Cultural Competence in Preparedness Planning - Transcript

Moderator: Haley McCalla
Presenters: Julio Dicent Taillepierre, MS
Date/Time: April 24, 2019, 1:00 – 2:00 pm ET

Good afternoon, everyone. I am Hailey McCalla an ORISE fellow appointed to CDC’s Center for Preparedness and Response, Division of Emergency Operations. Thank you so much for joining us today for our EPIC webinar titled Cultural Competence in Preparedness Planning.

Today we will hear from Julio Dicent Taillepierre. If you do not wish for your participation to be recorded, please exit at this time. You can earn continuing education by completing this webinar.

Instructions on how to earn continuing education can be found on our website emergency. cdc. gov/epic.

The course access code is EPIC0424 with all letters capitalized. To repeat, the course access code to receive continuing education units is, in all caps, EPIC0424. Today’s webinar is interactive.

To make a comment, click the “chat” button on your screen and then enter your thoughts. To ask a question, please use the “Q&A” button. The Q&A session will begin after our presenter has presented.

Closed captioning is available for this webinar. The button to enable this function will be found either at the bottom or top of your screen. Today, we are very fortunate to have Julio Dicent Taillepierre as our speaker today.

Julio is a team leader for the Initiatives and Partnerships team in CDC’s office of Minority Health and Health Equity. In this capacity, he provides technical leadership for the agency on the development of health equity program efforts and agency language access capacity building initiatives. He also oversees several agency-wide initiatives related to national public health pipeline programs, public communication efforts, and bi-national health equity collaborations with Brazil.

Prior to his current role, Julio was a Public Health Analyst in CDC’s Division of HIV and AIDS Prevention. In this capacity, he was the Branch lead for HIV Prevention Community Planning activities, and the lead for HIV capacity building efforts targeted Hispanic-serving community-based organizations. He oversaw national HIV awareness campaigns targeted to men who have sex with men, migrant farm worker populations, and Hispanic/Latinos.

Mr. Dicent Taillepierre has a masters degree in nonprofit management and policy analysis from the New School University in New York City and a Liberal Arts degree from Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts. Thank you so much for joining us today, Julio.

Please begin.

Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining this webinar. This webinar serves as an introduction to the topic of cultural competence in the context of preparedness planning. As part of the office the minority health and health equity at the CDC, our office’s mission is to advance health equity and women’s health issues through our science and programs, increase CDC’s capacity to leverage a diverse and we will trained workforce and engage stakeholders towards this end.

This seminar is one such way in which we will fulfill this mission. Our office understands that health disparities can be created or made more acute for distinct populations as a result of a emergency, due to state perceiving laws losses over time and populations already vulnerable. As an example that illustrates this dynamic the 2018 national health preparedness indeck indicated several relevant key findings including that geographic disparities in health security are persistent and become more pronounced over.

States in the deep south, southwest and upper mountain west lag behind other regions. States that experience higher economic losses from past disas percent showed lower overall levels of health security in 2017. With health security varies inversely with poverty levels and the proportion of the population without health insurance coverage.

And also, the preparedness index points to how community planning and engagement coordination is a critical function to ensure optimal national health security. For more information on the national health security preparedness index, see the webinar resource page for the web address, or by going to NHSPI dot organize. As an introductory seminar, I will provide a general description of the topic, giving some examples of how the issue of cultural competence is critical when conducting emergency planning.

As a result of completing the seminar, you will be able to discuss challenges in building cultural competence in the context of emergency preparedness and response planning, recall definitions and characteristics for how culture and culture competence concepts relate to preparedness planning practices, identify characteristics of culturally competent service and its relevance in emergency immediateness and response planning, as well as locate available training resources and technical tools for building cultural competence in emergency preparedness and response planning. Please note that while, in practice, preparedness planning is distinct from response, I will be referring to preparedness and response planning as related activities throughout the seminar. Also, while I’ll make general references throughout the presentation on preparedness planning, I’ll also pay particular attention to how cultural competence is critical in specifically community engagement strategies.

