Community Information and Warning...
118
Community Information and Warning System The Report of the Trial and Evaluation WIT.005.001.0833
Transcript of Community Information and Warning...
Community Information and Warning System
The Report of the Trial and Evaluation
WIT.005.001.0833
1
Foreword
The evaluation report of the Community Information and Warning System trial marks a milestone in what has been the most comprehensive study of community warning ever undertaken in Australia.
The report recognises the very complex issue of providing timely warnings and information to the public during an emergency, and confi rms the importance of having effective and timely warning systems in place as part of Victoria’s emergency management arrangements.
The primary benefi t of any community information and warning system is a better informed community, one which is more capable of responding appropriately and safely to an emergency. Communities today should be confi dent, educated and informed about emergency situations that might affect them. This awareness will foster the development of decision making processes that allow individuals to identify the best possible course of action to protect their own safety and that of others.
Effective communication can save lives and property, alleviate panic and anxiety, and help people take charge in the face of uncertainty. It is important to recognise that communication is not just about what to do during an emergency, but can also provide re-assurance when there is nothing to worry about.
Victoria’s emergency management arrangements are robust, and public warning system processes are already in place, but no single warning system can ever be one hundred percent guaranteed. Technology is only as good as its ability to operate on the day, and therefore the community should not rely on one formal warning but should have multiple ways of accessing time critical emergency information.
The Community Information and Warning System is perhaps best described as ‘another tool in the toolkit for the emergency services’. It is another component in an overall approach towards community safety in Victoria. I would like to acknowledge the collaboration and commitment that has gone into this project with the state’s police, emergency services, local and state government representatives, ABC Radio and members of the media all working in partnership in an attempt to identify ways in which to further enhance community safety outcomes. Particularly I would like to thank Telstra for approaching the state government with the idea and for their ongoing commitment to progress the project to a successful outcome for all involved.
The process of researching, conducting and evaluating the outcomes of this trial has been extremely thorough and rigorous, providing a reliable base from which to progress into the future. I look forward to the parties involved in the Community Information and Warning System progressing this initiative in the best interests of the Victorian community.
Bruce EsplinEmergency Services Commissioner
WIT.005.001.0834
2
Acknowledgments
CIWS Project Steering Committee – organisation representation:The Offi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner (OESC)
Telstra
Department of Sustainability and Environment – Spatial Information Infrastructure
Victoria Police
Bureau of Emergency Service Telecommunications (BEST)
Australian Broadcasting Corporation – Victorian ABC Radio Network
Shire of Northern Grampians
Shire of Yarra Ranges
CIWS Data Transfer Sub-group – organisation representation:Victoria Police
Telstra
OESC
CFA
VICSES
MFESB
BEST
DSE-SII
The CIWS Project Steering Committee wishes to acknowledge the contribution of the residents and community organisations from Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap who actively participated throughout the CIWS trial and evaluation process.
The CIWS Trial and Evaluation Project acknowledge the specifi c contributions of:
Mr. Tony Pearce, OESC
Mr. Graham Dwyer, OESC
Ms. Loriana Bethune, OESC
Ms. Robyn Betts, OESC
Ms. Amber Johnston, OESC
Ms. Julie McLean, OESC
Mr. Bernie Sydenham, Telstra Corporation
Mr. Eddie Traecey, Telstra Corporation
Mr. Ian Mannix, ABC Radio Network
Mr. Peter Mosley, DSE
Mr. John Simmons, BEST
Mr. Glen Hunt, Shire of Yarra Ranges
Superintendent Murray Adams, Victoria Police (retired)
This report was prepared by the Offi ce of the Emergency Service Commissioner, Department of Justice, Victorian Government.
Please send comments and enquiries to:
Ms. Robyn Betts, Manager, Research Projects Unit
Offi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner
Level 23, 121 Exhibition Street, Melbourne
GPO Box 4356
Melbourne Victoria 3001
© Department of Justice, 2006
ISBN 1921028319Authorised by the Victorian Government, Melbourne
Design and Publication by Millott & Mackness 279a Clarendon St, South Melbourne, Vic 3205
Ackn
owle
dgm
ents
2
WIT.005.001.0835
ContentsAcknowledgments 2Executive Summary 7
The CIWS Trial – Partnerships and process 7CIWS Trial and Evaluation goals 8CIWS evaluation methodology 8The infl uence of CIWS on public safety 8The CIWS, IPND and community privacy 8Incorporating the ABC network as the CIWS secondary information source 9The CIWS and communication needs of marginalised communities 9The CIWS as a combination of technology organisation and social factors 9
Introduction: Community Information and Warning System Trial and Evaluation 10 Introduction 10Public warning and community safety 10Project background 10Processes 11Proof of concept technology 12Evaluation purpose and methodology 13Conclusion 13
Section 1: Literature Review 14Introduction 14Risk communication and international emergencies 14Research in Victoria 15Involving the community 15Rationale 16The challenges 16Telephone alert systems 16The principles 17The aims 18Information technology and community warning 18A collection of activities 18Conclusion 19
Section 2: Technology 20Introduction 20Functional Blocks of CIWS Trial and Evaluation 20CIWS technology framework 21
Geo-code and database layer 22ESO GIS application access layer 23CIWS application layer 24Message delivery layer 25
CIWS technology design: challenges from the Trial 25Conclusion 26
Section 3: Trial and Evaluation Methodology 28Introduction 28Trial and evaluation methodology 28
Component 1: Stakeholder relationship development 28Component 2: Community consultation in Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap 29Component 3: Culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) and hearing impaired forums 30Component 4: Social science research methods for evaluation 30
Research methodolgy: outcomes 32Conclusion 32
3
WIT.005.001.0836
Section 4: Case Studies of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap – Preliminary research and fi ndings from the pre-trial survey 33
Introduction 33 Township selection criteria 33CIWS pre-trial questionnaire 34Case study 1: Mount Evelyn 34Case study 2: Stawell 35Case study 3: Halls Gap 36Conclusion 36
Section 5: Evaluation Findings – Log Booklet and Telephone Interview Results 37Introduction 37Consulting with marginalised community 37
CALD community consultation 37Hearing and speech impaired community consultation 38
Post trial community meetings 39Refl ections from interstate and Victorian emergency services 41Log-booklet surveys – postcards 43
Message reception 44How people received the message 45Time message was received 46Message understanding 47Entire message heard 48Convenient source of information 49Accessing further information 50Codeword recorded 51
Post-trial telephone survey – fi ndings 52Receiving message via telephone 53Information within the message 53Sources of information 55Waking telephone behaviour 56Telephone keypad functions 56Technology problems 57Hoax calls 58Impact of CIWS on attitude to emergencies 60
Conclusion 61Section 6: CIWS Program Logic Model 62
Introduction 62Development of the model 62Conclusions 70
Section 7: Analysis, Issues and Learnings for Future Consideration 71Introduction 71Social issues 71Technological issues 74Organisational issues 75Conclusions 77Learnings 78
4
WIT.005.001.0837
Appendices 79Appendix 1: CIWS invitation letter and consent form 79
Appendix 2: CIWS webpage 81
Appendix 3: Pre-trial questionnaire 83
Appendix 4: Observer questionnaire 91
Appendix 5: Community update letter 94
Appendix 6: Post-trial telephone interview 95
Appendix 7: Overall telephone survey 96
Appendix 8: CIWS – case study, pre-trial questionnaire statistics 102
Appendix 9: Emergency Service Field Offi cer PDA: CIWS operating procedures 111
Bibliography 114
List of FiguresFigure 1: Proof of concept map 11
Figure 2: Functional blocks of CIWS Trial and Evaluation 20
Figure 3: CIWS layers 21
Figure 4: CIWS telephone message logic model 24
Figure 5: CIWS message construct 27
Figure 6: Number of postcards returned 43
Figure 7: Message received Yarra Ranges 44
Figure 8 Message received Northern Grampians 44
Figure 9: How did you receive the message? Yarra Ranges 45
Figure 10: How did you receive the message? Northern Grampians 45
Figure 11: Time of message? Yarra Ranges 46
Figure 12: Time of message? Northern Grampians 46
Figure 13: Message understanding. Yarra Ranges 47
Figure 14: Message understanding. Northern Grampians 47
Figure 15: Entire message heard? Yarra Ranges 48
Figure 16: Entire message heard? Northern Grampians. 48
Figure 17: Sources of information most convenient: Yarra Ranges 49
Figure 18: Sources of information most convenient: Northern Grampians 49
Figure 19: Did you access further information? Yarra Ranges 50
Figure 20: Did you access further information? Northern Grampians 50
Figure 21: Remember code word: Yarra Ranges 51
Figure 22: Remember code word: Northern Grampians 51
Figure 23: Program logic Diagram 1 67
Figure 24: Program logic Diagram 2 68
Figure 25: Program logic Diagram 3 69
5
WIT.005.001.0838
TablesTable 1: Receiving message via telephone 53Table 2: Information within the message 53 Table 3: Information could do without 53Table 4: Expected information 54Table 5: Information making you feel less safe 54Table 6: Primary source of information 55Table 7: Reasons for using the source 55Table 8: Diffi culties accessing information 55Table 9: Waking telephone behaviour 56Table 10: Waking behaviour 56Table 11: Telephone keypad functions 56Table 12: Importance of the star key 57Table 13: Familiarity with telephone keys 57Table 14: Initial response to technology problem 57Table 15: Secondary response to technology problem 57Table 16: Usefulness of aged warning 58Table 17: Hoax calls 58Table 18: Reassuring the public that calls are genuine 58Table 19: Acceptability of telephone warning 59Table 20: Improvements to the service 59Table 21: Managing unanswered telephone messages when away most of the day 60Table 22: Messages when away for a short period 60Table 23: Impact of CIWS on attitude to emergencies 60Table 24: How attitude to emergencies has changed 60Table 25: Information to be better informed 61Table 26: CIWS community components 64Table 27: CIWS data transfer components 65Table 28: CIWS evaluation components 66
List of Acronyms ABC – Australian Broadcasting Corporation ABS – Australian Bureau of Statistics ACMA – Australian Communication and Media Authority ACIF – Australian Communication Industry Forum AMES – Adult Multicultural Education Service AT – Activity TheoryCALD – Culturally and Linguistically DiverseCDMA – Code Division Multiple AccessCFA – Country Fire Authority CIWS – Community Information and Warning SystemDHS – Department of Human ServicesDSE – Department of Sustainability and EnvironmentDSE, SII – Department of Sustainability and Environment, Spatial Information InfrastructureDTSG – Data Transfer Sub-GroupEMA – Emergency Management Australia ESS – Enterprise Speech Service GIS – Geographical Information System GPS – Global Positioning SystemIPND – Integrated Public Number DatabaseIVR – Interactive Voice ResponseMFESB – Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services BoardOESC – Offi ce of the Emergency Services CommissionerPSTN – Public Switched Telephone NetworkSERO – State Emergency Response Offi cer SEWS – Standard Emergency Warning SignalTAFE – Technical and Further EducationTTY – Telephone TypewriterVICSES – Victoria State Emergency Service
6
WIT.005.001.0839
Executive Summary
The CIWS Trial has been the fi rst opportunity in Victoria to comprehensively evaluate the responses and behaviour of communities to a public emergency warning system which integrates innovative telecommunication and data transfer technology with the public warning procedures and GIS mapping operations of Victoria’s emergency services.
The fi ndings of the evaluation concluded that for community warning systems such as the CIWS to be effective, the following elements were required:
• Telecommunication and geo-spatial technology needs to be seamlessly integrated within the operations of emergency service organisations and to be incorporated as a component of state and national emergency management arrangements.
• The emergency services’ knowledge of community engagement, culture and demographics and public safety principles needs to be included within their community warning communication procedures and decision making.
• The development and delivery of a public safety awareness campaign must enable individuals and communities to understand the purpose of community warning and information procedures and the means to access emergency and safety information. This will reinforce the public safety messages advocated by Victoria’ emergency services.
The CIWS Trial – partnerships and processThe Offi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner (OESC), in partnership with Telstra, ABC Radio, DSE, Victoria’s emergency services and the Shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians and their respective communities, trialled and evaluated the effectiveness of innovative spatial and telecommunications technology.
The trial was designed to incorporate Victoria’s emergency management arrangements and to deliver timely public warning information simultaneously to large numbers of households and businesses.
This spatial and telecommunications technology became known and referred to as the Community Information and Warning System (CIWS).
The CIWS Trial and Evaluation project commenced in October 2004, with the establishment of the steering group and the development of the trial’s parameters and proof of concept technology. As the project gained momentum, the Victorian emergency services including the Country Fire Authority, Victoria State Emergency Service, Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services Board and the Department of Human Services were requested by the steering group to form a Data Transfer Sub-Group. This sub-group worked to enable the trial to set-up and test enhanced data transfer capability for downloading images and mapping. It was intended that this data could be transmitted between notional in-fi eld Incident Controllers and an Emergency Operations Centre.
The trial and evaluation developed over the following six months with the project being offi cially launched in May 2005 and monthly ‘emergency’ telephone messages being delivered to the 664 participating residents of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap, from May through to September 2005. The evaluation process continued throughout the trial, with all data collected by November 2005.
It is important to note that the CIWS Trial and Evaluation was completed prior to the Mount Lubra wildfi re which occurred in January 2006 and which directly threatened residents from both Halls Gap and Stawell.
7
WIT.005.001.0840
CIWS Trial and Evaluation GoalsThe key goals for this CIWS Trial and Evaluation were
• to confi rm the knowledge about the effectiveness of public warning information technology and its links to public safety and
• to integrate the ABC Radio network as the trial’s major secondary information source in order to exercise Victoria’s ABC Radio and Emergency Services Memorandum of Understanding developed in 2005.
CIWS evaluation methodologyThe research fi ndings from the community components of the evaluation methodology, the semi-structured interviews with the emergency services and the observations of the trial provided a robust base of evidence for the design of a Program Logic Model and the conclusions drawn from the evaluation’s fi ndings. The Program Logic Model has been an innovative and major output of the project’s evaluation and was developed to map the application of the CIWS technology and to integrate this map with operational response decisions about risk communication and community behaviour.
The conclusions from the evaluation fi ndings discuss public safety decisions and behaviour and the CIWS activation. The fi ndings have identifi ed a combination of elements which are likely to contribute to the effectiveness of a telecommunication system of public warning communication.
The infl uence of CIWS on public safety The CIWS evaluation fi ndings concluded that:
• When people have a level of planning and preparedness knowledge about emergency events, combined with a realistic perception of their risk and a multi-faceted communication network, then a telephone emergency warning message is more likely to trigger appropriate decisions and behaviours, the results of which are likely to increase their safety and confi rm their self-reliance to be prepared.
• If a telephone ‘warning’ message is only partially heard, its value for an informed and prepared community would still be high because it represented only one source of trusted information and planning within that community’s total approach to information and community safety preparedness.
• People with limited understanding and awareness of their emergency risk and community safety, and who had not considered preparation and planning for emergency events, were consequently more likely to be wholly dependent on a telephone emergency warning message to determine their subsequent responses and behaviours.
• Consequently, in these situations, rather than triggering increased self reliance and informed decision making, the telephone message is more likely to become a source of information which could increase their uncertainty, lack of preparedness and reduce their ability to contribute to having a shared responsibility of safety with the emergency service organisations.
The CIWS, IPND and community privacyThe CIWS Proof of Concept model was set up to enable development of the telephone and property database from IPND (Integrated Public Number Database) data. Currently however, the IPND licensing agreement on data security prohibits the implementation of this component and consequently Telstra was not permitted to use the IPND database for the trial. Instead the CIWS Trial sought the participating residents’ permission to use their telephone numbers and property addresses for the development of the CIWS Trial database.
The participating residents’ expectation about the protection of personal information by government and organisations was based on trust and agreed rules about how their personal information would be accessed and used.
If the CIWS were to operate as a national or state-wide system using the IPND rather than asking residents to opt-in to supply their names and addresses, then the development of such a system would require security and privacy protocols, the ability for emergency service agencies to identify themselves as part of these protocols and the support of a public awareness and education program.
8
Exec
utiv
e Su
mm
ary
WIT.005.001.0841
Exec
utiv
e Su
mm
aryIncorporating the ABC Radio network as
the CIWS secondary information sourceThe ABC Radio network was successfully used as the major secondary information source which participating residents were encouraged to access following delivery of the CIWS trial’s automated telephone messages. The progressive development of public emergency warning information systems and, in particular, the use of Victoria’s ABC Radio and Emergency Services Memorandum of Understanding will continue to develop the predictability of a communication system which people will expect in order to access emergency information and to make decisions about their safety.
The CIWS and the communication needs of marginalised communitiesThe analysis of the information gained from the consultation and workshops with both cultural and linguistically diverse communities (CALD) and hearing impaired people from a Vic Deaf social group provided the CIWS Trial and Evaluation with a set of provisional principles which could be incorporated into the future development and implementation of public warning communication systems.
• The delivery of automated telephone messaging to communities which include hearing impaired and CALD groups must provide for their ability to receive and understand the message communicated by the telephone call.
• The secondary information sources incorporated into a CIWS communication process need to be diverse in order to address the communication requirements of marginalised and special needs sectors of the community.
• The evaluation of the CIWS Trial established the importance of further consultation and research to confi rm the communication and information needs of culturally and linguistically diverse communities and of people who have impaired hearing.
The CIWS as a combination of technology organisational and social factorsThe CIWS evaluation fi ndings and the conclusions have demonstrated the relationship between the CIWS technology and human factors. The Program Logic Model has highlighted the importance of emergency services’ decision-making processes to activate the CIWS in order to disseminate telephone messages to the public. The introduction of the Program Logic Model has, for the fi rst time, identifi ed the procedures, decisions and context necessary for the design and implementation of a technologically based and integrated public emergency information and warning system.
The evaluation’s conclusions clearly found that the effectiveness (perceptions of increased public safety) of public information and warning system design and delivery is linked to the incorporation of knowledge by emergency services personnel about a community’s culture and their level of risk awareness and preparedness. This knowledge needs to become an essential component within the organisational processes of public risk communication.
The CIWS Trial and Evaluation has made an important contribution to the importance of risk communication, public warning technology design and future decisions about the incorporation of such technology systems into state and national emergency management arrangements.
The rigorous implementation of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation can provide the emergency management sector with the confi dence to continue developing integrated public warning systems which incorporate telecommunication technology, public safety and public risk communication procedures.
9
WIT.005.001.0842
IntroductionThis introduction to the Community Information and Warning System (CIWS) Trial and Evaluation describes the importance of public warnings to community safety and defi nes the types of emergency events which may necessitate a CIWS.
It presents an overview of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation, its key technology and social components and a concept map description. The introduction concludes with an explanation of the evaluation methodology which is used to assess the capacity and capability of the trialled CIWS to issue warnings to communities in a defi ned geographic location.
Public warning and community safetyEmergency events can pose risks to human life, property and the environment and result in signifi cant socio-economic impacts.
Emergency risk management knowledge stresses the importance of issuing timely, accurate and relevant information and warnings to the public.
Victoria’s emergency management arrangements state that warnings should be used under specifi c circumstances where community action is necessary to protect lives, property and the environment (Sec 3.4, Victorian Emergency Management Manual, 2005).
Research exploring the impact of emergency events has found that robust partnerships need to be developed across and between emergency service organisations, state and local governments, community business and residents to harness local knowledge and ensure that safety and mitigation strategies are relevant.
The reviews of national and international emergencies have highlighted the important place of early warning systems in emergency management arrangements and the changing culture of public expectations.
Research into fl ood warning systems confi rms the advantages of providing the public with warning information as part of a process to share the responsibility of risk. Warnings reinforce the importance of emergency preparedness as well as being an element of emergency response (Betts 2002).
Effective public warning dissemination enables residents and business owners to make informed decisions about their safety and preparedness.
The ability to simultaneously telephone all properties within a defi ned geographical area could ease the logistical problems for police and emergency services needing to provide timely information to a targeted cluster of people in an emergency incident.
The CIWS Trial and Evaluation tested precisely that scenario.
Project backgroundRecognising the importance of building effective community safety strategies, the Offi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner (OESC) worked with Telstra, local communities and emergency management organisations to examine the effectiveness of available spatial and telecommunications technology to deliver public warning and information using the context of Victoria’s emergency management arrangements.
These spatial and telecommunications technologies became known and referred to as the Community Information and Warning System (CIWS) and are the subject of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation project.
10
IntroductionCommunity Information and Warning System Trial Evaluation
WIT.005.001.0843
Processes Following a presentation by Telstra to the Victorian Central Government Response Committee, the OESC began working with Victoria Police, the Department of Sustainability and Environment, ABC Radio and Telstra to trial and evaluate the CIWS.
The CIWS Trial and Evaluation project commenced in October 2004 with the establishment of the steering group and initial development of the trial’s parameters and proof of concept technology. The trial and evaluation developed over the following six months with the project being offi cially launched in May 2005 and an ‘emergency’ telephone message being delivered monthly to the participating residents from May through to September 2005 (a total of six messages were delivered to the participating residents from all three townships). The evaluation continued throughout the trial, with all data collected by November 2005.
In January 2005 the Shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians were invited to join this group
of stakeholders to provide local knowledge, expertise and access to the populations from the townships of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap. These stakeholders became collectively known as the CIWS Steering Group.
As the project gained momentum, the Victoria’s emergency services including the Country Fire Authority, Victoria State Emergency Service, Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services Board and the Department of Human Services were requested by the steering group to form a Data Transfer Sub-Group.
This sub-group worked with Telstra to set-up and test enhanced data transfer capability for downloading images and mapping. It was intended that this data could be transmitted between notional in-fi eld Incident Controllers and an Emergency Operations Centre established at the Telstra Innovation Centre. Figure 1 highlights the proof of concept process of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation with the identifi cation of the major components.
Implications for Community Implications for Technology
Implications for Local Government Implications for Emergency Services
Case Studies of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap containing: Key findings from all trial data sources
Figure 1: Proof of Concept Map
Intro
duct
ion
11
WIT.005.001.0844
The social and technological components associated with the CIWS Trial are as follows:
• Technology Component Part One: The CIWS technology would provide people in Mount Evelyn in the Shire of Yarra Ranges and Stawell and Halls Gap in the Shire of Northern Grampians with an automated information and warning message.
• Social Component Part One: It was necessary to identify and engage with the township communities and encourage them to take part in the trial by volunteering details of their property address and telephone contact information. This information was then geo-coded and used within the technology system to deliver community information and warning messages as part of the trial.
• Technology Component Part Two: The transfer of imagery, mapping and other spatial data between notional in-fi eld emergency sites and emergency operations centres using Telstra technology included providing visual data which tracked the status of the telephone calls and messages delivered to each property.
• Social Component Part Two: This incorporated the input from emergency services, the Shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians, consultation meetings and a pre-trial survey to develop the scenarios, messages and secondary information sources to be used during the trial.
Proof of concept technologyThe purpose of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation was to test the capacity of the CIWS technology to defi ne a geographic area that may be at risk and then send an automated telephone message to every fi xed landline within that area in the shortest time possible.
A further component of the trial involved Telstra working with Victoria’s emergency services to test the ability to transfer spatial data and imagery as part of a public warning system.
The trial also tested the capacity of the CIWS technology to provide status reports of all sent telephone calls, and the property addresses.
The report included graphic details about the address where the call:
• was directly received
• transferred to an answering machine
• connected but was not answered
• could not connect.
These reports were made available in written and map format, enabling emergency service personnel to consider subsequent directions for the emergency response operations.
The trial also tested a Memorandum of Understanding signed in 2005 by the OESC on behalf of Victoria’s emergency services, the Bureau of Meteorology and ABC radio. After each trial message was sent, the ABC radio network broadcast information messages to the townships involved in the trial.
A community consultation underpinned the trial’s technological process. Three townships were selected as the sites to trial the CIWS: Mount Evelyn in the Shire of Yarra Ranges and Stawell and Halls Gap in the Shire of Northern Grampians.
Before the trial began, the OESC visited and consulted with both municipalities to encourage residents to take part in the trial by volunteering their name, address and telephone number. These personal details were then registered as a database through a geo-coding procedure and used to target and deliver the warning and information messages.
The shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians worked with OESC to ensure that people were informed about their participation and the subsequent activities which would be included in both the trial and evaluation of the CIWS.
The residents who opted-in to the trial were issued with a pre-trial survey which explored their:
• baseline understanding of risk awareness and safety planning
• knowledge and awareness of risk communication and
• expectations of receiving emergency warning information.
The results of the pre-trial survey enabled the steering group to establish a community-relevant trial. It also established the rationale for the evaluation’s methodology.
Intro
duct
ion
12
WIT.005.001.0845
Evaluation purpose and methodologyThe evaluation methodology aimed to provide multiple sources of data which indicated the capacity and capability of the CIWS to deliver automated and timely telephone messages to the participating residents in Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap.
The 664 residents from the nominated towns, who voluntarily opted-in to the trial, provided the sampling frame for the evaluation research.
The key community components of the evaluation methodology were:
• the pre-trial survey
• the log booklet survey with questions completed by participants after they received each of the trial messages
• the telephone interviews conducted after each trial message with a random sample of the participating residents and
• the post-trial telephone survey of all participating residents conducted at the end of the trial.
The data yielded from these sources provided the basis of evidence to assess:
1. The impact of the CIWS technology on community behaviour.
2. Community expectation of emergency information and warning systems prior to the trial.
3. Community reaction (post-trial) to this specifi c technology (telephone messaging) used to provide emergency warning information.
Other elements of the evaluation were the interviews with emergency service personnel and the formal reports from Telstra about the CIWS technology. The evaluation provided the evidence to consider the capacity and capability of the CIWS technology.
Specifi cally it provided information to:
• gauge whether telecommunications and geo-spatial technology can effectively deliver warning and information from the fi eld to the community in a timely manner
• inform whether the application of the technology can continue to progress the development of effective public risk communication systems
• create further knowledge about people’s responses to emergency warning systems with models of public safety.
The primary output of the evaluation was a detailed program logic model which modelled the interactions across and between the emergency service, technological and community components of the trial. The model also acted as a record of decision making across and between all the participating stakeholders.
The research fi ndings from the community components of the methodology and the semi-structured interviews with the emergency services and the observations of the trial itself provided a robust base of evidence for the logic model. From this, a model was developed to map the application of the CIWS technology and to integrate this map with operational response decisions about risk communication and the community behaviour.
The program logic model (Figure 23) provides a basis for replicating future trials and evaluations.
ConclusionPublic information and warning are an integral part of public safety. This section has briefl y introduced the technologies and processes that formed the CIWS Trial and Evaluation.
The role that telecommunication and spatial data technology play in public warning and information must be trialled and evaluated to ensure that as a system each component adds value to public safety and emergency management knowledge.
The effectiveness of evaluation is enhanced through partnerships between government (state and local), private industry, public broadcasters, local communities and emergency services. This is captured in the program logic model (Figure 23) and in the fi nal analysis of the evaluation fi ndings.
Section 1 will provide an overview of the key research in the fi eld of community information and warning as the background to the report of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation.
Intro
duct
ion
13
WIT.005.001.0846
IntroductionThis section reviews the current literature associated with community information and warning. The literature, which highlights the technological and social components associated with effective warning communication, contributed signifi cantly to the development of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation, as did the key fi ndings from recent Victorian public warning research.
The role of communities and the operation of risk communication systems during recent emergency incidents are examined.
The section concludes with an overview of the Activity Theory (AT) literature as a framework to explain the varying expectations and tensions between emergency services and community that underpin the processes and decisions of emergency warning information systems.
Risk communication and international emergencies A number of high-profi le incidents have occurred in recent years:
• World Trade Centre and Washington DC terrorist attacks, 11 September 2001
• Bali bombings, 12 October 2002
• Indian Ocean tsunami, 26 December 2004
• London transport bombings, 7 July 2005
• Hurricane Katrina, August 2005.
These incidents have brought into focus the role of risk communication and highlighted the ongoing challenges associated with public information during times of emergency.
Tarrant (2005) notes that the features, complexities and random nature of large-scale emergency situations often result in a response that provides the basis for future lessons. Tarrant’s observation applies equally to public information and warning technology and procedures.
In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Sikich (2005) noted that despite multiple warnings ahead of time, the city of New Orleans and the State of Louisiana were still overwhelmed by the impact of a category four hurricane.
The World Trade Centre terrorist attack highlighted the need for government and emergency services to develop an integrated, shared and unifi ed commitment to risk communication (OESC Report, 2002).
The Bali bombings (2002), and more recently the London transport bombings (2005), highlighted the need for risk communication to be channelled to the public as part of an integrated system of emergency operations.
Before the London transport bombings, the British Government had outlined a process for effective warning procedures through the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, which put responsibility for the planning and delivery of warning and information in the hands of a lead response agency.
14
Section 1Literature Review
WIT.005.001.0847
Sect
ion
1
15
The events of 7 July, 2005 in London, however, demonstrated that an unpredicted emergency will require the collaboration of multiple agencies operating within an integrated system.
