Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Report prepared by the Torrens Resilience Institute.
AuthorsProfessor Arbon P. PhD. FACN
Dr. Gebbie K. DrPH. FAAN
Dr. Cusack L. PhD. MACN
Dr. Perera S. MD.
Verdonk S. BEcon.
Acknowledgements
This project was funded by the Commonwealth Government National Emergency Management Program. National Emergency Management Project: NP 1112-0015
Developing a model and tool to measure community disaster resilience
Final Report October 2012
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 1 14/12/2012 12:04:07 PM
2 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
Project TeamChief Project Officers
Professor Paul Arbon PhD. FACN
Dr Kristine Gebbie DrPH. FAAN
Dr Lynette Cusack PhD. MACN
Dr Sugi Perera MD.
Research Officer
Ms Sarah Verdonk BEcon.
Disclaimer:
This material was produced with funding provided by the Attorney-General’s Department through the National Emergency Management Program. The Torrens Resilience Institute, Attorney-General’s Department and the Australian Government make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in this document or any material related to this document for any purpose. The document is provided ‘as is’ without warranty of any kind to the extent permitted by law. The Torrens Resilience Institute, Attorney-General’s Department and the Australian Government hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall the Torrens Resilience Institute, Attorney-General’s Department or the Australian Government be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from the loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of information available in this document. The document or material related to this document could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors.
Acknowledgements
Special thank you to the local councils and communities who were so generous with their time to trial and advise on the Community Disaster Resilience Scorecard.
• Bunbury, Western Australia
• Emerald, Queensland
• Katherine, Northern Territory
• Marion, South Australia
• Murray Bridge, South Australia
• Whittlesea, Victoria
• Woodside, South Australia
Thank you to the members of the Project Advisory and Project Working Groups.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 2 14/12/2012 12:04:09 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 3
PART A
Executive Summary .................................................................................. 5
SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background ...................................................................................... 6
1.2 Project Aims and Scope ........................................................... 6
1.3 Terms and Definitions ............................................................... 7
1.4 Project Advisory and Working Groups ............................ 7
SECTION TWO: EVALUATION METHOD
2.1 Stage 1 Literature Review ....................................................... 10
2.2 Stage 2 Development of a Definition of Community Disaster Resilience ....................................................................... 10
2.3 Stage 3 Develop a Model and Tool to Measure Community Disaster Resilience. ........................................ 11
2.4 Stage 4 Testing the Model and Tool ................................. 12
2.5 Stage 5 Evaluation ....................................................................... 12
SECTION THREE: OUTCOMES FROM TRIAL TEST SITES
3.1 Evaluation Findings ..................................................................... 13
3.2 Conclusions ..................................................................................... 16
CONTENTSSECTION FOUR: PROJECT KEY DELIVERABLES
4.1 Literature Review .......................................................................... 17
4.2 Definition of Community Disaster Resilience ............. 17
4.3 Model: The Four Domains of Community Disaster Resilience .......................................................................................... 18
4.4 Final Tool ............................................................................................ 18
Appendix 1.
Acronyms ......................................................................................................... 19
Appendix 2.
Literature Review ........................................................................................ 20
PART B
Community Disaster Resilience Toolkit
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 3 14/12/2012 12:04:09 PM
4 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 4 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 5
Aim and scope
This project supports the vision of the 2009 Council of Australian Governments (COAG) National Disaster Resilience Statement and the National Strategy for Disaster Resilience by developing a tool to measure community resilience to all hazards. This will enable local policy makers to establish priorities, allocate funds and develop emergency and disaster management programs more effectively. The use of the measurement tool and balanced Scorecard will help identify the degree to which communities are able to build their resilience because they:
(1) foresee and/or acknowledge threats and risks;
(2) work with the emergency services and other agencies;
(3) have a sense-of-community and social capital; and
(4) take collective responsibility to reduce the socio-economic impact of disruptive events, emergencies and disasters.
PART A: Executive SummaryContext of tool development
This project was undertaken in several stages by the Torrens Resilience Institute (TRI), working with a Project Advisory Group and a Project Working Group. A careful review of existing community resilience models led to the development of a definition and model of community disaster resilience, and a Scorecard to measure community disaster resilience with a set of guidelines. A review of the literature informed the achievement of these key deliverables. The definition, model and Scorecard were reviewed and refined with the help of two communities before a final version was trialled in four communities across Australia (Northern Territory, South Australia, Queensland, Western Australia).
The feedback from these communities was then used to finalise the development of the definition, model, Scorecard and guidelines for use by communities interested in measuring their resilience to disasters from all hazards.
Key Deliverables
This project has delivered on:
• Literature review
• Definition of community disaster resilience
• Model of community disaster resilience
• Community Disaster Resilience Scorecard Toolkit
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 5 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
6 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
1.2 Project Aim and Scope
This project supports the vision of the 2009 COAG National Disaster Resilience Statement and the National Strategy for Disaster Resilience (February 2011) by clarifying the definition of community disaster resilience and developing a tool for communities to measure their disaster resilience to all hazards. The community using this tool will be better able to build resilience because it:
(1) foresees and/or acknowledges threats and risks;
(2) works with the emergency services and other agencies;
(3) has a sense of community and social capital; and
(4) takes collective responsibility to reduce the socio-economic impact of disruptive events, emergencies and disasters.
1.1 Background
This is the final report on developing a model and tool to measure community disaster resilience funded by Commonwealth Government National Emergency Management Program (2011/2012).
On 7 December 2009 the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) agreed to adopt a whole-of-nation resilience based approach to disaster management which recognises that a national, coordinated and cooperative effort is required to enhance Australia’s capacity to withstand and recover from emergencies and disasters.
The National Strategy for Disaster Resilience (February 2011) sets out how the nation should aim to achieve the COAG vision. It emphasises that disaster resilience is not solely the domain of emergency services; rather it involves society as a whole.
The project was implemented by the Torrens Resilience Institute. The Institute comprises the University of Adelaide, Cranfield University, Flinders University and the University of South Australia. The Institute aims to be a national and international centre of excellence through the development of advanced thinking in the concept of resilience.
SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 6 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 7
1.3 Terms and Definitions
For the purposes of this project:
a. The term community refers to a geopolitical community such as a town, district or local government area.
b. A disruptive event is an unwanted situation, which has the potential to become an emergency or even a disaster.
c. An emergency is an event, actual or imminent, which endangers or threatens to endanger life, property or the environment, and which requires a significant and coordinated response.
d. A disaster is a condition or situation of significant destruction, disruption and/or distress to a community.
e. A community is resilient when members of the population are connected to one another and work together, so that they are able to function and sustain critical systems, even under stress; adapt to changes in the physical, social or economic environment; be self-reliant if external resources are limited or cut off; and learn from experience to improve itself over time. Community resilience is more than the resilience of individuals, families or specific organisations, though all of those are key components of community resilience.
A summary of the key acronyms used in this report is provided in Appendix 1.
1.4 Project Advisory and Working GroupsAdvisory Group
The Advisory group was a national group with a broad perspective drawn from national, and state government level and consisted of:-
• Mr Beattie C., Chief Officer – State Emergency Services (South Australia).
• Ms Burgess ML., Project Officer – Community Engagement Sub-Committee National Emergency Management Committee (Brisbane).
• Mr Collett C., Assistant Secretary – Emergency Management Policy Branch Attorney General’s Department (Canberra).
• Ms Frittum J., Manager Policy and Strategy – [SA Fire and Emergency Services] (SAFECOM).
• Mr Holt J., Project Officer – Community Engagement Sub-Committee National Emergency Management Committee (Brisbane).
• Ms Hunt S., Assistant Secretary – Emergency Management Policy Branch Attorney General’s Department (Canberra).
• Mr Hyatt N., Senior Policy Officer – Infrastructure and Emergency Management (South Australia).
• Mr McLoughlin T., Manager Policy and Strategy – [SA Fire and Emergency Services] (SAFECOM).
• Ms Speechley C., Policy Manager – Department of the Premier and Cabinet (Adelaide).
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 7 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
8 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
• Dr Mwanri L., Course Coordinator, Masters of Health and International Development - School of Public Health, Flinders University.
• Mr Packer G., Director of Studies - University of Adelaide.
• Dr Stehlik T., Senior Lecturer - School of Education, University of South Australia.
• Mr Wray L., Research Officer - Griffith University.
Reports on the progress and key deliverables of the project were provided to the Attorney Generals Department Project Lead. A presentation on the project was also provided to the National Emergency Management Committee Subcommittees: Community Engagement, and, Risk Assessment Measurement and Mitigation.
Working Group
The members of the Working Group were drawn from the universities that comprise the Torrens Resilience Institute as well as other complementary government and sector experts. They were chosen from different specialties to contribute their varied expertise, to assist with the development of the definition of community disaster resilience and the key elements of a model and criteria for the Scorecard. The members of the Working Group include:-
• Mr Boyd S., Manager of Community Development - Adelaide Hills Council.
• Dr Burrows L., Lecturer - School of Education, Flinders University.
• Mr Button C., Manager of Health and Regulatory Services - Adelaide Hills Council.
• Dr Cottrell A., Senior Lecturer - James Cook University, Human Geography.
• Associate Professor Delpachitra S., Finance - Business School, Flinders University.
• Mr Duldig P., Director – IT Services, University of Adelaide.
• Professor Griffith M., Structural Engineering - School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering, University of Adelaide.
• Ms Malcolm F., Board Member - Queensland Council of Social Services.
• Associate Professor McIntyre J. – School of Social and Policy Studies, Flinders University.
• Mr McAslan A., Academic Staff – Centre for International Security and Resilience Cranfield University, England.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 8 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 9
The project design included a number of stages to achieve the key deliverables (See Table1).
Table 1. Key Deliverables
Milestones Tasks Completion1. Scoping study Conduct a scoping study to clarify the
key stakeholders, scope, approach, methodologies, deliverables and timings of the project.
Advisory and Working Groups established for the project.
2. Literature review of existing models Examine the suitability and effectiveness of existing models for measuring the ability of human systems to cope and be resilient in the face of adversity.
Literature search undertaken and review provided to Working and Advisory Groups.
3. Develop definition and model of community disaster resilience
Develop a definition and model of community disaster resilience.
Community disaster resilience definition and model developed.
4. Develop tool for general use Build a tool using the model with measures and indicators for general use. A key part of this stage was the development of user-friendly guidelines and examples.
Using desktop exercises, the tool was applied to a range of indicative communities against a range of potential threats and disruptive events.
Draft Scorecard and measurements developed.
Guidelines, glossary and information sheet on data resources developed.
Draft Scorecard trialed in three sites, one rural and two metropolitan.
5. Field test tool in at least three States/Territories
The tool and guidelines were field tested in four communities.
Community trial sites in South Australia, Western Australia, Northern Territory and Queensland.
6. Prepare final report The final report completed and deliverables presented ready for distribution.
Final report presented October 2012.
