An Evaluation of Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) in North Carolina, 2003-2010

Evaluating an equity-focused approach to assess climate resilience and disaster priorities through a community survey

As the Duwamish Valley community in Seattle, Washington, U.S.A. and other environmental justice communities nationally contend with growing risks from climate change, there have been calls for a more community-centered approach to understanding impacts and priorities to inform resilience planning. To engage community members and identify climate justice and resilience priorities, a partnership of community leaders, government-based practitioners, and academics co-produced a survey instrument and collected data from the community using the Seattle Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (SASPER), an approach adapted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER). In addition, we conducted a process and outcome project evaluation using quantitative survey data collected from volunteers and qualitative semi-structured interviews with project team members. In October and November 2022, teams of volunteers from partner organizations collected 162 surveys from households in the Duwamish Valley. Poor air quality, extreme heat, and wildfires were among the highest reported hazards of concern. Most Duwamish Valley households agreed or strongly agreed that their neighborhood has a strong sense of community (64%) and that they have people nearby to call when they need help (69%). Forty-seven percent of households indicated willingness to get involved with resilience planning, and 62% of households said that they would use a Resilience Hub during an emergency. Survey volunteers evaluated their participation positively, with over 85% agreeing or strongly agreeing that they learned new skills, were prepared for the survey, and would participate in future assessments. The evaluation interviews underscored that while the SASPER may have demonstrated feasibility in a pre-disaster phase, CASPER may not meet all community/partner needs in the immediate disaster response phase because of its lack of focus on equity and logistical requirements. Future research should focus on identifying less resource intensive data collection approaches that maintain the rigor and reputation of CASPER while enabling a focus on equity.

Evaluation of Household Preparedness and Risk Factors for Cutaneous Leishmaniasis (CL) Using the Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) Method in Pakistan

(1) Background: In endemic areas of Pakistan, local community knowledge and attitudes towards cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) are critical elements in the effective control and management of the disease. A cross-sectional epidemiologic design was used to assess the disease concern, preparedness, practices, and preventive behavior of the households and to assist the personnel and health care professionals in strengthening their planning efforts and awareness of CL. (2) Methods: A two-stage cluster sampling process, i.e., Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) was conducted from September 2020 to March 2021 on present household-level information about community needs and health status regarding CL in a cost-effective, timely, and representative manner. (3) Results: In the current study, 67% of the respondents were aware of CL and its causative agent and showed a low level of pandemic preparedness. The majority (74%) of the respondents mentioned that they did not avoid sandfly exposure areas. The majority (84%) of respondents had unsatisfactory behavior towards using bed nets, sprays, or repellents. (4) Conclusion: In endemic areas of Pakistan, the inadequate concern and low preparedness of the local community toward CL are critical aspects in efficient control and management of the disease.

Lessons Learned From an Epidemiologist-Led Countywide Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) in Oregon

CONTEXT

Conducting a large-scale Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) in a geographically and linguistically diverse county presents significant methodological challenges that require advance planning.

PROGRAM

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has adapted methodology and provided a toolkit for a rapid needs assessment after a disaster. The assessment provides representative data of the sampling frame to help guide effective distribution of resources.

IMPLEMENTATION

This article describes methodological considerations and lessons learned from a CASPER exercise conducted by Washington County Public Health in June 2016 to assess community emergency preparedness. The CDC's CASPER toolkit provides detailed guidance for exercises in urban areas where city blocks are well defined with many single family homes. Converting the exercise to include rural areas with challenging geographical terrain, including accessing homes without public roads, required considerable adjustments in planning. Adequate preparations for vulnerable populations with English linguistic barriers required additional significant resources. Lessons learned are presented from the first countywide CASPER exercise in Oregon.

EVALUATION

Approximately 61% of interviews were completed, and 85% of volunteers reported they would participate in another CASPER exercise. Results from the emergency preparedness survey will be presented elsewhere.

DISCUSSION

This experience indicates the most important considerations for conducting a CASPER exercise are oversampling clusters, overrecruiting volunteers, anticipating the actual cost of staff time, and ensuring timely language services are available during the event.

A modified Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) four months after Hurricane Sandy

This study sought to assess access to utilities, basic needs, financial burden, and perceived safety among households in the Rockaway Peninsula of New York City, United States, four months after Hurricane Sandy struck in 2012. A modified cluster survey design was used to select households for inclusion in the study. Survey content was created using the Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) toolkit, gathering relevant data on access to food and water, basic utilities, financial burden, household demographics, and safety. Four months after Sandy, electricity and heat had been restored to all households. However, around one-third of them still had difficulty in obtaining food, and about one-half believed that their neighborhood was unsafe. One-quarter had problems in acquiring prescription medications, and approximately one-half reported anxiety. While basic utilities were almost entirely restored, there were ongoing challenges in Rockaway four months after Sandy, relating to financial hardship, food insecurity, healthcare, and psychologic distress.