Weber, McEntire and Robinson (2002) use the example of the World Trade Centre attacks to highlight the diffi culty in obtaining credible and specifi c warning information that terrorists would hijack a plane and fl y it into a building.
The complexity of emergency incidents and the nature of the threat posed by each emergency demand specifi c and relevant warning and information strategies. These international emergencies highlight the need to integrate risk communication research fi ndings and emergency management practice.
Research in VictoriaVictoria’s emergency management arrangements documented in the Victorian Emergency Management Manual provide procedures for the delivery of emergency warning and information:
Warnings should be used under specifi c circumstances where community action is necessary to protect lives, property or the environment. Upon the request of a control agency to issue a warning, it is the responsibility of the emergency response co-ordinator to ensure that it is issued both to agencies and potentially affected community. The content and format of the warning must be simple, arresting, brief, suited to the needs of the affected community and worded in accordance with advice from the control agency.
Warning methods could include loud hailers, telephones, door knocks, radio or television announcements, or local community networks.
For emergencies of major community signifi cance, the warning should be authorised by an emergency response co-ordinator in consultation with the control agency.
( Emergency Management Manual, Section 4. p.10, 2003. Victoria)
Despite the acknowledgement of community networks, research into the social components of community information and warning systems is notably absent. Research is instead dominated by the technological concerns such as refi ning the accuracy of prediction for hazards such as fl oods and cyclones (Betts 2003, 2001).
Involving the community Recent Victorian research, including the trial and evaluation of a fi re alert siren at Ferny Creek and community and industry consultation with local government, to develop an emergency telephone message system for people living near Coode Island, provided much of the intellectual capital underpinning the processes and structures associated with the CIWS Trial and Evaluation; in particular the pre-trial questionnaire, the community engagement process and the program logic model.
The Ferny Creek Fire Alert Siren Trial and Evaluation was initiated following recommendations by the Victorian State Coroner after an inquest into the deaths of three people in the Dandenong Ranges fi res on 21 January 1997.
Unlike the dominant focus on technical components of previous community warning and information research, the Ferny Creek project instead tested the fi re alert siren’s effectiveness against the information needs of community stakeholders.
The results stressed the need for the Ferny Creek siren to develop as an integrated system for bushfi re safety using both informal and formal information sources and household preparedness plans.
The research also highlighted the importance to emergency services and community residents of developing shared meaning, trust and expectations about the fi re alert siren.
Signifi cantly, the Ferny Creek Fire Alert Siren Trial and Evaluation defi ned community information and warning as a series of social, organisational and institutional processes integrated with detection and prediction technology.
The Coode Island Telephone Message System Trial and Evaluation was concluded in November 2004. This project was signifi cant for its demonstration of industry, emergency services, local government and community resident groups working collaboratively to develop a system that could deliver automated telephone messages to residents living in the vicinity of the major hazard facilities site of Coode Island.
Underpinning the development of the telephone message operation were extensive community consultation and education activities which provided those who opted-in to the trial with relevant information. The responses to the community consultation and industry forums provided further opportunities for the trial to meet expectations and communication requirements.
WIT.005.001.0848
Sect
ion
1
16
As with the Ferny Creek Trial and Evaluation, the Coode Island research balanced the social and technological components of the community information and warning function. Although its fi ndings demonstrated the possibilities of telecommunication technology as a conduit to deliver community warning and information, it also highlighted the importance of integrating technology with stakeholder engagement, awareness and consultation.
The research projects have confi rmed that communication technology can only ever be one component of public information and warning systems. The research also emphasised the need for a greater research focus on collaboration with diverse cultural and linguistic communities as well as those who may have special communication requirements.
RationaleThe CIWS Trial and Evaluation was informed by key national and international research.
Handmer (2000-2) has articulated that early warning systems are developed and implemented for three core reasons:
1. To achieve an immediate aim in a crisis.
2. To foster and promote long term care and mitigation.
3. To build consensus over controversial issues.
Betts (2003) asserts that the development of communication processes capable of delivering reliable, timely and effective warnings to the community during times of emergency remains a challenge for researchers and practitioners.
The purpose of a public warning system is to help minimise the impact or perceived threat of emergencies on affected communities by providing timely and accurate information to assist people and organisations to make decisions about their own safety (Handmer, 2000-2; De Marchi, 1995; Drottz-Sjoberg, 1995).
The literature highlights the need for warning and information systems to provide information which is relevant, apt and timely.
The development of a community warning and information system is a complex process.
The existing body of literature within emergency management research offers little by way of examples featuring stakeholders being brought together to debate the assumptions of previous communication processes and consider a new approach espoused by an integrated framework.
Reser (1996) points out that social science research seeking to understand human behaviour in the event of an emergency is not well known by non-social scientists.
The challengesCommunity information and warning systems are an important component of emergency preparedness and response to emergency situations such as hazardous material leaks, severe storms, fl ooding, structural fi res, wildfi res and terrorist activity (Betts 2003).
Because of the complex nature of the risk posed by emergency situations (Dept of Justice, 2004) it is important that community warning and information systems are suffi ciently robust to provide multi-information and communication channels.
The diversity of lifestyles and circumstances within communities mean that people must be able to access formal information and warning from multiple sources including the telephone (both fi xed landline and mobile), radio, the media, and the internet.
Telephone alert systems Recent developments in the sphere of community information and warning have seen the telephone adopted to disseminate automated emergency alerts to residents in a specifi c geographic area (Kost & Moyer, 2003).
The advantage of such a system is that households, businesses and community organisations receive messages instantaneously and simultaneously.
The trial and evaluation of the Coode Island telephone message system showed the capacity of such technology providers to deliver an automated message to the community. However, without effective partnerships across and between local governments, the community and emergency services, the effectiveness is limited.
Telephone messaging requires contact details which, according to existing data security legislation, residents and business owners must provide voluntarily. Hence, at present, the only way a telephone warning system could be implemented is through members of the community opting-in to receive the identifi ed emergency warning and information messages. (Refer to the ACMA web-site. See Data Security at www.acma.gov.au)
WIT.005.001.0849
Sect
ion
1
17
Technical shortcomings highlighted by the trial and evaluation of the Coode Island telephone message system, including calls not connecting and the technology not recognising answering machines, further re-iterated the need to ensure that public warning systems are integrated within emergency management procedures.
There is also a social dimension to telephone message communication and delivery that emphasises people’s:
• Ability to reach their phone.
• Access to other sources of information such as the radio, TV, the internet or local government and emergency services.
• Ability to hear and understand a message clearly.
• Familiarity with and acceptance of automated telephone messaging.
The technical and social components associated with telephone messaging require signifi cant community engagement, involvement and consultation with the community.
International researchers continue to grapple with the challenges of how best to formulate a message which ensures that receivers hear, understand, believe, confi rm, and respond to the information (Mileti and O’Brien, 1992; Blanchard-Boehm, 1998).
Engaging stakeholders from the bottom-up has been well supported by national and international research as a vital element of warning and information system development (Clifford, 1956; Perry and Greene, 1982; Perry, 1985; Drabek, 1986; Neal and Parker, 1989).
The principlesCiting the ‘Warning Programme of the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction’, Betts (2002) summarises some key objectives which community warning and information systems at national and municipal levels should try to achieve:
• Warning systems must have familiarity with the predominant hazard types and local patterns must be incorporated.
• Warning systems need to monitor and forecast changes in vulnerability patterns, particularly at local levels.
• Warnings need to be operationally relevant with sole responsibility for the issuance of early warnings for natural and similar disasters resting with one agency.
• Warnings need to be based upon risk analysis.
• Warnings need to demonstrate practices that can communicate advisory information to vulnerable groups.
• Warnings need to be generated and communicated at local level.
• Warning systems should provide a range of communication methods.
• Warning systems should provoke multiple strategies for protection and risk reduction.
• Warning systems need a coherent set of linked operational responsibilities established at national and local levels of public administration and authority.
• All aspects of the design and implementation of community warning and information systems require the substantive involvement of stakeholders at the local and national levels.
Parker and Handmer (1998) have mentioned the existence of both offi cial systems and unoffi cial systems.
Offi cial systems are designed and implemented by government and associated emergency service agencies. These systems provide periodic and impersonal warning messages involving an inter-agency liaison structure.
Unoffi cial systems are designed by local communities through leadership within the community.
The Partnership for Public Warning has defi ned ‘warning’ as information provided to people at risk, in advance of, or during a hazardous event, with the objective of inducing those at risk to take appropriate action to reduce losses (http://www.partnershipforpublicwarning.org/ppw/).
The primary goal of warning is to prevent hazards from becoming disasters. Typically they evolve on a trial and error basis while relying on webs of socio-personal networks.
The Partnership for Public Warning has stated that the success of warning and information systems is measured by the timely and appropriate action taken to mitigate hazards and secure personal safety.
Mileti (1975) has stated that the capability of warning systems to successfully forecast hazards and to communicate an effective message to an endangered public is increased if the system is integrated.
Williams (1964) has asserted the need for an integrated warning system to synthesise both technological and social components associated with effective warning.
Gillespie, Perry and Mileti (1974) have suggested that fear is a key factor to explain how people react to a warning message, hence warnings need to maximise people’s defi nitions of danger, but not induce unnecessary fear.
WIT.005.001.0850
Sect
ion
1
18
The aimsA key factor in the development of an integrated system to administer an effective warning message is overcoming ‘situational perception of risk’ (Mileti and Sorenson, 1998:322).
Parker and Handmer (1998) determine this concept as ‘the perceptions and defi nitions of the situation which people form about both risk and response options; a process which includes relating warning information received to other available information and to past experiences’ (pg. 45).
Mileti (1975) consolidated the fi ndings of how people respond to warnings as follows:
1. Though everybody receives the same message, they hear and believe different things.
2. Response is based on how what they hear stimulates them.
3. People are stimulated differently depending on who they are, who they are with, and what they see.
Information technology and community warningHandmer, Keys and Elliott (1999) have remarked that the dramatic improvements in information technology have yet to play a role in getting messages directly to the public at risk.
The trial and evaluation of the Coode Island telephone message system has proved that technology can send information to a database of addresses.
Communities, however, are diverse and information may mean different things to different people. It becomes important, therefore, that communities have a shared defi nition of such a system’s operation.
Handmer (2000-2) has articulated three core reasons why warnings fail:
1. Methodological and defi nitional issues The nature of the risk is not categorically defi ned so the system design is fl awed.
2. Neglecting to establish shared meaning among the groups The population at risk does not have a shared meaning about the nature of the emergency which the warning system has been established for.
3. Diversity of groups involved in the process Warning systems are composed of both offi cial and unoffi cial groups. To function effectively the groups must have a shared meaning and agreement on the warning task.
A collection of activitiesThe delivery of community information and warning communication relies on multiple activities governed by Victoria’s emergency management arrangements and underpinned by the knowledge, experience and values from:
• Victoria’s emergency services – the lead agency controlling the emergency incident response
• Victoria’s Police – responsible for the coordination of public warning information
• State and local governments
• Public broadcasters – in particular the ABC Radio network
• Technology service providers
• Local communities.
Activity theory (AT) provides the basis for describing the decisions, infl uences and expectations of the stakeholders involved in the operation of any public warning communication system.
According to Engestrom (1987), the principles of activity theory focus on the relationships between the human agent and objects of the environment, that is the emergency incident, the technology and the operational response. This relationship is reconciled by values, attitudes and norms associated with the prevailing culture, in this case the culture of public preparedness and safety.
The CIWS Trial and Evaluation provided an opportunity to understand the complex system of activities associated with public warning (the human behaviour, the technology and risk communication procedures). It provided the foundation for more specifi c theories about how technology can be used to deliver information and warning to communities at risk.
WIT.005.001.0851
ConclusionThis section reviewed key literature associated with community information and warning. The literature, which highlighted the technological and social components associated with effective warning communication, and the key fi ndings of public warning research conducted within Victoria provide the basis for the CIWS Trial and Evaluation.
Section 2 will present the technology underpinning the trial.
Sect
ion
1
19
WIT.005.001.0852
Section 2Technology
IntroductionThis section introduces the CIWS Trial and Evaluation technological design and its potential to deliver emergency warnings to the public via automated telephone messages as well as the transfer of data and images from the emergency fi eld to an incident control centre.
It examines the function of the CIWS technology as one component of an integrated system underpinned by a network of stakeholder relationships and community activities.
It describes in detail the component parts of the four layers that make up the CIWS technological design, as a platform to provide and send the CIWS Trial message through Telstra’s telephone network.
It concludes with the challenges for the future technical design of a CIWS.
Functional Blocks of CIWS Trial and EvaluationFor the purposes of the trial, the CIWS technology was designed to function alongside the public warning procedures which operate as part of Victoria’s emergency management arrangements. These arrangements provided for the delivery of community information and warning as part of an emergency risk management system.
This CIWS technological design was a proof-of-concept which encompassed an end-to-end solution (see Figure 2) involving interlinking functional blocks. It also needed suffi cient fl exibility to support the changes which were required during the CIWS Trial.
The technological design of the CIWS Trial encompassed a range of technologies including:
• personal digital assistants (PDA)• video streaming• wireless data• geo-coded data• geographical information system (GIS)• spatial mapping• database management• message transmission• fi xed and mobile phone access• graphical reporting• an interactive voice response system• a message bank with email delivery• end-to-end system management.
20
Figure 2: Functional Blocks of CIWS Trial and Evaluation
WIT.005.001.0853
CIWS technology frameworkThe CIWS technology consisted of four layers enabling an automated telephone call and message to be transmitted through Telstra’s telephone network.
They are as follows:
1. A geo-code and database layer: this provided the GIS data and the database of residents’ telephone numbers and addresses.
2. An ESO GIS application access layer: this provided the GIS application and physical connection between the Emergency Incident Control and the CIWS application layer.
3. A CIWS application layer: this provided the technology components to support and control the functional requirements of receiving requests from the Incident Control Centre and sending instructions for messages to be delivered to the community.
4. A message delivery layer: this provided the infrastructure to combine the telephone number with a nominated pre-recorded message and deliver the telephone calls to the participating residents.
The following section describes each layer of technology in detail and illustrates the system of interactions which created the platform for the CIWS Trial.
21
Figure 3: CIWS layers
Sect
ion
2
WIT.005.001.0854
22
Sect
ion
1Se
ctio
n 2 1. The geo-code and database layer
A core component of the CIWS Trial was to investigate how geospatial technology could be used to enhance the delivery of community information and warning messaging.
Geo-coding
Geo-coding is the process of assigning geographical points on a standard reference grid (longitude, latitude, height) to objects, in this case residential and business properties. Once a geo-code has been determined it can be entered into a database.
The database developed for the CIWS Trial consisted of the geo-coded properties and the telephone numbers of the participating residents.
The Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) was responsible for geo-coding the properties within Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap.
Innovation in geospatial technology means that it is possible to draw a polygon on a map of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap and retrieve every geo-coded property that exists between these points.
During the trial, this function enabled the emergency service personnel to identify and retrieve all properties (and telephone numbers) within an area defi ned as high risk.
The process of geo-coding
The DSE database (Vic map Address) contains the geo-codes of all urban and rural property addresses in Victoria (see Appendix 9 for an example of DSE, SII product description).
As custodians of this database, the Spatial Information Infrastructure (SII) unit within the DSE collects, collates and inspects property data from Victorian local governments before entering it into the Vic map Address database.
Entries in the Vic map Address database are made up of a number of fi elds. The CIWS Trial technology, however, was only concerned with the street address and geo-code details of the properties included in the trial (eg John Street, Black Stump, 3796, 37.80290200, 145.37349300).
Although the Vic map Address database is complete, the information is not always 100% accurate. Specifi c errors can be associated with the following:
Rural properties where:
• numbering systems may not be uniform
• property owners and / or local governments may have no knowledge the property’s number
• the actual position (north south east or west) of properties on a corner can be unclear.
Urban properties where:
• the location of the property is defi ned by the housing estate rather than the suburb
• the actual position (north south east or west) of properties on a corner can be unclear
• businesses and multi-storey buildings are not geo-coded.
The database where:
• human error when entering the data can affect accuracy.
Database numbers and addresses
Telstra Corporation is responsible for the Australian Government’s Integrated Public Number Database (IPND). This database stores every telephone number, including silent numbers, that have an appropriate address.
The licensing agreement between Telstra and the Australian Communication and Media Authority (ACMA) determines how the IPND can be used. This agreement did not allow Telstra to access the IPND for the CIWS Trial.
Instead, the CIWS Trial simulated the use of the IPND by collecting the telephone numbers and addresses from residents who opted-in to the trial. This simulated IPND database was then matched up with geo-codes from Vic map Addresses for Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap properties. When the SII were able to match addresses in the databases, they had a geo-code for a property’s telephone number. This enabled polygon defi nition for the CIWS Trial scenarios.
In most cases, the SII were able to match details from Vic map Addresses with the addresses from the CIWS database. Diffi culties arose when data to be matched from the CIWS database and the simulated IPND varied in content. The most common problems were:
• frequent variations of expression and abbreviations in fi les used for matching. For example AV, AVE, AVEN, AV., Av, Avenue, Ave and BOX Hill North, Graythorn, Box Hill, Box Hill N
• housing estate addresses rather than suburbs given in place of the actual locality
• human error when entering the data.
The SII geo-coded 85-90% of the properties listed in the trial. 10% were geo-coded to street level, 5% to locality and 1% was not geo-coded. The SII geo-coded information was transferred to Telstra where each address was attached to its corresponding address and phone number in the IPND database.
WIT.005.001.0855
2. ESO GIS application access layer
The ESO GIS application access layer provided the physical connection from the Emergency Incident Control into the CIWS application layer.
This layer demonstrates the potential of mobile GIS to assist with the management of emergency incidents in real time, and that wireless technology adapted to Australian emergency conditions can support the exchange of dynamic data between fi eld personnel and the central command centres of one or more emergency services, as well as between (selected) fi eld personnel.
The CIWS Trial integrated emergency services data in real time, so that emergency managers could visualise and analyse events as they unfolded and so make important decisions to minimise their impact on life and property.
Telstra’s partner Map-Tel provided the GIS application (command map) and application support during the Trial.
The trial process collected the relevant data for a number of agreed emergency scenarios (eg. CFA maps).
Command map: A command map implementation was designed that would provide access to spatial data across low bandwidth connections i.e. Telstra CDMA / 1 x RTT mobile data network. Command map supports low bandwidth through the use of internet mapping technologies. Further data updates from fi eld personnel are generated as SMS messages from mobile devices or as ‘http’ requests. The command map implemented by Map-Tel consisted of 4 major components:
Command servers: The data and web servers that provided online map services of what was occurring in the fi eld.
Command pad: This component comprised mobile fi eld devices and software tailored to the requirements of various users in each of the agencies. These enabled users to collect photos or video, track positions and allowed other live map services to be viewed from the fi eld.
Command net: The communication network interface component, Command Net, used Telstra’s 1 x RTT / CDMA mobile network to send live data back to the Telstra Innovation Centre so that it could be viewed through a web server by emergency service fi eld users.
Command centre: this comprised the interfaces of various IT platforms, such as wireless or LAN / WAN networks, which enabled information to be shared between agencies and remote staff to visualise events live from the fi eld and integrate with other internal systems.
Other communication components utilised in the technology system included:
Video streaming: The CIWS Trial used wireless technology to provide the emergency incident controller and incident control centre with access to real-time visual knowledge of the emergency scenario.
In a real emergency situation, images captured could be delivered to incident vans and control centres. This would enable remote and shared access to fi rst-hand situation knowledge, thus reducing the need for physical proximity to the incident scene.
Information fl ows: During the CIWS Trial’s message ‘send-outs’, GIS coordinates were sent from a laptop computer to the CIWS Application. Properties within these coordinates were matched with their corresponding telephone number. This enabled a telephone message to be sent to the households that had opted-in to the trial. Each message ‘send-out’ instruction could be terminated or suspended by a subsequent abort command.
The status of each call (for example, whether the telephone was answered, busy, unanswered or call returned) was returned in approximately 30 seconds.
The format of the outbound exchanges from the GIS Application to the telephone message delivery platform contained:
• DOC_TYPE: batch_outdial instruction update_success_status.
• TEST_NO: one value being a string representation of any 3–digit integer representing a unique trial test.
• GEO_REGION: one value being a string representation of a static pre agreed enumerated valid region name for the trial, for example “halls_gap” or “yarra_ranges”.
• RETRY_LIMIT: one value being a string representation of any non zero 2–digit integer advising of how may attempts should be made to each of the prescribed telephone numbers.
• TEL_NO: one value being a string representation of any valid fi xed or mobile telephone number including area code.
23
Sect
ion
2
WIT.005.001.0856
• MESSAGE_SET: one value being a string representation of any 2–digit integer identifying a unique pre-recorded audio announcement selection to be played over the phone.
The reply format of the inbound exchanges (i.e. from the telephone message delivery platform to the GIS Application) contained all the information above with:
• DOC_TYPE: changed to show response message type
• MESSAGE_STATUS: one value being a string representation of static pre-agreed enumerated valid status classifi cations for the attempted audio delivery, for example “line_busy” or “no_answer”.
3. CIWS application layer
The CIWS application layer provided the component technology to support and control the functional requirements of:
1. Receiving requests from the incident control centre and sending instructions for messages to be sent to the community
2. Managing the community telephone number database
3. Updating the message status for telephones answered, busy, unanswered etc.
4. On-line reports
5. Archived on-line reports
Key components ensured that business objectives stipulated by the CIWS Steering Group were met.
The development of the CIWS application layer ensured availability of resources for each of the message ‘send-out’ days. It also enabled the CIWS technology to simultaneously send callouts to a number of regions (to all three townships) while monitoring and identifying any application faults during the trial.
Reports during the trial were generated and displayed on a standard web browser with regular updates.
Valid status values were:
• “not_attempted” – Not yet called. This term was changed to “Queued” in the GIS display.
• “answered” – The call had been answered, but the continuation response had not been received
• “success” – Successful completion
• “line_busy” – The line was busy
• “no_answer” – The call was not answered
• “abandoned” – The retry limit had been reached with no answer.
The reports provided a key basis for evaluating the performance of the CIWS technology.
24
Figure 4: CIWS telephone message logic model
Sect
ion
2WIT.005.001.0857
4. Message delivery layer
A key requirement of the CIWS Trial was the delivery of automated voice messages to fi xed phones (see Figure 4: CIWS telephone message logic model).
The message delivery layer provided the infrastructure to combine the CIWS Trial telephone numbers with a nominated pre-recorded message and deliver the calls to the community participants.
The message delivery layer process enabled outbound dialling of automated telephone messages to nominated phone numbers.
The key functional requirements were the ability to:
• deliver voice messages to fi xed and / or mobile phones
• suspend or terminate telephone calls using a suspend or abort command
• monitor progress on trial days and provide updates on call status
• ensure calls to Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap occurred in a timely manner.
The CIWS technology design used a network-based speech test platform known as Enterprise Speech Service (ESS) to deliver calls to the trial participants in Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap.
The network platform elements supplied during the trial included:
1. Application servers with ‘plug-in’ model for dialogue fl ow control
2. Servers for management, authentication and authorisation
3. Databases for confi guration information
4. Stateless protocols to bind the components together
The CIWS Trial’s automated telephone message was formulated by the CIWS Steering Group and recorded by the ABC Victorian regional radio network. Figure 5 (p. 27) illustrates the construct of the message.
A further requirement of the message delivery layer was to prove that the CIWS technology could deliver a message to hearing impaired telephone users. This was demonstrated by sending out the normal message refi ned as text messages to three teletypewriter (TTY) machines that were located in the Telstra Innovation Centre during the trial.
During the trial telephone messages were sent to the community from 60 lines that were rented from the Telstra Corporation Intelligent Network.
CIWS technology design: challenges from the TrialThe CIWS Trial and Evaluation highlighted a number of challenges which the CIWS technology design will need to address in future:
Challenge 1: Geo-coding and database layer
The current carrier licensing laws determined by the ACMA state that no telecommunications service provider, including Telstra Corporation, can use the Australian Government’s IPND outside of the current licensing agreement. Hence the only means to deliver automated emergency warning and advice telephone messages to households and properties in a specifi ed location is through informed consent such as the CIWS Trial community consultation and opt-in process.
The IPND issue means that any future trial using the CIWS technology will need to adopt a community opt-in process where people volunteer to take part. Hence, the names, addresses and telephone numbers will need to be collected from local government and forwarded to the SII before being forwarded to a technology provider such as Telstra Corporation.
The CIWS Trial illustrates that entering the address into the system can be prone to human error.
Challenge 2: ESO GIS application access layer
The emergency management arrangements in Victoria provide for an integrated approach to community information and warning. The CIWS Trial illustrated that different emergency services have different technological capacities and capabilities.
The CIWS technological design may not be compatible with the technologies currently used by Victoria’s emergency services. In particular, each emergency services uses a different mapping system which could hinder an all-hazards approach to public warning technology development.
There is also a need for the further development of GIS capabilities within the emergency services.
Activities undertaken by the emergency services during the CIWS Trial, including their access to Telstra’s equipment, illustrated the signifi cant differences in the technology capacities and capabilities between the emergency services.
Sect
ion
2
25
WIT.005.001.0858
Challenge 3: CIWS application layer
The CIWS application layer did not secure all the functional requirements of receiving requests from the Incident Control Centre and sending instructions for messages to be sent to the community.
On one occasion during the CIWS Trial when a limited number of call-out telephone lines (20 lines) were available, it took 60 seconds for delivery of the fi rst message. When the number of telephone call-out lines was increased to 61 the message delivery time was cut to 40 seconds.
This meant that those taking part in the trial received calls at different times. Hence some people were denied the opportunity to tune to ABC Radio to listen for further information.
Challenge 4: Message delivery layer
The CIWS Trial illustrated the message delivery layer’s failure to return call-out lines promptly once messages had been delivered. As a result, a system timing parameter was changed, to reduce the length of time that the call-out lines were unavailable.
Furthermore, the message delivery layer failed to return call-out lines when a call was answered by an answering machine, fax machine or modem. This was later overcome by forcing the system to terminate calls once messages had been delivered to these devices.
The CIWS technology design had to be adjusted when the initial system requirement that participants fi rst press the hash key (#) to access messages left on answering machines resulted in the messages cutting out.
This was overcome by delivering the message in its entirety. The importance of the # key issue was starkly illustrated when the Stawell Regional Hospital was unable to access the message because there was no # key facility on their switchboard.
ConclusionThis section has introduced the CIWS Trial and Evaluation technological design and its potential to deliver emergency warnings to the public via automated telephone messages as well as to transfer data and images from the emergency fi eld to an incident control centre.
It examined the function of the CIWS technology as one component of an integrated system underpinned by a network of stakeholder relationships and community activities (undertaken by the CIWS Steering Group and the Data Transfer Sub-Group).
It described in detail the component parts of the four layers that made up the CIWS Trial technological design, which consolidated as a platform to send the CIWS Trial message through Telstra’s telephone network.
It concluded with the future technical design challenges highlighted by the CIWS Trial and Evaluation.
The following section highlights the research methodology associated with evaluation.
Sect
ion
2
26
WIT.005.001.0859
27
Sect
ion
2
Figure 5: CIWS message construct
WIT.005.001.0860
Section 3Trial and Evaluation Methodology
IntroductionThis section presents the CIWS Trial and Evaluation methodology.
The research design functioned to collect information from stakeholders as well as provide a key conduit for consultation between the emergency services and the communities of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap.
This section explains in detail the methodology’s four component parts: stakeholder relationship development, community consultation in Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap; forums to culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) and hearing impaired groups and social science research methods for evaluation.
The aggregation of these components resulted in three case studies (detailed in Section 4) and the evidence-based program logic model (detailed in Section 5), both of which will provide the basis for the CIWS Trial and Evaluation analysis and outcomes (Section 7).
Trial and Evaluation methodologyThe four components of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation methodology were:
• stakeholder relationship development
• community consultation in Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap
• Forums with culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) and hearing impaired groups
• Social science research methods.
Component 1: Stakeholder relationship development
Throughout the trial and the evaluation of the CIWS, partnerships and joint activities occurred between emergency management organisations. The organisations included:
• The Victorian Government: the Department of Justice (Offi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner), the Department of Sustainability and Environment and the Department of Human Services (State Emergency Recovery Unit).
• Local government and the community: the shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians and, within these municipalities, the townships of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap as the sites selected for the CIWS Trial.
• Victorian’s emergency services: the Victoria Police, Country Fire Authority (CFA), Victoria State Emergency Service (VICSES) and Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services Board (MFESB).
• Industry partners: Telstra Corporation and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation – ABC 774 and Victorian Regional Radio Network.
Working in partnership as the CIWS Steering Group and the Data Transfer Group, these stakeholders contributed the necessary technologies and interdisciplinary capabilities that enabled development of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation structures. These partnerships were to become an important element of the trial’s success.