SECTION TWO: EVALUATION METHOD
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 9 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
10 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
2.1 Stage 1: Literature review
The scientific and grey literature reveals a wealth of information, definitions, frameworks and models of community resilience. Many articles provide practical tools that can be used by communities to build their overall resilience to issues that may affect their health and wellbeing. Those articles that specifically consider community disaster resilience have a focus on individuals and community vulnerability and risk assessments. Despite the range and depth of material, there is no standard definition of community disaster resilience and no published validated tool that communities can easily use to assess their resilience in preparing for an emergency event at the community level, rather than the individual level.
The existing papers and reports collated by the literature review have made it possible for the Project Working Group to compare models and frameworks and to tease out reoccurring themes and concepts to develop a tool that community members can use to measure community disaster resilience. By having such a tool that can be used at the community level the process of community engagement, including conversations and awareness about the hazards and risks in their local area will begin. This conversation provides a good first step to building community disaster resilience.
2.2 Stage 2: Development of a definition of community disaster resilience
Through TRI’s four partner universities, a range of experts who were members of the Working Group examined the suitability and effectiveness of the definitions and models from the literature and worked with the Project Team to define community disaster resilience.
Based on a synthesis of the data from the literature a definition of community disaster resilience was developed by the Project Team, Working and Advisory Groups.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 10 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 11
2.3 Stage 3: Develop a model and tool to measure community disaster resilience
The model of community disaster resilience is based on sets of physical, organisational and social capital, which all communities possess to varying degrees and can be used to respond to one or more disruptive events. Four components of community resilience in an emergency or disaster were identified which the Working Group considered summarised resilience.
These are:
1. How connected are the members of your community?
2. What is the level of risk and vulnerability in your community?
3. What procedures support community disaster planning, response and recovery?
4. What emergency planning, response and recovery resources are available in your community?
This resulted in the development of a tool that consists of a number of components:
1. Community Disaster Resilience Scorecard. This Scorecard comprises detailed questions and assessments of each of the four components of disaster resilience. The choice of criteria is not an exact science. The selected criteria were developed from the best available evidence related to the four components of community disaster resilience. If a specific criterion were supported by the literature and provided a readily accessible data source it was used. In all other cases, the criteria were selected by best judgement of the experts on the Working Group with input from the Advisory Group.
2. A guideline that outlines the process for completion of the Scorecard.
3. Glossary of terms used in the Scorecard, ensuring consistent interpretation.
4. Resource sheet to assist the Community Scorecard Working Group to find data sources required to assess their community disaster resilience.
The Working Group considered five versions of the Scorecard. Version Five of the Scorecard was reviewed in one rural and one metropolitan council area in South Australia with members of the local government and community. This was to gain feedback on the components of resilience identified in the Scorecard, the flow of the different components, the language and the criteria used to score the level of community disaster resilience. The feedback was presented to the Working Group for further discussion and changes were made resulting in a final working draft, Version Six, being presented to the Advisory Group for the test site trial.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 11 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
12 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
2.4 Stage 4: Testing the model and tool
The original proposal was to trial the tool with three communities in separate jurisdictions across Australia. Six communities expressed a willingness to participate, of which four in four jurisdictions completed the process. Two of the six communities willing to participate in the trial were unfortunately unable to do so within the time allocated for this stage of the project.
The Project Team with the Working and Advisory Groups identified a number of communities across the different Australian jurisdictions to be contacted to participate as a test site for the Scorecard. The communities represented a mixture of rural and metropolitan areas as well as those communities that had recently experienced a disaster and those that had not. With support of the Commonwealth Attorney Generals Department a letter was sent to the Mayor or Chief Executive Officer of the identified local government organisations seeking their support to participate in the trial.
The Project Team liaised with a representative from each participating local government service to provide more information about the project. Two Project Team members attended the first meeting of the Community Scorecard Working Group in each community to explain the process, note the response and any concerns or issues from the group. The Project Team also requested to attend the third and final meeting to evaluate the model, Scorecard and process with the local Community Scorecard Working Group.
2.5 Stage 5: Evaluation
Evaluate feedback from the test sites on the model and the tool.
The Project Team attended the third and final meeting to observe how the Community Scorecard Working Group used the Scorecard. They were asked whether or not they thought that the components in the Scorecard adequately assessed community disaster resilience. Hard copies of the evaluation form and a self-addressed envelope were left for members to complete and return to the Project Team. An electronic version of the evaluation form was also offered.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 12 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 13
3.1 Evaluation findings
Four communities participated as trial sites from South Australia, Western Australia, Queensland and the Northern Territory. The support of local government personnel was consistently excellent in all communities participating as trial sites. This highlighted the importance of the local government’s role in supporting this initiative by bringing the Community Scorecard Working Group together, providing the venue and in particular the personnel to coordinate the meetings and access information from the data bases, which many of the community members were unfamiliar with.
Evaluation Questions
The following questions were explored with each trial site Community Scorecard Working Group.
1. Did you understand the objective/purpose of completing this Scorecard to assess the community resilience to disasters?
All communities had clearly understood the purpose of completing the Scorecard. They consistently stated that it was a worthwhile process for any community to undertake. The exercise had also improved the community members’ understanding of the diversity of partners who play different but critical roles in supporting the resilience of a community to prepare for a potential disaster event.
2. Does the guideline and Toolkit provide clear explanation of what community disaster resilience is?
The majority of the trial sites felt the guideline and Toolkit provided clear information about the meaning of community disaster resilience and the different components of it. However, there was some general discussion about the term ‘resilience’ and what that means in the context of disaster response rather than as a general concept of resilience as a community. In addition, there was discussion on the use of the words ‘disaster’ verses ‘emergency’, in particular the communities’ view of what a disaster may or may not be and their willingness to take the disaster definition seriously, especially if a community had not experienced a significant event that had disrupted or potentially disrupted its functioning.
To address these discussions it was recommended that the definition of ‘resilience’ remain as it is, but is highlighted at the very beginning of the Toolkit as well as within the Scorecard to emphasise the context of the tool and why it is important to build disaster resilience for any community. It was also suggested that within the guideline and the Scorecard that the term emergency be used as well as disaster.
SECTION THREE: OUTCOMES FROM TRIAL SITES
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 13 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
14 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
3. Did you easily understand the guidelines/instructions provided to fill in the Scorecard?
All the communities easily understood the instructions provided to fill in the Scorecard. However, they wanted more explanation on the term ‘community’ and its boundaries and limits. This definition has now been provided in the guidelines.
The glossary and other supportive documents were perceived as comprehensive, though some admitted not having used them as the Scorecard was quite clear. Those who were not present at the first meeting of the Community Scorecard Working Group, when the process was explained by the research team, stated they were able to understand the objective and the process with the guidelines and instructions provided.
All communities stressed the importance of omitting ‘technical emergency management terms’ and to use lay language as far as possible throughout all parts of the Toolkit. There was also an emphasis from all communities that the Toolkit should be succinct, with the less to read the better.
The majority of the communities also felt the pictures used in the Toolkit were appropriate and meaningful, but suggested the addition of pictures of ‘disasters’ which were added to the final Toolkit.
4. Were you able to easily understand the different sections/items of the Scorecard?
The communities were able to understand the different sections of the Scorecard as being important components in the assessment of disaster resilience. The order of the sections was also considered to be logical. It was however suggested that the four components of resilience be introduced briefly at the front of the card and guideline, so that they can be seen quickly and be highlighted to ‘stand out’ using larger fonts at the top of each section of the Scorecard.
The questions under each of the four components on the Scorecard were thought to be important and relevant to the corresponding section. They felt it was a good mix of questions to be considered under each section. All communities mentioned that the questions facilitated good discussion in the group and some of the questions had not previously been thought about in relation to the preparation for an emergency or disaster.
The communities appreciated the inclusion of ‘self-assessment’ items on the Scorecard as it gave them an opportunity to hear the many views within the Working Group on some of the aspects of resilience.
The role of the Chair of the Community Scorecard Working Group plays an important part in making sure that all community members have an opportunity to participate equally in answering and scoring questions rather than allowing the ‘expert’ to dominate the discussion. Examples were given where the emergency personnel had indicated that an issue had been addressed and allocated a higher score, however the community members were not aware of or confident about these actions. Feedback was given by communities that this type of conversation was very informative and worthwhile for all involved.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 14 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 15
5. Are there any items in your opinion which need to be modified, if so what are they?
The four sections of the Scorecard were discussed and some of the questions and measures were changed based on the feedback. In addition, it was expressed that providing examples in the case of several questions would help in explaining the item better. These changes were made to the final version of the Toolkit.
Commenting on the data sources, some felt the data were not easily accessible from the stated websites. They proposed the inclusion of direct links from the Scorecard to the relevant information page, where possible, rather than the website. This suggestion will become a recommendation along with the development of an electronic version of the Toolkit.
6. Did you find this exercise useful to improve the resilience of your community in the event of a disaster?
The communities strongly felt it was a good exercise, which improved their understanding of disaster resilience. Many were of the opinion that the initial exercise was a good starting point for them and the initial scores could be set as a benchmark to further improve their community’s resilience. The communities felt the process shed light on a range of emergency preparation and planning activities conducted by the local council, emergency services as well as different areas such as the education and health departments, which they had not considered before.
They also appreciated the knowledge they gained about their local community in listening to the conversations from different personnel in the Community Scorecard Working Group and from accessing data sources during the exercise as they were previously unaware of some of the information that was available.
The communities thought that it was useful to have members from many different areas of the community on the Working Group. There was a lot of discussion in all communities about the importance of marketing this Scorecard to get the community more interested and involved.
It was mentioned that for some communities, the local government and emergency services were required to be involved in a number of emergency or disaster risk assessment and mitigation activities. The Scorecard could be seen as ‘one more thing to do’ if it was not marketed well. It was further suggested that all of the emergency or disaster requirements could be incorporated into one package including the resilience Scorecard to prevent any duplication, and to promote the complementary nature of these activities. Further discussion on this point recognised that one of the valuable key points with the Scorecard was the process of bringing different personnel together and having the conversations about their community as they complete the Scorecard.
7. Were you able to identify actions to be undertaken to improve your community’s disaster resilience?
The communities all scored their resilience and identified at least one area that they would like to improve on, which otherwise they would not have thought of. Some of the activities were to be incorporated into the local council’s ‘Emergency Management Plans’.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 15 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
16 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
8. Do you agree that this tool is measuring community disaster resilience?
Many were of the opinion that the tool effectively measures the resilience of a community in disasters. While some argued that the Scorecard provides a comprehensive measurement, the Project Team have concluded that the measurement of resilience is complex and the Scorecard represents an ‘adequate’ measure of communities’ disaster resilience. However, the positive response by communities to the items within the tool is very encouraging as it leads to the conclusion that the measures pass the ‘common sense’ test of the community and are acceptable, and likely to drive change in communities.
9. Any other comments
The process has brought together people from several fields and in some instances it was a good exercise to learn ‘who is doing what’. The communities stated that the composition of the working group is critical for the success of the process and wanted the final version to clearly indicate the different stakeholders that should be included. This was added to the introduction of the Toolkit as recommended. In addition, the process of completing the Scorecard with three meetings was seen as appropriate, though some thought it could be done in two meetings.
In addition, the communities felt strongly that further consideration should be given to attracting people from different areas within the community to be on the Community Scorecard Working Group, as it must not be seen as the council’s or emergency services’ activity and responsibility.