In example of why we are here, Hurricane Katrina. While our gold standard for preparedness approaches are to ensure the safety of the general public in any emergency, thoughtful consideration in the planning process must also include how disparate populations are systemically or contextually impacted given any particular emergency. Interest are a number of examples of the context of how past emergencies have impacted particular populations.

One such example is a lesson of preparedness that Hurricane Katrina provides us. Much has been and will continue to be written by about Cal did I in a. The article by Elder sited here provides some details on the which in which this emergency had immediate and long-term effects that would disparate by population in the context of race, socioeconomic status, and place of residence.

Eder notes in his findings how black populations interviewed had an explicit rationale supporting optimism in their ability to manage their own — excuse me, manage on their own during a hurricane as well as skepticism of the evacuation orders provided by emergency personnel. Eder’s analysis underscores the need for considerations of culture in each aspect of emergency preparedness and response if we are to construct plans that will not only ensure optimal survival but also optimal recover real for all those affected by an emergency. To start us off, let me take a moment to note the purpose of emergency preparedness planning.

Public health preparedness is the ability of the public health system, community, and individuals to prevent, protect against, quickly respond to, and recover from health emergencies, particularly those in which scale, timing, or unpredictability threatens to overwhelm routine capabilities. This definition is particularly relevant today when noting that it includes references to systems, communities, and individuals working together. While there are a number of definitions of the term “cultural competence,” there are appropriate that are appropriate for discussing culture at an individual group level, this version which is referenced in HHS’s definition, is most appropriate for emergency planning from because of the emphasis it places on the role that behaviors, attitudes, and policies play at a systems, agency, and professional level.

With this definition in mind, there are three general areas to consider overall in the context of cultural competence. At the organizational level, for example, the capacity for the planning professionals to consider the execution of their skills, judgment, and functions within a specific set of policy and regulatory context required or expected by the organization type that may conflict with their personal beliefs and experiences. Or, inversely, how those beliefs and experiences are used within that organization to support better cultural competent environment.

At the operational level, the capacity of individuals to work with others involved in preparedness planning will represent different professional disciplines and sectors that may conflict or complement each other. For example, a social worker versus an elected official. At the community level, the capacity of planning professionals with extensive public health experience to work with community stakeholders in the development and implementation of preparedness efforts.

I have organized this introductory presentation focussing primarily on community-level cultural competence. Strategic imperative for culturally competent preparedness planning. Culturally competent preparedness attempts to anticipate avoidable situational limitations during emergencies that come about as a result of social, structural, or historical circumstances by incorporating plans that allow for the strategic application of mechanisms, strategies, processes, and resources, to prepare for an emergency.

But it can only could do so when two distinct cultural planners are at play. Planners are able to work cross culturally across various disciplines, beach their own priorities and perspectives. And secondly, planning processes take in to account how emergency plans can be constructed in ways that effectively mitigate how an emergency may negatively or positively effect populations and communities.

For the latter, particular attention is needed in understanding what may be particular strategies that are needed for particular populations and communities. Elements of cultural competence in emergency preparedness life cycle. Here is an illustration of culture in the context of emergency preparedness.

These examples are intended to be inter related and cyclical, starting from the initial plan highlighted in the diagram in blue which I’ve combined in the elements, only to better illustrate my point for the purposes of this presentation. Therefore, keep in mind that culture competence is relevant in each phase of the life cycle of planning, organizing, and equipping, training, exercise, and evaluation or improvement. During the initial planning phase, considerations of how to ensure that effective cross cultural — I’m sorry, excuse me, cross sector communication and targeted vital information is possible has several include the Countrical considerations involving cultural competence.

For example, does the planning team have an understanding of what information is vital from the perspective of the community? How does one plan for, organize, and equip the planning team, staff, and stakeholders to disseminate vital information in a way that will effectively reach the community targets in preparation for and during an emergency? What conditions that make getting vital information of difficulty need to be addressed in emergency preparedness planning In these are just some of the questions related to ensuring appropriate considers considerations of culture that need to be accounted for in emergency planning. These questions can be specific to a stage in the life cycle. They can also function in a cascade where they impact other stages.