Their experience and expertise included:
• emergency management operations, legislation and policy
• community warning and information administration
• radio broadcasting administration
• geospatial and graphical information systems
• specifi c local and regional knowledge about the Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians
• telecommunications technology
• community engagement and consultation.
28
WIT.005.001.0861
Component 2: Community consultation in Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap
Community profi lingAn important precursor to the CIWS Trial and Evaluation was engaging the involvement of the residents from Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap.
Before beginning community consultation, the OESC undertook a community profi ling initiative.
The importance of community profi ling in strategic planning for consultation is noted in the Department of Sustainability and the Environment’s Workbook for Effective Community Engagement Version 2 (2006).
Information from primary sources (community meetings and the pre-trial survey) and secondary sources (Australian Bureau of Statistics and / or local government records) was examined to gain valuable insight into the communities of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap including their:
• contemporary societal and emergency management issues
• community communication and social networks• household types and demographic changes
between 1996 and 2001 • housing tenure arrangements • levels of (un)employment • nature of employment • levels of computer usage.
Community meetings and communication plan: Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap
Once profi ling was completed, the OESC began to plan community meetings to present the CIWS Trial and Evaluation objectives to those interested in taking part.
Gaining the trust, participation and commitment of the townships’ residents was an important element in the trial’s success, as was the need to inform and involve key community leaders in the process.
The community meeting process was characterised by Pretty and Hine’s (1999) concept of ‘participation by consultation’. Feedback collected at the meetings in each of the three townships enabled OESC to defi ne the issues, challenges and solutions which would be associated with the CIWS project.
Confi dentiality and trust that organisations would look after peoples’ names, addresses and telephone details emerged as the communities’ central concern. Their expectations of being kept continually informed about all aspects of the trial over its three months duration was also noted.
These concerns were brought back to the CIWS Steering Group and a process was developed to enable residents to opt-in to the CIWS Trial.
The results of the community meetings in Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap clearly demonstrated the need for the CIWS Steering Group to consider the ‘communities’ voice’.
The trial’s emphasis on public telecommunications and geo-coding would require everyone taking part to agree to storage of their address and telephone number in a database. Consequently, the CIWS Steering Group had a legal obligation to maintain the privacy of participants individual and household telephone numbers, as outlined in the Victorian Privacy Act 2000 and the ACMA’s policy on data security.
Using the ratepayers database from the shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians, a letter was posted to all residents and businesses within the boundary defi nition of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap inviting them to participate in the CIWS Trial and Evaluation. The content of the invitation letter was endorsed by both shires and the CIWS Steering Group (see Appendix 1).
A communication and media plan was activated to enable residents to access further information about the trial and assist them to make an informed decision about whether they would consent to take part. Information was available to residents from the following sources:
• local media releases
• a CIWS information fl yer distributed to residents, businesses and community information sites
• a CIWS telephone hotline
• the CIWS website (see Appendix 2).
The opt-in process was designed to conform to the Victorian Privacy Act 2000. All those who opted-in to the trial could withdraw at any stage. A consent form attached to each invitation letter requested the participant’s name, landline telephone number and associated property address, as well as their signature as an agreement to:
• have their landline telephone number and associated property address stored in a database and used as part of the trial
• participate for the duration of the trial by:- receiving automated telephone messages- responding to pre- and post-trial questionnaires- completing a log-booklet of postcards after
delivery of each trial message.
Sect
ion
3
29
WIT.005.001.0862
A total of 664 residents from the three townships opted-in to the CIWS Trial and Evaluation as follows:
• Mount Evelyn: 468 residents or approximately 7.6% of the township’s total population of people aged over 18 years.
• Stawell: 146 residents or approximately 2.5% of the township’s total population of people aged over 18 years.
• Halls Gap: 50 residents or approximately 15% of the township’s total population of people aged over 18 years.
(ABS, Regional Township Population Profi les, 2001)
The participating residents from the three townships are defi ned as self selected and are therefore not based on traditional sampling techniques and not representative of the broader townships’ population profi les.
The methodology outlined above was also used to facilitate community participation in the trial and evaluations of the:
• Ferny Creek Fire Alert Siren (see Section 1 pg. 15)
• Coode Island Telephone Message System (see Section 1 pg.15).
Component 3: Culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) and hearing impaired forums
Given the conceptual nature of the trial’s technology design and that there wasn’t representation from either CALD or hearing impaired participants, the Steering Group decided that a demonstration and discussion of the CIWS procedures rather than an actual message send-out would be appropriate to understanding the communication requirements of these specifi c communities.
CALD forum
Following liaison with the Adult Multicultural Education Service (AMES), the OESC held a workshop to explain the CIWS technology to adult students from a range of cultural and linguistic backgrounds (including China, Vietnam, Somalia, India, Japan, and Turkey).
The workshop featured an overview of Victoria’s emergency services and the rationale for trialling the CIWS technology, followed by a short video presentation detailing the events at the Telstra Innovation Centre during the fi rst message send-out. The participants were then invited to listen to the trial’s standard telephone message translated into Cantonese, Vietnamese and Somali.
In the fi nal part of the workshop, the participants worked in facilitated groups to discuss and provide feedback about the telephone message delivery and content as it applied to their specifi c communication requirements.
Hearing impaired forum
Following liaison with VicDeaf, the OESC held a workshop to present the CIWS technology to a senior social group of hearing impaired people who meet regularly at VicDeaf in East Melbourne. With the aid of interpreters, the workshop outlined the rationale for the CIWS Trial and Evaluation technology. A short video which demonstrated the telephone message delivery and its application by the emergency services was presented to the group.
The group were then invited to discuss the relevance of the CIWS technology and to raise issues on access to public warning communication and hearing impairment. Fifteen people who attended this forum volunteered to complete the CIWS pre-trial questionnaire which addressed themes of risk perception, risk communication, safety planning and preparedness.
Component 4: Social science research methods for evaluation
CIWS Trial and Evaluation: research design
The presence of multiple stakeholders (Component 1) and three different townships (Component 2) made it necessary to triangulate between social science research approaches, methods and techniques at different stages in the project.
This project used four types of triangulation as classifi ed by Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Lowe (1991) and Hussey and Hussey (1997), as follows:
Data triangulation: Data triangulation refers to the collection of data at different times or from different sources.
The principal data sources associated with the CIWS Trial and Evaluation were:
• The Victorian emergency services ( Victoria Police, CFA, VICSES, & MFESB)
• The participating residents from Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap.
Sect
ion
3
30
WIT.005.001.0863
Methodological triangulation: Methodological triangulation refers to the use of quantitative and qualitative research methods.
The principal quantitative research methods used were the:
• Pre-trial questionnaire: sent to all participants in Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap who opted-in to the trial (see Appendix 3).
• Log-booklet of postcard surveys: after each trial message send-out, participants were asked to return a log-book recording their feedback. This was designed as a postcard for easy completion and return.
• Telephone survey: after each trial message send-out a research consultant conducted a telephone survey of a random sample of participants in Mount Evelyn and as many as possible in Stawell and Halls Gap (see Appendix 6).
• Post-trial survey: a post-trial telephone survey of all participants conducted at the conclusion of the trial (see Appendix 7).
The principal qualitative research methods used were the:
• Semi-structured interviews: pre-trial interviews with Country Fire Authority, State Emergency Service, Victoria, Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services Board and Victoria Police to discuss the assumptions and procedures about public risk communication within the emergency service sector.
• Observer feedback: a questionnaire distributed with information packs to CIWS Trial and Evaluation observers from Victoria and interstate provided feedback about the potential advantages and disadvantages of the CIWS system from various organisational perspectives (see Appendix 4).
• Fieldwork observations: the actions and decision making of emergency service personnel involved in the trial scenario sessions located at the simulated Incident Control Centres, were observed by OESC (see Section 5).
Investigator triangulation: Investigator triangulation is the collection, collation and analyses of data by different researchers at different times.
The principal agencies collecting data during the project were the:
• OESC: the gatekeepers responsible for all the data and analysis throughout the trial. The OESC collected data which developed a framework about how warning and advice information is constructed and delivered by Victoria’s emergency services during an emergency incident. The OESC also consulted with each township’s participating residents.
• DSE, SII, Shire of Yarra Ranges and Shire of Northern Grampians: SII developed the geographic boundaries of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap. The shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians collated data containing the postal details of all properties within the geographic boundary defi nition.
• Strahan Research: An external research company was contracted to collect data from participating residents though telephone surveys during and after the trial. Each telephone survey was developed by the OESC from information gathered during the pre-trial survey and community consultation activities.
Theory triangulation: Theoretical triangulation refers to the use of theory from one discipline (evaluation) to explain different phenomena under investigation (such as the impact of information and warning technology delivered to a sample population).
The theories adopted from other disciplines used in the CIWS Trial and Evaluation included:
• Soft systems methodology (Checkland and Scholes, 1999): was used to develop a concept map to enable the research to take a systematic approach evaluating all operational, technological and community components associated with the trial (see Figure 1, p.11).
• Program logic modelling: was used to model the interactions across and between the emergency service sector, the technological and the community components of the trial.
The research fi ndings from the community consultation meetings, pre-trial surveys, log-booklet of postcard surveys and the semi-structured interviews with the emergency service representatives provided robust evidence for the program logic model and enabled the development of a framework to gauge the CIWS technology’s capacity to deliver timely and accurate messages to the participating residents.
Sect
ion
3
31
WIT.005.001.0864
Research methodology: outcomesThe data and fi ndings generated from the research methodology’s four components enabled the compilation of three case studies (see Section 4) and the opportunity to consider how the trial technology functioned in each specifi c local context. The nature of the case study as a methodology allowed the research team to present a systematic, fact-driven examination of all data generated from the trial.
A second outcome from the research methodology was an evidence-based program logic model (see Section 5) which enabled the modelling of all behaviours, reactions and outcomes associated with the activity of the trial participants and emergency services. The program logic model recorded all decisions, reasons, motivations and structural relationships during the lifecycle of the trial. The framework offered by the logic model has enabled observation about what happened and why.
The three case studies (each township) and the program logic model provided the basis to ask whether the CIWS technology had the capacity to:
• send simultaneous and accurate telephone messages to households in a defi ned geographic area
• transfer data from the site of an emergency to an incident control centre
• use spatial and telecommunications technology to provide police, emergency services and local government with an effective and effi cient method of warning people about emergency threats which might impact on their safety
• be accessed and understood by those whose fi rst language may not be English
• be accessed and understood by those who may be hearing impaired
• encourage people to seek further information from identifi ed sources
• strengthen people’s ability to make decisions which would enhance their safety and preparedness.
ConclusionThis section has presented the CIWS Trial and Evaluation methodology.
The research design functioned both to collect information from the stakeholders and provide a key conduit for consultation between the emergency services and the communities of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap.
This section explained in detail the methodology’s four component parts: stakeholder relationship development, community consultation in Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap; forums for culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) and hearing impaired communities and social science research methods.
The aggregation of these components resulted in three case studies (detailed in Section 4) and an evidence-based program logic model (detailed in Section 5), both of which provide the basis for the CIWS Trial and Evaluation analysis and key learnings (Section 7).
Sect
ion
3
32
WIT.005.001.0865
Section 4Case Studies of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap – Preliminary research and fi ndings from the pre-trial survey
IntroductionThis section presents the fi ndings from the research methods used to collect the data before the CIWS Trial.
It outlines the process and criteria that led to selection of the townships that took part in the trial and summarises the public warning and information research which formed the basis of the pre-trial questionnaire.
Case studies for the selected townships of Mount Evelyn, Halls Gap and Stawell include population profi les of each and the pre-trial questionnaire’s fi ndings about the residents’ communication networks, response to offi cial and unoffi cial warning information, risk perception and emergency preparedness and planning.
The case study methodology enables the data to be considered from both the pre-trial and post-trial contexts and provides the basis for analysing the impact of the trial on community behaviour.
The pre-trial questionnaire statistics for each township are included as Appendix 8.
Township selection criteriaThe Shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians were identifi ed by the OESC and Victoria Police as appropriate local government areas for the CIWS Trial and Evaluation.
Both shires had demonstrated a commitment to community-centred emergency management activities in previous work with the OESC and both had reliable ABC Radio network coverage and telephone services.
Following meetings with each shire to confi rm the CIWS Trial and Evaluation parameters, the shires selected Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap as the townships which best matched the trial’s selection criteria based on the following:
• telecommunication and ABC Radio reception
• presence of township and community leadership structures
• moderate level of emergency risk
• population diversity and distribution
• rural and urban characteristics.
The Shire of Northern Grampians chose Stawell and Halls Gap for their example as regional and rural townships respectively and the Shire of Yarra Ranges nominated the township of Mount Evelyn for its rural and urban characteristics.
The SII (DSE) defi ned the geographic boundary for each of these townships and only those households and businesses located within these boundaries were given the opportunity to participate in the CIWS Trial & Evaluation.
The resulting self-selected samples are not necessarily representative of the townships’ population profi le.
The pre-trial questionnaire enabled the development of a sound profi le of the participating residents before the trial of the telephone message delivery began.
The log-booklet survey, the during trial telephone interviews and the post-trial survey delivered at the trial’s completion, captured the participants’ experiences and attitudes during and after the CIWS Trial.
33
WIT.005.001.0866
CIWS pre-trial questionnaireThe CIWS pre-trial questionnaire (See Appendix 3) addressed specifi c themes associated with community-centred emergency warning and information systems. It was designed to provide contextual information about the self-selected participants within each township that would establish a community profi le of:
• specifi c demographics
• level of risk perception and preparedness and accessing communication networks
• awareness of and need for emergency warning and information communication
• expectations of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation.
The questionnaire was based on previous public warning and information research from which fi ve themes were extracted:
Communication: Previous research on community warning systems and community behaviour during bushfi res identifi ed that people seek emergency information from both offi cial and unoffi cial sources (Betts, 2002, Rhodes, 2005). Unoffi cial warning systems are designed by local communities and personal networks and include high levels of social trust (Handmer, 2000). Accessing information from community-based networks can also enable community rather than individual decisions and actions to be determined.
Emergency risk perceptions: Mileti (1975) identifi ed demographic characteristics, perceptions of danger and loss of control as infl uences on risk communication such as an emergency warning message. Betts (2002) has noted that the perception of risk and subsequent responses to risk communication can also be infl uenced by:
• perception of the physical environment
• social cues
• protective actions and plans
• people’s activities at the time of the warning message.
Drabek (1985) has remarked on the consistency in research fi ndings that people’s underestimation of risk results in denial, distortion or ignoring warning messages in stressful situations.
Receiving and responding to (un) offi cial warning information: Parker and Handmer (1998) defi ne an integrated warning system as the inclusion of cooperation between offi cial and unoffi cial communication systems.
Offi cial systems are implemented by government agencies providing staged and impersonal warning messages. Unoffi cial systems are designed by local communities and evolve over time through need coupled with trial and error. Both systems rely on community networks with the meaning of the message directly relating to the links between people and property (Betts, 2001). The interaction with both offi cial and unoffi cial communication systems assists people to generate a common defi nition of the message and recommended actions.
Preparedness for an emergency event: Boxelaar and Reinholtd’s (2001) exploration of community perceptions about potential sources of information showed that levels of preparedness and past experience infl uence people’s perceptions about where to obtain information and how they might be alerted about fi re in their area. The principles of community responsibility and self-reliance apply to information fl ow as they do to personal and property protections.
Experiences of an emergency event: Emergency warning and information messages interact with the context and situational perception of the risk which people perceive. Boxelaar et al (2001) summarised that when awareness and understanding of risk is gained through actual experience of an emergency the likelihood of adaptive behaviour will improve. An OESC research study to support the Maribyrnong River fl ood management policy identifi ed that people who had experienced the last fl ooding of the Maribyrnong River linked the timing and content of warning information to their risk level and their subsequent decisions to take action (Betts 2005).
Case study 1: Mount Evelyn Mount Evelyn is an outer suburb of Melbourne in the foothills of the Dandenong Ranges. The area is predominantly residential with most properties being detached dwellings.
Mount Evelyn has a total of 2895 households and of these, 468 households or 16% of dwellings had a resident who opted-in to the CIWS Trial and Evaluation. This number of participants represented 7.6% of Mount Evelyn’s total population.
The pre-trial questionnaire was sent to the 468 residential householders and businesses that opted-in to participate. Of these, 390 returned completed pre-trial questionnaires. This represents an 82% response rate.
Pre-trial questionnaire summary
The Mount Evelyn population sample is predominantly aged over 40 years with 65% working or volunteering full time or part time.
34
Sect
ion
4WIT.005.001.0867
Over half of the respondents were living with children, with 22% of the total group staying home to care for children or other family members.
This sample population identifi ed a very strong connection and communication with family, friends and neighbours and an interest in local news accessed from local newspapers and newsletters.
They appear to have a realistic perception of the natural hazards which could pose a risk to their safety and 47% stated that they had previously experienced an emergency event.
Their reasonable levels of confi dence to plan and prepare for an emergency still required a need for information and specifi c knowledge about preparedness and how to contact the emergency services.
If they were to receive an emergency warning message, they would expect to receive information detailing the nature of the emergency and actions which they needed to take.
This population sample preferred telephone communication to access and confi rm emergency information either through local emergency services or family, friends or neighbours.
They were unsure about the ABC 774 radio as an emergency information source but looked to TV as a provider of reliable information.
They expected that the CFA fi re siren or a door knock from the emergency services would be the likely means they would access an emergency warning, although they would prefer to receive a telephone message.
There is probably a growing awareness and use of emergency service websites and other forms of telecommunications that would be regarded as effective methods to receive information.
Case study 2: StawellStawell is a provincial town at the northern end of the Grampian Ranges. The town is predominantly residential with most properties being detached dwellings. There are a number of industrial areas in the town and the township is surrounded by farmland.
Stawell has a total of 3352 households and of these, 146 households or 4.5% of dwellings had a resident who opted-in to take part in the CIWS Trial and Evaluation. This number of participants represented 2.5% of Stawell’s total population.
The pre-trial questionnaire was sent to the 146 residential householders and businesses that opted-in to participate. Of these, 113 returned completed pre-trial questionnaires. This represents a 77% response rate to the pre-trial questionnaire.
Pre-trial questionnaire summary
The Stawell population sample is predominantly aged over 40 years, with 68% working or volunteering full time or part time within the township area.
The majority of the population sample did not have children living at home, 26% reported living alone. Over half of this population sample had lived in Stawell for more than 15 years.
The population sample can be described as having a very strong connection and communication to family, friends and neighbours, with the local newspapers, newsletters and at times the ABC local radio providing the much-required local information.
There was a high expectation that television would provide emergency information and local news and information sources such as community safety brochures, fridge magnets which listed emergency services telephone numbers were also valued as part of community safety planning.
Although this population group had a realistic perception of most natural and personal risks, only 42% of this group thought it was possible that they would be affected by bushfi re and only 27% reported that they had experienced an emergency event.
The preparedness and planning levels of this population sample are, according to the pre-trial survey, quite low, with people opting to leave if threatened by an emergency and only 26% reporting that they would actively defend their property through an emergency.
Telephone messaging was regarded as an effective means of receiving emergency warning information, but it was important for people that they received details about the emergency and the actions which they should take.
This population sample’s communication profi le also indicates an increasing use of the internet (emergency services websites) as an information source.
35
Sect
ion
4
WIT.005.001.0868
Case study 3: Halls GapHalls Gap is a small rural hamlet surrounded by the Grampians National Park and Wonderlands Forest Park. The town is relatively isolated with a permanent population of about 300 people. The Halls Gap population can swell to several thousand during the holiday season.
The area’s main industry is eco-tourism which has evolved a diverse range of properties including holiday rental houses, self-contained cabins / units, bush campsites and caravan parks. The tourism industry generates national and international day and overnight visitors.
Halls Gap has a total of 249 households and of these, 50 households or 20% of dwellings had a resident who opted-in to take part in the CIWS Trial and Evaluation. This number of participants represented 15% of Halls Gap’s total population.
The pre-trial questionnaire was sent to the 50 residential householders and businesses that opted-in to participate. Of these, 36 returned completed pre-trial questionnaires. This represents a 72% response rate to the pre-trial questionnaire.
Pre-trial questionnaire summary
The Halls Gap population sample is aged mainly over 40, recently moved to the area and living in households without children. This population reported its reliance on local communication networks (friends / neighbours), with local newspapers, newsletters and the local ABC radio providing most of the information they require.
The emergency communications profi le was focused on locally based emergency services and the use of the telephone and local ABC radio and television.
The population sample was highly aware of bushfi re risk and the associated information sources (CFA bushfi re telephone hotline and websites).
The majority of this sample would stay and defend their property to some degree depending on the level of threat which they experienced, however their confi dence in knowing how to prepare and plan for an emergency was quite low.
Only 25% of respondents had experienced an emergency event and approximately a quarter of the responses believed that they required information, planning and education and training to better equip them to prepare for an emergency.
These results are probably indicative of an older age group who have recently moved to a small rural town and are still learning about the environment in which they live.
ConclusionThis section presented the fi ndings from the research methods used to collect data before the CIWS Trial and Evaluation.
It outlined the process and criteria that led to the selection of the townships that took part in the trial and summarised the public warning and information research which formed the basis of the pre-trial survey.
Case studies for the selected townships of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap included population profi les of each and the pre-trial questionnaire’s fi ndings about respondents’ access to communication, response to offi cial and unoffi cial warning information, risk perception, emergency preparedness and planning.
The case study methodology enabled the data to be considered from both the pre-trial and post-trial contexts and provides the basis for analysing the impact of the trial on community behaviour.
Section 5 will present the evaluation fi ndings that underpin the Program Logic Model, providing a blueprint for future trials while illustrating areas for future research and development in technology and community information and warning.
Sect
ion
4
36
WIT.005.001.0869
IntroductionThis section presents the community and Victorian and interstate emergency services’ responses to the CIWS Trial and Evaluation based on:
• feedback following presentations to the CALD and hearing-impaired communities
• post-trial community meetings
• participant feedback collected from a log-booklet of postcard surveys completed after each trial message send-out
• a random post-trial telephone survey of 362 participants
• interviews with Victorian emergency services and interstate observers.
The fi ndings have indicated a need to further develop the CIWS technology to ensure its relevance to community safety and highlight the importance of integrating all the components of the community information and warning system.
Consultation with marginalised community There was no representation of CALD or hearing-impaired people amongst the participating residents and a decision was made to consult with representatives of these communities to enable their views about public warning communication to be included.
CALD community consultation
Negotiations with Adult Multicultural Education Services (AMES) enabled adult students enrolled in Certifi cate 3 level English classes to be presented with information about the CIWS Trial. Approximately 60 students attended the forum.
A discussion with the 60 participating students about the communication of emergency warning information to people who did not have English as their fi rst language identifi ed the following themes from either a show of hands indicating agreement or from individual verbal responses:
• Sixty percent of the group were aware that they needed to telephone ‘000’ to access the emergency services.
• The majority of the participants acknowledged that it would be acceptable for their cultural community to receive a telephone message warning them of an emergency.
• Some participants verbally responded that receiving such a message could cause undue confusion, stress or worry to specifi c groups within their community, in particular for elderly and newly arrived people.
• Most participants acknowledged and commented that only a little English was necessary to understand a basic emergency warning message.
• A couple of comments were made which stated that they believed their English was suffi cient but were concerned that if they were to receive a message in the event of an emergency, the stress of the situation, rather than the warning message itself, might contribute to their confusion about the message. They believed it would then be more diffi cult to access a secondary information source if they had not properly interpreted the message.
• It was necessary for the emergency warning information to be repeated in the message. They believed that a siren or the word ‘emergency’ repeated three times at the start of the message would be a helpful tool to allow those who did not speak English to identify the important and urgent nature of the message. This would also increase their belief that the call was legitimate.
• There was general agreement that they would want to be informed about the safety actions which they needed to take during an emergency incident.
• Most of the group indicated that they were not aware of the ABC 774 radio network and some stated that they did not have a radio at home. Television and the internet were both suggested as viable information sources.
37
Section 5Evaluation Findings – Log Booklet and Telephone Interview Results
WIT.005.001.0870
The participants agreed that a community education program on public safety was a necessary part of implementing a community information and warning system, particularly to CALD communities.
It would be useful to advertise instructions about what to expect from a community warning system (receiving a telephone call). There was agreement that media sites which CALD groups would be most likely to access include multi-cultural newspapers, local ethnic radio and SBS Television.
The presentation included the opportunity for the participants to hear the standard CIWS warning message translated into Vietnamese, Somali and Turkish. The resulting discussion about the value for people to receive information in their fi rst language provided a view that people needed to be able to select an option which meant that they could independently access the information in their preferred language.
This forum provided the CIWS Trial and Evaluation with an initial insight into the specifi c communication needs of CALD communities. It is important that these fi ndings are incorporated with further consultation and existing and future research evidence.
Hearing impaired community consultation
Information about the CIWS Trial and Evaluation was presented to a senior social group who meet regularly at Melbourne’s VicDeaf organisation.
The presentation included a group discussion with approximately 40 people about the issues and concerns for hearing impaired people who may wish to access relevant information during an emergency incident. As a result of this presentation, 15 people also completed the CIWS pre-trial survey.
The discussions identifi ed themes which were directly relevant to the communication requirements of the hearing impaired community. These included the technology’s ability to deliver the emergency warning messages to TTY systems and the value of the internet and SMS messaging as secondary information sources.
• About 50% of those participating in the group discussion identifi ed that they had access to a TTY telephone facility or to a fax machine.
• Television was reported by the group as a priority source of information if there was an emergency.
• People have pre-arranged communication methods to contact family and friendship networks.
• Past experiences of emergencies such as fi re and storms were discussed and it was commonly
reported that people who were hearing impaired were unlikely to be unaware that an emergency event was occurring and that their safety could be threatened.
CIWS pre-trial survey results
The results of the CIWS pre-trial questionnaire produced the following fi ndings:
• All of the respondents were aged over 40 years.
• Of the 15 respondents, three lived alone, three lived with their partner, two lived with housemates and one was living with both their partner and children.
• 53% of the respondents reported that they had lived in their neighbourhood for more than 15 years.
Communication networks
• 80%of the respondents found out what was happening in their area through family and friends and by reading the local newspaper and council newsletter.
• All the respondents said that they didn’t use radio, the local government website or visits to community centres to access local information.
Risk perception
• 80% of respondents thought it was possible or very likely that their household could be affected by burglary or an accident in the home.
• 53% thought it was possible or very likely that their household could be affected by a house fi re.
• 66% thought it was possible or very likely that their household could be affected by a severe storm or fl ood but only two responded that they could possibly be affected by a bushfi re.
• 40% of respondents reported that they had experienced an emergency event.
Accessing information about an emergency
The most popular sources of information accessed to fi nd out about an emergency were:
• neighbour
• television (news)
• family living in the area
• local police station
• only two respondents (13%) identifi ed that they had accessed the websites of the emergency services (CFA, DSE, VICSES) and the Victorian Bushfi re Information Line.
Sect
ion
5
38
WIT.005.001.0871
If a warning message was communicated, respondents said it was most important that the message provided details of the emergency, sources of further information and what actions needed to be taken.
When asked to rate the importance of existing emergency information sources, the most highly rated sources were:
• television news
• emergency services websites
• fridge magnet with emergency services telephone numbers
• community safety information (written).
Conclusion
People with hearing impairment were likely to rely on their own well–established communication networks such as family, friends and neighbours.
It can’t be assumed that people have access to TTY and fax technology but it seems evident that mobile telephone communication using SMS messaging is becoming a primary source of interactive communication.
Secondary information sources (which could be accessed as part of public warning information) needed to be visually based, including written documentation, internet websites and, of course, television.
Post-trial community meetingsAt the conclusion of the CIWS Trial, community meetings in the shires of Northern Grampians and Yarra Ranges allowed all participants an opportunity to express their views.
The meetings were well attended, with 50 people from Halls Gap and Stawell attending the meeting at Stawell and 70 attendees at the meeting for Mount Evelyn.
Overall the participating residents from both meetings generally supported the operation of the CIWS and believed that such a system would be benefi cial to their communities during an emergency incident. They noted that their participation in the trial had also prompted them to revise their household bushfi re safety plans.
Residents from Mount Evelyn discussed how their participation in the trial had prompted their:
• recognition of important essential preparedness items, such as a battery-powered radio and non-electric telephone
• awareness of the emergency events which they could experience
• awareness of people within their community who may be at risk, such as people who had recently moved to the area, the elderly and people who may have a disability.
The residents from the Stawell and Halls Gap townships who attended the meeting agreed that the CIWS Trial had raised their awareness of emergencies and confi rmed the importance of their communities having a safety plan and being protected.
There was consensus across both meetings about the value of community emergency warning messages containing:
• details about the emergency event and
• the date and time when the warning message was delivered.
A majority of participants from Mount Evelyn also agreed that it was necessary to include:
• the level of threat which they might experience
• instructions about what action to take
• where to go if evacuation was necessary.