3.2 Conclusions
The testing of the Scorecard with a range of communities was extremely valuable as the feedback enabled the process and tool to be refined. This community friendly Scorecard is a workable tool for a community to measure its disaster resilience.
The definition of community disaster resilience was thought to be understandable and the four components of disaster resilience, their questions and criteria were considered appropriate measures of resilience at this time. The process was user friendly and the Community Scorecard Working Group enjoyed the discussions that the scoring generated, which proved to be just as valuable as the final score itself.
The outcome led to actions that will feedback into the cycle of quality improvement and resilience building for local government and the services participating in the Community Scorecard Working Group. The outcomes also need to be fed back into the community in a way that will engage their interest.
It was considered that the use of such tools would help identify the degree to which communities:
(1) are able to foresee and/or acknowledge threats and risks;
(2) work with the emergency services and other agencies, especially the local government to build disaster resilience;
(3) have a sense-of-community and social capital.
The biggest challenge remains however to develop willingness by the community to take on a collective responsibility to reduce the socio-economic impact of disruptive events, emergencies and disasters. The use of the Scorecard will positively contribute to this challenge.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 16 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 17
This project produced a literature review, definition of community disaster resilience, designed a community disaster resilience model and a tool that is easy for community stakeholders to use, while keeping sufficient validity and rigour to enable a relatively effective and objective measurement of disaster resilience in a community.
All key deliverables for this project were achieved on time and within budget.
4.1 Literature Review
The literature review reveals a wealth of information, definitions, frameworks and models of community resilience. Many articles provide practical tools that can be used by communities to build their overall resilience to many issues that may affect their health and wellbeing. Those articles that focus specifically on community disaster resilience have a focus on individuals and community vulnerability and risk assessments. Despite the range and depth of material, there is no published validated tool that communities can practically use to measure their resilience in preparing for an event at the community level, rather than the individual level (See Appendix 2 for complete literature review).
4.2 Definition of community disaster resilience
The project assessed definitions and descriptions in scientific and grey literature and reached consensus through discussions within the Project Team, Working and Advisory Group members on the following definition. Beyond the resilience of individuals or individual organisations, your community will prove resilient in the event of a severe emergency or disaster when members of the population are connected to one another and work together, so that they are able to:
• function and sustain critical systems, even under stress;
• adapt to changes in the physical, social or economic environment;
• be self-reliant if external resources are limited or cut off; and
• learn from experience to improve over time.
SECTION FOUR: PROJECT KEY DELIVERABLES
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 17 14/12/2012 12:04:11 PM
18 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
4.3 Model: The Four Domains of Community Disaster Resilience
The model describes the identified four essential domains of community disaster resilience and is presented in Figure 1. It is argued that the four domains overlap and interact, making relatively equal contributions to building disaster resilience in the community. Should a domain be weakened, beyond its tipping point overall resilience will be affected. A balanced Scorecard approach addressing each domain will identify strengths and weaknesses in the key elements of each domain.
4.4 Final Tool
The final product of the project (PART B) includes five components:
• Community Disaster Resilience Scorecard guidelines.
• Working copy of the Scorecard
• Master copy of the Scorecard
• Scorecard Glossary of terms and data access resource sheet.
• Sample letters of invitation and draft agendas for the three meetings.
Figure 1. A model for community disaster resilience.
Available Resources
Risk and Vulnerability
Community Connectedness
Planning and Procedures
Resilience
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 18 14/12/2012 12:04:12 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 19
Acronyms
AGD Attorney General’s Department
COAG Council of Australian Governments
NSDR National Strategy for Disaster Resilience. This sets out how the nation should aim to achieve the COAG vision. It emphasises that disaster resilience is not solely the domain of the emergency services, rather it involves society as a whole: governments, local authorities, organisations in the private and public sectors, NGOs and volunteers, households and communities. The resilience of communities is particularly important.
NEMC National Emergency Management Committee
NEMP National Emergency Management Project
TRI Torrens Resilience Institute was established by the Government of South Australia at the International University Precinct in Adelaide, South Australia to improve the capacity of organisations and societies to respond to disruptive challenges, which have the potential to overwhelm local disaster management capabilities and plans. The mission of the TRI is to assist the Federal and State Governments, the emergency services, organisations and civil society enhance their leadership and management capabilities, and thus enable them to prepare for, and respond better to, disruptive challenges. In addition to building national and community resilience within Australia, TRI assists the Federal and State Governments achieve their foreign policy and humanitarian objectives by developing resilient national capacities in the countries of South East Asia and the Pacific Rim.
Appendix 1
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 19 14/12/2012 12:04:12 PM
20 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
Appendix 2May 2012
Torrens Resilience Institute.
Measuring Community Disaster Resilience: A Review of the Literature
National Emergency Management Plan: Project NP 1112-0015
Introduction
Resilience is a concept that has recently found its way into human systems. Taken from the Latin word, resilire, which means ‘to rebound’ or ‘to recoil’, it had become an important concept in 19th Century British naval architecture and materials science, where it was used as a measurement of the comparative strengths of the various woods and materials used in the construction of the Royal Navy’s warships. Scientist Robert Mallet worked on this concept and developed a measure, known as the modulus of resilience, for assessing the capacity of materials to stand up to adverse conditions. This measure has been used in other applications, notably the evaluation of the suitability of materials used for building homes and public infrastructure (McAslan 2010, p.2). Lately, however, resilience has been used with increasing frequency in areas and disciplines as varied as health, medicine, economics, information management, security, emergency management, and several fields among the various social sciences. It has been used in the analysis of individual human characteristics, as well as of human systems such as organisations, institutions and communities (Braes & Brooks 2010, p.15).
The National Emergency Management Plan (NEMP) funded project presently being undertaken by the Torrens Resilience Institute (TRI) is to develop a useful tool for measuring the resilience of Australian communities against disasters. The importance of strengthening local communities against disaster events by enabling them to determine how resilient they are against these adverse situations is critical. As noted in the Commonwealth National Strategy for Disaster Resilience it is important to build upon our existing emergency planning arrangements, to focus more on action-based resilience planning to strengthen local capacity and capability, with greater emphasis on community engagement and a better understanding of the diversity, needs, strengths and vulnerabilities within communities.
The National Strategy for Disaster Resilience goes on to say that community resilience can be defined in many ways. Rather than define disaster resilience, the strategy focuses on the “common characteristics of disaster resilient communities, individuals and organisations. These characteristics are: functioning well while under stress; successful adaptation; self-reliance, and social capacity. Resilient communities also share the importance of social support systems, such as neighbourhoods, family and kinship networks, social cohesion, mutual interest groups, and mutual self-help groups” (2011, p4). Furthermore the strategy identifies with the Insurance Council of Australia’s (2008, p4) understanding of resilience “Communities that develop a high level of resilience are better able to withstand a crisis event and have an enhanced ability to recover from residual impacts. Communities that possess resilience characteristics can also arrive on the other side of a crisis in a stronger position than pre-event.” The United Nations/International Strategy for Disaster Resilience (UN/ISDR) has defined resilience as a desirable property
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 20 14/12/2012 12:04:12 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 21
of natural and human systems in the face of a range of potential stresses and hazards. This property involves the capacity of such systems to absorb the impact of such hazards and then recover or return to their original state (Klein, Nicholls & Thomalla 2003, p.35).
Disasters often occur in unexpected forms or magnitudes and in unexpected locations, making it impossible to prevent, defend or address all such threats. Thus resilience has become an increasingly important concept for community disaster management and recovery (Zhou, Wang, Wan & Jia 2012, p.22). This is especially important for Australia, not only because Australia’s unique environment includes regular hazard events and incidents among its communities every year, but also because in recent times, many of these hazard events have been unanticipated, unusually massive, and have resulted in serious consequences against Australia’s affected communities. The ability of an Australian community to measure and assess its own resilience thus contributes towards its ability to become stronger and better able to deal with, survive and recover from disasters.
The Literature Search
The literature search was conducted from information published on measuring community resilience within the context of disaster preparation, response and recovery, focusing in particular on tools that have been developed to measure community disaster resilience. An exhaustive search had been conducted in a number of online databases to seek out relevant papers, book chapters, policy documents, and various other publications. The keywords used in this searched consisted of two sets, namely, ‘Measurement and Community Resilience’ and ‘Measurement tools and Community Resilience and Disaster.’ The main databases searched, as well as the results obtained were:
• Pro-Quest Central:
o Measurement and Community Resilience: 3,964 results
o Measurement tools and Community Resilience: 2,369 results
• Springer Link:
o Measurement and Community Resilience: 5,797 results
o Measurement tools and Community Resilience: 2,909 results
• SAGE Journals Online:
o Measurement and Community Resilience: 2,024 results
o Measurement tools and Community Resilience: 823 results
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 21 14/12/2012 12:04:12 PM
22 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
These databases were chosen on the basis of the wide selection of subjects and topics to which they enable access. The searches were restricted only to scholarly articles and those that have been peer reviewed. The majority of the academic publications included in this review have been obtained from these databases. Most of the results obtained were duplicates among the data bases, or were not relevant to the community self-assessment focus of this project. Articles which had no content or clear relationship to the development of resilience measures were set aside. All in all, after having eliminated what was not needed, 65 relevant publications were included.
Google was also searched for non-academic publications/ grey literature, and out of 193,000 results, 50 were selected as being the most relevant to this project. These were systematically reviewed and further numbers were eliminated from this review. Additional material suggested by the members of this project’s working-group have also been reviewed, and if found relevant, were included here. The search continues and the literature review is regularly updated by TRI.
This literature review has contributed significantly to the initial considerations by the Project Working Group for developing the model and tool to measure community disaster resilience.
Some Initial Findings
The literature describes various factors that relate to community resilience, though there is very little discussion about how to measure community disaster resilience, specifically prior to an event as an approach to disaster preparedness.
The themes that have emerged from the publication include using mathematical modelling to measure community resilience; components of community resilience; measuring social vulnerability, and frameworks for understanding community resilience.
Complex Mathematical Modelling
A broad and general summary of the publications in this review seem to indicate that many academic publications, most of which are in the form of academic journal articles, devise models that require complex and sophisticated mathematical modelling and calculation of community resilience or one aspect of this such as infrastructure (Rose, A 2004; Arianoutsou M, Koukoulas S & Kazanis D 2011; Zobel CW 2011). Though these may be relevant from a theoretical perspective they are not tools that can be easily used by community members to measure and understand their degree of disaster resilience. Components of these models appear, however, in many other publications discussed below.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 22 14/12/2012 12:04:12 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 23
Components of Community Resilience
Both published articles and the non-academic publications have numerous similarities, in that community resilience measures are a function of different components, characteristics or aspects of a community. In many cases, authors of these publications have arrived at similar or comparable components. Some authors call them ‘capitals’ such as social, economic, health, political, physical (Cocklin, C. & Dibden, J. 2005; Mayunga, J.S. 2007; Callaghan, E.G. & Colton, J 2008). Other authors call them ‘aspects’, ‘resources’, ‘enablers’, or ‘outcomes’. There are differences in emphasis, focus, or prioritisation, but most publications have two or more similar components.