Use of the Community Assessment for Public Health Response (CASPER) Method by Public Health Agencies in Texas, 2001-2015

Objectives

The use of the Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) method in disaster and non-disaster settings continues to grow. While CASPERs flexibility has been well demonstrated, the documentation of specific actions that have resulted from the utilization of CASPER data has been limited. We attempted to document changes in emergency preparedness planning and policy based on CASPER data.

Methods

Written reports from 19 CASPERs conducted in Texas between 2001 and 2015 were collected. Key informant interviews were conducted with 9 public health staff knowledgeable about the CASPERs. Written reports and interview transcripts were coded and analyzed for themes.

Results

Few specific outcomes could be documented beyond a single successful grant application. Respondents felt CASPER data was not duplicative and was useful for improving existing plans. CASPER is seen as an effective way to enhance relationships with communities and partnerships with agencies including Emergency Management.

Conclusion

As the use of CASPER grows, it is increasingly important to document any specific and measurable benefits, actions, and changes to planning or policy taken as the result of data collected using the CASPER method. Without measurable outputs and outcomes, support for the use of CASPER from decision-makers may begin to wane. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:680-684)

Assessing the Prevalence of Risk Factors for Neglected Tropical Diseases in Brazos County, Texas

INTRODUCTION

Although more than one billion people live at risk of neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) in areas of Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin America, the degree to which they burden countries like the U.S. is unclear. Even though many NTDs such as dengue, leishmaniasis, and Chagas disease are typically not endemic to the U.S., the possibility of their emergence is noteworthy, especially in states like Texas with high levels of poverty, large immigrant populations, geographic proximity to endemic areas, and a climate amenable to the vectors for these diseases. Despite the health threat that emerging NTDs may pose, little is known about the prevalence of risk factors for NTDs in the U.S.

METHODS

We tested the Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) method to assess the prevalence of risk factors for NTDs in Brazos County, Texas.Results: We found relatively low prevalence of risk factors related to travel (5.2% of respondents visited an endemic area in the previous 3 months); however, few respondents reported adherence to mosquito prevention, such as wearing long sleeves and long pants (14.1%, 95% CI: 13.9,14.4) and repellant containing DEET (13.5%, 95% CI: 13.2,13.7). Between 5.4% and 35.8% of respondents had a visible container (e.g., pet water dishes, flower pots, bird baths) that could support mosquito breeding.

DISCUSSION

CASPER findings present public health authorities with potential avenues for implementing health education and other interventions aimed at reducing exposure to risk factors for NTDs among Texas residents.

Rapid Health Needs Assessment after Typhoons Bolaven and Tembin Using the Public Health Assessment for Emergency Response Toolkit in Paju and Jeju, Korea 2012

Following natural disasters, rapid health needs assessments are required to quickly assess health status and help decision making during the recovery phase. The Korean Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC) developed the Public Health Assessment for Emergency Response (PHASER) Toolkit which was optimized for a weather disaster in Korea. The goal of this study is to assess public health needs following the 2012 typhoons Bolaven and Tembin in both urban and rural areas in Korea. We conducted pilot trials using the PHASER toolkit to assess health needs following typhoons Bolaven and Tembin in Paju and Jeju during summer 2012. We sampled 400 households in Jeju and 200 households in Paju using a multistage cluster sampling design method. We used a standardized household tracking sheet and household survey sheet to collect data on the availability of resource for daily life, required health needs, clinical results and accessibility of medical services. The primary outcomes were clinical results and accessibility of medical service after the typhoons. We completed surveys for 190 households in Paju and 386 households in Jeju. Sleeping disorders were identified in 6.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8%-10.8%) surveyed in Paju and 17.4% (95% CI, 12.8%-22.0%) in Jeju. We used the PHASER toolkit to assess healthcare needs rapidly after 2 typhoons in Korea. Sleeping disorders were frequently identified in both Paju and Jeju following the 2 typhoons.

Conducting Community Health Needs Assessments in the Local Public Health Department: A Comparison of Random Digit Dialing and the Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response

CONTEXT

Community health needs assessments (CHNAs) are now required by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) for nonprofit hospitals and the Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) for local health departments that seek accreditation. Currently, various primary data collection methods exist that meet the ACA and PHAB requirements.

OBJECTIVE

To compare 2 CHNA data collection methods implemented in the same geographical area from a local health department perspective.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Two community surveys, one door-to-door and one telephone, in the 76706 zip code area of McLennan County, Texas.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult survey respondents (Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response [CASPER]: N = 184; random digit dialing [RDD]: N = 133) of the 76706 zip code in McLennan County, Texas.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Survey response rates, sociodemographic characteristics of survey respondents, and self-reported health behaviors from both community survey types.

RESULTS

The CASPER survey had a contact rate of 36.0% and a cooperation rate of 60.5%, compared with a 10.1% response rate for the RDD survey. CASPER respondents were younger (26.6% aged 18-24 years), had lower education attainment (17.4% less than high school), and had a higher proportion of Hispanics (24.5%) than RDD respondents (4.6%, 10.5%, and 17.3%, respectively). CASPER respondents were less likely to report being overweight or obese (56.5%), to report days where no fruit or vegetables were consumed (7.1%), and to report days where no walking activity was conducted (9.8%) than RDD respondents (70.2%, 27.8%, and 21.8%, respectively). The CASPER survey cost less to conduct ($13 500) than the RDD survey ($100 000) and was logistically easier for the local health department to conduct using internally available resources.