A minority of the meeting attendees stated that they did not want a message to tell them what to do and that they only required information about the emergency incident.
A majority of meeting attendees from Stawell / Halls Gap also agreed that it was necessary for a warning message to include:
• where to go for extra information
• the time frame of the emergency
• actions to take.
Attendees at both meetings proposed suggestions as a result of their participation in the trial which they believed would make the CIWS more effective for them. They suggested that:
• The time taken from receiving the message on the telephone to hearing the message on the radio was important.
• The pause that occurred when they picked up the telephone before the message began could cause concern and even prompt people to hang up and not hear the message.
• During the trial, the warning message began playing as soon as the telephone was answered from the answering machine and without waiting for the answering machine welcome greeting to be played. If the message was too long the answering machines did not accurately record the warning message.
Sect
ion
5
39
WIT.005.001.0872
They also suggested that:
• The CIWS technology needed to have the capacity to repeat the calls made to the resident.
• The CIWS technology needed to have the capacity, in times of extreme emergency, to interrupt telephone calls which might be in progress at the time.
• The emergency warning message needed to include the date and time it was delivered.
The Mount Evelyn residents suggested that the emergency warning message should have a siren sounding at the start of the message.
The Stawell / Halls Gap residents also suggested that:
• The CIWS technology should provide a recognised ID telephone number to provide caller identifi cation information.
• The emergency warning message include the time when more information could be received on the radio.
• The telephone emergency warning message information is consistent with information accessed from the secondary information sources.
A number of concerns about the CIWS Trial and Evaluation were raised during the community meetings.
Mount Evelyn residents expressed concern about the CIWS security:
• The community may not have suffi cient trust in the emergency services to deliver emergency warning information.
• The security of telephone numbers and property addresses from the database needed to be protected from computer hackers.
• A CIWS would ‘clog up’ the telephone lines in an emergency.
• There could be a problem if the telephone lines or power lines were down, particularly given the reporting of inconsistent mobile telephone and radio (ABC 774) reception in areas of Mount Evelyn.
The residents from Stawell and Halls Gap expressed concern about vulnerable people living in their community. They believed that all senior and disabled citizens should be a part of a safety telephone line that was part of, but separate to, the CIWS. The residents reported that they were unsure about what to do after receiving a telephone warning message. Was it their duty to pass the information on to their neighbour or to others who may not be able to receive emergency warning information?
Residents at both meetings believed that there needed to be protocols for the radio and television stations as the secondary sources of emergency information. While residents generally accepted that they would access a secondary information source, there was discussion and some confusion about what constituted ‘secondary information sources’. They suggested that these information sources could include FM and local community radio stations and television.
The majority of residents from both meetings acknowledged that they lived in an area of high bushfi re risk and that a warning and information system such as the CIWS could be particularly helpful. They believed that, in spite of the privacy and security issues, it was important that all people received a telephone warning message in the event of an emergency.
Finally, the participants felt that if such an information and warning system was to be introduced, it should be supported by an effective media and awareness campaign, to ensure that the system could become part of general household emergency safety plans.
Sect
ion
5
40
WIT.005.001.0873
Refl ections from interstate and Victorian emergency servicesThe following refl ections were gathered from focus group interviews with Victoria’s emergency services and trial observation questionnaires completed by representatives from interstate emergency management organisations. Although these results are not assumed to be the formal position of any particular organisation, it is important to include the perspectives of people who address the issues of public warning information as part of their regular professional duties.
Community and public safety
Interstate and Victorian emergency services made the following observations and comments about community and public safety:
• It was noted that community information and warning systems could facilitate self reliance and encourage communities to work together to plan for emergency situations.
• Each community had a role to play as a driver of this system, even though pockets of people may be hard to reach.
• Communication issues for CALD people and other vulnerable groups would present a challenge.
• Community education about emergency risk management was necessary to both underpin the emergency warning system and understand the community’s response to this style of emergency warning message delivery.
• Hazards are totally unpredictable and always uncertain. The nature of the trialled system may make it more appropriate for a slower developing and predictive event rather than for an event which had a sudden onset of threat.
• The system could, however, reduce the necessity to send volunteers into particularly dangerous situations.
• The system needed back-up contingencies and was only one tool to access information. If evacuation was required, for example, would the telephone message system be the only way to communicate this information?
• Messages needed to be timely and accurate based on the interpretation of hazard consequences.
• Messages needed to respond to community need, remain simple and provide pointers to other information sources.
• Although lacking in interactive opportunities for the community, the telephone message system could provide multiple levels of information and reassurance and be used in conjunction with other communication tools.
Operational response
Emergency services’ operational responses to CIWS were as follows:
• The CIWS could become part of a tiered approach to public warning and allow incident controllers to focus on the task at hand and provide a better use of resources. Agencies, however, needed to be clear about how the community would respond to the message. ‘Real time’ information needed to lead toward a safe response, and greater integration was needed between warning systems and operational procedures.
• One respondent stated that he believed that his organisation didn’t have a responsibility to provide that sort of emergency warning information. It was generally agreed that the operation of a CIWS system would rest with Victoria Police, in particular the Divisional Emergency Response Coordinator.
• Operational agreements needed to be clarifi ed through standard operating procedures and supported by adequate training for emergency service personnel.
• One respondent noted that currently their organisation lacked the technological capacity and resources to support this form of emergency communication.
• A CIWS would have to fi t into existing emergency management arrangements. It would need protocols for its activation and ‘accountability’ issues about using and not using this technology would have to be worked through.
• The use of this system had the potential to enable agencies to meet their community safety obligations and encourage closer links with the community, for example, when receiving feedback from properties where householders received the telephone call.
Sect
ion
5
41
WIT.005.001.0874
Public expectations about emergency services response
Emergency services’ comments about public expectations stated:
• The public’s expectations of a community information and warning system may increase. People may demand to be told what to do, despite community education, and demand that information be timely and accurate. These expectations may be diffi cult to provide at all times during an emergency incident.
• As a result of the CIWS, the community may feel that they are getting ‘good value’ from emergency services, and many in fact might become more aware of the role of emergency services and how to source reliable information.
• The community’s expectations may be too high if some emergency services do not have the resources to deliver messages through the CIWS or if information is not available to deliver to the public.
• The expectation about being told ‘what to do’ may not be forthcoming.
Emergency services expectations of CIWS
The emergency services’ expectations of the CIWS included the following comments:
• The communities needed to acknowledge residual risk so that there wasn’t a total reliance on the CIWS.
• Extending the government’s reach into homes may raise public expectations.
• Concern about how public expectation would be managed in the event that, for some reason, the system were not activated.
• Maintaining awareness of a CIWS may be diffi cult due to the diversity and the infrequency of emergency events – the system would need the support of good and ongoing education and promotion.
• The system needed to provide the best outcomes for the community’s safety.
Necessary datasets
When asked about the importance of datasets to support the operation of a CIWS the emergency service personnel responses stressed the value of layered GIS information, the need for data about critical infrastructure and access to properties and the integration of GIS data to the emergency.
The layers of GIS information needed to incorporate:
• the immediacy of threat with the population density of people to be contacted
• transport routes and types
• community demographics and land ownership
• positions of community refuges and assembly points
• community emergency information distribution points
• lifeline agencies such as water, gas and power and local government sites
• residential, commercial and public buildings and topography
• language information for specifi c community areas
• industrial on-site risk code data for major hazard facilities.
The datasets needed to be integrated with the emergency event so that a full range of emergency threat information and meteorological conditions was available.
There was a need to link datasets with response procedures and the decision to warn or alert the public.
The geo-coding process underpinning the CIWS was identifi ed as providing valuable information for emergency operational response procedures. The assessment of incident threat gained from fl ood and inundation levels and modelling of hazard plumes for major hazard facilities and fi re behaviour modelling could be matched to geographic areas and to property locations and their associated telephone numbers.
Sect
ion
5
42
WIT.005.001.0875
Log-booklet surveys - postcardsCIWS Trial technology errors
A number of errors with the CIWS technology impacted how and when people received a telephone message during the trial. This meant that people could not always respond to the message and sometimes this resulted in confusion. For this reason, the following errors associated with message send-outs needed to be taken into account when analysing the fi ndings of the log-booklet surveys:
• Trial 1 – No message received: On the fi rst day of the trial, participants who received a message from an answering machine were only able to hear the initial opening statement of the message as opposed to hearing the entire message.
• Trials 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 – Message cut-off: Although participants with an answering machine were able to receive a message, their existing pre-recorded greeting message meant that some of the CIWS message was missed.
• Trial 4 – Telephone message system drop out: The telephone message system dropped out because no telephone lines were available at the time.
• Trials 5 and 6 – Limited message: Participants were only given the option to access radio (ABC 774 or Horsham 594) for further information. The CIWS website and the CIWS Hotline were not offered as sources of further information during this trial.
• All Trials – Number ordering: the CIWS technology design meant that numbers were called in order from the smallest to the highest. As a result country numbers were called before urban numbers and urban numbers were called before mobile numbers.
All Trials – Number of telephone lines available: Telstra Corporation booked 60 lines for the CIWS Trial. Although the 60 lines were not all utilised at each of the trials, the capacity to access the required number of lines would be available from within Telstra Corporation’s intelligent network.
Survey fi ndings
There were 664 households who opted-in to the trial. Each of these households was issued with a log-booklet of postcards. The six postcard surveys in each log-booklet posed 8 identical questions which addressed the following:
• the way in which people received the message
• the time of day people received the message
• people’s understanding of the message
• the secondary sources of information which were accessed.
The participating residents were requested to return a log-booklet ‘postcard’ at the completion of each trial message. The fi ndings are presented in aggregated format with the ‘Shire of Yarra Ranges’ being all responses returned from Mount Evelyn while the ‘Shire of Northern Grampians’ represents the total number of responses from Stawell and Halls Gap.
Survey response
468 people opted-in to the trial from the Shire of Yarra Ranges. At the completion of the trial, 1614 postcards were returned from a possible 2808. This represented a 58% response rate.
196 opted-in to the trial from the Shire of Northern Grampians. Upon completion of the trial 596 postcards were returned from a possible 1176. This represented a 51% rate of response.
Figure 6 shows that the number of postcards returned decreased as the trial progressed. The Yarra Ranges shire had a slightly higher return rate than Northern Grampians, though they both followed a similar pattern.
43
Sect
ion
5
0
20
40
60
80
Perc
enta
ge(%
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Yarra Ranges 76 71.5 47 47.5 31 24.5Northern Grampians 55 67.5 44 41.5 31 12
28 th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
Fig. 6 – Number of postcards returned
WIT.005.001.0876
Message receptionIn Question 1, respondents in the shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians were asked whether they received a message. Figures 7 and 8 display the results.
Key Finding
The results from both regions indicate that as the trial progressed, there was a percentage increase in the number of respondents who received a call from the CIWS. This coincided with a decrease in the number of respondents that answered ‘No’ to receiving a message. This suggests that people became more familiar with the technological processes of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation as the trial progressed.
Overall, 93% of the log book respondents answered ‘Yes’ to receiving a message.
There were two technology issues associated with Trial 1:
1. The answering machine: the CIWS message was only partially recorded to answering machines, which meant that some participants received an incomplete message.
2. Missing participant contact details: the OESC learned through the CIWS Hotline and calls to the OESC that some participants’ contact details had not been included in the trial’s database.
Both issues resulted in a lower percentage (80.5%) of Yarra Ranges shire participants receiving a message in this particular trial. Overall 6% of the logbook respondents answered ‘No’ to receiving a message. The technology issues listed above meant that a higher percentage (17%) answered ‘No’ to receiving the fi rst message than at any other time during the trial.
44
Sect
ion
5
-10
10
30
50
70
90
Perc
enta
ge (%
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Yes 71.5 95.5 96.5 96.5 93.5 100No 25 0 3.5 2.5 5 0Blank 3.5 4 0 0 0 0Maybe 0 1 0 1 1.5 0
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
0
20
40
60
80
100
Perc
enta
ge (%
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Yes 80.5 96 97.5 97.5 98.5 96.5No 17 2.5 2 2.5 1.5 0Blank 1.5 1.5 0.5 0 0 3.5Maybe 0.5 0 0 0 0 0
28 th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
Figure 8: Message received, Northern Grampians
Figure 7: Message received, Yarra Ranges
WIT.005.001.0877
How people received the messageIn Question 2, respondents in the shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians were asked how they received a message. Figures 9 and 10 display the results.
Key Finding
A high percentage of people in both regions indicated that they received a message by ‘direct pick-up’ during the CIWS trial.
The towns in the Shire of Northern Grampians always had a higher percentage of direct pick-ups than Mount Evelyn in the Shire of Yarra Ranges. Of particular note was the high rate of direct pick-up in trial 2 (20 August) and Trial 6 (26 September).
In Trial 2 the CIWS messages were sent on Saturday in the morning and afternoon while in Trial 6 the message was sent in the evening at 1900 hours. These are times when people would most likely be at home and able to answer the telephone.
The high rate of direct pick-up from the Northern Grampians shire residents during both trials could be attributed to the demographic profi le (pre-trial survey which identifi ed the majority of residents being retired, working part-time and being at home during the day.
It would appear that those participants who received CIWS messages by direct pick-up were more likely to complete and return their log-book postcard survey. This was not the case for those who heard the message from an answering machine.
45
Sect
ion
5
0
20
40
60
80
100
Perc
enta
ge($
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Answering Machine (AM) 38.5 27 39.5 43 20.5 11.5Direct Pick Up (DPU) 16.5 70 58 55 78 89Blank 45.5 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 0Both AM & DPU 0 1 0 0.5 0 0
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September
26th September
0
20
40
60
80
100
Perc
enta
ge(%
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Answering Machine (AM) 28.5 21 21 33.5 21.5 8.5Direct Pick Up (DPU) 47 75 75.5 65.5 75.5 91.5Blank 24 3.5 3.5 1 3 0Both AM & DPU 0 1 0 0 0 0
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September
26th September
Figure 10: How did you receive the message? Northern Grampians
Figure 9: How did you receive the message? Yarra Ranges
WIT.005.001.0878
Time message was receivedIn Question 3, respondents in the shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians were asked about the time of day they received a message. Figures 11 and 12 display the results.
Key Finding
The log-booklet postcard surveys show that most people recorded that they received the message at the correct time that the message was sent out.
There were a high percentage of respondents who accurately recorded the time they received the message in the evening after Trial 6. This may be as a result of people becoming familiar with the expectations of the evaluation (completing the log-booklets).
This message was sent at 1915 hours, which is a time when most people would be at home and in position to answer the telephone.
46
Sect
ion
5
-10
10
30
50
70
90
110
Morning 7.5 46 80.5 71 91Afternoon 65 39.5 12 17.5 2.5Evening 8.5 3.5 4.5 7 3.5Blank 17.5 3 2.5 3.5 2.5Morning & Afternoon 0.5 7.5 1 0 0
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September
Afternoon Both morning &afternoon
Morning Morning Morning EveningActual Time
Per
cent
age
(%)
of p
ostc
ards
rec
eive
d
26th September
2.54.59.300
Figure 11: Time of message, Shire of Yarra Ranges
0
20
40
60
80
100
Perc
enta
ge(%
) Of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Morning 11 41.5 14 32 90 4Afternoon 55.5 44 78 65.5 0 4Evening 8.5 3 3.5 1 6.5 91.5Blank 25 1 4.5 0 1.5 0Morning & Afternoon 0 9 0 0 0 0
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
Afternnoon Morning & afternoon
ActualTime
Afternoon Morning & noon Morning Evening
Figure 12: Time of message, Northern Grampians
WIT.005.001.0879
Message understandingIn Question 4, respondents were asked whether they understood the message they received from the CIWS. Figures 13 and 14 display the results.
Key Finding
A high percentage of respondents indicated that they understood the messages which they received during the CIWS Trial.
The increasing trend of this fi nding indicated that people became more familiar with the likely content of the message as each trial was undertaken.
When people received the message from their answering machine in Trial 1 they received an initial greeting before being invited to press the hash (#) key. Unfortunately, when people pressed the # key, the message cut out and no message was recorded. This meant that people reported that they could not understand the message. Trial 1 resulted in a lower percentage of people who reported that they did not understand either the telephone message or the link between the telephone message and the radio broadcast.
Telephone numbers missing from the database resulted in people not receiving a telephone message but hearing the information about the trial on ABC 774 as the secondary information source.
47
Sect
ion
5
0
20
40
60
80
100
Perc
enta
ge(%
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Yes 58.5 91 95.5 91.5 87 96No 15 5.5 1 3.5 6.5 4Blank 27 4 3.5 5 6.5 0
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
Figure 13: Message understanding, Yarra Ranges
0
20
40
60
80
100
Perc
enta
ge(%
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Yes 58.5 91 95.5 91.5 87 96No 15 5.5 1 3.5 6.5 4Blank 27 4 3.5 5 6.5 0
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
Figure 14: Message understanding, Northern Grampians
WIT.005.001.0880
Entire message heardIn Question 5, respondents were asked whether they heard the entire message from the telephone, answering machine / voicemail. Figures 15 and 16 display the results.
Key Finding
After Trial 1, amendments were made to the CIWS technology to enable the message to be played in full from answering machines. The OESC also wrote to trial participants to acknowledge earlier diffi culties about the message being recorded to answering machines and to advise of these changes. Figures 15 and 16 show that an increasing number of participants heard the entire message as the trial progressed.
48
Sect
ion
5
0
20
40
60
80
100
Perc
enta
ge (%
) of P
ostc
oard
s Re
ceive
d
Yes 47 82 86 86 89.5 95No 44 15 11.5 12.5 9 5Blank 9 3 2.5 2.5 1.5 0
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
0
20
40
60
80
100
Perc
enta
ge(%
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Yes 42.5 85.5 91 79 78.5 91.5No 35 10.5 7 16 15 1Blank 22.5 4 2.5 5 6.5 4
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
Figure 15: Entire message heard? Yarra Ranges
Figure 16: Entire message heard? Northern Grampians
WIT.005.001.0881
Convenient sources of informationIn Question 6, respondents were asked what sources of secondary information they found most convenient. Figures 17 and 18 display the results.
Key Finding
During the opt-in process, and prior to the commencement of the trial, respondents had been advised of all available secondary information sources.
The log-booklet of postcard surveys identifi ed that the ABC 774AM and Horsham 594AM radio stations, along with the CIWS Telephone Hotline, proved to be the most convenient secondary sources of information.
A minority of participants indicated that the local shire website would be a convenient source of further information.
49
Sect
ion
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Perc
etna
ge(%
) of p
ostc
ards
rece
ived.
ABC 774 10 22 10 17.5 15 23Horsham 594 23 50.5 44 28.5 43.5 46Telephone Hotline 31 17 35 43.5 22.5 23Local Shire Website 4 2.5 8.5 8.5 9 0Blank 32.5 7.5 3 2 10.5 7.5
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September
26th September
Figure 18: Sources of information most convenient: Northern Grampians
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Perc
enta
ge(%
) of P
osca
rds
Retu
rned
ABC 774 24.5 65 32 29 65.5 63.5Telephone Hotline 38 21 49 53.5 23 30.5Local Shire Website 13 8.5 16 15 6.5 4Blank 24.5 5 2.5 2.5 5 1.5
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
Figure 17: Sources of information most convenient: Yarra Ranges
WIT.005.001.0882
Accessing further information In Question 7(a), respondents were asked if they had actually accessed the secondary information sources after receiving the telephone message.
Figures 19 and 20 display the results.
Key Finding
Between Trials 1 and 3 there was a steady increase in the percentage of participating residents who accessed the secondary information sources after they had received a telephone message. This declined in Trial 4 before increasing again in Trial 5.
The decline in people actually accessing further information may be a consequence of the participants’ familiarity with the information which would be available from the secondary sources. There was no increased motivation for the residents to access further information as the trial deliberately steered away from ‘emergency’ driven communication.
50
Sect
ion
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Perc
tena
ge (%
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Yes 32.5 61.5 85 82.5 70.5 79No 36 32.5 9.5 7.5 12.5 12.5Blank 31.5 6 6 10 8 8.5
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
0
20
40
60
80
100
Perc
enta
ge(%
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Yes 41 63.5 84.5 82 74.5 86No 49 28 7.5 10.5 19 8.5Blank 10 8.5 7.5 7.5 6 5
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
Figure 19: Did you access further information? Yarra Ranges
Figure 20: Did you access further information? Northern Grampians
WIT.005.001.0883
Codeword recordedIn Question 8, participants were asked if they recorded the codeword which was part of the information contained in the secondary information sources. This was to re-affi rm that participants had understood the detail of the message available from the secondary information sources.
Figures 21 and 22 display the results.
Key Finding
The log-booklet of postcard surveys indicated that respondents recalled the codeword occasionally rather than consistently throughout the trial.
In the Shire of Yarra Ranges, Trials 3, 4 and 5 showed that a high percentage of participants accessed further information and recalled the codeword. Trials 3 and 4 in the Shire of Northern Grampians showed a high percentage of participants who reported that they had accessed a source of further information and remembered the codeword.
51
Sect
ion
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Perc
enta
ge (%
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Yes 37.5 53.5 87.5 85.5 74.5 86No 21 14.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.5Blank 41.5 32 10 12 22.5 10.5
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
Perc
enta
ge (%
) of P
ostc
ards
Rec
eived
Yes 0 60.5 90.5 70.5 24.5 54No 1 4.5 3.5 0 44.5 5.5Blank 99 35 6 29.5 31 37.5
28th July 20th August 31st August 6th September 22nd September 26th September
Figure 22: Remember codeword: Northern Grampians
Figure 21: Remember code word: Yarra Ranges
WIT.005.001.0884
Log-booklet: postcard surveys summary
The fi ndings of the log-booklet postcard surveys suggest that the success rate of people receiving and understand a message increased as the trial progressed. However, it was clear that the technology did not deliver a perfect message to all those who had opted-in to the trial.
In Trial 1 it was not possible for people, especially in Mount Evelyn, to access the entire message from their answering machines. The community feedback meetings and comments from the CIWS Trial and Evaluation telephone hotline suggest that people wanted to access a message from their answering machine even if the message was replayed some hours after it was originally sent and recorded. Furthermore, a small number of participants did not receive any call even though their details were included on the database.
Post-trial telephone survey – fi ndingsThe OESC commissioned an external research contractor to undertake a telephone survey to establish the participants’ experiences with and acceptance of community information and warning systems.
The research addressed the following issues:
• acceptability of an automated telephone message system (CIWS)
• information required from a CIWS system
• use of information sources
• diffi culties using information sources
• sleep behaviours and emergency message recall
• attitudes toward and familiarity with the use of telephone key pad keys
• r esponses to potential technical problems with the CIWS
• usefulness of out-of-date warning messages
• attitudes toward hoax warning calls
• telephone messaging behaviour
• improvements to the CIWS.
Research methodology
Sample
A random telephone survey of 362 participants of the CIWS Trial was conducted. Respondents were located in:
• Mount Evelyn (n = 223)
• Stawell (n= 100)
• Halls Gap (n = 39).
This sample size allows 95% confi dence that sample results will be within 5% of overall population values.
Questionnaire
The questionnaire, designed in close consultation with the OESC, incorporated the research objectives and issues set out above. See Appendix 7.
Management of data collection
Surveying of participants was rigorous and comprehensive:
• One interview per household was obtained.
• Sample households were telephoned up to four times in order to make contact to complete an interview.
• Only individuals within the sample were interviewed.
• Highly experienced interviewers were used.
52
Sect
ion
5WIT.005.001.0885
Receiving message via telephone
Respondents were asked:
How acceptable is receiving a telephone message (less acceptable, the same or more acceptable) compared to receiving a door knock from emergency services?
Acceptability of receiving Less Same More Don’t warning message via phone Knowcompared with other methods % % % %
Receiving a door knock from emergency services 5.2 13.3 81.2 0.3
Hearing information on the radio 4.7 6.1 88.4 0.8
More than eight in ten respondents said that receiving a warning message from a telephone call was more acceptable to them than:
• A door knock from emergency services (81.2%).
• Hearing information on the radio (88.4%).
Approximately one in twenty respondents (5.2% and 4.7% respectively) said that it was less acceptable to receive a telephone message than these other options.
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
Information within the message
Information defi nitely needed
Respondents were asked:
If you received an automated telephone message about an emergency, what is the information you would defi nitely need so you could make informed decisions about what to do?
Required information Yes No Don’t Know % % %
Date the message was sent 92.0 7.7 0.3Time the message was sent 93.6 5.8 0.6Identity of the organisation that was leaving the message 91.7 7.7 0.6Nature of the emergency 99.7 0.3 0.0Actions to take 94.2 5.5 0.3Level of threat 97.5 1.9 0.8
More than nine in ten respondents said that they would defi nitely need all information about an emergency through an automated telephone message.
Respondents almost unanimously said they would defi nitely want information on the:
• nature of the emergency (99.7%)• level of the threat (97.5%).
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
Information could do without
Respondents were then asked: Given that an actual emergency situation would place pressures on everybody involved, what information could you do without and still make informed decisions about what to do?
Required information Yes No Don’t Know % % %
Date the message was sent 42.5 56.4 1.1Time the message was sent 39.5 59.4 1.1Identity of the organisation that was leaving the message 40.1 58.3 1.7Nature of the emergency 18.0 80.9 1.1Actions to take 26.5 71.5 1.9Level of threat 26.5 71.8 1.7
The three information elements that most respondents said that they could do without were the:
• date the message was sent (42.5%)• identity of the organisation leaving the message
(40.1%)• time the message was sent (39.5%).
53
Sect
ion
5
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
WIT.005.001.0886
Respondents resident in Stawell and Halls Gap, more than in Mount Evelyn said that they could not do without the:
• date the message was sent (67.6%)• time the message was sent (67.6%)• actions to take (85.6%).
Expected information
Respondents were asked:
After receiving a telephone warning message, what information would you expect to receive from the Telephone Hotline and nominated radio station?
Expected information Telephone Radio Hotline Station Yes No Yes No
Nature of the emergency 95.9 3.0 97.0 1.9
Level of threat 95.6 3.3 96.1 2.2
Actions to take 90.9 7.5 91.7 6.9
Weather conditions 64.1 32.0 70.4 26.5
How I can stay informed 95.6 33.3 95.0 3.9
Local council website 45.9 51.1 47.8 49.2
*Balance responded “do not know”
The majority of respondents for the four information elements stated that they would expect to receive a message from both the Telephone Hotline and the nominated radio station about the:
• nature of the emergency (95.9% and 97.0% respectively)
• level of threat (95.6% and 96.1% respectively)• means stay informed (95.6% and 95.0%
respectively)• actions to take (90.9% and 91.7% respectively)
Information on weather conditions was identifi ed by around two-thirds of respondents (64.1% and 70.4% respectively).
Information about the local council website was identifi ed by a minority of respondents (45.9% and 47.8% respectively).
Respondents resident in Stawell and Halls Gap, more than those residents in Mount Evelyn, said that they expected the following information from the Telephone Hotline:
• weather conditions (76.3%).• council website (53.2%).
Respondents resident in Stawell and Halls Gap, more than those residents in Mount Evelyn, said that they expected information on weather conditions from the radio (78.4%).
Information making you feel less safe
Respondents were asked:
Is there any information from an automated telephone emergency warning message that could make you feel less safe rather than safer?
Information that would makeparticipants feel less safe %
Inadequate information 10.2
How information was communicated/panicked 3.9
If there was an immediate threat 3.3
Other 5.8
Don’t know 2.2
Nothing make me feel less safe 74.6
Almost three quarters of respondents (74.6%) said that there was no information from an automated telephone warning message that would make them feel less safe. One in ten respondents (10.2%) said they would feel less safe if inadequate information was provided in the automated telephone message. They would also feel less safe if the information was communicated in such a way as to cause panic (3.9%) or if they were told there was an immediate threat (3.3%). There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
54
Sect
ion
5
Table 4
Table 5
WIT.005.001.0887
Sources of information
Primary source of information
Respondents were asked:
During this trial, you were provided with three other information sources, the Telephone Hotline, the radio station and the council website. Which was the main one that you tended to use?
Main source of information %
CIWS Telephone Hotline 43.6ABC 774 or 594 radio station 45.7Local council website 8.4Other information source 2.2
The primary sources of information used by respondents were the ABC radio stations (45.7%) and the Telephone Hotline (43.6%).
One in twelve respondents (8.4%) used the council website as their primary source of information.
Respondents resident in Stawell and Halls Gap, more than those resident in Mount Evelyn, used ABC radio as their main source of information (52.5%).
Respondents resident in Mount Evelyn, more than those residents in Stawell and Halls Gap, used the Telephone Hotline as their main source of information (49.5%).
Reasons for using the source
Respondents were asked:
What was the reason why you mainly used the radio station / Telephone Hotline/ council website?