This literature has been the most useful in trying to draw out the comparable components that, if measured, give an indication of a much broader community resilience approach. An example of this comes from the work of Maguire & Cartwright (2008) who developed resilience criteria consisting of equity, quality, sustainability and ownership; in measuring resilience, they recommend in their Toolkit that its users think of their community-assets when evaluating their communities. These assets comprise of people and their skills, knowledge, experience and motivation, encompassing associations or groups of people working with common interests as volunteers, institutions or paid groups of people who are structurally organised. Community assets also include physical assets and the connections between these physical assets.
A different approach based on similar concepts is that proposed by Longstaff, P H., et al. (2010), in which resilience is identified through a social assessment tool that assesses the following connected issues: the
internal community structure, the community history and community vulnerabilities. The assessment of community resources and adaptive capacities are also included in this grouping of connected social issues. The value for measuring community connectedness emerges as one item that needs to be captured in a community disaster resilience tool.
Adding to these examples of key concepts for understanding community resilience Hallegatte, S. (2011) takes a systems approach, which can be assessed through subsystems analysis using a number of community characteristics. The subsystems mentioned by Hallegate (2011) include diversity, robustness, connectedness, functional cross-scale links and learning capacity.
These three examples demonstrate the different types of approaches the various authors have considered, but with similar concepts emerging. There is however not one usable published tool that measures community disaster resilience.
A number of other assessments and possible measures of resilience mentioned in the literature specifically relate to critical infrastructures, such as those designed for flood mitigation, water supply, information technology and buildings (Klein, R. J. T., Nichols, R. J. & Thomalla, F 2003; Tierney, K. & Bruneau, M. 2007; Hallegatte, S. 2008; Fekete, A. 2011; Frommer, B. 2011). These articles highlight the importance of having in place appropriate risk assessments for community disaster planning, response and recovery.
Many of the articles on building community disaster resilience discuss the concept of resilience building, at either an individual or community level, but after rather than before a disaster event (Cox, R.S. & Perry, K-ME 2011, Millen D 2011; Zobel, C.W. 2011) when prevention activities could aid a community to recover much more quickly.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 23 14/12/2012 12:04:12 PM
24 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
Measuring Social Vulnerability
There were a number of articles that sought to measure social vulnerability as an indicator of community resilience. This concept of vulnerability involves, not only specific disadvantaged groups within a community, but also there is a strong emphasis on socio-economic factors that may affect the quality of community resilience (Fekete, A., Damm, M. & Birkmann, J. 2009; Flanagan, BE., Gregory. EW., Hallisey, EJ., Heitgerd, JL. & Lewis, B. (2011). For the purpose of this project community the literature clearly supports vulnerability as an important consideration to be included within a community disaster measurement tool. In particular what is the level of risk and vulnerability in the community especially for those who do not speak English, are new migrants and the frail elderly.
Frameworks for Understanding Community Resilience
Other articles and papers reviewed feature frameworks for better understanding the concept of community resilience. A number focus on processes or procedures that would measure community resilience (Centre for Community Enterprise 2000; Bay Localize 2009; James Cook University 2010).
Many non-academic papers, such as those published by non-governmental organisations (NGO’s), civic organisations, or even a few academic writers and researchers, have designed models and tools that do not require sophisticated mathematical knowledge or skill to use (Emerald Community House 2011; Emergency Volunteering 2011)
Summary
This project seeks to design a community disaster resilience measurement model with a tool that would be easy for non-academic community stakeholders to use, while keeping sufficient effectiveness and rigour to enable an objective measurement of disaster resilience in a community. The literature review reveals a wealth of information, definitions, frameworks and models of community resilience. Many articles provide practical tools that can be used by communities to build their overall resilience to many issues that may affect their health and wellbeing. Those articles that focus specifically on community disaster resilience have a focus on individuals and community vulnerability and risk assessments. Despite the range and depth of material, there is no published validated tool that communities can use to measure their resilience in preparing for an event at the community level, rather than the individual level.
The existing papers and publications in the literature review have made it possible for the Project Working Group to compare models and frameworks and to tease out the reoccurring themes and concepts to develop a tool that community members can use to measure community disaster resilience. By having such a tool that can be used at the community level the process of community engagement, conversations and awareness about the hazards and risks in their local area will begin. This is the first step to building community disaster resilience.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 24 14/12/2012 12:04:12 PM
Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience 25
References
Bay Localize. 2009. Community Resilience Toolkit: A Workshop Guide for Community Resilience Planning, Oakland, CA.
Braes, B. & Brooks, D. 2010. ‘Organisational resilience: a propositional study to understand and identify the essential concepts’, 3rd Australian Security and Intelligence Conference, Edith Cowan University Research Online, 30 November 2010, pp. 14-22.
Callaghan,E.G. & Colton, J. 2008. Building Sustainable and Resilient Communities: A Balancing of Community Capital Environment, Development and Sustainability, 10 (6Springer Science + Business Media, pp. 931-942.
Centre for Community Enterprise. 2000. The Community Resilience Manual: A Resource for Rural Recovery and Renewal CCE Publications, Port Alberni, BC, Canada.
Centre for Community Enterprise. 2000. Tools and Techniques for Community Recovery and Renewal CCE Publications, Port Alberni, BC, Canada.
Cocklin, C. & Dibden, J. 2005 Sustainability and Change in Rural Australia. University of New South Wales Press, Sydney.
Commonwealth of Australia. 2011. National Strategy for Disaster Resilience, Attorney-General’s Department, Barton ACT Australia.
Cox, RS. & Perry, K-ME. 2011 like a fish out of water: reconsidering disaster recovery and the role of place and social capital in community disaster resilience, American Journal Community Psychology. Vol48:395-411.
Emerald Community House. 2011 The Go List: A Resource for Bushfire Planning and Information. Emerald Community House, Interactive Website www.thegolist.org.au. Viewed April 2012.
Emergency Volunteering. 2011 Disaster Readiness Index. Volunteering Qld. & Emergency Management Queensland. Interactive Website http://www.emergencyvolunteering.com.au/home/knowledge/readiness-index Viewed April 2012.
Fekete, A. 2011 Common Criteria for the Assessment of Critical Infrastructures International Journal Disaster Risk Science Vol 2, No.1: 15-24.
Fekete, A. Damm, M. & Birkmann, J. 2009 Scales as a Challenge for Vulnerability Assessment Natural Hazards, 55 (2010), Springer Science + Business Media, pp. 729-747.
Flanagan, B.E., Gregory. E.W., Hallisey, E.J., Heitgerd, J.L., & Lewis, B. 2011. A Social Vulnerability Index for Disaster Management. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management: Vol. 8:Iss 1, Article 3 Berkeley Electronic Press.
Frommer, B. 2011. Climate Change and the Resilient Society: Utopia or Realistic Option for German Regions? Natural Hazards, 58, Springer Science + Business Media, pp. 85-101.
Hallegatte, S. 2008. What Determines Farmers’ Resilience towards ENSO-related Drought? An Empirical Assessment in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia Climatic Change, Vol 86, Springer Science + Business Media, pp. 291-307.
Insurance Council of Australia. 2008. Improving Community Resilience to Extreme Weather Events, Insurance Council of Australia, Sydney.
James Cook University. 2010. Know your Patch to Grow your Patch. Understanding Communities Project Bushfire. CRC and Centre for Disaster Studies, James Cook University.
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 25 14/12/2012 12:04:12 PM
26 Model and Tool for Community Disaster Resilience
Klein, R.J.T., Nichols, R. J. and Thomalla, F. 2003 Resilience to Natural Hazards: How Useful is this Concept? Environmental Hazards, 5 Elsevier, pp. 35-45.
Longstaff, P.H., et al. 2010. Building Resilient Communities: Tools for Assessment. Institute for National Security and Counter terrorism, Syracuse University.
Maguire, B. & Cartwright, S. 2008. Assessing a Community’s Capacity to Manage Change: A Resilience Approach to Social Assessment Bureau of Rural Sciences, Commonwealth of Australia.
Mayunga, J.S. 2007. Understanding and Applying the Concept of Community Disaster Resilience: A Capital Based Approach Summer Academy for Social Vulnerability and Resilience Building, Munich.
McAslan, A. 2010. ‘The concept of resilience: understanding its origins, meaning and utility’, 14 March 2010, Torrens Resilience Institute, Adelaide, pp. 1-13.
Millen, D. 2011. Deliberative Democracy in Disaster recovery Reframing community engagement for sustainable outcomes Centre for Citizenship and public Policy, University of Western Sydney.
Tierney, K. & Bruneau, M. 2007. Conceptualising and Measuring Resilience: A Key to Disaster Loss Reduction TR News 250, May-June 2007, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies.
Zhou, H., Wang, J., Wan, J & Jia, H. 2010, ‘Resilience to natural hazards: a geographic perspective’, Natural Hazards, 53, Springer Science + Business Media, pp. 21-41.
Zobel, C.W. 2011. Representing Perceived Tradeoffs in Defining Disaster Resilience Decision Support Systems, 50 Elsevier, pp. 394-403.
Dis
clai
mer
This
mat
eria
l was
pro
duce
d w
ith fu
ndin
g pr
ovid
ed b
y th
e A
ttor
ney-
Gen
eral
’s D
epar
tmen
t thr
ough
the
Nat
iona
l Em
erge
ncy
Man
agem
ent P
rogr
am.
The
Torr
ens
Resi
lienc
e In
stitu
te,
Att
orne
y-G
ener
al’s
Dep
artm
ent a
nd th
e A
ustr
alia
n G
over
nmen
t mak
e no
repr
esen
tatio
ns a
bout
the
suita
bilit
y of
the
info
rmat
ion
cont
aine
d in
this
doc
umen
t or a
ny m
ater
ial r
elat
ed to
this
do
cum
ent f
or a
ny p
urpo
se.
The
docu
men
t is
prov
ided
‘as
is’ w
ithou
t war
rant
y of
any
kin
d to
the
exte
nt p
erm
itted
by
law
. Th
e To
rren
s Re
silie
nce
Inst
itute
, Att
orne
y-G
ener
al’s
Dep
artm
ent
and
the
Aus
tral
ian
Gov
ernm
ent h
ereb
y di
scla
im a
ll w
arra
ntie
s an
d co
nditi
ons
with
rega
rd to
this
info
rmat
ion,
incl
udin
g al
l im
plie
d w
arra
ntie
s an
d co
nditi
ons
of m
erch
anta
bilit
y, fi
tnes
s fo
r par
ticul
ar p
urpo
se, t
itle
and
non-
infri
ngem
ent.
In n
o ev
ent s
hall
the
Torr
ens
Resi
lienc
e In
stitu
te, A
ttor
ney-
Gen
eral
’s D
epar
tmen
t or t
he A
ustr
alia
n G
over
nmen
t be
liabl
e fo
r any
spe
cial
, in
dire
ct o
r con
sequ
entia
l dam
ages
or a
ny d
amag
es w
hats
oeve
r res
ultin
g fro
m th
e lo
ss o
f use
, dat
a or
pro
fits,
whe
ther
in a
n ac
tion
of c
ontr
act,
negl
igen
ce o
r oth
er to
rtio
us a
ctio
n, a
risin
g ou
t of o
r in
conn
ectio
n w
ith th
e us
e of
info
rmat
ion
avai
labl
e in
this
doc
umen
t. T
he d
ocum
ent o
r mat
eria
l rel
ated
to th
is d
ocum
ent c
ould
incl
ude
tech
nica
l ina
ccur
acie
s or
typo
grap
hica
l er
rors
.