For example, in the training on exercises stage, emergency planning teams may want to get training on plain language writing, usualing translation assistance services and conducting exercises where the specific task is to test the packaging of key dissemination and information to key audiences. Another approach may involve providing training and communities stakeholders as a way to engage communities unfamiliar with the process in emergency planning, as well as to gain greater insights on key questions such as those I posed earlier related to vital information. Early engagement with also facilitate a relationship that will assist in getting community unpit early on how well the plans were designed and executed during the evaluation and improvement planning phases.

Often when, discussing cultural competence, it is difficult to understand whether or not cultural competent is present. Here are some examples of results in the planning process when cultural competence is present. Preparedness interventions must be culturally sensitival at all phases of the planning process.

They acknowledge culture and historical context explicitly. The plans also account for how communities have historicallien been impact bid an emergency during the ever and and long after the response is over about learning from the effect of the emergency from the perspective of those impacted. This information is both documented and shared with those same communities.

Intervention planning efforts are participatory, negotiating the sometimes competing needs and expectations of diverse perspectives from multiple stakeholders. App universal approach, however previously successful, will not always be the most relevant or appropriate across diverse communities and sectors, but they do serve as a learning tool for those involved in the current planning process. In this way, historical context and lessons are shared and communicated and used to demonstrate how that context is being taken in to account in the planning process.

Adaptation of these preparedness invery he thinkses in a manner that responds to the particular context, resource, and circumstances is key. The planning activities that integrate a culturally competent approach involve continually asking, whether or not perspective is missing? And how can they be included in the process? How do we build our capacity to address diverse needs during an emergency? How can we maximize the inclusion of key skills and perspectives of those who are engaged now to build this capacity over time, in the current emergency as well as in the planning process in the future?

Cultural competence domains to improve emergency preparedness, possible examples. Listed here some examples of that can improve preparedness planning in the context of marginalized populations. Of emphasis of these examples is on creating opportunities of inclusion, if not of the actual representatives, being involved in the planning process given that the involvement in what it can be a long-term activity is not always feasible for communities, then, at minimum, the inclusion and consideration of their perspectives and emergency needs in concrete preparedness intervention strategies.

And so the examples involve engaging marginalized communities to participate in the planning process. Are, soliciting their input and feedback on the design and implementation of practice drills. The establishment and the continued commitment to the increase in the level of trust and literacy in the context of preparedness.

Are and are he response readiness for people with specifically limited English proficiency, and conducting a reresponse and recovery assessments that account for population that is are not routinely served by public services either due to language, social position, societal stigma, or structural discrimination. Building cultural competence and emergency preparedness relevant areas of planning. There are general areas of emergency planning that have explicit reference to cultural competence listed here, relating these to the 2018 public health preparedness capabilities, they directly align with the following capabilities.

Capability one, community preparedness. Capability four, emergency public information and warning. Capability 6, information sharing.

Capability 7, mass care. Capabilitied 11, nonpharmaceutical interventions. Capability 14, responder safety and health.

And capability 15, volunteer management. Each of these capabilities, take in to account the issues of communication, training and education, providing resources for those involved in the planning as well as those involved in the response. Measuring and evaluating from a advantageage point that takes in to account diverse perspectives.

As well as the consideration of specific policies and program initiatives. I’ve intentionally emphasized those capabilities that relate most explicitly to activities relevant in preparedness most associated with community involvement. Examples of preparedness initiativetive that include culturally competent approaches.

The following are just a few examples of local efforts to creed culturally competent emergency planning initiatives. The first example, the community outreach information network or COIN is an emergency planning initially ittive that has been replicated in multiple states across the country. Kentucky is one such example.

A common parkistic of each of these examples listed here, including the emergency community health outreach network or ECH O, and the China town disaster response project, is that each of them is an example of how community engagement and participation has been embedded in emergency planning and execution. And one of the key characteristics of each of these examples is that these planning processes are ongoing, involve multiple populations, often take place in community driven activities and processes, and use multiple communication approaches. So common questions in concerning you will haver in are a rabl populations in culturally competent emergency planning.