Reason for using source of information %
Convenient/easy 48.7Always on-line/listen to that station 13.2No computer/web access/computer illiterate 11.3Get information immediately 8.5Can’t use radio/not accessible 4.7Trouble getting radio reception 4.0Wouldn’t work in emergency (loss electricity) 1.6Other 8.0
The three primary reasons why respondents mainly used the information source were:
• it was convenient and easy for them to use (48.7%)• they always had the radio station playing / are
continuously online (13.2%)• didn’t have a computer or internet access (11.3%)
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
Diffi culties accessing information
Respondents were asked:
During the trial, did you have any diffi culties accessing any of the sources of information?
Diffi culty accessing sources Yes No Didn’t Try % % %
Tuning into 774 ABC 19.6 51.5 29.3Tuning into 594 FM ABC 7.3 20.6 72.0Accessing the CIWS information from the shire’s website 5.2 18.0 76.8Accessing the information from the Telephone Hotline 5.0 54.0 41.0
Respondents who used the sources had the greatest diffi culties tuning into ABC Radio 774 and 594 (19.6% or 38.0% of total tuning into ABC 774 and 7.3% or 38.4% of total tuning into ABC 594 respectively).
Respondents resident in Stawell, Halls Gap and Mount Evelyn:
• did not have diffi culty tuning to ABC 594 (49.6%)• did not try to tune to ABC 774 (43.2%) or use
the Telephone Hotline (48.2%).
Respondents resident in Mount Evelyn, more than those residents in Stawell and Halls Gap, used the Telephone Hotline as their main source of information (49.5%). In addition they:
• did not have diffi culty tuning to ABC 774 (61.9 %)• did not try to tune to ABC 594 (97.7%).
Diffi culty with ABC 774
Respondents (n = 71) had diffi culties accessing information through ABC 774 primarily because they got poor radio reception (69.6%), because information was too limited (17.4%) and because it took too long to get the information (10.1%).
Diffi culty with ABC 594 AM
Respondents (n = 26) had diffi culties accessing information through ABC 594 primarily because they got poor radio reception (74.1%), because information was too limited (18.5%) and because it took too long to get the information (7.4%).
Diffi culty with shire website
Respondents (n = 19) had diffi culties accessing information through the council website because they had trouble fi nding it on the site (88.2%).
Sect
ion
5
55
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
WIT.005.001.0888
Diffi culty with Telephone Hotline
Respondents (n = 18) had diffi culties accessing information through the Telephone Hotline because the:
• message was read too fast (30.8%)• participants couldn’t get through on the
telephone line (23.1%)• information was too limited (15.4%)• message cut out (7.7%)• other reasons (23.1%).
Waking telephone behaviour
Position of telephone
Respondents were asked:
If you were aware that an emergency situation may develop during the next sleeping period (e.g. an approaching bushfi re) and that a phone warning system was in place (suggesting you may be telephoned if an emergency did develop) which of the following would you be most likely to do?
Emergency behaviour %
Ensure that a phone would ring inside the room where I was sleeping 69.9
Rely on hearing the phone, located in a room other than where I was sleeping 29.6
Don’t know 0.5
Almost seven in ten respondents (69.9%) said that they would have their telephone ringing inside their room. There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
Waking behaviour
Respondents were asked:
When people are suddenly awoken from a deep sleep they may feel confused and groggy at fi rst. If you were awoken from deep sleep by an unexpected emergency phone call which of the following is likely to apply to you within the fi rst one minute of answering the phone?
Emergency behaviour %
Confused and groggy, with some diffi culty following instructions and remembering details 10.5
Somewhat groggy but likely to be able to follow most instructions and remember most details 42.8
Clearheaded enough to reliably follow all
instructions and remember all details 46.7
Respondents were evenly divided between those believing that they would awaken clearheaded and somewhat groggy.
Almost half of respondents (46.7%) believed that they would, within a minute of waking, be clearheaded enough to follow all instructions and remember details.
Over four in ten (42.8%), however, thought that they would be somewhat groggy but able to remember most details and instructions.
Only one in ten respondents (10.5%) believed they would be confused and groggy and have diffi culty remembering details and following instructions.
Respondents resident in Stawell and Halls Gap more than those from Mount Evelyn said that they were likely to wake up confused and groggy with some diffi culty following instructions and remembering details (14.4%).
Telephone keypad functions
Importance of the hash key
Respondents were asked:
On a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is not important at all and 10 is extremely important, how important is it to press the hash key to enable you to hear the entire message?
Importance of hash key to hear all message %
Rating 6 -10 Total important 78.48-10 Very important 74.36 - 7 Important 4.13 - 5 Small importance 9.70 - 2 Not important 5.50 - 5 Total not important 15.2
*Remaining 6.4% of respondents don’t know
Almost eight in ten respondents (78.4%) believed that it was important to press the hash key to hear the entire message. Almost three quarters of respondents (74.3%) thought it was very important (rated 8-10).
Sect
ion
5
56
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11
WIT.005.001.0889
Importance of the star key
Respondents were asked:
On a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is not important at all and 10 is extremely important, how important is it to press the star key to enable you to replay the message and listen to it again?
Importance of star key to replay message %
Rating 6 -10 Total important 90.18-10 Very Important 85.76 - 7 Important 4.43 - 5 Small importance 3.90 - 2 Not important 1.10 - 5 Total not important 5.0
*Remaining 6.4% of respondents don’t know
More than nine in ten respondents (90.1%) believed that it was important to press the star key to enable the message to be replayed. Over 85% of respondents thought it was very important (rated 8-10).
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
Familiarity with telephone keys
Respondents were asked:
How familiar are you with using the hash and star keys on your telephone keypad. Would you say you are:
Familiarity with phone keys %
Not familiar at all 5.0Slightly familiar 6.9Reasonably familiar 25.4Totally familiar 62.7
More than six in ten respondents (62.7%) said that they were totally familiar with the hash and star keys on their telephone. A further quarter (25.4%) said that they were reasonably familiar with them.
Respondents resident in Stawell and Halls Gap, more than those resident in Mount Evelyn, were likely to say that they were not at all familiar (9.4%) or slightly familiar (11.5%) with the hash and star keys.
Respondents resident in Mount Evelyn, more than those resident in Stawell and Halls Gap, were likely to say that they were totally familiar (74.4%) with the keys.
Technology problems
Initial response to technology problem
Respondents were asked:
What do you think you would do if you received a telephone message which you believed was advising of an emergency but a technology problem meant that you didn’t hear the entire message?
Action if unable to hear all of message %
Access other information sources 62.4
Don’t worry about it 0.8
Check other information to confi rm emergency 35.6
Complain to emergency services 1.1
Over six in ten respondents (62.4%) said that they would access other information sources such as the hotline, radio or council website to get information about the emergency.
A further 35.6% said that they would check other information such as neighbours and friends (and CFA) to confi rm the emergency.
Respondents resident in Stawell and Halls Gap, more than those residents in Mount Evelyn, said that they would check with other information sources to confi rm the emergency (52.5%).
Respondents resident in Mount Evelyn, more than those residents in Stawell and Halls Gap, said that they would access other information sources (72.6%).
Secondary response to technology problem
Respondents were then asked:
What would be the next thing that you would do?
Next action I would take % Total
Make decision about what to do 38.4
Be ready to deal with emergency 6.1
Do what I’m told to do 1.9 46.4
Access other information source 28.2
Call emergency services 8.3
Confi rm with other source 2.5
Complain to emergency services 0.6 39.6
Depends on type of emergency 4.4 4.4
Other 3.6 3.6
Don’t Know 6.1 6.1
Sect
ion
5
57
Table 12
Table 13
Table 14
Table 15
WIT.005.001.0890
Once respondents had confi rmed the existence of an emergency, most respondents said that they would perform one of two things:
• Decide what to do or prepare in some way (46.4%) – make a decision about what to do, be ready to deal with the emergency, do what they are told.
• Access other information sources about the emergency (39.6%) – access/confi rm with other information source, call/complain to emergency services.
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
Usefulness of aged warning
Respondents were asked:
If an emergency advice telephone message was recorded to your answering machine or message bank, on a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is not useful at all and 10 is extremely useful, how useful would the information be to you if you listened to the message less than 20 minutes / up to an hour / over an hour after it was recorded?
Usefulness of message left on answering machine or message bank
Time Total Total Very Useful Small Notsince useful low useful (6-7) Use- usefulMessage (6-10) useful (8-10) % fulness (0-2) % (0-5) % (3-5) % % %
Less than20 minutesafter it wasrecorded 79.0 9.2 71.2 7.8 7.5 1.7
Up to an hourafter it wasrecorded 55.6 29.0 37.4 18.2 22.6 6.4
Over an hourafter it wasrecorded 31.5 55.3 16.3 15.2 31.0 24.3
* Balance of respondents unsure about usefulness of the information in the message
Respondents believed that the usefulness of an emergency telephone message declined as the period between when it was recorded, and listened to, increased.
Almost eight in ten respondents (79.0%) said that the message would be useful if it were listened to within 20 minutes of it being recorded, with 71.2% believing it would be very useful.
A majority of respondents (55.6% with 37.4% saying it would be very useful) felt the message would be useful even up to an hour after it was recorded.
However not quite a third of respondents (31.5%) believed that the message would be useful if it were more than an hour old.
Respondents resident in Stawell and Halls Gap, more than those residents in Mount Evelyn, felt that a message was not useful:
• less than 20 mins after it was recorded (18.3%)
• up to an hour after it was recorded (42.0%).
Hoax calls
Worry about hoax callsRespondents were asked:
If the CIWS system was implemented, would you be worried about hoax calls about emergencies?
Worried about hoax calls %
Yes 27.3
No 71.5
Don’t know 1.2
While over seven in ten respondents (71.5%) said that they were not worried about hoax calls about emergencies, over a quarter said that they were.
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
Reassuring the public that calls are genuine
Respondents were asked:
What do you think could be done to reassure the public that the emergency warning/advice message call from the emergency services was genuine?
Done to reassure the public %
Provide other public sources to confi rm emergency 23.6
Organisation calling identify itself 10.6
Code or password 8.1
Couldn’t hoax/would know 8.1
Unique sound or voice 5.6
Number to call-back and confi rm 5.6
Standard message format 4.4
Publicity about system 1.7
Other 4.4
Don’t know 28.1
Sect
ion
5
58
Table 16
Table 17
Table 18
WIT.005.001.0891
Almost three in ten respondents (29.2%) thought that the public could verify the genuineness of an emergency warning by confi rming it with other sources (23.6%) or through a number that could be called back (5.6%). One in ten (10.6) felt organisational identifi cation would be suffi cient to reassure the public.
The security of the message could also be enhanced by a code / password (8.1%), a unique sound or voice (5.6%) or a standard message format (4.4%).
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
Acceptability of telephone warning
Respondents were asked:
Having been part of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation, on a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is totally unacceptable and 10 is highly acceptable, how acceptable is an automated telephone message for you and your family/household/ business as a way to receive emergency advice and warning from the emergency services?
Acceptability of telephone message %
Rating 6 -10 Total acceptable 95.08-10 Very acceptable 90.36 - 7 Acceptable 4.73 - 5 Not acceptable 1.70 - 2 Not acceptable at all 2.50 - 5 Total not acceptable 4.5
* Balance of respondents are unsure about acceptability of automated message
An overwhelming proportion of respondents (95.0%) said that an automated telephone message was an acceptable way to receive emergency advice and warning from emergency services.
Nine in ten respondents said this method was highly acceptable to them.
Less than one in twenty respondents said the approach was unacceptable.
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
Improvements to the service
Respondents were asked:
Having been part of this CIWS Trial and Evaluation, what improvements would you suggest for making the current system easier to use and understand?
Improvements to make system easier to useand understand %
No improvements needed 41.4Message to mobile / SMS / nominated phone 9.4Fix problems with message on answering machine 8.0Slower/clearer message 4.4Ability to repeat message 3.3More radio stations / a dedicated station 3.0More regular radio broadcast 2.5More detailed message 2.5Include siren in message 1.7Ability to delay start of message 1.4Ring back unanswered calls 1.4TV broadcast 1.1Differing ring tone for warning call 1.1Improve website 1.1Public education on message system 1.1No hash – play immediately 0.8Other 6.6Don’t know 9.1
Over four in ten respondents believed that no improvements were necessary to make the automated warning system easier to use and understand.
The improvements that over a quarter of respondents (27.1%) identifi ed are to:
• enable messages to be sent to mobiles, SMS and other nominated numbers
• deal with issues around accessing messages left on answering machines
• make the message slower and clearer
• allow message to be repeated
• broadcast details of the emergency over more radio stations.
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
Sect
ion
5
59
Table 19
Table 20
WIT.005.001.0892
Managing unanswered telephone messages when away most of the day
Respondents were asked:
How do you manage your telephone when you are not at home for all or most of the day? Do you….
Managing phone calls when not at home %
Put on answering machine 54.1Have message bank 23.5Divert telephone to mobile 7.2Don’t worry about telephone calls being unanswered 15.2
A majority of respondents (54.1%) managed their telephone if they were away all day by turning on their answering machine. A further 23.5% used message bank. More than one in seven (15.2%) left the telephone unanswered.
Messages when away for a short period
Respondents were asked:
How do you manage your telephone when you may be away from your home for a short time or may not be available to answer the telephone? Do you….
Managing phone calls when not available to answer phone %
Put on answering machine 53.5Have message bank 23.8Divert telephone to mobile 6.1Don’t worry about telephone calls being unanswered 16.6
Respondents’ behaviour when their telephones were left unattended for a short time was similar to that when they were away all day.
Slightly more respondents (16.6%) leave their phone unanswered (by leaving their answering machine off) when they are away only for a short period.
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
CIWS acceptance in household
Respondents were asked:
Are there any reasons why you or members of your household wouldn’t want to receive information or warning messages from the emergency services?
Respondents, almost unanimously (97.6%) said that there were no reasons why they, or a member of their household, would not want to receive information or warning messages from the emergency services.
Impact of CIWS on attitude to emergencies
Attitude to emergencies and community safety
Respondents were asked:
Has being part of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation changed the way you think about emergency situations and community safety?
CIWS changed thinking about emergency situations and community safety %
Yes 53.9No 46.1Don’t know 0.0
Respondents were fairly evenly divided in their view of whether the experience of the trial had changed the way they think, although a majority (53.9%) believed that it had.
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
How attitude to emergencies has changed
The 195 respondents who said that the trial had changed the way they think about emergency situations and community safety were asked:
How has being part of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation changed the way you think about emergency situations and community safety?
How CIWS changed thinking about emergency situations and community safety %
More aware/think more about community safety 75.6More confi dent can cope/ feel safer 15.0More involved in the community 4.1Other 5.2
Over three quarters of respondents (75.6%) said that their awareness of and alertness to emergencies and community safety had been enhanced.
Over one in seven respondents (15.0%) felt more confi dent and safer as a consequence of being involved in the trial.
Respondents resident in Stawell and Halls Gap, more than those in Mount Evelyn, tended to say that the CIWS Trial and Evaluation had made them more aware of and alert to emergencies and community safety (86.3%).
Sect
ion
5
60
Table 21
Table 22
Table 23
Table 24
WIT.005.001.0893
Information to be better informed
Respondents were asked:
Is there any specifi c information that local government and emergency services can provide you with to help you become better informed about emergency events and community safety?
Information to be better informed %
None required 52.1Evacuation procedures/location refuges 18.6Booklet/fridge magnet with information 9.2Information source/number to call 5.8Publicity on the message system 2.8Other 12.6
A majority of respondents (52.1%) did not want information to help them to be better informed about emergency events and community safety.
However, almost one if fi ve (18.6%) said they would like information about evacuation procedures and location of refuges.
Almost one in ten (9.2%) wanted information in booklet form or on a fridge magnet that they could readily refer to.
Over one in twenty (5.8%) said that they would like a permanent telephone number they could call to get information on emergencies.
There were no signifi cant differences between respondents resident in Mount Evelyn compared to those living in Stawell and Halls Gap.
ConclusionThis section presented the community and Victorian and interstate emergency services’ responses to the CIWS Trial and Evaluation based on:
• feedback following presentations to the CALD and hearing-impaired communities
• post-trial community meetings
• participant feedback collected from a log-booklet of postcard surveys completed after each trial message send-out
• a random post-trial telephone survey of 362 participants
• interviews with Victorian emergency services and interstate observers.
The fi ndings indicated a need to further develop the CIWS technology to ensure its relevance to the community and highlighted the importance of ensuring that all aspects of the community information and warning system are integrated.
Although the telephone was an acceptable means to deliver emergency information, it failed to deliver messages to everyone who opted in to the trial and, when delivery succeeded, the message was not always received in its complete form.
Participants expected to access the message from an answering machine even if the message was no longer current.
Section 6 will present the Program Logic Model which will show how all aspects of the trial and evaluation have been linked together.
Sect
ion
5
61
Table 25
WIT.005.001.0894
IntroductionThis section presents the CIWS Trial and Evaluation as a program logic model.
The CIWS Program Logic Model was created from the research conducted throughout the trial. Its aim was to enable the CIWS Steering Group to consider all the trial’s inputs, processes and decision making.
The model described how key stakeholders collaborated to resolve community, technological and operational issues. This descriptive information enabled:
• consideration of the CIWS technology’s capacity to support and improve the delivery of community warning and information and
• testing of the ability of wireless technology to transfer fi eld images of the emergency incident to a national incident control centre.
The Program Logic Model was also designed to provide an ‘evidence-based framework’ from which both the Steering and Data Transfer groups could make informed decisions about the future capability of the CIWS technology and the implications of this for Victoria’s emergency service operations and emergency management arrangements.
This model also provided a basis for clarifying how the challenges surrounding public warning information systems may be managed through stakeholder partnerships and collaborations.
Development of the modelThe Program Logic Model illustrates the interactions across and between:
• the decisions and procedures of emergency services and operations
• the technological and community components of the CIWS Trial and
• the evaluation processes.
The research fi ndings from the community consultation meetings and pre-trial surveys, interviews with Victoria’s emergency services and the log-booklet survey have provided robust evidence for the logic model’s development.
This has also enabled the design of an activity and decision baseline to gauge the capacity of the CIWS technology to deliver timely and accurate messages to community residents.
Understanding the components
The Program Logic Model has been structured into tables and a fl ow chart to clearly identify the decisions and activities undertaken within each of the model’s components. The research process worked through a detailed analysis of all the components related to the CIWS Trial and Evaluation. This process resulted in three tables:
1. Community components
2. CIWS data transfer components
3. CIWS evaluation components
(see pgs 64, 65, 66)
62
Section 6Program Logic Model
WIT.005.001.0895
Table 26: Community components
Table 26 (on pg 64) illustrates the trial’s community components which can be summarised as follows.
The OESC worked closely with the shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians to help both communities prepare for the trial and to establish a process to collect the names, telephone numbers and addresses of participants who opted-in to the trial.
The database of participants was forwarded to DSE, SII where it was geo-coded before being sent to Telstra for use during the trial. These activities contributed to the initial engagement of the community and establishing a shared understanding about the way in which the trial would progress.
Table 27: CIWS data transfer components (operational)
Table 27 (on pg 65) illustrates the trial’s data transfer components and the stakeholder partnerships that it supported. It can be summarised as follows.
Victoria’s emergency services worked in partnership to script scenarios to add contextual richness to the trial.
The emergency services supplied maps of Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap which were used at the Telstra Innovation Centre to demonstrate the status of calls during the trial. The Victoria Police, using its responsibilities stated in Victorian Emergency Management Manual, telephoned the ABC Radio to request the broadcasting of information that specifi cally addressed listeners in Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap.
Stakeholder collaboration enabled knowledge and experience about public warning issues to be identifi ed and incorporated into the trial. The results of this collaboration underpinned the decision and activities of the trial’s implementation and became part of the Program Logic Model.
Table 28: CIWS evaluation components
Table 28 (on pg 66) illustrates the evaluation activity that resulted from each of the trial message send-outs.
The trial yielded a consistent level of township resident support in the form of well-attended community feedback meetings and survey and interview responses, which provided the evidence to reinforce the evaluation fi ndings.
Workshops conducted by the OESC at VicDeaf and AMES presented the CIWS technology to the hearing-impaired and CALD communities respectively and provided the basis for the Steering Group to consider the future risk communication requirements for these communities. The success of the trial was dependent on the ability to maintain community participation throughout the trial and access to evaluation data and information related to that participation.
An explanation of the processes, decisions and outcomes
The CIWS Program Logic Model (fl owchart) structures Tables 1, 2 and 3 into a series of processes, decisions and outcomes.
Figure 23 illustrates the CIWS Program Logic Model (see pgs 67-69).
The CIWS Program Logic Model presents the CIWS Trial & Evaluation within the context of the community residents’ participation, the operation of the technology and the emergency services’ roles.
The performance of the program logic model provides the basis for theory development (see Chen and Rossi 1990) about community information and warning in Victoria and the conduct of future trials of CIWS technology.
It is also the basis from which the emergency management sector can further explore key issues which directly relate to the operational, technological and community components associated with the trial.
Sect
ion
6
63
WIT.005.001.0896
Initi
ator
Cons
ulta
tion
and
colla
bora
tion
betw
een
Info
rmat
ion
give
n an
d ac
tions
take
nIn
form
atio
n re
ceiv
edOu
tcom
e
OESC
Shire
of Y
arra
Ran
ges,
Sh
ire o
f Nor
ther
n Gr
ampi
ans
Set u
p th
e cr
iteria
: pop
ulat
ion
dist
ribut
ion,
po
pula
tion
dive
rsity
, ind
ustr
y pr
esen
ce,
risk
leve
ls (m
oder
ate)
, co
mm
unic
atio
ns in
frast
ruct
ure
Supp
lied:
prop
erty
type
prop
erty
occ
upie
r, pr
oper
ty a
ddre
ss
Tow
nshi
ps d
efi n
ed fo
r the
tria
l
OESC
Com
mun
ity le
ader
s, lo
cal v
olun
teer
s an
d m
unic
ipal
em
erge
ncy
man
agem
ent s
take
hold
ers
Proj
ect b
riefi n
g an
d m
eetin
gLo
cal k
now
ledg
eSh
ared
ow
ners
hip
of p
roje
ctCo
mm
unity
trus
t
OESC
Loca
l gov
ernm
ent c
omm
unic
atio
ns s
taff
Brie
fi ngs
, bac
kgro
und
info
rmat
ion,
br
ochu
re, m
edia
rele
ases
and
Ho
tline
info
rmat
ion
Enqu
iries
to th
e CI
WS
Hotli
ne, c
omm
unity
fe
edba
ck a
bout
the
trial
Rais
ed p
rofi l
e of
tria
l in
the
com
mun
ity
OESC
Targ
eted
/pot
entia
l par
ticip
ants
Lette
r of i
nvita
tion
incl
udin
g tri
al
info
rmat
ion
and
opt-i
n fo
rm (c
onse
nt)
Opt-i
n fo
rms
retu
rned
with
na
me,
add
ress
and
la
ndlin
e te
leph
one
num
ber
Self-
sele
cted
par
ticip
ant d
atab
ase:
M
t Eve
lyn
468,
Staw
ell 1
46,
and
Halls
Gap
50
OESC
Parti
cipa
nt d
atab
ase
(pro
vide
d co
ntac
t de
tails
to s
end
the
pre-
trial
sur
veys
)Pr
e-tri
al s
urve
ys
Enqu
iries
to th
e CI
WS
Hotli
neCo
mm
unity
feed
back
ab
out t
he tr
ial
Mt E
vely
n: 3
90 p
re-tr
ial s
urve
ys re
turn
ed
Staw
ell:
146
pre-
trial
sur
veys
retu
rned
Ha
lls G
ap :
36 p
re-tr
ial s
urve
ys re
turn
ed
OESC
DSE,
SII
Parti
cipa
nt d
atab
ase
Opt-i
n pr
oper
ties
geo-
code
d Se
nt to
Tel
stra
OESC
Tels
tra a
nd D
SE, S
IIGe
ocod
ed p
rope
rties
pa
rtici
patin
g in
the
trial
Mat
ched
info
rmat
ion
to s
imul
ated
IPND
Map
s of
Mou
nt E
vely
n,
Staw
ell a
nd H
alls
Gap
OESC
Tels
tra, A
BC R
adio
Mes
sage
con
tent
(inf
orm
atio
n qu
ality
)Ho
tline
and
fe
edba
ck s
heet
sM
essa
ge c
onte
nt c
hang
ed. A
dd a
nd re
mov
e co
nten
t fro
m th
e de
liver
ed m
essa
ge
OESC
Tels
tra a
nd A
BC R
adio
Mes
sage
stru
ctur
e (a
nsw
erin
g m
achi
nes)
Hotli
ne a
nd
com
mun
ity fe
edba
ckM
essa
ge s
truct
ure
chan
ged
to d
eliv
er
com
plet
e m
essa
ge to
ans
wer
ing
mac
hine
s
Tabl
e 26
: CIW
S c
omm
unit
y co
mpo
nent
s
Sect
ion
6
64
WIT.005.001.0897
Initi
ator
Resp
onsi
ble
Orga
nisa
tions
Requ
irem
ents
Pr
oced
ures
Outc
ome
CIW
S St
eerin
g Gr
oup
/ DTS
G VI
CPOL
, CFA
, VIC
SES,
MFE
SB,
ABC
Radi
o, D
HS, D
SE, T
elst
ra
Form
at o
f tria
l sce
nario
sSc
ript o
f tria
l sce
nario
sTi
met
able
for m
essa
ge
send
-out
s
Inci
dent
Con
trolle
r pro
visi
on o
f:•
fact
ual a
nd ti
mel
y ad
vice
abo
ut to
xic
spill
• ad
vice
abo
ut th
e po
pula
tion
at ri
skRe
com
men
ds:
• W
here
pol
ygon
sho
uld
be d
raw
n
Emer
genc
y Re
spon
se C
o-or
dina
tor a
utho
rises
:•
Use
CIW
S sy
stem
s an
d te
chno
logi
es•
Radi
o m
essa
ge v
ia A
BC M
oU
28 J
uly,
200
5 to
xic
spill
sce
nario
in
Mou
nt E
vely
nTe
leph
one
mes
sage
sen
d-ou
ts:
Halls
Gap
Staw
ell
Mou
nt E
vely
n
CIW
S St
eerin
g Gr
oup
/ DTS
GVI
CPOL
, CFA
, VIC
SES,
MFE
SB,
ABC
Radi
o, D
HS, D
SE, T
elst
raTi
met
able
for m
essa
ge s
end-
outs
Emer
genc
y Re
spon
se C
o-or
dina
tor a
utho
rises
:•
Use
CIW
S sy
stem
s an
d te
chno
logi
esRa
dio
mes
sage
via
ABC
MoU
20 A
ugus
t, 20
05 n
on s
cena
rio d
ayTe
leph
one
mes
sage
sen
d-ou
ts:
Halls
Gap
Staw
ell
Mou
nt E
vely
n
CIW
S St
eerin
g Gr
oup
/ DTS
GVI
CPOL
, CFA
, VIC
SES,
MFE
SB,
ABC
Radi
o, D
HS, D
SE, T
elst
ra
Form
at o
f tria
l sce
nario
sSc
ript o
f tria
l sce
nario
sTi
met
able
for m
essa
ge s
end-
outs
Prov
isio
n of
:•
fact
ual a
nd ti
mel
y ad
vice
abo
ut to
xic
spill
• ad
vice
abo
ut th
e po
pula
tion
at ri
skRe
com
men
ds:
• W
here
pol
ygon
sho
uld
be d
raw
n
Emer
genc
y Re
spon
se C
o-or
dina
tor a
utho
rises
:•
Use
CIW
S sy
stem
s an
d te
chno
logi
esRa
dio
mes
sage
via
ABC
MoU
31 A
ugus
t, 20
05 fl
ood
scen
ario
in S
taw
ell
Tele
phon
e m
essa
ge s
end-
outs
:Ha
lls G
apSt
awel
lM
ount
Eve
lyn
CIW
S St
eerin
g Gr
oup
/ DTS
GVI
CPOL
, CFA
, VIC
SES,
MFE
SB,
ABC
Rad
io, D
HS, D
SE, T
elst
ra
Form
at o
f tria
l sce
nario
sSc
ript o
f tria
l sce
nario
sTi
met
able
for m
essa
ge s
end-
outs
Prov
isio
n of
:•
fact
ual a
nd ti
mel
y ad
vice
abo
ut to
xic
spill
• ad
vice
abo
ut th
e po
pula
tion
at ri
skRe
com
men
ds:
• W
here
pol
ygon
sho
uld
be d
raw
n
Emer
genc
y Re
spon
se C
o-or
dina
tor a
utho
rises
:•
Use
CIW
S sy
stem
s an
d te
chno
logi
esRa
dio
mes
sage
via
ABC
MoU
6 Se
ptem
ber,
2005
bus
hfi re
sce
nario
in
Hal
ls G
ap
Tele
phon
e m
essa
ge s
end-
outs
:Ha
lls G
apSt
awel
lM
ount
Eve
lyn
CIW
S St
eerin
g Gr
oup
/ DTS
GVI
CPOL
, CFA
, VIC
SES,
MFE
SB,
ABC
Radi
o, D
HS, D
SE, T
elst
raTi
met
able
for m
essa
ge s
end-
outs
Lass
o de
mon
stra
tion
22nd
Sep
tem
ber,
2005
Tele
phon
e m
essa
ge s
end-
outs
:Ha
lls G
apSt
awel
lM
ount
Eve
lyn
CIW
S St
eerin
g Gr
oup
/ DTS
GVI
CPOL
, CFA
, VIC
SES,
MFE
SB,
ABC
Radi
o, D
HS, D
SE, T
elst
raTi
met
able
for m
essa
ge s
end-
outs
Lass
o de
mon
stra
tion
that
inco
rpor
ated
sen
t mes
sage
s to
a s
elec
ted
area
with
in th
e Ha
lls G
ap a
rea
26 S
epte
mbe
r, 20
05Te
leph
one
mes
sage
sen
d-ou
ts:
Halls
Gap
Staw
ell
Mou
nt E
vely
n
Tabl
e 27
: CIW
S d
ata
tran
sfer
com
pone
nts
Sect
ion
6
65
WIT.005.001.0898
Eval
uatio
n Ac
tivity
Inst
ruct
ions
/ fe
edba
ckCo
mm
unity
Res
pons
e
Unde
r the
aus
pice
s of
EM
AV
and
the
Mem
oran
dum
of U
nder
stan
ding
:
SERO
, VIC
POL
cont
acts
ABC
Rad
io
Requ
ests
inte
rrup
tion
to A
BC R
adio
sch
edul
e to
sen
d in
form
ativ
e m
essa
ge to
Mou
nt E
vely
n, S
taw
ell a
nd H
alls
Gap
Parti
cipa
nts:
Tu
ne to
ABC
Rad
ioLo
g on
to: w
ww
.yar
rara
nges
.vic
.gov
.au
ww
w.n
gshi
re.v
ic.g
ov.a
uCo
ntac
t CIW
S ho
tline
ABC
RADI
OAB
C 77
4AB
C 59
4 (H
orsh
am)
Broa
dcas
t CIW
S Sc
ripte
d M
essa
ge:
1. E
ncou
rage
d pa
rtici
pant
s to
com
plet
e CI
WS
log
book
2. E
ncou
rage
d pa
rtici
pant
s to
log
onto
CIW
S w
ebpa
ge3.