Dev
elop
ing
a m
odel
and
too
l to
mea
sure
com
mun
ity
dis
aste
r re
silie
nce
Com
mun
ity
Dis
aste
r R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd T
oolk
it
Oct
ober
201
2
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
12/1
2/20
12
4:06
:59
PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 26 14/12/2012 12:04:13 PM
Dis
clai
mer
This
mat
eria
l was
pro
duce
d w
ith fu
ndin
g pr
ovid
ed b
y th
e A
ttor
ney-
Gen
eral
’s D
epar
tmen
t thr
ough
the
Nat
iona
l Em
erge
ncy
Man
agem
ent P
rogr
am.
The
Torr
ens
Resi
lienc
e In
stitu
te,
Att
orne
y-G
ener
al’s
Dep
artm
ent a
nd th
e A
ustr
alia
n G
over
nmen
t mak
e no
repr
esen
tatio
ns a
bout
the
suita
bilit
y of
the
info
rmat
ion
cont
aine
d in
this
doc
umen
t or a
ny m
ater
ial r
elat
ed to
this
do
cum
ent f
or a
ny p
urpo
se.
The
docu
men
t is
prov
ided
‘as
is’ w
ithou
t war
rant
y of
any
kin
d to
the
exte
nt p
erm
itted
by
law
. Th
e To
rren
s Re
silie
nce
Inst
itute
, Att
orne
y-G
ener
al’s
Dep
artm
ent
and
the
Aus
tral
ian
Gov
ernm
ent h
ereb
y di
scla
im a
ll w
arra
ntie
s an
d co
nditi
ons
with
rega
rd to
this
info
rmat
ion,
incl
udin
g al
l im
plie
d w
arra
ntie
s an
d co
nditi
ons
of m
erch
anta
bilit
y, fi
tnes
s fo
r par
ticul
ar p
urpo
se, t
itle
and
non-
infri
ngem
ent.
In n
o ev
ent s
hall
the
Torr
ens
Resi
lienc
e In
stitu
te, A
ttor
ney-
Gen
eral
’s D
epar
tmen
t or t
he A
ustr
alia
n G
over
nmen
t be
liabl
e fo
r any
spe
cial
, in
dire
ct o
r con
sequ
entia
l dam
ages
or a
ny d
amag
es w
hats
oeve
r res
ultin
g fro
m th
e lo
ss o
f use
, dat
a or
pro
fits,
whe
ther
in a
n ac
tion
of c
ontr
act,
negl
igen
ce o
r oth
er to
rtio
us a
ctio
n, a
risin
g ou
t of o
r in
conn
ectio
n w
ith th
e us
e of
info
rmat
ion
avai
labl
e in
this
doc
umen
t. T
he d
ocum
ent o
r mat
eria
l rel
ated
to th
is d
ocum
ent c
ould
incl
ude
tech
nica
l ina
ccur
acie
s or
typo
grap
hica
l er
rors
.
Dev
elop
ing
a m
odel
and
too
l to
mea
sure
com
mun
ity
dis
aste
r re
silie
nce
Com
mun
ity
Dis
aste
r R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd T
oolk
it
Oct
ober
201
2
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
12/1
2/20
12
4:06
:59
PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 27 14/12/2012 12:04:13 PM
2M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Com
mun
ity
Dis
aste
r R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd T
oolk
itW
elco
me
to th
e Co
mm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce S
core
card
To
olki
t. Y
ou a
re h
ere
beca
use
you
are
inte
rest
ed in
hel
ping
yo
ur c
omm
unity
to b
e pr
epar
ed, r
espo
nd a
nd re
cove
r m
ore
effec
tivel
y sh
ould
an
emer
genc
y or
dis
aste
r occ
ur.
This
reso
urce
has
bee
n de
sign
ed fo
r you
as
a pa
rt o
f th
e A
ustr
alia
n N
atio
nal S
trat
egy
for D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
, es
peci
ally
for t
he u
se o
f com
mun
ities
inte
rest
ed in
sel
f-as
sess
men
t of t
heir
pote
ntia
l res
ilien
ce a
nd to
dev
elop
a
sprin
gboa
rd fo
r an
actio
n pl
an to
str
engt
hen
resi
lienc
e.
This
Too
lkit
has
all o
f the
pie
ces
need
ed b
y th
e le
ader
or
coor
dina
tor o
f the
pro
cess
, and
incl
udes
wor
king
mat
eria
ls
to b
e di
strib
uted
to c
omm
unity
mem
bers
par
ticip
atin
g in
th
e pr
oces
s.
Wor
king
toge
ther
to c
ompl
ete
the
Scor
ecar
d, y
ou a
nd
fello
w p
artic
ipan
ts w
ill le
arn
mor
e ab
out y
our c
omm
unity
an
d its
reso
urce
s, an
d w
ill b
e st
imul
ated
to c
onsi
der a
ctio
n st
eps
that
will
sta
nd y
ou in
goo
d st
ead,
not
onl
y in
the
face
of
dis
aste
r but
on
a da
y-to
-day
bas
is.
The
proc
ess
is n
ot d
ifficu
lt, a
nd th
e tim
e in
vest
men
t is
mod
est.
The
sco
re y
ou id
entif
y is
for y
our u
se in
taki
ng
ongo
ing
actio
ns to
str
engt
hen
your
com
mun
ity.
We
hope
yo
u w
ill e
njoy
as
wel
l as
lear
n.
The
Torr
ens
Resi
lienc
e In
stit
ute
Team
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
3M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Intr
oduc
tion
to th
e To
olki
t ....
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
....4
Get
ting
the
proc
ess
star
ted
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......6
Wor
king
cop
y of
the
Scor
ecar
d ....
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
...9
Com
mun
ity M
aste
r Cop
y of
the
Scor
ecar
d.....
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.15
Revi
ewin
g th
e Sc
orec
ard
and
Nex
t Ste
ps ...
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
......2
1
App
endi
ces
• G
loss
ary
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
...22
• Sa
mpl
e le
tter
of i
nvita
tion
to th
e Sc
orec
ard
Wor
king
Gro
up....
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.....2
4
• Sa
mpl
e le
tter
of i
nvita
tion
to th
e Sc
orec
ard
Wor
king
Gro
up C
hair
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
...25
• Sa
mpl
e ag
enda
s fo
r Wor
king
Gro
up M
eetin
gs ...
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
...26
Tab
le o
f Con
tent
s
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 3
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 28 14/12/2012 12:04:13 PM
2M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Com
mun
ity
Dis
aste
r R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd T
oolk
itW
elco
me
to th
e Co
mm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce S
core
card
To
olki
t. Y
ou a
re h
ere
beca
use
you
are
inte
rest
ed in
hel
ping
yo
ur c
omm
unity
to b
e pr
epar
ed, r
espo
nd a
nd re
cove
r m
ore
effec
tivel
y sh
ould
an
emer
genc
y or
dis
aste
r occ
ur.
This
reso
urce
has
bee
n de
sign
ed fo
r you
as
a pa
rt o
f th
e A
ustr
alia
n N
atio
nal S
trat
egy
for D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
, es
peci
ally
for t
he u
se o
f com
mun
ities
inte
rest
ed in
sel
f-as
sess
men
t of t
heir
pote
ntia
l res
ilien
ce a
nd to
dev
elop
a
sprin
gboa
rd fo
r an
actio
n pl
an to
str
engt
hen
resi
lienc
e.
This
Too
lkit
has
all o
f the
pie
ces
need
ed b
y th
e le
ader
or
coor
dina
tor o
f the
pro
cess
, and
incl
udes
wor
king
mat
eria
ls
to b
e di
strib
uted
to c
omm
unity
mem
bers
par
ticip
atin
g in
th
e pr
oces
s.
Wor
king
toge
ther
to c
ompl
ete
the
Scor
ecar
d, y
ou a
nd
fello
w p
artic
ipan
ts w
ill le
arn
mor
e ab
out y
our c
omm
unity
an
d its
reso
urce
s, an
d w
ill b
e st
imul
ated
to c
onsi
der a
ctio
n st
eps
that
will
sta
nd y
ou in
goo
d st
ead,
not
onl
y in
the
face
of
dis
aste
r but
on
a da
y-to
-day
bas
is.
The
proc
ess
is n
ot d
ifficu
lt, a
nd th
e tim
e in
vest
men
t is
mod
est.
The
sco
re y
ou id
entif
y is
for y
our u
se in
taki
ng
ongo
ing
actio
ns to
str
engt
hen
your
com
mun
ity.
We
hope
yo
u w
ill e
njoy
as
wel
l as
lear
n.
The
Torr
ens
Resi
lienc
e In
stit
ute
Team
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
3M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Intr
oduc
tion
to th
e To
olki
t ....
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
....4
Get
ting
the
proc
ess
star
ted
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......6
Wor
king
cop
y of
the
Scor
ecar
d ....
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
...9
Com
mun
ity M
aste
r Cop
y of
the
Scor
ecar
d.....
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.15
Revi
ewin
g th
e Sc
orec
ard
and
Nex
t Ste
ps ...
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
......2
1
App
endi
ces
• G
loss
ary
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
...22
• Sa
mpl
e le
tter
of i
nvita
tion
to th
e Sc
orec
ard
Wor
king
Gro
up....
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.....2
4
• Sa
mpl
e le
tter
of i
nvita
tion
to th
e Sc
orec
ard
Wor
king
Gro
up C
hair
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
...25
• Sa
mpl
e ag
enda
s fo
r Wor
king
Gro
up M
eetin
gs ...
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
...26
Tab
le o
f Con
tent
s
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 3
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 29 14/12/2012 12:04:14 PM
4M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
emer
genc
y, a
nd c
ould
wel
l be
surp
rised
to d
isco
ver t
hat
reco
very
is m
uch
mor
e di
fficu
lt th
an a
nyon
e th
ough
t.
This
Com
mun
ity D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd is
you
r too
l; an
ear
ly s
tep
tow
ards
und
erst
andi
ng w
hich
of t
he li
nes
depi
cted
bel
ow w
ill b
e yo
ur to
wn’
s st
ory.
Emer
genc
ies
and
disa
ster
s ca
n ha
ppen
, alm
ost a
ny
time
or a
ny p
lace
, and
thin
king
ahe
ad to
reco
very
is
impo
rtan
t. T
hat i
s w
hy A
ustr
alia
has
a N
atio
nal
Stra
tegy
for D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
(htt
p://
ww
w.e
m.g
ov.
au/P
ublic
atio
ns/P
rogr
am%
20pu
blic
atio
ns/P
ages
/N
atio
nalS
trat
egyf
orD
isas
terR
esili
ence
.asp
x). I
nlan
d to
wns
m
ay n
ot n
eed
to p
repa
re fo
r tsu
nam
is o
r cyc
lone
s; flo
ods
gene
rally
do
not h
appe
n fa
r fro
m w
ater
cour
ses;
bush
fire
s ha
ve h
appe
ned
in e
very
sta
te a
nd te
rrito
ry o
f Aus
tral
ia.