The key here with any questions related to culture competence is that you want to create an environment of continuous cull cultural learning. Whether it is related to language or race, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability, the intent so acknowledge culture in emergency planning in a manner that goes beyond merely collecting a distinct set of demographic or contextual facts of particular populations. It remembers an environment for learning that engages all members of the planning process in considering complex issues such as structural inequality, societal stigma and the specific position of the various communities located within the geographic area under review.

These questions on this slide are just a few examples of how planning committees should thoughtfully consider taking on a cultural confidence approach. While the previous examples have focussed on national efforts, these questions are applicable in either a local, national or global planning context. For example, what populations are considered you will haver in are a rabl and why? Typically, in an emergency planning context the machining would imply that everyone is vulnerable.

Taking in to account structural and historical inequalities, an emergency may exacerbate those existing vulnerabilities and may result in disparate levels in which a population is impacted by a particular emergency. Asking this question in advance of an emergency is critical to start taking in to account who should be involved that may be the least able to participate. What are the unique circumstantial or structural characteristics that could introduce vulnerability within an emergency? There may be demographic, societal, behavioral, or contextual issues related to the population that may only come in to play during an emergency but that may not be occurring outside of an emergency.

Given that the machining may exacerbate or even create such vulnerabilities. Separately, how do these populations define an emergency? It is critical understand to what are the particular issues of health literacy and emergency literacy that are a population is intrinsically working with when we are attempting to involve a population or community in emergency planning. If that population does not define an emergency as constituting the need to participate with formal emergency planning organizations and stakeholders, they may reject participating in such planning.

And so ensuring that populations have common definitions of what an emergency is and how they are impacted by it is critical as part of a planning process. What are these populations sources of resilience in emergencies? It is important to understand in that planning process where communities go for help. There may be other institutions, stakeholders, or geographic locations, where populations and communities go during an emergency that if we’re not able to involve them directly, we might be able to involve those stakeholders and institutions in those geographic locations where they seek help to be part of the planning process.

Who are the key stakeholders and community resources these populations depend on? So once having identified these stakeholders and community resources do, we have a relationship with them? Do they or would they seek our involvement or our participation in that emergency response? Do we see the actions in be a emergency in a way that’s align with the those community resources and stake holeders? What is our level of capacity to engage and partner with these populations and communities? Is it both informed by and influenced by the responses to these previous questions but but then once we have answers, what is our actual operational capacity to take an extra step, adden extra intervention, add an extra stage in our planning time line to in order to make sure that we’ve taken the necessary steps to engage and partner with communities appropriately. All of these questions as well as others I have not covered here, are important in that planning process. Up in of these questions are particularly important at any particular time.

They should be questions that are asked repeatedly and consistently throughout the emergency planning process. Given that building cultural competence is not a one step process and is a continual commitment as part of the planning effort, ongoing training, preparation, and discussion is key for emergency preparedness planning members. And so the following are key on-line resources which are recommended to build greater cultural competence, understanding, and skills appropriate in medical and emergency response settings.

Additional examples are also included in the resupports link for the webinar. You are encouraged to, in particular, link to the cultural competence curriculum for disaster preparedness and crisis response which provides a very robust course on cultural competence in the context of health services. The public health workbook to define, locate, and reach special and vulnerable at risk populations in emergency as well as the health literacy and plain language resource site on the CDC dot.

gov website. In closing, any group involved in planning will have views, concerns, and priorities that co-Poe tension alley conflict with those in others in the planning process. These differences and priorities are best addressed when the underlying cultural perspectives are acknowledged and responded to.

Competence is a performance effective that can be applied consistently. The kin corporation of cultural preparedness in a life cycle is applied by the vigor and ingenuity applied pi the participants in each emergency life cycle stage. App culturally competent planning process is context specific and can rarely account for all cultural issues and all populations, nor ensure that planned approaches will be successful in all situations.

However, it does serve as a foundation for planning, for communication and for benchmarking in a way that can be shared and communicated with others. A cultural competence approach does not ensure an effective and efficient emergency plan but it does support the optimal conditions that the plan be successful. Now I’ll open the webinar to consider questions from viewers on-line.

