

No specific question asked in the survey to determine the baseline.

20

Proposal for Future TrackingValidate/Amend Results

Low response rateState Partners will update MES-EC selected metric

data through 2010 by November 30, 2011Amended metrics will become the Baseline Metrics

Annual Metric UpdateWashington State will coordinate annual State

Partner surveyAnnual Meeting: Sub-Committee Co-Chairs will

provide updates on annual metrics at Annual NTHMP Meeting

Metric data will be posted on NTHMP Website21

Next StepsCoordinate with other Sub-Committee Co-

Chairs and gain their approval of this proposal

Validate/Amend FY10 ResultsPresent Findings and Proposal to NTHMP-CC

22