The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-funded Preparedness and Emergency Response Research Centers (PERRCs) conducted research from 2008 to 2015 aimed to improve the complex public health emergency preparedness and response (PHEPR) system. This paper summarizes PERRC studies that addressed the development and assessment of criteria for evaluating PHEPR and metrics for measuring their efficiency and effectiveness.

We reviewed 171 PERRC publications indexed in PubMed between 2009 and 2016. These publications derived from 34 PERRC research projects. We identified publications that addressed the development or assessment of criteria and metrics pertaining to PHEPR systems and describe the evaluation methods used and tools developed, the system domains evaluated, and the metrics developed or assessed.

We identified 29 publications from 12 of the 34 PERRC projects that addressed PHEPR system evaluation criteria and metrics. We grouped each study into 1 of 3 system domains, based on the metrics developed or assessed: (1) organizational characteristics (n = 9), (2) emergency response performance (n = 12), and (3) workforce capacity or capability (n = 8). These studies addressed PHEPR system activities including responses to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic and the 2011 tsunami, as well as emergency exercise performance, situational awareness, and workforce willingness to respond. Both PHEPR system process and outcome metrics were developed or assessed by PERRC studies.

PERRC researchers developed and evaluated a range of PHEPR system evaluation criteria and metrics that should be considered by system partners interested in assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of their activities. Nonetheless, the monitoring and measurement problem in PHEPR is far from solved. Lack of standard measures that are readily obtained or computed at local levels remains a challenge for the public health preparedness field. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:626-638)

The objectives of this study were to (1) identify available training programs for emergency response personnel and public health professionals on addressing the needs of Deaf and hard of hearing individuals and older adults, (2) identify strategies to improve these training programs, and (3) identify gaps in available training programs and make recommendations for addressing these gaps.

A literature review was conducted to identify relevant training programs and identify lessons learned. Interviews were conducted by telephone or email with key informants who were subject matter experts who worked with Deaf and hard of hearing persons (n=11) and older adults (n=11).

From the literature, 11 training programs targeting public health professionals and emergency response personnel serving Deaf and hard of hearing individuals (n=7) and older adults (n=4) were identified. The 4 training programs focused on older adults had corresponding evaluations published in the literature. Three (43%) of the 7 training programs focused on Deaf and hard of hearing persons included individuals from the affected communities in the development and implementation of the training. Key informant interviews identified common recommendations for improving training programs: (1) training should involve collaboration across different emergency, state, federal, and advocacy agencies; (2) training should involve members of affected communities; (3) training should be more widely accessible and affordable; and (4) training should teach response personnel varied communication techniques relevant to the Deaf and hard of hearing and older adult communities.

Developing effective, accessible, and affordable training programs for emergency response personnel working with Deaf and hard of hearing persons, some of whom belong to the older adult population, will require a collaborative effort among emergency response agencies, public health organizations, and members of the affected communities. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:606–614)