Community Resilience and Public Health Emergency Preparedness Grants: Exploratory Analysis of New York State
*Names in bold indicate Presenter
Data. Index’s data was collected for all counties in New York State. However, New York City and its associated counties (i.e. Bronx, Queens, Kings and Richmond) were excluded from the analysis for two reasons. First, the public health preparedness cooperative agreement has a different line of funding directed specifically for NYC which is not administrated by New York State Department of Health. Secondly, NYC and its associated counties showed to be extreme outliers. Thirty-one variables compose the community resilience index. All of them were collected using secondary data sources including data from 5-year estimates from the American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012), the New York State Bureau of Elections, the National Center for Education Statistics and the Association of Religion Data Archives. The number of presidential disaster declarations in the state of New York between 2000 and 2014 was collected through the Federal Emergency Management Agency data feed.
Population: Fifty-seven counties in New York State. –Excluding New York City-
Preliminary results. First, geographic representation of results for the variables of interest allowed the identification of Hamilton County as a special case and this was confirmed by the Exploratory Spatial Data Analysis. It is interesting to see that the county with the highest level of community resilience has the highest level of DOH grant expenditure per individual but has the lowest percentage of total expenditure, only 50% of its total allocating. However, this article demonstrates that this is due to its population characteristics. Furthermore, these results show that there is a need for further analysis of the allocation criteria for the grant as number of individuals appears to be a less efficient criteria than considering for example population density. This (i.e. population density) could be a better criteria as it would differentiate between counties with lower density levels.
Implications for practice. Strengthening emergency capabilities has been a long standing objective for local governments. Developing instruments to monitor and evaluate communities’ capabilities to respond and recover from emergencies opens an opportunity to indirectly monitor the impact of preparedness grants.