CONCLUSIONS

Local health departments use various data collection methods to conduct CHNAs for their populations and require varying levels of commitment and resources. RDD and CASPER can be used to meet ACA and PHAB requirements, collecting valuable health needs estimates and offer various strengths and weaknesses. PHAB and ACA requirements can be met using the CASPER or RDD survey to conduct CHNAs. However, local health departments may consider the CASPER survey a viable alternative to the RDD survey when time and resources are limited. The CASPER survey offers flexibility and efficiency and requires limited equipment and training.

The role of applied epidemiology methods in the disaster management cycle

Disaster epidemiology (i.e., applied epidemiology in disaster settings) presents a source of reliable and actionable information for decision-makers and stakeholders in the disaster management cycle. However, epidemiological methods have yet to be routinely integrated into disaster response and fully communicated to response leaders. We present a framework consisting of rapid needs assessments, health surveillance, tracking and registries, and epidemiological investigations, including risk factor and health outcome studies and evaluation of interventions, which can be practiced throughout the cycle. Applying each method can result in actionable information for planners and decision-makers responsible for preparedness, response, and recovery. Disaster epidemiology, once integrated into the disaster management cycle, can provide the evidence base to inform and enhance response capability within the public health infrastructure.

Assessing Radiation Emergency Preparedness Planning by Using Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) Methodology

Introduction

Approximately 1.2 million persons in Oakland County, Michigan (USA) reside less than 50 miles from the Fermi Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2, but information is limited regarding how residents might react during a radiation emergency. Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) survey methodology has been used in disaster and nondisaster settings to collect reliable and accurate population-based public health information, but it has not been used to assess household-level emergency preparedness for a radiation emergency. To improve emergency preparedness plans in Oakland County, including how residents might respond during a radiation emergency, Oakland County Health Division (OCHD), with assistance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Michigan Department of Community Health (MDCH), conducted a CASPER survey.

Methods

During September 2012, a 2-stage cluster sampling design was used to select 210 representative households in Oakland County. By using in-person surveys, the proportion of households with essential needs and supplies, how residents might respond to public health authorities’ instructions, and their main source for obtaining information during a radiation emergency were assessed. Data were weighted to account for the complex sampling design.

Results

Of the goal of 210 households, 192 (91.4%) surveys were completed: 64.7% and 85.4% of respondents indicated having 3-day supplies of water and of nonperishable food, respectively; 62.8% had a 7-day supply of prescription medication for each person who needed it. Additionally, 64.2% had a working carbon monoxide detector; 67.1% had a first-aid kit; and 52% had an alternative heat source. In response to instructions from public health officials during a radiation emergency, 93.3% of all respondents would report to a radiation screening center; 96% would evacuate; and 91.8% would shelter-in-place. During a radiation emergency, 55.8% of respondents indicated their main information source would be television, 18.4% radio, and 13.6% the Internet. The most trusted source for information would be the local public health department (36.5%), local news (23%), a physician (11.2%), and family members (11.1%). Including completed and incomplete interviews, refusals, and nonrespondents, 517 total households were contacted.

Conclusions

CASPER data regarding how residents might react during a radiation emergency provided objective and quantifiable information that will be used to develop Oakland County's radiation emergency preparedness plans. Survey information demonstrates the feasibility and usefulness of CASPER methodology for radiation emergency preparedness planning.

NyakuMK, WolkinAF, McFaddenJ, CollinsJ, MurtiM, SchnallA, BiesS, StanburyM, BeggsJ, BayleyegnTM. Assessing radiation emergency preparedness planning by using Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) methodology. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2014;29(3):1-9.

An Evaluation of Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) in North Carolina, 2003-2010

INTRODUCTION

Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) is a group of tools and methods designed by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to provide rapid, reliable, and accurate population-based public health information. Since 2003, North Carolina public health professionals have used CASPERs to facilitate public health emergency responses and gather information on other topics including routine community health assessments.

PROBLEM

To date, there has been no evaluation of CASPER use by public health agencies at the state or local level in the US.

METHODS

Local health departments of North Carolina reported when and how CASPERs were used during the period 2003 to 2010 via an online survey. Data on barriers and future plans for using CASPERs also were collected.

RESULTS

Fifty-two of North Carolina's 85 local health departments (61%) completed the survey. Twenty-eight departments reported 46 instances of CASPER use during 2003 to 2010. The majority of CASPERs were performed for community health assessments (n = 20, 43%) or exercises (n = 11, 24%). Fifty-six percent of respondents indicated they were "likely" or "very likely" to use CASPERs in the future; those who had prior experience with CASPERs were significantly more likely (P = .02) to report planned future use of CASPERs compared to those without prior experience with the tool. Lack of training, equipment, and time were the most frequently reported barriers to using CASPERs.

CONCLUSIONS

Local public health agencies with clear objectives and goals can effectively use CASPERs in both routine public health practice and disaster settings.