Enc
oura
ged
parti
cipa
nts
to c
onta
ct C
IWS
hotli
ne4.
Enc
oura
ged
parti
cipa
nts
to s
tay
tune
d fo
r fur
ther
info
rmat
ion
58%
from
Yar
ra R
ange
s co
mpl
eted
and
retu
rned
log-
book
sur
vey
post
card
s51
% fr
om N
orth
ern
Gram
pian
s co
mpl
eted
and
retu
rn lo
g-bo
ok s
urve
y po
stca
rds
Key
fi ndi
ngs
Peop
le w
ant t
o he
ar a
ll th
e m
essa
ge s
ent a
s pa
rt of
the
trial
Not e
very
body
rece
ived
a m
essa
ge
Tele
phon
e In
terv
iew
s af
ter e
ach
deliv
ered
mes
sage
Logb
ook
Tele
phon
e In
terv
iew
s Po
stca
rd s
urve
ys
Answ
erin
g m
achi
ne &
has
h (#
) pre
vent
ed p
eopl
e ac
cess
ing
the
mes
sage
Som
e pe
ople
rece
ived
no
mes
sage
but
hea
rd A
BC 7
74 &
ABC
594
(Hor
sham
) m
essa
gePe
ople
rece
ived
cal
ls a
t diff
eren
t tim
esDi
rect
pic
k-up
s w
ere
high
est o
n Sa
turd
ay a
m a
nd in
the
even
ing
time
Post
tria
l com
mun
ity m
eetin
gs a
t:Li
lyda
le (S
hire
of Y
arra
Ran
ges)
Staw
ell (
Shire
of N
orth
ern
Gram
pian
s)
Com
mun
ity g
iven
the
oppo
rtuni
ty to
rela
y fe
edba
ck to
the
OESC
, RPU
This
feed
back
was
rela
yed
to th
e CI
WS
Stee
ring
Grou
p Co
mm
ittee
Tria
l had
rais
ed p
artic
ipan
t aw
aren
ess
of e
mer
genc
ies
Com
mun
ities
may
not
hav
e su
ffi ci
ent t
rust
in th
e em
erge
ncy
serv
ices
to
deliv
er e
mer
genc
y w
arni
ng in
form
atio
nGe
nera
lly a
ccep
ted
by th
e re
side
nts
that
they
wou
ld a
cces
s a
seco
ndar
y in
form
atio
n so
urce
Extra
act
ivity
Inst
ruct
ions
/feed
back
Grou
p re
spon
se/re
fl ect
ions
Pres
enta
tion
to C
ertifi
cat
e 3
Engl
ish
Stud
ents
OESC
, RPU
pre
sent
the
CIW
S te
chno
logy
to A
MES
stu
dent
s fro
m:
Chin
a, V
ietn
am, S
omal
ia, I
ndia
, Jap
an, T
urke
y
Was
acc
epta
ble
to re
ceiv
e a
phon
e m
essa
ge
Mes
sage
may
cau
se w
orry
/stre
ss to
eld
ers
Lack
of E
nglis
h m
ay h
inde
r acc
essi
ng fu
rther
info
rmat
ion
Sire
n at
beg
inni
ng o
f mes
sage
may
add
legi
timac
y
Pres
enta
tion
to S
enio
r Soc
ial G
roup
Hear
ing
impa
ired
pres
enta
tion
to s
enio
r soc
ial g
roup
at V
icDe
afCI
WS
pre-
trial
sur
vey
pres
ente
d to
the
grou
p
This
gro
up re
lies
heav
ily o
n co
mm
unity
net
wor
ks N
ot e
very
body
has
TTY
faci
litie
s S
MS
wou
ld b
e us
eful
for t
his
grou
p
Pres
enta
tion
of C
IWS
tech
nolo
gy to
inte
rsta
te a
nd V
icto
rian
emer
genc
y se
rvic
esDe
mon
stra
tion
of te
leph
one
mes
sagi
ng a
nd d
ata
trans
fer
as a
n in
tegr
ated
pub
lic w
arni
ng a
nd in
form
atio
n sy
stem
This
gro
up n
oted
that
any
impl
emen
tatio
n of
CIW
S te
chno
logy
wou
ld n
eed
to fi
t with
in th
e em
erge
ncy
man
agem
ent a
rran
gem
ents
with
in th
eir s
tate
. St
anda
rd o
pera
ting
proc
edur
es w
ould
nee
d to
be
deve
lope
d.
Tabl
e 28
: CIW
S e
valu
atio
n co
mpo
nent
s
Sect
ion
6
66
WIT.005.001.0899
Sect
ion
6
67
WIT.005.001.0900
Sect
ion
6
68
WIT.005.001.0901
Sect
ion
6
69
WIT.005.001.0902
The Program Logic Model provided the CIWS Steering Group with a series of ‘needs criteria’ at the technological, operational and community levels. The following statements describe the necessary capacities which would enable the continuing development of the CIWS proof of concept.
Technological level
• CIWS needs to have the capacity to record the status of all calls on a consistent basis.
• CIWS needs to have the capability to transmit an automated telephone message to properties within a boundary defi nition.
• CIWS must incorporate languages other than English.
• CIWS technology needs to be able to transfer spatial information from an incident control centre during an emergency.
• CIWS needs to have the capacity and capability to deliver messages to the hearing impaired community.
Operational level
• Victoria’s emergency services need to work together with government and private industry to ensure that they have correct procedures and protocols to activate the CIWS.
• The CIWS will need to fi t with current emergency management arrangements.
• Victoria’s emergency services will need to work with the Victorian government to provide appropriate arrangements to accommodate a system such as the CIWS.
• Radio messages broadcast to the community need to be timely, accurate and relevant.
• The warning message delivery technology is only one component of a systemic approach to emergency operations.
Community level
• The perception of risk among different age groups in the area needs to be assessed before implementing a system such as the CIWS.
• People will need to be advised of secondary information sources.
• During this trial radio is the most popular source of further information.
• People’s safety behaviour, including their receptiveness to emergency warning messages, is contingent on previous awareness and preparedness knowledge and the safety and risk culture of the local area.
ConclusionThis section has presented the CIWS Trial and Evaluation as a program logic model.
The CIWS Program Logic Model was created from the research conducted throughout the trial and enabled the CIWS Steering Group to consider all the trial’s inputs, processes and decision making.
The model’s depiction of how key stakeholders collaborated to resolve community, technological and operational issues enabled the research to:
• evaluate how the CIWS technology could support and improve the delivery of community warning and information
• test the ability of wireless technology to transfer images of the fi eld / emergency situation to a notional incident control centre.
The Program Logic Model has provided a valid and reliable framework from which informed decisions about the future capability of the CIWS technology and its impact on emergency service operation can be considered.
The model has provided the basis for conducting future trials and clarifying how challenges and issues may be overcome through stakeholder partnerships and collaborations.
Sect
ion
6
70
WIT.005.001.0903
IntroductionThis section provides a discussion and analysis of the social, technological and organisational issues and achievements from the trial.
It draws on evidence from the evaluation, previous research, literature and current emergency management knowledge and it will enable emergency management policy makers and researchers to determine a future direction in public warning communication.
The evaluation supports the potential of the CIWS to be implemented as an integrated public warning system within emergency services’ operations and state-wide emergency management arrangements.
The outcome from the evaluation is a program logic model which has identifi ed the key social and technological design activities in the trial, and provides a set of principles to assist with future development work on community information and warning systems. As a summation of the evaluation analysis, specifi c learnings have been documented for consideration.
Social issues Public safety decisions and behaviour
King (2000) and research undertaken by the CFA (1999) infer that people generally underestimate their safety risk. People do not consider planning as a prerequisite to their safety. Their likely response to an emergency event is to evacuate from their home.
The CIWS Trial and Evaluation identifi ed different perspectives in people’s attitudes to emergency risk:
• The pre-trial questionnaire indicated that people over 40 years of age who have made a decision to live in rural and high fi re risk locations had a realistic awareness of emergency and personal risk situations which could impact on their safety.
• In Halls Gap and Mount Evelyn the participating residents indicated that they would undertake some level of planning and preparedness to assist their responses in an emergency (in particular wildfi re). This included having access to a variety of information sources to assist their decision making during an emergency. These participants also had knowledge about safety rules such as household planning, self-reliance measures and leaving their property early.
However, the pre-trial survey also showed that people would evacuate their home if threatened by an emergency situation. This fi ts with research undertaken by the CFA which fi nds that the timeliness of people’s decision to evacuate from their home when they feel threatened is a signifi cant factor which can undermine public safety (CFA, 2003).
Further research undertaken by CFA and Emergency Management Australia (1999) acknowledged the link between peoples’ emergency experiences and their level of:
• risk awareness • emergency preparedness and• planning.
The success of a community information and warning system underpinned by the CIWS technology will depend on the public having the resources and knowledge to make appropriate decisions about their safety.
71
Section 7Analysis, Issues and Learnings for Future Consideration
WIT.005.001.0904
Public risk communication
This CIWS Trial and Evaluation found that the decisions to prepare and plan a response to an emergency event were more likely to be infl uenced by both collective community activity and the emergency service agency’s education campaigns on safety and preparedness.
The evaluation identifi ed that the most common responses from the participating residents to an emergency event would be to:
• access local information sources
• value the importance of neighbours, friends and family
• access local ABC Radio as a key source of emergency information (this fi nding was particularly strong for Halls Gap residents who tuned to 594 Horsham).
The delivery of an emergency warning message through an automated telephone messaging system was acceptable to over 98% of the participating residents.
The CIWS telephone message directed residents in Mount Evelyn, Stawell and Halls Gap to a secondary information source (namely the ABC Radio network) rather than providing specifi c information. In contrast, the majority of the participating residents believed that they required more detailed and specifi c information from the telephone message. In particular, people wanted to receive information about:
• the nature of the emergency
• the level of threat and
• the actions which they needed to take.
As a result of these fi ndings, it is evident that the optimum value of emergency warning messages delivered to the public by telephone is more likely to be achieved when the message content is understood and shared by both the emergency service agencies and the members of the public who have received the message.
Handmer (2000) and Betts (2001) assert that ‘shared understanding’ is a result of common knowledge between communities, individuals and the emergency service agencies. It is a factor which contributes to effective public warning communication.
The community and emergency services’ confl icting expectations about the content of emergency warning telephone messages challenge the emergency management sector to fi nd a balance between the emergency service agency’s priorities about warning message content and the public’s information requirements.
Communication sources and community context
The participating residents in the rural towns of Stawell and Halls Gap expected to access the local ABC radio station for emergency warnings and subsequent information. They also expected to access other local emergency services and community agencies including neighbours to confi rm and obtain further relevant information.
The situation was different in urban Mount Evelyn, where residents identifi ed less preference for local information sources and instead nominated the general telephone hotline and emergency service websites as their preferred methods of communication.
The majority of the Halls Gap and Stawell participating residents remained in their local area during the day and either worked / volunteered or cared for family members. This lifestyle activity reinforced their regular connection with local emergency services and local activity.
Over the course of the trial, the Halls Gap and Stawell respondents identifi ed a higher level of community safety and emergency awareness than their counterparts in Mount Evelyn.
This was reinforced by the local ABC radio station’s very strong promotion of the trial and its own role as the secondary information source within the trial. Its reputation for broadcasting on local emergency and community topics seemed well regarded by the community.
The Mount Evelyn residents predominantly worked or volunteered out of their local area during the day. They were less concerned about when the message was sent and whether they received the message from their answering machine. Mount Evelyn residents seemed to have less direct involvement with their local community on a day-to-day basis, and seemed more satisfi ed to access further emergency information from less localised sources.
The evaluation fi ndings strongly demonstrated that the majority of the participating residents understood the link between receiving the telephone message and immediately accessing ABC Radio as the secondary information source. There was also a strong response to continue using the telephone to access other sources of information (such as a telephone hotline).
The community’s confi dence in ABC Radio as a source of emergency information was strengthened when the radio station had been identifi ed as a source of local information. Regional radio stations were widely defi ned as ‘local radio stations’.
Sect
ion
7
72
WIT.005.001.0905
It was important to the Stawell and Halls Gap residents that an emergency warning message and secondary information sources contained date and time details, actions to take and weather conditions. These criteria, however, were not as important for the Mount Evelyn residents.
Although weather conditions are more likely to have relevance to rural communities due to commercial (agricultural) and lifestyle activities, it is unclear why the need for ‘date’, ‘time’ and ‘actions to take’ information was more important for Halls Gap and Stawell communities than the Mt Evelyn community.
The choice which people made about accessing further information relied on:
• the information sources available to them• their familiarity in using these sources (the internet
was not a preferred method of accessing information for the participating residents from Stawell)
• their expectations about the relevance of the information to their safety.
This analysis of the evaluation fi ndings about public safety decisions and behaviour and the CIWS activation identifi ed a combination of elements which are likely to contribute to the effectiveness of a telecommunication system of public warning communication. These elements are:
• When people have a level of planning and preparedness knowledge about emergency events combined with a realistic perception of their risk and a multi-faceted communication network (multiple access to information sources), then a telephone emergency warning message is more likely to trigger appropriate decisions and behaviours thereby increasing their safety and confi rming their self-reliance to be prepared.
• Even if the telephone message is only partially heard, the evaluation results found that its value for an informed and prepared community would be high because it still represented one source of trusted information and planning within their total approach to community safety preparedness.
• People with limited understanding and awareness of their emergency risk and community safety who had not considered preparation and planning for emergency events were consequently more likely to be wholly dependent on a telephone emergency warning message which they believed would provide them with specifi c instructions about required actions. In these situations, rather than triggering increased self reliance and informed decision making, the telephone message is more likely to become a source of information which could increase their dependence on emergency services and contribute to an uncertainty about decisions and behaviours.
There is some evidence to indicate that the context of rurality and urbanisation will determine the necessary elements of an emergency warning message and the communities’ preferred secondary information sources.
Emergency warning communication to marginalised communities
The analysis of the information gained from the consultation and workshops with both CALD and VicDeaf communities provided this project with a set of provisional principles which could be incorporated into the future development and implementation of public warning communication systems.
The delivery of automated telephone messaging to communities which include hearing impaired and CALD groups must provide for their ability to:
• receive the telephone call
• understand or be able to seek assistance to understand the emergency warning message and
• have available, accessible and relevant secondary information sources.
The CIWS technology already has the capacity to locate and deliver a message to TTY connections. However, given the signifi cant percentage of the hearing impaired population who do not have access to TTY, such technology systems may need to include other message delivery formats such as SMS messaging and fax. The secondary information sources integrated into the CIWS will need to be expanded to include sources of visually-based communication and telephone and radio services which provide information in languages other than English.
Although the CALD communities indicated that mistrust, lack of confi dence or knowledge about emergencies may cause them not to follow advice outlined in a warning message, they did acknowledge that a siren sound or repeating the word ‘emergency’ at the beginning of a message would alert them to its importance and urgency. All of these requirements warrant continued consultation with the relevant community groups and the telecommunication provider so that social and cultural factors are incorporated with the technology components as part of the integration process.
Sect
ion
7
73
WIT.005.001.0906
Technological issues
The Geo-coding process
The geo-coding process (see Section 2) was a key technological component of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation. A primary objective of the trial was to test the capacity of the CIWS technology to spatially link landline telephone numbers to their respective property identifi cation codes.
The Program Logic Diagram 2 (Fig. 23) shows how the geo-coding process required collaboration between local government (shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians), state government (DSE, SII) and Telstra to ensure address and telephone number details from the shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians were accurately geo-coded.
This data transfer process, coupled with the limited sample size and continuous manual error checks, resulted in a very high percentage of property addresses being geo-coded. This collaborative process also enabled the CIWS Steering Group to resolve errors during the trial. The evaluation fi ndings concluded that the data transfer and geo-coding processes would be infl uenced by:
• the data, technology and resource capacity of individual local governments
• the level of agreement and acceptance between all relevant agencies about data transfer protocols
• the resources available to achieve an effective percentage yield of property and telephone number matches.
The development of a CIWS working model for regional or state-wide implementation would require extensive geospatial data transfer between DSE, SII and local government. This could only happen if the telephone number and address information was released through the IPND.
The CIWS Trial and Evaluation has shown that the geo-coding process is more than a technical process. It requires collaboration across and between stakeholders.
Privacy and information security
The CIWS Proof of Concept model was set up to enable development of the telephone and property database from IPND data. Currently, however, the IPND licensing agreement on data security prohibits the implementation of this component and consequently Telstra was not permitted to use the IPND database for the trial.
Instead the CIWS Trial and Evaluation sought participants’ permission to use their telephone numbers and property addresses for the development of the CIWS Trial database.
The public’s expectations about the protection of personal information by government and organisations were based on trust and agreed rules about how personal information will be accessed and used. The evaluation process gave participants the opportunity to express their perspectives about information security issues which emerged during the trial.
Although the majority of the participants who provided information to the post-trial telephone survey weren’t worried about hoax calls if a CIWS were in place, some concern was expressed. The residents reported that these concerns could be reduced if the message content could be confi rmed from another reliable information source and if the emergency organisation sending the message provided identifi cation.
Participants also suggested that a CIWS be equipped with a distinct telephone ring and that an emergency warning siren (possibly the SEWS) be used to distinguish it from hoax or other unsolicited telephone calls.
Although intrusion (unexpectedly receiving a telephone call delivering emergency information) was not a concern to residents when life or death issues were at stake, they needed to trust the relevant emergency service organisations and be assured that their personal details (telephone number and property address) would be securely managed within a CIWS.
The role of trust and reassurance, according to Bradbury, Branch and Focht (1999), sits alongside risk communication and aims to reduce complexity and provide cohesion and foster collaboration.
Privacy and data security factors have infl uenced the development of other localised telephone emergency messaging information systems and have necessitated consultation with community in order to build the understanding and participation of those communities (OESC, 2004).
Sect
ion
7
74
WIT.005.001.0907
If the CIWS were to operate as a regional or state-wide system using the IPND rather than asking residents to opt-in to supply their names and addresses, the following evaluation fi ndings may need to be considered.
• The CIWS requires the support of a public awareness and education campaign about the objectives of such a system and the impact on public safety.
• The CIWS requires the development of security and privacy principles and protocols.
• The CIWS technology needs to consider the options of a distinct telephone ring, the use of the Standard Emergency Warning Signal, and a means of agency identifi cation as security maintenance components.
• The # and * function of the current CIWS model need to be retained as security measures.
• The CIWS secondary information sources need to be easily accessed by all community sectors to reassure residents that the emergency warning message is genuine and important.
Organisational issues
Integration of the CIWS within emergency service operations
The CIWS Trial and Evaluation has been the fi rst opportunity in Victoria to explore the integration of telecommunications (delivery of public emergency warning information) and data transfer technology within current emergency service communication and GIS mapping operations.
The trial’s use of geo-coding to establish the telephone number and property database demonstrated the role and relevance of this technology system and its compatibility and capacity between agencies and local governments.
The design and inclusion of the trial scenarios enabled Victoria’s emergency services to role play an emergency incident control process. This process demonstrated how a telephone warning message can be activated by emergency services as an initial public risk communication mechanism.
The inclusion of the follow-up telephone message delivery status report was identifi ed by the emergency service personnel as a data transfer and mapping resource which could assist subsequent operational decisions.
Mileti (1975), Betts (2002) and Handmer (2001) have articulated that the design and operation of community warning and information systems need to be integrated with emergency service operations. Handmer (1999) in Flood Warning: An Australian Guide states, ‘achieving integration required cooperation, shared responsibility, thinking broadly about problems and involvement of the community at risk.’
The CIWS Program Logic Model diagrams 1, 2 and 3 (Fig. 23) also captured the interface between:
1. the CIWS technology
2. the emergency services’ organisational decisions and processes and
3. the residents’ decisions and behaviour.
This confi rms that it is possible to develop and operate an integrated system of public warning information.
The CIWS Program Logic Model extends Mileti’s focus from the combination of technology and operational procedures to Handmer’s more inclusive defi nition which incorporates human behaviour and thinking.
Sect
ion
7
75
WIT.005.001.0908
CIWS activation: decisions and processes
The Program Logic Model captured the activities, decisions and processes associated with disseminating community information and warning using the CIWS technology.
Owen (2001) asserts that activity theory provides one method of exploring and explaining the organisational and individual factors which underpin an emergency service offi cer’s decision to plan and issue public warning information.
The trial’s activities highlighted the role that Victoria’s emergency services undertook during the trial. These activities included:
• the control agency’s use of the GIS polygon to assess the threat to specifi c geographic locations and the residents of those areas
• the system design required to support the incident control centre personnel to send messages to the identifi ed residential areas ‘under threat’
• the use of a web-based reporting system which provided visual data detailing the answered and unanswered telephone calls.
The evaluation fi ndings demonstrated the relationship between the CIWS technology and human factors. The Program Logic Model highlighted the emergency services decision-making process which resulted in the CIWS technology’s activation to disseminate a telephone message to participants. The trial demonstrated that the CIWS technology did not always deliver a telephone message to the most telephone numbers in the shortest possible time. The limiting factors during the CIWS trial were:
• limited availability of Telstra telephone lines
• call transmission timing brought about by ‘engaged’ lines and calls delivered to answering machines
• the timing of the numerical order of the telephone call delivery and the possibility that the telephone service may be temporarily unavailable.
These factors are the responsibility of the telecommunications service provider not the emergency service agency coordinating the public warning process. However the limitations of the technology need to be incorporated into the incident control agency’s decision when activating a warning and information system. Hence, the agency responsible for the coordination and delivery of public warning information will need to consider the limitations of the technology when determining an operational response.
Integrating the ABC Radio network within the CIWS
A primary objective of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation has been to test the use and integration of the ABC Radio network and the ABC / Emergency Services Memorandum of Understanding.
The memorandum of understanding between the ABC Radio network and Victoria’s emergency services states that “ABC Radio in Victoria will broadcast an emergency message immediately, repeatedly, for as long as necessary and to whatever target audience in any area as is requested by Victoria’s Emergency Services and who are authorised by Victoria Police to do so, in order to notify listeners that a signifi cant emergency is occurring in their area.” (ABC Victoria and Victorian Emergency Services Organisations, Memorandum of Understanding 2005.)
The ABC Radio network was used as the major secondary information source which participating residents were encouraged to access following delivery of the CIWS Trial’s automated telephone messages. The other information sources were a CIWS Telephone Hotline and participating local government websites. The evaluation fi ndings enabled an analysis of ABC Radio’s role as part of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation.
The pre-trial survey identifi ed some uncertainty for the participating residents about the preference and importance of ABC Radio – both ABC 774 and 594 AM Horsham – as a source of emergency warning information. This result was to be expected, given that these views may not have been previously requested, that the majority of respondents reported no experience of an emergency and that the ABC Memorandum of Understanding had only been in operation since 2005.
The participating residents had a limited context from which to associate the emergency warning information messages with the tuning into ABC Radio, and this may have infl uenced their responses.
However, the pre-trial questionnaire fi ndings identifi ed familiar information sources such as the television (news and current affairs programs) and the expectation that information would be made available to them by door-knocks from emergency service personnel. (It is important to note that this trial and evaluation occurred prior to the January 2006 bushfi res where residents from Halls Gap and Stawell directly experienced and were threatened by the Mount Lubra wildfi re.)
Sect
ion
7
76
WIT.005.001.0909
The continuing development of public emergency warning information systems and, in particular, the use of the ABC Radio MOU will gradually develop the context and experience which people will require to make informed choices about emergency information sources.
According to the post-trial survey, residents’ responses about their access to radio after the delivery of a telephone message are based on:
• the convenience – whether or not they were home and available to tune into their radio
• the familiarity of tuning their radio to the ABC station and the quality of the reception
• their past experience and use of the ABC local radio station as a provider of local and emergency information.
The regional ABC radio station (594AM) was confi dently used by the Halls Gap residents as it was highly regarded as a source of local information.
At the time of the pre-trial survey, residents in Mount Evelyn did not regard their ABC Radio station specifi cally as a source of local or relevant information. Residents in rural areas appeared to distinguish between the local radio station and ABC 774 as separate stations within the ABC Radio network.
During the course of the trial, the pattern of tuning into the nominated ABC Radio station as a response to a received telephone message became accepted knowledge and practice to most participating residents from Mount Evelyn.
The success of a CIWS will be dependent on the access to reliable and acceptable secondary information sources. The incorporation of the ABC Radio network (be it local or state-wide) will need to include the dependent variable that there will be geographic areas where people may identify that reception to the ABC Radio network as poor or non-existent.
In those instances, it will be essential to include other secondary information sources such as a telephone hotline, website address or an alternative radio station frequency.
It is important that the results of this evaluation do not limit the relevance of radio – both commercial and local radio – and other major media as reliable secondary information sources which can be used by the emergency services.
ConclusionThe primary intention of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation identifi ed from the Proof of Concept plan and subsequent discussions in the Steering Group and Data Transfer Sub Group meetings was to utilise telecommunications (telephone messaging and feedback) and mobile data technology (CDMA) for data transfer as an integrated public warning and information system, offering benefi ts to the emergency service agencies and the public.
The focus of the technology system was the simultaneous and automated delivery of warning messages to large numbers of households using landline telephone services.
Effi cient delivery was central to the system so that the control and support agencies could make an assessment from the locations of the delivered and received messages about further public warning communication. This required partnerships across agencies, acceptance of the technology and communication components, and acceptance of the assumptions which underpin public warning and risk communication.
The integration of the ABC Radio network as the major secondary information source (after receipt of a telephone message) enabled the exercising of the ABC Radio Memorandum of Understanding.
By building on previous research and the accounts of recent international disasters and public warning information, the trial evaluated the participating communities’ responses to the technology and the processes relevant to any future development and operation of a CIWS.
Although the highly structured and rehearsed nature of the trial did not necessarily refl ect a real-time emergency response situation, it did enable each component of the telecommunication and mobile data technology to be tested on each of the six individual occasions when telephone messages were delivered.
Sect
ion
7
77
WIT.005.001.0910
LearningsThe CIWS Trial and Evaluation’s multi-agency collaboration and engagement with community residents refl ected the principles supporting Victoria’s emergency management arrangements and the value of ‘shared responsibility’ which underpins the developing relationship between emergency service agencies and the public.
The introduction of the Program Logic Model has, for the fi rst time, identifi ed the procedures, decisions and context necessary for the design and implementation of a technologically based and integrated public emergency information and warning system.
Currently a platform of theoretical principles, the Program Logic Model is suffi ciently fl exible for use as a tool to underpin further trials of risk communication systems.
The evaluation processes, including the acknowledgement of previous literature and research and the Program Logic Model, allow for further extension and development.