Epid
emic
s or
indu
stria
l and
tran
spor
tatio
n em
erge
ncie
s (e
.g.,
chem
ical
leak
age,
fire
, and
trai
n de
railm
ent)
are
po
ssib
le.
Ever
y co
mm
unity
in A
ustr
alia
, lar
ge o
r sm
all,
has
som
e de
gree
of v
ulne
rabi
lity
to d
isas
ter o
r lar
ge s
cale
Intr
oduc
tion
to
the
Tool
kit
Tim
e
Value
SHO
CK o
r STR
ESS
Colla
pse
Resi
lienc
eAv
aila
ble
Reso
urce
sRi
sk a
nd
Vuln
erab
ility
Com
mun
ity C
onne
cted
ness
Plan
ning
and
Pro
cedu
res
Resi
lienc
e
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 4
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
5M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Def
init
ion
of c
omm
unit
y d
isas
ter
resi
lienc
e
Beyo
nd th
e re
silie
nce
of in
divi
dual
s or
indi
vidu
al
orga
nisa
tions
, you
r com
mun
ity w
ill p
rove
resi
lient
in th
e ev
ent o
f a s
ever
e em
erge
ncy
or d
isas
ter w
hen
mem
bers
of
the
popu
latio
n ar
e co
nnec
ted
to o
ne a
noth
er a
nd w
ork
toge
ther
, so
that
they
are
abl
e to
:
• fu
nctio
n an
d su
stai
n cr
itica
l sys
tem
s, ev
en u
nder
str
ess;
• ad
apt t
o ch
ange
s in
the
phys
ical
, soc
ial o
r eco
nom
ic
envi
ronm
ent;
• be
sel
f-rel
iant
if e
xter
nal r
esou
rces
are
lim
ited
or c
ut o
ff;
and
• le
arn
from
exp
erie
nce
to im
prov
e ov
er ti
me.
Som
e of
the
info
rmat
ion
need
ed to
com
plet
e th
e Sc
orec
ard
will
com
e fro
m o
ffici
al c
ensu
s or
sim
ilar
info
rmat
ion,
and
one
or m
ore
indi
vidu
als
may
be
task
ed w
ith g
athe
ring
som
e of
the
need
ed in
form
atio
n.
How
ever
, the
Sco
reca
rd s
houl
d be
com
plet
ed th
roug
h an
inte
ract
ive
proc
ess
that
invo
lves
repr
esen
tativ
es o
f the
lo
cal g
over
nmen
t and
indi
vidu
als
from
the
com
mun
ity,
incl
udin
g so
me
who
may
not
see
issu
es th
roug
h th
e sa
me
lens
. Th
e re
sults
sho
uld
be w
idel
y sh
ared
as
a pa
rt o
f th
e st
rate
gy to
take
act
ion
tow
ard
incr
ease
d co
mm
unity
re
silie
nce.
It is
not
pos
sibl
e to
pla
n im
prov
emen
ts w
ithou
t kno
win
g w
here
you
are
sta
rtin
g. T
he C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Scor
ecar
d is
one
par
t of t
he p
roce
ss n
eces
sary
to h
elp
a co
mm
unity
(a to
wn,
a re
gion
al c
ounc
il, a
dis
tric
t) b
ecom
e m
ore
resi
lient
in th
e fa
ce o
f maj
or e
mer
genc
ies
or d
isas
ters
. Th
is S
core
card
may
be
of e
ven
grea
ter h
elp
to a
com
mun
ity
that
has
not
had
rece
nt e
xper
ienc
e w
ith a
n em
erge
ncy
even
t tha
n it
is to
thos
e w
ho li
ve in
are
as w
ith fr
eque
ntly
oc
curr
ing
chal
leng
es s
uch
as fl
oodi
ng o
r cyc
lone
s.
The
com
plet
ed S
core
card
will
pro
vide
a p
oint
-in-t
ime
snap
shot
of s
ome
key
mea
sure
s im
port
ant t
o re
silie
nce,
pr
ovid
ing
guid
ance
on
aspe
cts
of c
omm
unity
life
that
sh
ould
rece
ive
atte
ntio
n in
ord
er to
incr
ease
resi
lienc
e an
d st
reng
then
resi
lienc
e ov
er ti
me.
Usi
ng th
e Sc
orec
ard
at a
nnua
l int
erva
ls w
ill a
llow
you
to tr
ack
your
pro
gres
s on
sel
ecte
d ac
tion
area
s, an
d to
iden
tify
any
new
are
as
need
ing
atte
ntio
n.
Each
com
pone
nt o
f res
ilien
ce is
sco
red
from
1 to
5,
with
5 b
eing
the
high
est l
evel
of r
esili
ence
. Th
e sc
orin
g pr
oces
s is
not
a p
reci
se s
tatis
tical
pro
cess
, but
rath
er a
be
st a
ppro
xim
atio
n of
how
eac
h el
emen
t fits
into
ove
rall
com
mun
ity re
silie
nce,
and
you
r bes
t loc
al ju
dgem
ent a
nd
know
ledg
e ar
e w
hat c
ount
s. W
here
sco
ring
is b
ased
on
num
eric
info
rmat
ion,
suc
h as
a fi
gure
from
the
curr
ent
cens
us, t
he 1
-5 ra
nge
was
est
ablis
hed
base
d on
the
curr
ent l
itera
ture
on
the
com
pone
nts
of re
silie
nce.
In
mos
t ca
ses,
a de
finiti
on o
r an
exam
ple
of w
hat m
ight
lead
to
each
of t
hese
sco
ring
leve
ls is
pro
vide
d, a
nd in
all
case
s, th
ere
is a
n in
dica
tion
of w
here
the
info
rmat
ion
requ
ired
to
dete
rmin
e a
scor
e m
ight
be
foun
d. I
f the
re a
re lo
cal d
ata
sour
ces
such
as
an a
nnua
l sur
vey
of re
side
nts
that
ask
ed a
re
leva
nt q
uest
ion
or a
rece
nt p
ost-
emer
genc
y cr
itiqu
e th
at
addr
esse
d an
item
on
this
Sco
reca
rd, t
hen
use
them
. The
gl
ossa
ry a
ttac
hed
(App
endi
x 1)
incl
udes
link
s to
iden
tified
da
ta s
ourc
es.
Staff
from
the
Torr
ens
Resi
lienc
e In
stitu
te w
ho d
evel
oped
th
is S
core
card
are
ava
ilabl
e to
ans
wer
que
stio
ns a
s a
com
mun
ity p
roce
eds
to u
se th
e Sc
orec
ard.
Con
tact
the
TRI b
y em
ail (
info
rmat
ion@
torr
ensr
esili
ence
.org
) or p
hone
(0
8 82
2154
40).
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 5
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 30 14/12/2012 12:04:14 PM
4M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
emer
genc
y, a
nd c
ould
wel
l be
surp
rised
to d
isco
ver t
hat
reco
very
is m
uch
mor
e di
fficu
lt th
an a
nyon
e th
ough
t.
This
Com
mun
ity D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd is
you
r too
l; an
ear
ly s
tep
tow
ards
und
erst
andi
ng w
hich
of t
he li
nes
depi
cted
bel
ow w
ill b
e yo
ur to
wn’
s st
ory.
Emer
genc
ies
and
disa
ster
s ca
n ha
ppen
, alm
ost a
ny
time
or a
ny p
lace
, and
thin
king
ahe
ad to
reco
very
is
impo
rtan
t. T
hat i
s w
hy A
ustr
alia
has
a N
atio
nal
Stra
tegy
for D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
(htt
p://
ww
w.e
m.g
ov.
au/P
ublic
atio
ns/P
rogr
am%
20pu
blic
atio
ns/P
ages
/N
atio
nalS
trat
egyf
orD
isas
terR
esili
ence
.asp
x). I
nlan
d to
wns
m
ay n
ot n
eed
to p
repa
re fo
r tsu
nam
is o
r cyc
lone
s; flo
ods
gene
rally
do
not h
appe
n fa
r fro
m w
ater
cour
ses;
bush
fire
s ha
ve h
appe
ned
in e
very
sta
te a
nd te
rrito
ry o
f Aus
tral
ia.
Epid
emic
s or
indu
stria
l and
tran
spor
tatio
n em
erge
ncie
s (e
.g.,
chem
ical
leak
age,
fire
, and
trai
n de
railm
ent)
are
po
ssib
le.
Ever
y co
mm
unity
in A
ustr
alia
, lar
ge o
r sm
all,
has
som
e de
gree
of v
ulne
rabi
lity
to d
isas
ter o
r lar
ge s
cale
Intr
oduc
tion
to
the
Tool
kit
Tim
e
Value
SHO
CK o
r STR
ESS
Colla
pse
Resi
lienc
eAv
aila
ble
Reso
urce
sRi
sk a
nd
Vuln
erab
ility
Com
mun
ity C
onne
cted
ness
Plan
ning
and
Pro
cedu
res
Resi
lienc
e
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 4
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
5M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Def
init
ion
of c
omm
unit
y d
isas
ter
resi
lienc
e
Beyo
nd th
e re
silie
nce
of in
divi
dual
s or
indi
vidu
al
orga
nisa
tions
, you
r com
mun
ity w
ill p
rove
resi
lient
in th
e ev
ent o
f a s
ever
e em
erge
ncy
or d
isas
ter w
hen
mem
bers
of
the
popu
latio
n ar
e co
nnec
ted
to o
ne a
noth
er a
nd w
ork
toge
ther
, so
that
they
are
abl
e to
:
• fu
nctio
n an
d su
stai
n cr
itica
l sys
tem
s, ev
en u
nder
str
ess;
• ad
apt t
o ch
ange
s in
the
phys
ical
, soc
ial o
r eco
nom
ic
envi
ronm
ent;
• be
sel
f-rel
iant
if e
xter
nal r
esou
rces
are
lim
ited
or c
ut o
ff;
and
• le
arn
from
exp
erie
nce
to im
prov
e ov
er ti
me.
Som
e of
the
info
rmat
ion
need
ed to
com
plet
e th
e Sc
orec
ard
will
com
e fro
m o
ffici
al c
ensu
s or
sim
ilar
info
rmat
ion,
and
one
or m
ore
indi
vidu
als
may
be
task
ed w
ith g
athe
ring
som
e of
the
need
ed in
form
atio
n.
How
ever
, the
Sco
reca
rd s
houl
d be
com
plet
ed th
roug
h an
inte
ract
ive
proc
ess
that
invo
lves
repr
esen
tativ
es o
f the
lo
cal g
over
nmen
t and
indi
vidu
als
from
the
com
mun
ity,
incl
udin
g so
me
who
may
not
see
issu
es th
roug
h th
e sa
me
lens
. Th
e re
sults
sho
uld
be w
idel
y sh
ared
as
a pa
rt o
f th
e st
rate
gy to
take
act
ion
tow
ard
incr
ease
d co
mm
unity
re
silie
nce.
