Customizing Casper (Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response) in a Geographically Diverse Oregon County

Monday, June 20, 2016: 10:40 AM
Tubughnenq' 5, Dena'ina Convention Center
Kimberly K Repp , Washington County, Public Health, Hillsboro, OR
Eva C Hawes , Washington County, Hillsboro, OR
Beth A. Vorderstrasse , Washington County, Hillsboro, OR
Sue R. Mohnkern , Washington County, Hillsboro, OR
BACKGROUND:  

In the event of a disaster, communities can conduct a Rapid Needs Assessment (RNA) to gather information about the status of the residents, to determine what supplies are most needed, and to prioritize resources.  However, many communities may not have personnel trained in survey methodology to design appropriate studies that yield valid statistical estimates. To meet this need, the CDC has developed a method called Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) for use by public health professionals in local communities.

CASPER methodology was adapted to fit our local community of Washington County, Oregon, a geographically large and populous county with highly urban and highly rural areas. This preparation was done to prepare for a federal Cascadia Subduction Zone Earthquake exercise response, which will be completed in early June, 2016 with considerable media attention. Historically, our county has attempted a practice implementation of a similar methodology for evaluating health status but the survey methodology was not followed in the field when it became challenging due to geography. Learning from that experience, we fully customized a CASPER addressing all known historical issues, developed just-in-time training, and anticipated logistics for analysis with the goal of an in-the-field response within 72 hours of a disaster. 

METHODS:  

We evaluated the CASPER toolkit provided by the CDC and identified issues in implementing in our community. We then adapted it by creating our own surveys for two different scenarios (post disaster response and disaster preparedness) tailored to our local community. We developed a just in time training for non-epidemiologists who would be administering the surveys in the field. We also altered the selection process of the households for interview based on our unique geographic needs. 

RESULTS:  We identified challenges with the CASPER toolkit methodology and adapted the methodology to fit the unique needs of our community and emergency response staff.

CONCLUSIONS:  

The implementation of the CDC designed CASPER toolkit in a county that is both highly urban and highly rural presented many challenges and learning opportunities for other health departments attempting to implement a CASPER. The CASPER toolkit provides basics of sampling methodology, but it is very valuable to prepare, customize, and exercise a CASPER to identify the unique needs of a particular community prior to administering it, particularly after a disaster event.