A key goal for this CIWS Trial and Evaluation was to confi rm knowledge about the effectiveness of public warning information technology and its links to public safety.
This trial was not designed to capture information from inner urban and central business district communities, and future trials and research needs consideration of these contextual factors.
However, the evaluation clearly found that the effectiveness (perceptions of increased public safety) of public information and warning system design and delivery is linked to the incorporation of knowledge by emergency services personnel about a community’s culture and that community’s level of risk awareness and preparedness. This knowledge needs to become a component within the organisational process of public risk communication.
The higher the level of community risk perception, emergency preparedness and expectation of access to and receiving emergency information, the more likely that an unexpected telephone message about the threat or onset of an emergency incident will trigger safe and appropriate decisions and behaviour.
It is likely that if people received unexpected emergency warning communication via a telephone message about an emergency incident that they were unaware of and unprepared for, this could result in confused and possibly unsafe behaviour and decisions regardless of the emergency warning message’s content.
The evaluation of the CIWS Trial established from its own limitations that further consultation and research needs to be undertaken to highlight the communication needs of culturally and linguistically diverse communities and of people who have impaired hearing.
The CIWS Trial and Evaluation has made an important contribution to the importance of risk communication, public warning technology design and future decisions about the incorporation of such technology systems into state and national emergency management arrangements.
The rigorous implementation of the CIWS Trial and Evaluation can provide the emergency management sector with confi dence to continue the development of integrated public warning systems which incorporate telecommunication technology, public safety and public risk communication procedures.
Sect
ion
7
78
WIT.005.001.0911
Appendix 1: CIWS invitation letter and consent form
Dear Resident
RE: Participation in Victoria’s Community Information and Warning System Trial
As part of the State Government’s commitment to enhancing public safety, the Victorian Premier, The Honourable Mr. Steve Bracks recently announced the trial of an innovative Community Information and Warning System to be conducted in the Shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians.
The Community Information and Warning System trial aims to:
• Test newly developed automated telephone message technology; and
• Understand the value of delivering computer generated emergency warning and information messages to a wide range of communities in the event of an emergency such as bushfi res, fl oods etc.
Your town was nominated by your Shire as the most suitable to participate in this trial. As a result we are keenly seeking your participation.
This trial is a collaborative project between the Offi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner, Victoria’s police and emergency services, Lands Victoria (DSE), Telstra and the shires of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians. We are relying heavily on community participation, including your involvement to make this trial a success, and encourage you to help us to identify further ways in which to deliver the best possible emergency response service to the Victorian community.
PARTICIPATING IN THE TRIAL
If you choose to take part in the trial you will receive between four to six trial warning messages to a landline telephone number of your choice during the months of July August and September 2005.
(Please note: These will be simulated warning messages and will not be able to be confused with a real emergency event, nor will the way in which the information is provided cause anxiety)
If you decide that you want to participate, you will need to:
• Sign the consent form attached to this letter and provide your name, landline telephone number and address of the landline telephone. Return this form to us in the envelope provided as soon as you can.
• Complete a pre-trial survey which will be posted to you at the beginning of June and return the survey in the envelope provided.
• Complete a log book entry by answering a small number of questions, after you have received each of the trial telephone messages. This will form part of the trial’s evaluation process. The log book and a return stamped envelope will be sent to you just before the trial commences in July.
It is important to note that your decision to participate in this trial is completely voluntary and you may choose to withdraw your decision to participate at any time during the project.
79
AppendicesWIT.005.001.0912
What happens to my contact details?
Your telephone number will be placed on a participation list. This list will not include your name. The list will only be used for the purpose of the trial. Your name and address details will be used to send you the pre-trial survey, the log book, further information about the trial project, and a summary report of the project when it has been completed.
The trial will use the information you provide strictly within the Victorian Privacy Act 2000. The evaluation process will adhere to the Research Ethics Guidelines of the Department of Justice, Victorian Government.
Should you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact me on the details below. We look forward to beginning the trial, and encourage you to participate in this exciting community project.
Yours sincerely,
Robyn BettsManager Research Projects UnitOffi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner
Project telephone hotline: 8647 0894Project Website: www.yarraranges.vic.gov.au (and follow the prompts) www.ngshire.vic.gov.au (and follow the prompts)Email: [email protected]
If you decide to participate in the trial of the Community Information and Warning System Trial project, please read what is involved and sign your name to say that you consent to be a participant and that you understand how the information which you are providing will be used for the trial
I (Please write your name in block letters)…………………………………………................................................
Choose to volunteer to participate in the Community Information and Warning System Trial
Understand that I will need to submit a preferred landline telephone number
Understand that the telephone I am submitting will be incorporated into a list of telephone numbers which will be used to deliver the trial ‘warning message’.
Understand that my name and address will be used to send me information about the trial including the pre-trial survey and log book.
Am willing to complete the pre-trial survey and log book and to return this information as advised.
Understand that any information that I provide to this project will only be used for the purpose of evaluating the Community Information and Warning System Trial Project and that I will not be identifi ed in any subsequent reports or documentation.
Understand that my participation is voluntary and that I can withdraw from the trial at any time by contacting Robyn Betts (Research Manager) on Tel 96510028
I have read and understood the conditions associated with participating in this trial
SIGNED……………………………………………………………..................
PREFERRED CONTACT TELEPHONE NUMBER (landline) …………………………………........................
ADDRESS OF TELEPHONE NUMBER…………………………………………………………………………
Please return this consent form in the envelope providedThank you for your decision to participateRobyn Betts
Appe
ndic
es
80
WIT.005.001.0913
Appendix 2: CIWS webpage
Community Information and Warning System
This is the Community Information and Warning System (CIWS) Trial for Northern Grampians and Yarra Ranges Website.
Already there are some questions answered on this website, however if you would like us to cover more material or explain an issue you are confused about please do not hesitate to contact us. Answers to your questions will be posted on this website.
We encourage your participation in the Community Information and Warning Systems Trial and ask that you sign up to be involved in this exciting project.
Updates
The fi rst message was sent out on the 28th of July and we are happy to report that the launch was a success.
We at the OESC would like to report that we have received many of the participants’ concerns and comments regarding this fi rst message and will use this feedback as a guide to building a better message system. In particular we are working on the diffi culties people have been experiencing with the answering machine and the hash key.
We would also like to report our sincere gratitude to those who have returned their Pre-trial Survey and we would encourage those who have not, to fi ll these out and return them to us at the Offi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner.
We hope that you have received your log book and we look forward to receiving your responses.
FAQs
1. What is the Community Information and Warning System trial about?
This trial is concerned with testing and evaluating a newly designed system of emergency communication which will provide additional information to members of the public. This system will be able to automatically deliver telephone messages to large numbers of people at the same time. It will allow the Police and emergency service organisations, such as fi re services to identify specifi c geographic locations which may be under threat from an emergency situation and to contact the communities within those locations in a timely fashion.
The information and warning system trial will not just be about testing new technology. This trial is attempting to understand the value of delivering automated telephone emergency warning and advice
messages to various households and communities in the event of an emergency, such as a bushfi re or fl ood.
It will be important that the community becomes really involved in the trial. The community’s participation in the trial and the evaluation will enable comprehensive results and secure accurate trial outcomes.
2. As a participant how can I contribute now that the trial has started?
We have received a large number of responses to the Pre-trial Questionnaire and we encourage you to keep up the good work in regards to the log book.
We consider your responses to the Community Information Warning System as being very valuable as it allows us to properly evaluate this system.
It is also important that you understand that your decision to participate in this trial is completely voluntary and you are able to choose to stop being involved in the trial at any time during this project.
3. What other organisations are involved in this trial?
The major organisations involved in this trial are:
• The Offi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner
• Victoria Police
• Telstra
• Department of Sustainability and Environment
• ABC Radio
• The Country Fire Authority (CFA)
• Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services Board (MFESB)
• Victoria State Emergency Service (VICSES)
• Department of Human Services (DHS)
• Northern Grampians Shire
• Shire of Yarra Ranges
Appe
ndic
es
81
WIT.005.001.0914
4. What to do if/when I get a telephone message as a part of the trial?
The fi rst thing to remember when you answer one of the information and warning system telephone calls, is that, this call will not be related to an emergency situation. The trial message will ask you to ‘seek further information’ as part of the exercise. What we would also like you to do, is to take a minute to consider what your actions would be if it was a real emergency.
• Would you turn on the radio and listen to the ABC (as the offi cial emergency radio network) and attempt to seek further information?
• Would you endeavour to ring the Police and Emergency Information line?
• What sort of information would be suffi cient for you to determine your response?
• Would you consider logging onto your local government or emergency services website?
After you have received the telephone call, simply fi ll out the log book, which has been provided for you, tear off the postcard and mail it back to us at the Offi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner. (The postcard is self addressed and reply paid)
5. What will happen to my telephone number when I provide it as part of my decision to participate in the trial? Will my responses to the pre-trial questionnaire and log book be private?
The trial will use the information you provide strictly within the Victorian Privacy Act 2000. The evaluation process will adhere to the Research Ethics Guidelines of the Department of Justice, Victorian Government.
Your telephone number and address will be recorded on a data base which will be used as a part of the trial; however it will in no way be connected to your own name. After the trial has been completed, all specifi c participant numbers and information will be destroyed.
6. What is going to happen with the results of the trial and evaluation?
We will require you to return your completed log books after the trial has completed. This information along with other evaluation information will be analysed and documented into a report which will be published. This report will be used as a resource for Victoria’s emergency services and to assist in any future discussions on community information and warning technology and systems.
7. Will we have this service after the trial?
It is important to remember that this use of automated telephone messaging is only a trial. It is in fact the fi rst time that such comprehensive information and warning system technology has been trialled in Australia. Although the success of this technology is not dependent on this evaluation, this trial will contribute to a better understanding of the worth of this technology in emergency situations, for Victoria and Australia as a whole.
8. Who do I call if I have a question about the trial?
There has been a Hotline set up especially for this project.
The number is 8647 0894.
If you have any further questions regarding the trial that haven’t been answered from this website’s information, it is recommended that you call this number. An email system has also been set up.
The address is [email protected].
Please feel free to use these services as they have been set up for your own benefi t.
9. What happens if I call the Hotline?
When you make a call to the Hotline, an answering service will take your message. Your message will then be sent via e-mail to the team of people who are coordinating the community participation and evaluation sections of the trial. These people will be able to open the email and listen to your question through a wave fi le. They will then get back to you and attempt to answer your question. It is important therefore to include a contact telephone number and your fi rst name in your Hotline message. Answers to commonly asked questions will also be posted on this website.
Contacts
There has been a Hotline set up especially for this project.
Phone: 8647 0894.
If you have any further questions regarding the trial that haven’t been answered from this website’s information, it is recommended that you call this number. An email system has also been set up.
Email: [email protected].
Please feel free to use these services as they have been set up for your own benefi t.
82
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0915
Appendix 3: Pre-trial questionnaire
Community Information and Warning System Trial Project
Pre-Trial Community Survey
Dear Householder
• As part of your decision to participate in this project we are seeking your agreement to complete this pre-trial survey.
• The survey should only take you about 10 minutes to complete. Most of the questions just require you to tick a box which best suits your point of view.
• The survey results will be used as a key part of the evaluation of the community information and warning system technology.
• Your decision to complete the survey is voluntary. Please feel free to read the attached survey before volunteering your participation.
• This survey complies with the Victorian Privacy Act 2000 which means that information collected will only be used for the purposes of the trial and evaluation and no identifying information will be used in any subsequent documentation.
• Please mail your completed questionnaire in the stamped addressed envelope provided and return to us by 1st August, 2005 so we can ensure this trial is relevant to you.
• Please contact Robyn Betts on (03) 9651 0028 if you would like to talk about this project or need any help completing this survey.
83
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0916
1. I am a person who is: (Please tick a box below)
� Under 20 years � 20 – 39 years
� 40 – 59 years � 60+ years
2. Please tell us more about your household by reading the statements below and ticking the box which is most relevant to your household:
a) I am a person living alone � (Go to Question 4 on the next page)
I am a person living with:
b) Partner/spouse, children and elderly dependants �c) Partner / spouse and children �d) Partner / spouse no children �e) Children but no partner / spouse �f) Friends / housemates �Other ....................................................................................................................................................................
3. What age group best describes your partner / spouse / housemates / dependants / children? (Please tick as many as applicable)
Partner/Spouse Children Housemates Elderly/Disabled Dependants
� Under 20 years � 0-4 years � Under 20 years � Under 60 years
� 20-39 years � 5-9 years � 20-24 years � 60-64 years
� 40-59 years � Teenager � 24-29 years � 64-69 years
� 60+ years � 20+years � 30+years � 70+ years
Other age group, please specify below: ....................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................................................................
4. Do you believe you have a disability which could affect your safety during an emergency event? (Please tick yes or no)
� Yes � No
If yes, please provide brief information: ..................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Do you live with a person who has a disability? (Please tick yes or no)
� Yes � No
If yes, please provide brief information: ...................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................................................................
84
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0917
6. How long have you lived in the area? (Please tick one box below)
� Less than 2 years � 2-5 years
� 6-10 years � 11-15 years
� More than 15 years
7. What do you do most days of the week? (Please tick one box below)
� Work / volunteer part time or full time in the local area
� Work / volunteer part time or full time in another suburb
� Stay home and look after the family, children and / or others
� Study full time or part time in the local area
� Study full time or part time in another area
� Other activities, please explain: .........................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................................................
8. Please indicate by ticking the boxes in the table below how often you have contact with the following community groups. (Please tick as appropriate below)
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Seldom
• Family � � � � �• Primary school � � � � �• Kindergarten � � � � �• Sport/recreation groups � � � � �• Childcare centre � � � � �• Church/religious groups � � � � �• Secondary school � � � � �• Council services � � � � �• Neighbourhood/community centres � � � � �• TAFE/Learning centres � � � � �• Social/friendship networks � � � � �• Neighbours � � � � �Other, please specify below:
..................................................................................................................................................................................
85
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0918
9. How do you fi nd out about what is happening in your local area? (Please tick as many boxes that are relevant to you)
� Talk to neighbours / friends / family
� Read the local newspaper
� Read the council newsletter
� Read community newsletter
� Visit the local neighbourhood and / or community centre
� Listen to local commercial radio station
� Listen to local ABC Radio station
� Listen to 774 ABC Melbourne
� Belong to and visit community groups
� Access the Shire’s website
� Read community noticeboards
� Not interested in what’s happening in the local area
� Other ways, please specify
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
10. How likely is it that you and your household could be affected by the following incidents? (Please tick as appropriate below)
Very Likely Possibly Not likely at all
• Burglary � � �• House fi re � � �• Bushfi re � � �• Severe storm � � �• Flood � � �• Physical assault � � �• Motor vehicle accident � � �• Tanker overturn/spillage � � �• Drug related activity � � �• Accident in the home � � �Other incidents which may affect you, your family and / or the people you live with? Please explain:
.......................................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................................
11. Have you ever experienced an emergency event such as a bushfi re, severe storm or a fl ood? (Please tick yes or no)
� Yes � No
If yes, what did you do to protect the safety of your family / dependants / housemates / property?
.......................................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................................
86
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0919
12. If you needed to fi nd out more information about an emergency situation where would you go to get the information you required? (Please tick as appropriate below)
Always Sometimes Never
• Neighbour � � �• Family in the area � � �• Friends in the area � � �• Work colleagues � � �• Local Fire Brigade � � �• Local Police Station � � �• Police/Fire ‘000’ � � �• Council customer service � � �• Council website � � �• Local commercial radio � � �• Local ABC Radio � � �• 774 - ABC Melbourne � � �• Telephone � � �• Television � � �Other, please explain:
.......................................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................................
13. Please tick the other sources of information you may use:
Always Sometimes Never
• Victorian Bushfi re Information Line � � �• CFA Website � � �• DSE Website � � �• SES Website � � �• Bureau of Meteorology Website � � �
87
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0920
14. How important would these sources of information be for you during the course of an emergency event? (Please tick as appropriate below)
Extremely Very Fairly Somewhat Not at all Important Important Important Important Important
• Access to the Emergency Service � � � � �Websites such as CFA, SES
• Local Government Website � � � � �• Community Safety Information Brochures � � � � �
which may have been sent to you
• Local Commercial radio � � � � �- Community Safety Messages- News- Local ABC Radio
• 774 ABC Melbourne � � � � �- Community Safety Messages- News
• Television News � � � � �• Bushfi re Information Line � � � � �• Referring to a Fridge Magnet with Emergency Service � � � � �
Telephone Numbers
Are there other sources of information that you would use, please specify below:
...................................................................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................................................................
15. What would be the most effective way for you to receive warning information about a possible emergency event which could threaten your property: (Please tick as appropriate below)
Most Somewhat Don’t Ineffective Most effective effective know ineffective
• Local Commercial Radio � � � � �Local ABC Radio
• 774 ABC Melbourne � � � � �• Door Knock from Emergency Services � � � � �• Siren � � � � �• Television � � � � �• Telephone Message � � � � �• SMS Message � � � � �• Email � � � � �• Fax � � � � �
88
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0921
16. How likely do you think it is that you will receive an offi cial warning about an emergency situation from the sources listed below? (Please tick as appropriate below)
Very Likely Likely Unlikely Very Unlikely
• Local Commercial Radio � � � �• Local ABC Radio � � � �• 774 ABC Radio � � � �• TV Announcement � � � �• Local CFA Siren � � � �• Contact from neighbours/friends � � � �• Door Knock from Emergency Services � � � �Other, please explain:
….........................................….........................................….........................................….......................................
….........................................….........................................….........................................….......................................
17. How confi dent are you that you would know how to react if there was an emergency situation in your local area? (Please tick one box below)
Very confi dent � Fairly confi dent � Not confi dent �
18. What three things do you believe could help you better prepare for an emergency situation in your local area/community?
….........................................….........................................….........................................….......................................
….........................................….........................................….........................................….......................................
19. If you received information telling you about an emergency situation in the area would you try to confi rm it? (Please tick yes or no below)
� Yes � No
If ‘yes’, how would you confi rm it?
….........................................….........................................….........................................….......................................
….........................................….........................................….........................................….......................................
20. Which one of the following actions are you most likely to take if all members of your household were at home when an emergency, such as a fl ood, severe storm or a bushfi re occurred in your area?
Very Likely Likely Unlikely Very Unlikely
• Stay and protect the house through the emergency � � � �• Do as much as possible to protect the house but leave if � � � �
threatened by the fi re
• Wait and see what will happen but leave if I feel threatened � � � �• Wait for the emergency services to tell me what to do � � � �• Leave as soon as I am aware that there is a fi re in the area � � � �
89
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0922
22. What is the most important information that a warning and information message should contain? (Please tick as appropriate below)
Most Important Indifferent Somewhat Least Important Important Important
Explain what the emergency is � � � � �Tell me what action to take � � � � �Tell me where I can get further information about � � � � �the emergency
Re-assure me when an emergency is over � � � � �
23. If you have any fi nal comments please write them in the space below:
….........................................….........................................….........................................…........................................
….........................................….........................................….........................................…........................................
…........................................….........................................….........................................….........................................
….........................................….........................................….........................................…........................................
….........................................….........................................….........................................…........................................
Thank you for completing this questionnaire, your contribution is valued and will be an important contribution to the project’s evaluation.
Graham DwyerActing Manager, Research Projects UnitOffi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner
90
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0923
Appendix 4: Observer questionnaire
Community Warning and Information System Trial
PROJECT EVALUATION
Dear Observer
• Your participation in this CIWS trial is valued and it would be appreciated if you could provide responses to the following questions as a contribution to the project’s evaluation process.
• There are 2 sections in this brief questionnaire.
• The fi rst section asks your opinion about delivering public warning information through a telecommunication system.
• The second section asks you to consider the information sources which your organisation uses when issuing warning information to the public.
• The questions are open-ended. We are asking you to consider the questions with your emergency service experience in mind.
• The information which you provide will be aggregated with other observer responses and as such your responses will not be individually identifi ed in the evaluation report. The information which you provide in this questionnaire will only be viewed by the Project Evaluation Team.
• Your contribution to respond to the following questions is voluntary and if you require further information about this questionnaire or this Project’s evaluation please contact the Project Evaluation Coordinator, Robyn Betts on Tel 03 96510028 or e-mail [email protected]
Thank you for your participation
Organisation (optional) ........................................................................................................................
Australian State ....................................................................................................................................
91
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0924
Section 1
What are your views (both positive and negative) about the public warning information which is delivered through a telecommunication system in relation to the following:
Community and Public Safety
The Emergency Operational Response Procedures of your organisation
Public Expectations about Emergency Service Response
92
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0925
Section 2
The data transfer component of this trial will be used in conjunction with the delivery of the telephone warning message to participants in a selected location.
Most Important Data Sets
Please identify the data sets that are most important to your organisation’s decisions to issue warning information to the public?
Other Types of Information
Are there other types of information which support your organisation’s decision to issue warning information to the public?
Thank you for the contribution of your views to these questions
93
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0926
Appendix 5: Community update letter
Dear CIWS Participant
As a result of the fi rst telephone message delivery and your much valued feedback, this letter is to provide you with an update of the Community Information and Warning System project.
Your feedback from both the telephone calls and the returned log book sheets has been extremely valuable to the evaluation and to the conduct of the next trial telephone message delivery.
As a result, the telephone message technology will now allow the messages to be delivered to answering machines and message banks.
For those people who directly receive the next telephone message, please can you continue to press the ‘hash’ key as instructed. The trigger of the hash key is testing a system which provides a visual indication of the households where there has been a direct answer. This visual screen shows a map with red dots indicating all of the registered households and their landline telephone numbers. As the telephone calls are answered the dots on the screen change to green. This process has the potential to assist emergency services with the identifi cation of areas where added public warning information may be necessary. Remember the ‘hash key’ is the key below the ‘9’.If you listen to the telephone message from your answering machine or from message bank, you will not have to press the hash key; just listen to the whole message.
The sources of information will remain the same. The ABC radio either 774 or 594 (AM radio for Stawell and Halls Gap)The Telephone HotlineThe Shire of Yarra Ranges and Northern Grampians websites. If you choose to access these websites, please follow the ‘For Residents’ link located on the fi rst page.
It is important for the evaluation that you continue to access the information sources which are most convenient for you at the time.
Some of you have asked when the next message will be delivered and were disappointed that you didn’t receive the fi rst message. Hopefully this concern will be eased with the messages being delivered to answering machines next time. During the rest of August and September there will be a further 5 message trials.
Please remember if you have any questions, the Telephone Hotline- 86470894 remains available for you to leave a message, the Shires’ web sites have current CIWS information or you can contact Robyn Betts the Evaluation Coordinator on 96510028 or e-mail [email protected].
Thanks again for supporting the CIWS Trial Project.
Yours sincerely
Robyn BettsManager Research Projects UnitOffi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner
94
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0927
Appendix 6: During-trial telephone interview
[ON CONTACT]
Hello. I am [NAME OF INTERVIEWER] from Strahan Research. Could I speak to [NAME OF CONTACT ON SAMPLE SHEET]
[IF NOT AVAILABLE ASK FOR A TIME TO CALL BACK AND NOTE ON SAMPLE SHEET]
[WHEN SPEAKING TO THE RIGHT PERSON]We are conducting a survey for the Offi ce of the Emergency Service Commissioner on the trial of the Community Information and Warning System. The survey is straight forward and takes 5 minutes. Privacy laws protect the confi dentiality of any comments you make here. We prefer you to answer all the questions in the survey but you don’t have to…
1. Did you receive the recent Community Information and Warning System Message?
Yes � No �
2. Did you hear all of the message clearly?
Yes � No �
3. Can you remember anything from the Community Warning and Information System telephone message?
Yes � No �If you answered ‘yes’, what can you remember?
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
4. The message requested that you access one of the following information sources.
ABC – 774 � The Trial Hotline � Horsham 594 (for Halls Gap and Stawell) � Local Shire Website �
Other � (please outline below):
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
5. Did you access any of these information sources?Yes � No �
6. Which type of information source would be the most convenient for you to access? Most Convenient Convenient Least convenient
Radio � �Website � � �What was the code word that you heard from these information sources?
.........................................................................................................................................................................
7. Would you have taken any further action had the telephone message advised of a fl ood, storm, bushfi re or toxic spill in your area:
(a) Didn’t pose any threat Yes � No �(b) May have a posed a threat Yes � No �
8. Are there further comments you wish to make about the trial?
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
95
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0928
Appendix 7: Post-trial telephone survey
[ON CONTACT]
Hello. I am [NAME OF INTERVIEWER] from Strahan Research. Could I speak to [NAME OF CONTACT ON SAMPLE SHEET] about the Community Information and Warning System trial they were involved in. [IF NOT AVAILABLE ASK FOR A TIME TO CALL BACK AND NOTE ON SAMPLE SHEET]
[WHEN SPEAKING TO THE RIGHT PERSON]
The Offi ce of the Emergency Service Commissioner is conducting a fi nal survey on the trial of the Community Information and Warning System. The survey is very important in getting your overall views on the trial and only takes 10 minutes. Privacy laws protect the confi dentiality of any comments you make here. We prefer you to answer all the questions in the survey but you don’t have to…
1. How acceptable is receiving a telephone message (less acceptable, the same or more acceptable) compared to only:
Less Same More DK
a Receiving a door knock from emergency services 1 2 3 9 F2
b Hearing information on the radio 1 2 3 9 F3
2. If you received an automated telephone message about an emergency, what is the information you would defi nitely need so you could make informed decisions about what to do?
Yes No Don’t Know
a Date the message was sent 1 2 9 F4
b Time the message was sent 1 2 9 F5
c Identity of the organisation that was leaving the message 1 2 9 F6
d Nature of the emergency 1 2 9 F7
e Actions to take 1 2 9 F8
f Level of threat 1 2 9 F9
3. Given that an actual emergency situation would place pressures on everybody involved, what information could you do without and still be able to make informed decisions about what to do?
Yes No Don’t Know
a Date the message was sent 1 2 9 F10
b Time the message was sent 1 2 9 F11
c Identity of the organisation that was leaving the message 1 2 9 F12
d Nature of the emergency 1 2 9 F13
e Actions to take 1 2 9 F14
f Level of threat 1 2 9 F15
96
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0929
4. After receiving a telephone warning Telephone Nominated Radiomessage, what information would Hotline… Station…you expect to receive from
Yes No Don’t Know Yes No Don’t Know
a Nature of the emergency 1 2 9 1 2 9 F22F16
b Level of threat 1 2 9 1 2 9 F23F17
c Actions to take 1 2 9 1 2 9 F24F18
d Weather conditions 1 2 9 1 2 9 F25F19
e How I can stay informed 1 2 9 1 2 9 F26F20
f Local council web site 1 2 9 1 2 9 F27F21
5. Is there any information from an automated telephone emergency warning message that could make you feel less safe rather then more safe? F28
......................................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................................
6. During this trial, you were provided with three other information sources, the telephone hotline, the radio station and the Council website. Which was the main one that you tended to use? F29
CIWS Telephone hotline 1
ABC 774 or 594 Radio station 2
Local Council Web site 3
Other information source [Please specify] 4
............................................................................................................................................................... F30
7. What was the reason you mainly used the radio station/ telephone hotline/Council website? F31
.....................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................................................
97
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0930
8. During the CIWS trial, did you have any diffi culties….?
Yes No Didn’t try
a Tuning into 774 ABC 1 2 3 F32
b Tuning into 594 FM ABC(Stawell and Halls Gap only) 1 2 3 F33
c Accessing the CIWS information from the Shire’s website 1 2 3 F34
d Accessing the information from the Telephone Hotline 1 2 3 F35
Details if yes (specify which source):
.................................................................................................................................................................. F36
9. If you were aware that an emergency situation may develop during the next F37sleeping period (eg an approaching bushfi re) and that a phone warning system was in place (suggesting you may be telephoned if an emergency did develop) which of the following would you be most likely to do?
Ensure that a phone would ring inside the room where I was sleeping 1
Rely on hearing the phone, located in a room other than where I was sleeping 2
Don’t know / Haven’t thought about it 9
10. When people are suddenly awoken from a deep sleep they may feel confused F38and groggy at fi rst. If you were awoken from deep sleep by an unexpected emergency phone call which of the following is likely to apply to you within the fi rst one minute of answering the phone? Please try to estimate even if this has not happened to you.