It is
not
pos
sibl
e to
pla
n im
prov
emen
ts w
ithou
t kno
win
g w
here
you
are
sta
rtin
g. T
he C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Scor
ecar
d is
one
par
t of t
he p
roce
ss n
eces
sary
to h
elp
a co
mm
unity
(a to
wn,
a re
gion
al c
ounc
il, a
dis
tric
t) b
ecom
e m
ore
resi
lient
in th
e fa
ce o
f maj
or e
mer
genc
ies
or d
isas
ters
. Th
is S
core
card
may
be
of e
ven
grea
ter h
elp
to a
com
mun
ity
that
has
not
had
rece
nt e
xper
ienc
e w
ith a
n em
erge
ncy
even
t tha
n it
is to
thos
e w
ho li
ve in
are
as w
ith fr
eque
ntly
oc
curr
ing
chal
leng
es s
uch
as fl
oodi
ng o
r cyc
lone
s.
The
com
plet
ed S
core
card
will
pro
vide
a p
oint
-in-t
ime
snap
shot
of s
ome
key
mea
sure
s im
port
ant t
o re
silie
nce,
pr
ovid
ing
guid
ance
on
aspe
cts
of c
omm
unity
life
that
sh
ould
rece
ive
atte
ntio
n in
ord
er to
incr
ease
resi
lienc
e an
d st
reng
then
resi
lienc
e ov
er ti
me.
Usi
ng th
e Sc
orec
ard
at a
nnua
l int
erva
ls w
ill a
llow
you
to tr
ack
your
pro
gres
s on
sel
ecte
d ac
tion
area
s, an
d to
iden
tify
any
new
are
as
need
ing
atte
ntio
n.
Each
com
pone
nt o
f res
ilien
ce is
sco
red
from
1 to
5,
with
5 b
eing
the
high
est l
evel
of r
esili
ence
. Th
e sc
orin
g pr
oces
s is
not
a p
reci
se s
tatis
tical
pro
cess
, but
rath
er a
be
st a
ppro
xim
atio
n of
how
eac
h el
emen
t fits
into
ove
rall
com
mun
ity re
silie
nce,
and
you
r bes
t loc
al ju
dgem
ent a
nd
know
ledg
e ar
e w
hat c
ount
s. W
here
sco
ring
is b
ased
on
num
eric
info
rmat
ion,
suc
h as
a fi
gure
from
the
curr
ent
cens
us, t
he 1
-5 ra
nge
was
est
ablis
hed
base
d on
the
curr
ent l
itera
ture
on
the
com
pone
nts
of re
silie
nce.
In
mos
t ca
ses,
a de
finiti
on o
r an
exam
ple
of w
hat m
ight
lead
to
each
of t
hese
sco
ring
leve
ls is
pro
vide
d, a
nd in
all
case
s, th
ere
is a
n in
dica
tion
of w
here
the
info
rmat
ion
requ
ired
to
dete
rmin
e a
scor
e m
ight
be
foun
d. I
f the
re a
re lo
cal d
ata
sour
ces
such
as
an a
nnua
l sur
vey
of re
side
nts
that
ask
ed a
re
leva
nt q
uest
ion
or a
rece
nt p
ost-
emer
genc
y cr
itiqu
e th
at
addr
esse
d an
item
on
this
Sco
reca
rd, t
hen
use
them
. The
gl
ossa
ry a
ttac
hed
(App
endi
x 1)
incl
udes
link
s to
iden
tified
da
ta s
ourc
es.
Staff
from
the
Torr
ens
Resi
lienc
e In
stitu
te w
ho d
evel
oped
th
is S
core
card
are
ava
ilabl
e to
ans
wer
que
stio
ns a
s a
com
mun
ity p
roce
eds
to u
se th
e Sc
orec
ard.
Con
tact
the
TRI b
y em
ail (
info
rmat
ion@
torr
ensr
esili
ence
.org
) or p
hone
(0
8 82
2154
40).
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 5
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 31 14/12/2012 12:04:14 PM
6M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Sele
ctin
g Pa
rtic
ipan
ts
The
Scor
ecar
d is
NO
T a
docu
men
t for
a s
ingl
e in
divi
dual
, or
a s
ingl
e go
vern
men
t age
ncy,
or a
gro
up o
f exp
erts
in
emer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss a
nd m
anag
emen
t to
com
plet
e;
it re
quire
s di
scus
sion
with
a la
rger
, mor
e di
vers
e gr
oup.
Co
mpl
etin
g th
e Co
mm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce S
core
card
is
bes
t don
e by
a S
core
card
Wor
king
Gro
up o
f 10
to 1
5 in
divi
dual
s, in
clud
ing
som
e lo
cal g
over
nmen
t offi
cial
s an
d a
num
ber o
f peo
ple
reco
gnis
ed a
s le
ader
s by
gro
ups
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
. It i
s pa
rtic
ular
ly im
port
ant t
hat
the
Scor
ecar
d W
orki
ng G
roup
repr
esen
t the
who
le
com
mun
ity, c
onsi
derin
g ge
ogra
phy,
age
, eco
nom
ics,
soci
al
and
ethn
ic g
roup
s, le
ngth
of t
ime
in th
e co
mm
unity
and
si
mila
r fac
tors
. Th
ey s
houl
d no
t be
indi
vidu
als
who
hol
d id
entic
al v
iew
s ab
out t
he c
omm
unity
; hav
ing
dive
rgen
t pe
rspe
ctiv
es e
ngag
ed in
the
proc
ess
will
str
engt
hen
the
outc
omes
.
A s
ampl
e le
tter
of i
nvita
tion
to th
e W
orki
ng G
roup
is
incl
uded
in A
ppen
dix
2 an
d in
dica
tes
the
expe
ctat
ion
that
it
is a
com
mitm
ent t
o 3
mee
tings
ove
r 4-6
wee
ks.
Get
ting
the
Pro
cess
Sta
rted
The
deci
sion
to c
ompl
ete
the
Scor
ecar
d is
usu
ally
mad
e at
the
loca
l gov
ernm
ent l
evel
, aft
er c
onsu
ltatio
n w
ith k
ey
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs w
ho m
ay p
artic
ipat
e in
the
proc
ess,
or b
e ke
y so
urce
s of
info
rmat
ion.
It i
s N
OT
a do
cum
ent
to b
e as
sign
ed to
a s
ingl
e in
divi
dual
or g
over
nmen
t de
part
men
t to
com
plet
e. T
he g
eogr
aphi
c ar
ea to
be
incl
uded
sho
uld
be c
lear
ly d
efine
d at
the
outs
et, t
o fa
cilit
ate
use
of c
ensu
s an
d ot
her d
ata
sour
ces,
and
iden
tify
the
Wor
king
Gro
up. I
t may
be
help
ful t
o m
ark
on a
map
an
d di
spla
y bo
th th
e co
mm
unity
for w
hich
the
Scor
ecar
d is
bei
ng c
ompl
eted
(the
tow
n bo
unda
ries)
and
the
larg
er
regi
on o
r cou
ncil
to w
hich
this
tow
n re
late
s. F
or a
sm
all
to m
ediu
m to
wn,
a W
orki
ng G
roup
of a
doz
en is
suffi
cien
t; if
the
deci
sion
is to
look
at a
regi
on o
r dis
tric
t, th
e W
orki
ng
Gro
up m
ay n
eed
to b
e ex
pand
ed to
20
or s
o to
ass
ure
a ra
nge
of p
ersp
ectiv
es a
nd e
xper
ienc
es a
re re
pres
ente
d. A
t th
e re
gion
al o
r dis
tric
t lev
el, i
t may
be
best
to e
ncou
rage
all
tow
ns w
ithin
the
regi
on to
com
plet
e th
eir o
wn
Scor
ecar
ds
befo
re a
ssem
blin
g a
grou
p to
look
at t
he a
rea
as a
who
le.
The
Cha
ir of
the
Wor
king
Gro
up w
ill p
roba
bly
be id
entifi
ed
prio
r to
the
first
mee
ting,
but
may
be
sele
cted
by
the
mem
bers
at t
heir
first
mee
ting.
The
Cha
ir sh
ould
be
som
eone
who
is a
ble
to e
ncou
rage
gro
up d
iscu
ssio
n,
nego
tiate
agr
eem
ent a
mon
g th
ose
with
div
erge
nt
view
poin
ts, a
nd k
eep
the
grou
p on
trac
k w
ithin
the
expe
cted
tim
elin
e. T
he C
hair’
s pr
iorit
y sh
ould
be
the
proc
ess
of th
e gr
oup
rath
er th
an a
ny o
ne p
artic
ular
vi
ewpo
int a
bout
resi
lienc
e or
dis
aste
rs.
The
Cha
ir sh
ould
be
resp
onsi
ble
for a
ssur
ing
that
the
Mas
ter C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Sco
reca
rd is
com
plet
ed a
nd
avai
labl
e fo
r use
in p
lann
ing
any
follo
w-u
p ac
tiviti
es.
A
mem
ber o
f the
Wor
king
Gro
up m
ay b
e as
ked
to a
ssis
t in
prep
arin
g th
e fin
al c
opy.
A s
ampl
e le
tter
of i
nvita
tion
to s
erve
as
Cha
ir of
the
Wor
king
Gro
up is
incl
uded
in A
ppen
dix
3.
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 6
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
7M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Sche
dulin
g
Whe
n or
gani
sing
the
Com
mun
ity D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
Sc
orec
ard
Wor
king
Gro
up, s
ome
key
sche
dulin
g ite
ms
to
thin
k ab
out a
re:
• In
itial
invi
tatio
n to
Sco
reca
rd W
orki
ng G
roup
Mem
bers
• Se
lect
ion
of S
core
card
Wor
king
Gro
up C
hair
• Fi
rst M
eetin
g: In
itial
orie
ntat
ion
mee
ting
(app
roxi
mat
ely
2 ho
urs)
for S
core
card
Wor
king
Gro
up
(app
roxi
mat
ely
2 w
eeks
aft
er le
tter
s ar
e is
sued
). Fa
mili
aris
e th
e gr
oup
with
geo
grap
hic
com
mun
ity
unde
r con
side
ratio
n, th
e de
finiti
on o
f com
mun
ity
disa
ster
resi
lienc
e an
d go
thro
ugh
the
Scor
ecar
d to
as
sign
indi
vidu
als
to d
ata
gath
erin
g ta
sks
(see
nex
t se
ctio
n).
• Se
cond
Mee
ting:
Sco
ring
mee
ting,
(app
roxi
mat
ely
2 ho
urs)
dur
ing
whi
ch g
athe
red
info
rmat
ion
is
pres
ente
d, a
nd th
e gr
oup
mak
es in
itial
judg
emen
ts
abou
t sco
ring
indi
vidu
al it
ems
(app
roxi
mat
ely
2 w
eeks
af
ter o
rient
atio
n m
eetin
g)
• Th
ird M
eetin
g: F
inal
revi
ew m
eetin
g (a
ppro
xim
atel
y 1
hour
) dur
ing
whi
ch W
orki
ng G
roup
mem
bers
can
sha
re
refle
ctio
ns o
n th
eir d
raft
sco
res,
cons
ider
any
add
ition
al
info
rmat
ion
gath
ered
from
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs
or o
ther
reso
urce
s in
the
mea
nwhi
le a
nd m
ake
final
sc
orin
g de
cisi
ons.