Thank you so much, Julio for that presentation. Jonathan, can you read us our first question?

Yes. So we’ve gotten some really good questions for this, Julio. The first is going to come from Abigail E Buchanan.

Is communication and resources for preparedness enough to address cultural and community needs for marginalized populations when there are struck tours in place that reenforce increased risks to disasters? So, for example, chemical exposure and lack of stringent chemical regulations and post exposure healthcare in low income, high minority communities.

That’s a difficult question because they ask is it enough and perhaps we can broaden it to does it help what’s the most that we can do, that whole range.

Okay. So thank you for that question, Abigail. It depends, again, on what you mean by resources.

So and how those structural limitations or the instruct context in which the emergency planning is taken in to place, taken in to account, assen ingrant characteristic of the plan. In many cases the ways in which communication is constructed, disseminated and what vital information is included in that communication might account for some of that structural context, given whatever conflicts are created by local policies, or conflicts created for vulnerabilities created by geographic characteristics of a particular locality. So the communication might, in anticipation of what those limitations are, and who the intended audience is for that vital information, you can have tour it in a way that speaks directly to those limitations, the same with resources.

Not every community needs the same resources and given how geographic and regulatory policies often impact populations distinctly, those resources need to be equally tailored to the needs of those particular populations. Depending on what the planning pros accepts is and what resources are brought to bear by partners in the emergency planning process, the resources might not only mitigate what those limitations are but actually depending on the extend to which key stakeholders may have a policymaking role within that locality, at the might even be able to significantly mitigate, even to the point of eliminating some of those vulnerabilities. If given enough time and awareness of what they are.

But that’s only if those planning committees are, of course, looking to understand what those vulnerabilities are and what are the causes of those vulnerabilities.

Next question.

Just to add to what you said, Julio, our experience working at emergency preparedness is it is all about the preparation, something you emphasized here as well. So Ellen Taylor asked, can I apply this valued information to state prisons? Julio?

Yes, I’m writing the question down. That’s an excellent question. So this is a perfect example of what I was speaking to earlier regarding an institutional culture made up of policies, norms, and roles that may create vulnerabilities.

I think the most immediate response I would give to that question is it would depend if you can bring in is state correctional or prison officials to be part of that emergency planning process. So the depending on the kind of emergency, for example, people in a correctional facility or a prison may be vulnerable because they’re in a static location. So, for example, with extreme issues of flooding or either quakes or environmental exposure, emergency plans may need to very explicitly think about what happens to and what to do about protecting the lives of those who are in those institutions, whether they work there or whether they’re institutionalized there.

The same applies, for example, for people who are you know, immobilizeed and unable to be transported out of where they’re located be it because of a disability or be it because of a medical condition at a hospital or clinic or let’s say in a assisted living residence. So this issue of the kind of institution, the kinds of limitations of what is possible is part of what we said earlier, what you might want to pay particular attention to in that preparatory phase in that learning planning process.

Thank you. Our next question is coming to come from Timothy McMahon muss who asked, are there any approaches that have failed or needed to be reworked to be culturally confident and successful for communicating with vulnerable and minority groups?

That’s a great question. Unfortunately, I did not prepare this presentation to talk about failures. So one of the things that I focussed on are those intervention that is are currently working but let me also point out that the examples I gave are conditionally successful in that, and what I mean by that, is that no process, particularly in terms of ebb engaging communities and being culturally competent for people who are both involved in the planning as well as the people that they are engaging is a perfect process.

Every effort attempting to be culturally competent is going to go through a veeries or a succession of many failures as those processes get designed, implemented, and evaluated. And anyone who has been doing this work for awhile will attest that it is always challenging. There’s never a, you know, foolproof intervention or strategy.

It’s always about improving the work that you’re doing over time.

I would just like to add to that from our own experience. These webinars originally did not have live closed captioning, we listened to one of our partners, the hearing loss association of America, who let us know, in no, you know, no uncertain terms, that that really should take place and they were right, and we made that change, and that ability to listen and accept feedback and react quickly seems to be a key component. And I I’ll go on to the next question.