Confused and groggy, with some diffi culty following instructions and remembering details 1
Somewhat groggy but likely to be able to follow most instructions and remember most details 2
Clearheaded enough to reliably follow all instructions and remember all details 3
11. On a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is not important at all and 10 is extremely important, how important is it to press the…
(DON’T KNOW = 99)
a Hash key to enable you to hear all of the message F39
b Star key to enable you to replay the message and listen to it again F40
12. How familiar are you with using the hash and star keys on your telephone key-pad? Would you say you are… F41
Not familiar at all 1
Slightly Familiar 2
Reasonably familiar 3
Totally familiar 4
98
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0931
13. What do you think you would do if you received a telephone message which you believed was advising of an emergency but a technology problem meant that you didn’t hear all of the message?. F42
Access other information sources 1
Don’t worry about it 2
Check other information to confi rm emergency 3
Complain to emergency services 4
14. What would be the next thing that you would do? F43
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
15. If an emergency advice telephone message was recorded to your answering machine or message bank, on a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is not useful at all and 10 is extremely useful, how useful would the information be to you if you listened to the message…? (DON’T KNOW = 99)
a Less than 20 minutes after it was recorded F44
b Up to an hour after it was recorded F45
c Over an hour after it was recorded F46
16. If the CIWS system was implemented, would you be worried about hoax calls about emergencies? F47
Yes 1
No 2
Don’t Know 9
17. What do you think could be done to reassure the public that the emergency warning/advice message call from the emergency services was genuine? F48
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
18. Having been part of the CIWS trial, on a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is totally unacceptable and 10 is highly acceptable, how acceptable is an automated telephone message for you and your family/household/ business as a way to receive emergency advice and warning from the emergency services?
(DON’T KNOW = 99) F49
19. Having been part of this CIWS trial, what improvements would you suggest to make the current system easier to use and understand? F50
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
99
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0932
20. How do you manage your telephone when you are not at home for all or most of the day? Do you…. F51
Put on answering machine 1
Have message bank 2
Divert telephone to mobile 3
Don’t worry about telephone calls being unanswered 4
21. How do you manage your telephone when you may be away from your home for a short time or may not be available to answer the telephone? Do you…. F52
Put on answering machine 1
Have message bank 2
Divert telephone to mobile or another telephone 3
Don’t worry about telephone calls being unanswered 4
22. Are there any reasons why you or members of your household wouldn’t want to receive information or warning messages from the emergency services? F53
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
23. Has being part of the CIWS trial changed the way you think about emergency situations and community safety? F54
Yes 1 Q24
No 2 Q25
Don’t Know 9 Q25
24. How has the CIWS trial changed the way you think about emergency situations and community safety? F55
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
25. Is there any specifi c information that local government and emergency services can provide you with to help you become better informed about emergency events and community safety? F56
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................
100
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0933
That is the end of the interview, thank you very much for your contribution to the evaluation of the CIWS trial. My name is [NAME OF INTERVIEWER] for Strahan Research. If you have any questions about this research you can phone our offi ce on 9604 9199.
RECORD CONTACT NAME:
F57
RECORD PHONE NUMBER:
F58
RECORD AREA: Mt Evelyn 1
F59 Stawell 2
Halls Gap 3
DATE:
TIME COMPLETED:
(24 hr clock)
DAY F60MONTH F61Phone p F62
HOURS F63MIN F64
101
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0934
Appendix 8: CIWS – Case study, pre-trial questionnaire statistics
Mount Evelyn - Case Study Profi leParticipating residents
Population sample demographics (of returned pre-trial questionnaires):
• 75% were aged over 40 years• 50% had lived in Mount Evelyn for more than 15 years• 23% had lived in Mount Evelyn for less than 5 years• 50% resided with partner and children• 25% did not have children living at home• 7% resided solely with children• 9% lived alone• 35% worked or volunteered full-time or part-time outside the local area• 30% worked or volunteered full-time or part-time within the local area• 22% stayed home to care for family.
Communication
Contact with community groups and services to access information
• 84% ‘always’ or ‘often’ had contact with their families• 46% ‘always’ or ‘often’ had contact with friends• 41% ‘always’ or ‘often’ had contact with their neighbours• 54% ‘rarely’ or ‘seldom’ had contact with TAFE learning centres, neighbourhood centres, schools or church groups• 61% ‘rarely’ or ‘seldom’ had contact with kindergartens or childcare centres• 44% ‘rarely’ or ‘seldom’ had contact with local government services or sport and recreation centres• 33% ‘sometimes’ had contact with local government services
Community news and information
99% of respondents were interested in fi nding out about local news. The most widely used information sources were:
• local newspapers: 96%• talking to neighbours / family / friends: 79%• reading the community newsletter: 78%• reading the council newsletter: 76%
31% of respondents used ABC 774 radio as an information source for local news, 69% had never used the ABC 774 radio as a local information source.
Accessing information in an emergency situation
• 84% would watch television to acquire the information they required in an emergency• 81% would contact the local fi re brigade• 80% would contact the local police• 74% would contact friends• less than 40% of the respondents would access local government information sources • 54% would contact ‘000’ as an information source for an emergency event
Use of emergency service information sources
• 58% would access the Victorian Bushfi re Information Line (telephone)• 38% would access either the CFA or Bureau of Meteorology websites• 56% would never access either the VIC SES or DSE websites for emergency information
Rating the importance of the usually available emergency information sources
• 73% rated the television news as very important• 72% rated telephone information lines as very important• 66% rated having emergency service telephone numbers on a fridge magnet as very important• 53% rated listening to both ABC 774 and commercial radio as very important
102
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0935
Responding to offi cial and unoffi cial warning information
Effectiveness of current emergency warning and information options
The most effective emergency warning information delivery options were:
1. telephone message2. door-knock from emergency services3. siren4. television5. ABC 774 and local ABC radio
The most ineffective emergency warning information delivery options were:
1. fax2. email3. SMS message4. local ABC radio / commercial radio5. ABC 774 radio
Receiving emergency warning information
Emergency warning information was most likely to be received from:
1. local CFA siren2. neighbours / friends3. door-knock from emergency services4. television announcement5. ABC 774 radio
Emergency warning information was most unlikely to be received from:
1. local ABC radio (no local station in Mount Evelyn)2. commercial radio3. ABC 774 radio4. television announcement5. door knock from emergency services
Confi rming information contained in an emergency warning message
• 84% would try to confi rm an emergency warning message using methods such as telephoning local emergency services, tuning into radio or television, contacting neighbours and friends or accessing the emergency services websites
• 4% of this group would telephone ’000’ to confi rm an emergency warning message.
The most important information which an emergency warning message requires
• 99% indicated that the details of the emergency event were most important• 92% indicated that being told what actions to take was most important• 82% indicated that reassurance was most important• 80% indicated that being told where to get more information was most important.
Risk perception
Rating the likelihood of their household being affected by an emergency event
• 91% responded that it was very likely or possible that they would be affected by a severe storm• 88% responded that it was very likely or possible that they would be affected by a bushfi re• 87% responded that it was very likely or possible that they could be affected by a home based accident,
burglary or house fi re.
103
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0936
Emergency preparedness and planning
Confi dence in reacting to an emergency in the local area
• 27% were very confi dent about knowing how to react to an emergency in their area• 57% were fairly confi dent about knowing how to react to an emergency in their area• 14% they were not confi dent about knowing how to react to an emergency in their area.
Experiences of an emergency event
47% stated that they had experienced an emergency event, and of this group:
• 70% described tasks that involved property and personal protection• 8% described tasks involving communication with emergency services• 1% described tasks involving community protection• 21% did not describe any personal actions that they undertook.
Being better prepared for an emergency event
• 43% indicated that information would assist them to be better prepared for an emergency• 17% indicated that specifi c knowledge would assist them to be better prepared for an emergency• 16% indicated that planning would assist them to b e better prepared for an emergency• 7% indicated that training and education would assist them to be better prepared for an emergency Further analysis of these categories revealed the following:
Information:
• 10% emphasised ‘early warning’• 8% emphasised preparedness materials (brochures, fridge magnets, kits)• 6% emphasised emergency service and community contact telephone numbers• 5% emphasised the need to know what to do and where to go• Other identifi ed information sources included public meetings, local newspapers, TV campaigns, telephone
trees, siren, door knock and contact with neighbours
Planning:
• 6% emphasised household plans • 5% emphasised evacuation plans• 2% emphasised community planning
Knowledge:
• 10% emphasised specifi c knowledge on evacuation, assembly and safe places• 7% emphasised knowledge on emergency service numbers and ‘who to talk to’ in an emergency.
Rating possible decisions and actions during an emergency
• 82% would be likely to protect their house and leave if threatened• 50% would be likely to wait for the emergency services to tell them what to do• 44% would be very likely to stay and protect their house in an emergency• 28% would be very likely to leave as soon as they were aware that there was an emergency
Each of these options requires different levels of planning and preparedness knowledge.
Although 50% of respondents rated their likelihood to wait for the emergency services to advise them, the high ratings of the options involving property protection may indicate a reasonable level of safety planning.
104
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0937
Stawell - Case Study Profi le
Participating residents
Population sample demographics (of returned pre-trial questionnaires)
• 82% were aged over 40 years• 57% of respondents had lived in Stawell for more than 15years• 18% of respondents had lived in Stawell for less than 5 years• 27% resided with partner and children• 59% did not have children living at home• 7% resided solely with children• 26% lived alone• 10% worked or volunteered full time or part time outside the local area• 58% worked or volunteered full time or part time within the local area• 15% stayed home to care for family.
Communication
Contact with community groups and services to access information
• 93% ‘always’ or ‘often’ had contact with their families• 51% ‘always’ or ‘often’ had contact with friends• 53% ‘always’ or ‘often’ had contact with their neighbours• 57% ‘rarely’ or ‘seldom’ had contact with TAFE learning centres, neighbourhood centres, schools or
church groups• 68% ‘rarely’ or ‘seldom’ had contact with kindergartens or childcare centres• 32% ‘rarely’ or ‘seldom’ had contact with local government services or sport and recreation centres• 32% ‘sometimes’ had contact with local government services.
Community news and information
100% of respondents indicated their interest in fi nding out about local news. The most widely used information sources were:
• local newspapers: 91%• talking to neighbours / family / friends: 90%• reading the council newsletter: 76%
40% of respondents indicated use of ABC 774 radio as an information source for local news60% indicated that they had never used the ABC 774 radio as a local information source.
Accessing information in an emergency situation
• 82% would watch television to acquire the information they required in an emergency• 81% would contact the local police• 74% would contact the local fi re brigade• 74% would contact neighbours• less popular emergency information sources were those provided by local government• 50% would contact ‘000’ as an information source for an emergency event.
Use of emergency service information sources
• 39% would access the Victorian Bushfi re Information Line (telephone)• 27% would access either the CFA or Bureau of Meteorology websites• 56% would never access either the VIC SES or DSE websites for emergency information.
Rating the importance of the usually available emergency information sources
• 67% rated the television news as very important• 58% rated having a fridge magnet with emergency service telephone numbers as very important• 44% rated a telephone hotline as very important• 44% rated having community safety printed information as very important.
105
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0938
Responding to offi cial and unoffi cial warning information
Effectiveness of current emergency warning and information options
The most effective emergency warning information delivery options were:
1. telephone message2. door knock from emergency services3. siren4. local ABC radio5. television
The most ineffective emergency warning information delivery options were:
1. fax2. email3. SMS message4. ABC 774 radio (limited reception in this area)
Receiving emergency warning information
Emergency warning information was most likely to be received from:
1. local CFA siren2. local ABC radio3. neighbours / friends4. door knock from emergency services5. television announcement
Emergency warning information was most unlikely to be received from:
1. ABC 774 radio (limited reception in this area)2. local ABC radio3. commercial radio4. door knock from emergency services
Confi rming information contained in an emergency warning message
• 80% would try to confi rm an emergency warning message • 56% would seek to confi rm the information from the emergency services• 25% would seek to confi rm the information through the media• 22% would seek to confi rm the information through contact with neighbours• A number of responses indicated that they would access the emergency services websites to confi rm the
information.
The most important information which an emergency warning message requires
• 96% indicated that the details of the emergency event were most important• 91% indicated that being told what actions to take was most important• 85% indicated that reassurance was most important• 81% indicated that being told where to get more information was most important
Risk Perception
Rating the likelihood of their household being affected by an emergency event
• 86% responded that it was very likely or possible that they would be affected by a severe storm• 42% responded that it was very likely or possible that they would be affected by a bushfi re• 87% responded that it was very likely or possible that they could be affected by a home based accident,
burglary or house fi re• 83% responded that it was very likely or possible that they could be affected by a motor vehicle accident.
106
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0939
Emergency preparedness and planning
Confi dence in reacting to an emergency in the local area
• 23% were very confi dent about knowing how to react to an emergency in their area• 60% were fairly confi dent about knowing how to react to an emergency in their area• 12% were not confi dent about knowing how to react to an emergency in their area.
Experiences of an emergency event
27% stated that they had experienced an emergency event. Of this group:
• 45% described tasks that involved property and personal protection• 13% described tasks involving community protection• 42% did not describe any personal actions that they undertook.
Being better prepared for an emergency event
• 51% indicated that information would assist them to be better prepared for an emergency• 16% indicated that specifi c knowledge would assist them to be better prepared for an emergency• 17% indicated that planning would assist them to be better prepared for an emergency• 6% indicated that training and education would assist them to be better prepared for an emergency
Further analysis of these categories revealed the following:
Information:
• 10% emphasised ‘early warning’• 6% emphasised preparedness materials (brochures, fridge magnets, kits)• 7% emphasised emergency service and community contact telephone numbers• 5% emphasised the need to know what to do and where to go• Other identifi ed information sources included public meetings, local newspapers, TV campaigns, telephone
trees, siren, door knock and contact with neighbours.
Planning:
• 7% emphasised household plans • 5% emphasised evacuation plans• 5% emphasised community planning.
Knowledge:
• 8% emphasised specifi c knowledge on evacuation, assembly and safe places• 7% emphasised knowledge on emergency service numbers and ‘who to talk to’ in an emergency.
Rating possible decisions and actions during an emergency
• 59% would be likely to protect their house and leave if threatened• 34% would ‘wait and see’ but leave if threatened• 21% would be likely to wait for the emergency services to tell them what to do• 26% would be very likely to stay and protect their house in an emergency• 4% would be very likely to leave as soon as they were aware that there was an emergency
Each of these options requires different levels of planning and preparedness knowledge.
A high percentage of responses indicated that being threatened by an emergency would cause them to ‘leave’.
This high response combined with a fairly low rate of property defence indicates that this population sample has a low level of preparedness and planning knowledge.
107
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0940
Halls Gap - Case Study Profi le
Participating residents
Population sample demographics (returned pre-trial questionnaires)
• 83% were aged over 40 years• 36% of respondents had lived in Halls Gap for more than 15 years• 41% of respondents had lived in Halls Gap for less than 5 years• 33% resided with partner and children• 61% did not have children living at home• 0% resided solely with children• 19% lived alone• 35% worked or volunteered full-time or part-time outside the local area• 30% worked or volunteered full-time or part-time within the local area• 22% stayed home to care for family.
Communication
Contact with community groups and services to access information
• 75% ‘always’ or ‘often’ had contact with their families• 63% ‘always’ or ‘often’ had contact with friends• 62% ‘always’ or ‘often’ had contact with their neighbours• 57% ‘rarely’ or ‘seldom’ had contact with TAFE learning centres, neighbourhood centres, schools or
church groups• 67% ‘rarely’ or ‘seldom’ had contact with kindergartens or childcare centres• 36% ‘rarely’ or ‘seldom’ had contact with local government services or sport and recreation centres• 33% ‘sometimes’ had contact with local government services.
Community news and information
100% of respondents indicated that they were interested in fi nding out about local news. The most widely used information sources were:
• local newspapers: 83%• talking to neighbours / family / friends: 83%• reading the council newsletter: 76%• community noticeboards: 61%
58% of respondents stated that they would listen to the local ABC regional radio to access information about their local area.
75% of respondents stated that they would not use commercial radio as a local information source.
Accessing information in an emergency situation
• 89% would contact the local police• 86% would contact the local fi re brigade• 83% would contact neighbours• 78% would use the local ABC radio• 70% would use television as an information source• 42% would never contact their family to access emergency information due to their families not living in
either Halls Gap or nearby areas.
Use of emergency service information sources
• 64% would access the Victorian Bushfi re Information Line (telephone)• 47% would access either the CFA or Bureau of Meteorology websites• 40% would never access either the VIC SES or DSE websites for emergency information.
108
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0941
Rating the importance of the usually available emergency information sources
• 83% rated the local ABC radio and commercial radio as very important• 78% rated a telephone information line as very important• 70% rated the television news as very important• 53% rated having a fridge magnet with emergency and community telephone numbers as very important
Responding to offi cial and unoffi cial warning information
Effectiveness of current emergency warning and information options
The most effective emergency warning information delivery options were:
1. telephone messaging2. local ABC radio3. door knock from emergency services4. siren5. television
The most ineffective emergency warning information delivery options were:
1. fax2. email3. SMS message4. ABC 774 radio (no reception in this area)5. television
Receiving emergency warning information
Emergency warning information was most likely to be received from:
1. local ABC radio2. neighbours / friends3. local commercial radio4. television announcement5. local CFA siren
Emergency warning information was most unlikely to be received from:
1. television announcement2. ABC 774 radio (no reception in this area)3. local CFA siren (no CFA station located in Halls Gap)4. door knock from emergency services5. local commercial radio
Confi rming information contained in an emergency warning message
• 89% would try to confi rm an emergency warning message • 48% would seek to confi rm the information from the emergency services• 32% would seek to confi rm the information through the media• 55% would seek to confi rm the information through contact with neighbours.
Responses emphasised local community communication sources.
The most important information which an emergency warning message requires
• 97% indicated that the details of the emergency event were most important• 89% indicated that being told what actions to take was most important• 86% indicated that reassurance was most important• 78% indicated that being told where to get more information was most important.
109
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0942
Risk perception
Rating the likelihood of their household being affected by an emergency event
• 92% responded that it was very likely or possible that they would be affected by a severe storm• 92% responded that it was very likely or possible that they would be affected by a bushfi re• 75% responded that it was very likely or possible that they could be affected by a home based accident,
burglary or house fi re• 78% responded that it was very likely or possible that they could be affected by a motor vehicle accident.
Emergency preparedness and planning
Confi dence in reacting to an emergency in the local area
• 19% were very confi dent about knowing how to react to an emergency in their area• 67% were fairly confi dent about knowing how to react to an emergency in their area• 11% were not confi dent about knowing how to react to an emergency in their area
Experiences of an emergency event
25% stated that they had experienced an emergency event, and of this group:
• 44% described tasks that involved property and personal protection• 23% described tasks involving communication with emergency services• 33% did not describe any personal actions that they undertook.
Being better prepared for an emergency event
• 25% indicated that information would assist them to be better prepared for an emergency• 8% indicated that specifi c knowledge would assist them to be better prepared for an emergency• 16% indicated that planning would assist them to b e better prepared for an emergency• 12% indicated that training and education would assist them to be better prepared for an emergency
Further analysis of these categories revealed the following
Information:
• 10% emphasised ‘early warning’• 2% of responses stated the requirement of information accuracy• single responses noted the relevance of fridge magnets and public meetings however the majority of responses
did not provide detail about required information.
Planning:
• 5% emphasised household plans • 5% emphasised evacuation plans• 5% emphasised community planning• 1% emphasised preparedness plans.
Knowledge:
• 2% emphasised specifi c knowledge on evacuation, assembly and safe places• 6% emphasised knowledge on emergency service numbers and ‘who to talk to’ in an emergency.
Rating possible decisions and actions during an emergency
• 42% would be very likely to stay and protect their house in an emergency• 53% would be likely to protect their house and leave if threatened• 19 % would ‘wait and see’ but leave if threatened• 14% would be likely to wait for the emergency services to tell them what to do• 8% would be very likely to leave as soon as they were aware that there was an emergency.
Each of these options requires different levels of planning and preparedness knowledge.
A high percentage of these responses indicated that they would intend to defend their property in an emergency but experiencing a level of threat would prompt them to consider leaving.
A reasonably low response to the ‘wait and see’ options and immediate leaving indicates that this population sample has a moderate level of preparedness and planning for emergency events.
110
Appe
ndic
esWIT.005.001.0943
Appendix 9 : Emergency Service Field Offi cer PDA: CIWS Operating Procedures
111
ES offi cer draws mapby dotting points on screen.
ES offi cer enters in the emergency.➡
Emergency Service (ES)offi cer logs in.
ES offi cer pulls up mapon PDA.➡
ES offi cer enters weather. ES offi cer enters user.➡Ap
pend
ices
WIT.005.001.0944
Appe
ndic
es
112
ES offi cer ESO
in attendance.
ES offi cer enters infrastructure
that may be affected by emergency.
➡
ES offi cer moves to 2nd page.
ES offi cer enters valid factor.➡
ES offi cer enters
the casualties. ➡ ES offi cer takes live feed.
WIT.005.001.0945
ES offi cer that it is live. ➡ ES offi cer sends off polygon.
113
Appe
ndic
es
WIT.005.001.0946
Bibliography
ABC Victoria and Victorian Emergency Services Organisations: Memorandum of Understanding, http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/emergency
Betts, R. (2001). Ferny Creek Fire Alert Siren Evaluation Report, The Offi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner, Department of Justice, Victorian State Government.
Betts,R. (2002). Ferny Creek Fire Alert Siren: Evaluation Report from the Second Summer SeasonUnpublished report completed by OESC Research Projects Unit.
Betts, R. (2003). ‘The missing links in community warning systems: fi ndings from two Victorian community warning system projects’ The Australian Journal of Emergency Management. Vol. 18, No 3.
Betts, R. (2005). Maribyrnong River Flooding: A response from the residents Unpublished report completed by OESC Research Projects Unit and Maribyrnong City Council.
Blanchard-Boehm, R.D. (1998). ‘Understanding public response to increased risk from natural hazards: Application of the hazards risk communication framework’ International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, Vol. 16, Number 3, pp.247-248.
Boxelaar, L. and Reinholtd, S.Community Safety and Evaluation Report: Whats Happening? Meeting community needs for information during wildfi res Emergency Management Australia and Country Fire Authority.
Bradbury, J., Branch, K. and Focht, W. (1999). ‘Trust and public participation in risk policy issues’ in Cvetkovich, G. and Lofstedt, R., Social Trust and the Management of Risk, Earthscan Publications: London.
Checkland, P. and Scholes, J. (1999). Soft Systems Methodology in Action, John Wiley.
Chen H.T. (1990). Theory-Driven Evaluation. Oaks, CA: Sage.
Department of Sustainability and the Environment, Department of Primary Industries. Community Engagement Unit, Resources and Regional Services Division/Catchment and Agriculture Services, Effective Community Engagement, Version 2, ISBN 1 74106 776 6.
Clifford, R.A. (1956). ‘The Rio Grande fl ood: a comparative study of border communities’ National Research Disaster Study Number 7, National Academy of Sciences, Washington DC.
Country Fire Authority (2003). Community Safety (Wildfi re) Post Incident Analysis Part 2, Community Development. Unpublished, CFA. Victoria.
Country Fire Authority and Emergency Management Australia (1999). Community Safety Research and Evaluation Report: Preparedness: A framework for understanding and monitoring levels of preparedness for wildfi re.
Country Fire Authority and Emergency Management Australia (1999). Community Safety Research and Evaluation Report: Stay or Go: Understanding Community Responses to Emergencies.
114
WIT.005.001.0947
De Marchi (1995). ‘Risk communication to reduce vulnerability’ in Horlick-Jones, T., Amendola, A. and Casale, R. Natural Risk and Civil Protection, E&FN Spon. ISBN 0 419 19970 5.
Department of Justice (2004). Coode Island Community Warning and Information System: Trial and Evaluation of the Telephone Message System, ISBN 1 92102 801 7.
Drabek, T.E. (1986). Human System Responses to Disaster: An Inventory of Sociological Findings, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Drottz-Sjoberg, B.M. (1995). ‘Exposure to risk and trust information: implications for the credibility of risk communication’ The Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies, available on-line: http://www.massey.ac.nz/~trauma/issues/2000-2/drottz.htm
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., Lowe, A. (1991). Management Research: An Introduction Sage, London Publishing.
Emergency Management Manual Victoria, July 2003.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Orienta-Konsultit Helsinki.
Fenton, D.M. and Coakes, S.J. (1998).4 Social Impact Assessment and Water Resource Management: An Application of TRC Analysis, Unpublished paper, Sheridan Coakes Consulting.
Gillespie, D.F., Perry, R.W. and Mileti, D. (1974). ‘Collective Stress and Community Transformation’, Human Relations, Vol.27, No.8, pp.767-778
Handmer, J.W., Keys, K. and Elliot, J. (1999). ‘Achieving lasting change in a multi-organisational task: fl ood warnings in Australia.’ Applied Geography. 19: 179-197
Handmer, J. (2002) ‘Are fl ood warnings futile? Risk communication in emergencies’ The Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies, Volume 2.
Hussey, J. and Hussey, R. (1997). Business Research: A practical guide for undergraduate and postgraduate students, Palgrave London Publishing.
King, D. (2000). ‘You’re on your own: Community vulnerability and the need for awareness and education for predictable natural disasters’, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, Vol. 8, No. 4, UK.
Kost, J. and Moyer, K. (2003). Real-Time Warnings to Citizens. Gartner Advisory Group, February13. http://intranet.vic.gov.au/xgov/gartner/GGV4.NSF
Mileti, D. (2000). (1975). Natural hazard warning in the United States: A research assessment, monograph, University of Colorado, USA.
Mileti, D.S. and O’Brien, P.W. (1992). ‘Warnings during disaster: Normalizing communicated risk, social problems’, Volume 39, pp.40-57 in Blanchard-Boehm, R.D. (1998). ‘Understanding Public Response to Increased Risk from Natural Hazards: Application of the Hazards Risk Communication Framework’. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, Vol. 16, Number 3, pp.247-248.
Mileti, D.S. and Sorensen, J.H. (1988). ‘Planning and Implementing Warning Systems’ in Lystad, M. (Ed.), Mental Health Response to Mass Emergencies, Brunner/Mazel, New York, pp. 321-345.
Neal, J. and Parker, D.J. (1989). ‘Flood warnings in the Severn-Trent Water Authority Area: an investigation of standards of service, effectiveness and customer satisfaction’, Geography and Planning Paper, Number 23, Middlesex University, Enfi eld.
115
Bibl
iogr
aphy
WIT.005.001.0948
116
Owen, C. (2001). ‘The role of organisational context in mediating workplace learning and performance’, Computers in Human Behaviour, Vol. 17. pp 597-614, Pergamon Press.
Parker, D.J. and Handmer, J.W. (1998). ‘The role of unoffi cial fl ood warning systems’, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, Vol.6, No.1.
Petts, J. and Leach, B. (2000). Participation and Consultation by the Environment Agency: Literature Review, (Draft), Environment Agency R& D Technical Report, E2-030 (Eds DSE).
Perry, R.W. (1985). Comprehensive Emergency Management: Evacuating Threatened Populations. JAI Press Inc., London.
Perry, R.W. and Greene, M.R. (1982). ‘The role of ethnicity in the emergency decision making process’, Sociological Inquiry, Volume 52, Number 2, pp.306-334. U.K.
Pretty, J. and Hine, R. (1999). Participatory Appraisal for Community Assessment, Centre for Environment and Society, University of Essex http://www2.essex.ac.uk/ces/ResearchProgrammes/pa&caoverview.htm
Offi ce of the Emergency Services Commissioner (2002). Unpublished Report of Visit to New York City and Washington DC to Examine the Terrorist Attacks on the World Trade Centre and Subsequent Anthrax Release.
Reser, J. (1996). Coping with natural disaster warnings: The nature of human response and psychological preparedness. NDR 96: Conference of nature disaster reduction, Surfers Paradise, Queensland, Institutions of Engineers.
Sikich, G.W. (2005). ‘Hurricane Katrina: Nature’s “dirty bomb” incident?’ Accessed through www.comtinuitycentral.com/feature0247.html
Suchman, E.A. (1967). Evaluative Research: Principles and Practice in Public Service and Social Action Programs. NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Tarrant, M. (2005). ‘Hurricane Katrina’, The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, Vol. 20, No. 4.
Weber, R., McEntire D.A. and Robinson R.J. (2002). Public/Private Collaboration in Disaster: Implications from the World Trade Centre Terrorist Attacks Quick Response Report #155, Natural Hazards Research and Application Information Centre, University of Colorado. USA.
Wholey, J.S. (1983). Evaluation and Effective Public Sector Management. NY: Little Brown Publishing, New York.
Williams, H.B. (1964). ‘Human factors in warning and response systems’ in Gresser, G.H. Wechsler, H. and Greenblatt, M. (eds). The Threat of Impending Disaster – Contributions to Psychology of Stress, pp. 79-114, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge U.K.
Bibl
iogr
aphy
116
WIT.005.001.0949
www.justice.vic.gov.au
WIT.005.001.0950
![getdoc[1]securities.stanford.edu/filings-documents/1010/.../1999224_r03c_98153… · Title: getdoc[1].pdf Author: cperlas Created Date: 3/17/2005 2:35:32 PM](https://static.fdocuments.in/doc/165x107/5f934aefcb7b3f75d7294dcd/getdoc1-title-getdoc1pdf-author-cperlas-created-date-3172005-23532-pm.jpg)