This one is from police kill la Baez who asks, would you say that the emergency preparedness life cycle can be applied to recovery as well?

Most definitely, yes. So in the recovery process there are very similar activities and dynamics, particularly when, as was just being said, you may be listening after an emergency plan has been implemented and you’re in the response or even recovery phase there. May be depending on the type of emergency, intervals where community stake holed holders may be solicited and given a an opportunity to give you feedback, let you know where resources need to be redirected in real-time, or as a result of having gone through a process of trying to learn from the emergency response that just took place.

So one, there’s always — there’s never a bad time to solicit feedback from communities, listening, as was said earlier, is an incredibly powerful tool to both build engagement opportunities with communities that often are not considered or given an opportunity to participate, as well as building those avenues where those communities will become part of the planning effort in the next go round. So in both preparedness planning, response and recovery, these strategies and considerations are appropriate.

Thank you for that. This question comes from the DeKalw county schools EL study program. What advice do you have for large school district who have large multilingual and refugee populations?

So one of the issues, one of the reasons why I, in my presentation, focussed so much on communication and particularly communicating vital information, is on this issue of getting vital information out to multiple communities, often with language issues, whether it’s due to a disability or a limited English language proficiency, as well as a issue of literacy. So when working with any population where there are language — known language issues, it is important particularly in the engagement phase to engage the communicators within those communities, the stakeholders, the gait keepers, the translators, the educators in those communities who may not be emergency pro pro fess as or even public health professionals but are involved daily in communicating to these populations with these communication vulnerabilities. And it is through engaging those individuals as partners that your emergency preparedness planning can take in to account not only how to reach a large set of communities that may not speak English as their first language but what are the key messages that are important but just as important, what are the mechanisms by which information can get to those populations? The communication mechanism that is we may use, protection, here at CDC may not be the communication mechanisms that vulnerable communities use, ie, newspaper or television it.

Might be social media hubs, it might be very o localized news papers, or it might be very specific community institutions. So knowing that in advance and engaging those community communication vectors is an important come pen innocent emergency preparedness planning process.

Thank you, Julio. This next question addresses a topic that we have also sought answers for. Do you know of any models, this by the way is from wkwon, do you know of any models or examples of where this approach has been applied to planning for populations struggling with homelessness?

Yes. So in many of the examples that you have links to in this webinar at the state and local level, you will see specifically, I’m thinking of Florida as well as several states in California, where they have developed emergency planning processes that engage ending innocent populations, be it homeless, migrant, or undocumented populations, in order to engage those communities because they know that those are communities that are particularly you will havenary rabl. In some cases they do it indirectly by engaging key compliant stakeholders and organizations; for example, homeless shelters, churches, particularly churches with food pantries, and engaging the leaders from those institutions at the community level to be part of a long-standing partner in that emergency planning process.

Engaging those stakeholders not only helps the planning process to take in account what to do and what are the needs of, for example, the homeless population but also engages those trusted leaders that these populations may already be going to so that they become the best gait keepers in getting out both the messages and resources to these target populations.

Thank you. The next question comes from JQL3. Besides African Americans and limited English proficient populations that you have mentioned, which other communities, cultures, marginalized communities are you referring to? How can emergency staff identify those communities and prioritize them? So as I said before, this is a process that is needs to be a consistent, continual process and that’s often cyclical.

Where learning is a critical component to a effective and planning process. And continual learning is intrinsic to the long-term success at a local level. You may not be able at first instance be able to identify all of the relevant you will haver in are a rabl populations or vulnerabilities even within a particular community during an emergency.

That’s why energy planning as well as response and recovery assessment and evaluation is a key component in that continuum of the response and planning process. And the community engagement is a key component. Often they will let emergency stakeholders and leaders know they are vulnerable.

The issue is whether they will feel that they are heard or know that they are heard. So the question here is what is the capacity of that emergency planning process at the local level to collect information from communities that may not come at the most on per tune time or in the most direct way. What are multiple ways in which that information is being collected, that could happen, for example, as I said earlier, by looking around the room wfrn within that emergency planning process there.

May be representative s ever vulnerable communities who are professionals in emergency planning, they may represent a racial group or a language group or a sexual or rent tags group or they may be living in an area where they are structurally marginalized and they may be aware of those issues. How are you pulling the team around you so that their experiences and perspectives are accounted for. Similarly, as you reach out to communities, are you asking for communities about what their knowledge base is regarding other communities that may be adjacent to theirs.

So this continual commitment to learning is a critical aspect of this process.

And Julio, one comment that was mentioned in chat was working with local VOADings, anyone who doesn’t know that, that stands for volunteer organizations active in disaster, was the possibility of working with local VOADS to acquire. So cultural organization that a given organization may not have. Can you comment on that?

So, again, the issue of compliant engagement, volunteers are I think unsung heroes of any community engagement and community planning process, whether it is emergency planning or not. So engaging volunteers is a critical way and so that’s a great point to raise here. VOADS are a mechanism to get resources from communities that you can’t anticipate in advance.

There may be volunteers who are connected either politically or economically or structurally to resources and communities that may be critical during that, so engaging them proactively and continually is key.

Thank you.

Asked about resources and approaches for employers and those operating on a limited budget.

So made a concerted effort to make on-line resources that are currently already been designed and packaged to be adapted by others. In this presentation is to point out that there are a lot of resources and I, you know, fully expect that we did not exhaust all of these resources even in the number of links that were in my slide set or that are on the webinar resource page. So I strongly encourage people to not only use those links but active ly partner with the organization that is are indicated in those links as well as to regularly visit the center for preparedness and response for many of the resources that are currently available.

These resources are made to provide a foundation as well as templates and examples of strategies and resources that are easily replicated by communities that may not have as much funding and also employers can engage those organization that is are doing this work already and that are ill stated in these links by partnering and contacting them to act as resources, technical resources for those employers. This is not work that can be done in isolation. It is very context specific.

But we, none of us want to start from scratch, and there are ample resources out there to help us move this forward.

Julio, what will probably be our final question. This comes from an anonymous attendee who says it is understood and understood value to engage the vulnerable communities. However, the distrust of government is widespread.

How do you overcome such distress and what ways has CDC used to address this?

That’s a very valid and important question to ask. I think it’s, again, one of the reasons why I emphasize in this presentation a community-level approach and a community engagement as a critical element of an emergency preparedness plaque process is precisely because in issues where there’s government dis trust working with community stakeholders who have these populations of communities is a very well-established strategy for ensuring appropriate engagement. CDC moves forward nationally through the strength of our collaborations with our partners, when we work at the state and local level, we work with those state and local jurisdictional stakeholders, institutions, and community gait keepers and they are are our best not only ambassadors but advocates and resources for making sure that we’re able to appropriately support local emergency responses.

So working with community gait keeps keepers and stakeholders is a tried and true strategy. Now, what kinds of stakeholders are important, it can run the gamut. It can be the business owner, it can be the president of the PTA, it could be a local elected official or it could be the neighborhood volunteer organizer for the 5K run and walk for a health issue that’s popular in that community.

All of these individuals, including faith heeler — faith leaders and community health workers are people who engage others, they’re seen as leaders in their communities, and they’re known, they’re popular by definition, among them. So engaging these oI’m going to pass it back to Hailey, but I’m going to say this is the Hailey’s final webinar, she accepted a promotion on another team and Celt, so thank you so much, Hailey, for being with us for so long.

Thank you so much. This it has been an absolute pleasure and what a great webinar to end my time on, especially since you all have asked so much sow many wonderful questions and I have been so engaged in the Q&A sessions. Thank you for joining us, and if we didn’t get to you to your question, please e-mail me at Epic at CDC dot.

gov. I’d also like to reiterate that if the in the webinar website there is an additional resources tab with links that are available in the resources that Leah mentioned today. So as a reminder today’s presentation has been recorded.

And you can earn continuing education for your participation. Please follow the instructions on emergency dot CC dot. gov slash Epic.

The course access code is EPIC0424 with all letters capitalized. Thank you so much, everyone. Have a great afternoon.

Page last reviewed: May 1, 2019