(App
roxi
mat
ely
2 w
eeks
aft
er th
e fir
st
scor
ing
mee
ting)
. A
t thi
s m
eetin
g in
itial
act
ion
plan
s to
str
engt
hen
resi
lienc
e ar
e al
so id
entifi
ed.
Sett
ing
up th
e m
eeti
ngs
The
Wor
king
Gro
up s
houl
d be
sch
edul
ed to
mee
t in
a co
nven
ient
loca
tion
that
has
com
fort
able
sea
ting
in a
ro
und
tabl
e ar
rang
emen
t, w
ith w
ater
and
pos
sibl
y co
ffee/
tea
avai
labl
e. L
ate
afte
rnoo
n or
ear
ly e
veni
ng ti
mes
may
be
bes
t to
acco
mm
odat
e th
e de
sire
d ra
nge
of m
embe
rs.
The
Wor
king
Cop
y of
the
Scor
ecar
d sh
ould
be
avai
labl
e fo
r ev
ery
mem
ber o
f the
gro
up, a
nd c
opie
s of
the
glos
sary
and
an
y ot
her r
esou
rce
mat
eria
l you
hav
e id
entifi
ed in
adv
ance
(s
uch
as a
rece
nt c
omm
unity
pla
nnin
g do
cum
ent o
r co
mm
unity
em
erge
ncy
plan
) sho
uld
be in
the
room
.
Scor
ing
For e
ach
ques
tion
on th
e Sc
orec
ard,
the
Scor
ecar
d W
orki
ng G
roup
mus
t agr
ee o
n a
scor
e, ra
ngin
g fro
m 1
(q
uite
un-
resi
lient
, or i
n th
e re
d zo
ne) t
o 5
(ver
y re
silie
nt,
the
gree
n zo
ne).
Whe
re th
e ite
m d
epen
ds o
n re
port
ed
stat
istic
al in
form
atio
n su
ch a
s th
e ce
nsus
, it i
s a
mat
ter o
f id
entif
ying
the
mos
t cur
rent
dat
a an
d ci
rclin
g th
e sc
ore
that
bes
t rep
rese
nts
the
loca
l situ
atio
n. F
or q
uite
a fe
w
of th
e ite
ms,
how
ever
, a c
onse
nsus
judg
emen
t is
calle
d fo
r. T
he W
orki
ng G
roup
Cha
ir m
ust e
nsur
e th
at a
ltern
ate
pers
pect
ives
on
the
scor
e ar
e ex
pres
sed,
and
dis
cuss
ion
allo
wed
bef
ore
dete
rmin
ing
the
scor
e. A
fter
com
plet
ing
a fir
st d
raft
of t
he S
core
card
the
Wor
king
Gro
up m
embe
rs
shou
ld th
ink
over
and
eve
n di
scus
s w
ith fr
iend
s an
d co
lleag
ues
thei
r vie
ws
befo
re th
e fin
al s
core
is a
ssig
ned.
Th
is s
tren
gthe
ns th
e pr
oces
s, an
d in
crea
ses
the
likel
ihoo
d th
at th
e sc
ore
final
ly s
elec
ted
repr
esen
ts th
e po
tent
ial
resi
lienc
e of
the
com
mun
ity.
If th
ere
is s
ubst
antia
l dis
agre
emen
t on
the
corr
ect s
core
, an
d th
ere
wel
l may
be,
set
ting
the
scor
e at
a lo
wer
leve
l (t
he le
ss re
silie
nt le
vel)
rath
er th
an a
hig
her o
ne w
ill b
e a
mor
e eff
ectiv
e w
ay o
f con
tinui
ng to
eng
age
mem
bers
of
the
com
mun
ity in
str
engt
heni
ng re
silie
nce.
Rem
embe
r, th
e Sc
orec
ard
resu
lts a
re n
ot fo
r any
one
outs
ide
of th
e co
mm
unity
: the
y ar
e yo
urs
to u
se a
s a
qual
ity im
prov
emen
t and
com
mun
icat
ion
tool
.
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 7
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 32 14/12/2012 12:04:14 PM
6M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Sele
ctin
g Pa
rtic
ipan
ts
The
Scor
ecar
d is
NO
T a
docu
men
t for
a s
ingl
e in
divi
dual
, or
a s
ingl
e go
vern
men
t age
ncy,
or a
gro
up o
f exp
erts
in
emer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss a
nd m
anag
emen
t to
com
plet
e;
it re
quire
s di
scus
sion
with
a la
rger
, mor
e di
vers
e gr
oup.
Co
mpl
etin
g th
e Co
mm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce S
core
card
is
bes
t don
e by
a S
core
card
Wor
king
Gro
up o
f 10
to 1
5 in
divi
dual
s, in
clud
ing
som
e lo
cal g
over
nmen
t offi
cial
s an
d a
num
ber o
f peo
ple
reco
gnis
ed a
s le
ader
s by
gro
ups
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
. It i
s pa
rtic
ular
ly im
port
ant t
hat
the
Scor
ecar
d W
orki
ng G
roup
repr
esen
t the
who
le
com
mun
ity, c
onsi
derin
g ge
ogra
phy,
age
, eco
nom
ics,
soci
al
and
ethn
ic g
roup
s, le
ngth
of t
ime
in th
e co
mm
unity
and
si
mila
r fac
tors
. Th
ey s
houl
d no
t be
indi
vidu
als
who
hol
d id
entic
al v
iew
s ab
out t
he c
omm
unity
; hav
ing
dive
rgen
t pe
rspe
ctiv
es e
ngag
ed in
the
proc
ess
will
str
engt
hen
the
outc
omes
.
A s
ampl
e le
tter
of i
nvita
tion
to th
e W
orki
ng G
roup
is
incl
uded
in A
ppen
dix
2 an
d in
dica
tes
the
expe
ctat
ion
that
it
is a
com
mitm
ent t
o 3
mee
tings
ove
r 4-6
wee
ks.
Get
ting
the
Pro
cess
Sta
rted
The
deci
sion
to c
ompl
ete
the
Scor
ecar
d is
usu
ally
mad
e at
the
loca
l gov
ernm
ent l
evel
, aft
er c
onsu
ltatio
n w
ith k
ey
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs w
ho m
ay p
artic
ipat
e in
the
proc
ess,
or b
e ke
y so
urce
s of
info
rmat
ion.
It i
s N
OT
a do
cum
ent
to b
e as
sign
ed to
a s
ingl
e in
divi
dual
or g
over
nmen
t de
part
men
t to
com
plet
e. T
he g
eogr
aphi
c ar
ea to
be
incl
uded
sho
uld
be c
lear
ly d
efine
d at
the
outs
et, t
o fa
cilit
ate
use
of c
ensu
s an
d ot
her d
ata
sour
ces,
and
iden
tify
the
Wor
king
Gro
up. I
t may
be
help
ful t
o m
ark
on a
map
an
d di
spla
y bo
th th
e co
mm
unity
for w
hich
the
Scor
ecar
d is
bei
ng c
ompl
eted
(the
tow
n bo
unda
ries)
and
the
larg
er
regi
on o
r cou
ncil
to w
hich
this
tow
n re
late
s. F
or a
sm
all
to m
ediu
m to
wn,
a W
orki
ng G
roup
of a
doz
en is
suffi
cien
t; if
the
deci
sion
is to
look
at a
regi
on o
r dis
tric
t, th
e W
orki
ng
Gro
up m
ay n
eed
to b
e ex
pand
ed to
20
or s
o to
ass
ure
a ra
nge
of p
ersp
ectiv
es a
nd e
xper
ienc
es a
re re
pres
ente
d. A
t th
e re
gion
al o
r dis
tric
t lev
el, i
t may
be
best
to e
ncou
rage
all
tow
ns w
ithin
the
regi
on to
com
plet
e th
eir o
wn
Scor
ecar
ds
befo
re a
ssem
blin
g a
grou
p to
look
at t
he a
rea
as a
who
le.
The
Cha
ir of
the
Wor
king
Gro
up w
ill p
roba
bly
be id
entifi
ed
prio
r to
the
first
mee
ting,
but
may
be
sele
cted
by
the
mem
bers
at t
heir
first
mee
ting.
The
Cha
ir sh
ould
be
som
eone
who
is a
ble
to e
ncou
rage
gro
up d
iscu
ssio
n,
nego
tiate
agr
eem
ent a
mon
g th
ose
with
div
erge
nt
view
poin
ts, a
nd k
eep
the
grou
p on
trac
k w
ithin
the
expe
cted
tim
elin
e. T
he C
hair’
s pr
iorit
y sh
ould
be
the
proc
ess
of th
e gr
oup
rath
er th
an a
ny o
ne p
artic
ular
vi
ewpo
int a
bout
resi
lienc
e or
dis
aste
rs.
The
Cha
ir sh
ould
be
resp
onsi
ble
for a
ssur
ing
that
the
Mas
ter C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Sco
reca
rd is
com
plet
ed a
nd
avai
labl
e fo
r use
in p
lann
ing
any
follo
w-u
p ac
tiviti
es.
A
mem
ber o
f the
Wor
king
Gro
up m
ay b
e as
ked
to a
ssis
t in
prep
arin
g th
e fin
al c
opy.
A s
ampl
e le
tter
of i
nvita
tion
to s
erve
as
Cha
ir of
the
Wor
king
Gro
up is
incl
uded
in A
ppen
dix
3.
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 6
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
7M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Sche
dulin
g
Whe
n or
gani
sing
the
Com
mun
ity D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
Sc
orec
ard
Wor
king
Gro
up, s
ome
key
sche
dulin
g ite
ms
to
thin
k ab
out a
re:
• In
itial
invi
tatio
n to
Sco
reca
rd W
orki
ng G
roup
Mem
bers
• Se
lect
ion
of S
core
card
Wor
king
Gro
up C
hair
• Fi
rst M
eetin
g: In
itial
orie
ntat
ion
mee
ting
(app
roxi
mat
ely
2 ho
urs)
for S
core
card
Wor
king
Gro
up
(app
roxi
mat
ely
2 w
eeks
aft
er le
tter
s ar
e is
sued
). Fa
mili
aris
e th
e gr
oup
with
geo
grap
hic
com
mun
ity
unde
r con
side
ratio
n, th
e de
finiti
on o
f com
mun
ity
disa
ster
resi
lienc
e an
d go
thro
ugh
the
Scor
ecar
d to
as
sign
indi
vidu
als
to d
ata
gath
erin
g ta
sks
(see
nex
t se
ctio
n).
• Se
cond
Mee
ting:
Sco
ring
mee
ting,
(app
roxi
mat
ely
2 ho
urs)
dur
ing
whi
ch g
athe
red
info
rmat
ion
is
pres
ente
d, a
nd th
e gr
oup
mak
es in
itial
judg
emen
ts
abou
t sco
ring
indi
vidu
al it
ems
(app
roxi
mat
ely
2 w
eeks
af
ter o
rient
atio
n m
eetin
g)
• Th
ird M
eetin
g: F
inal
revi
ew m
eetin
g (a
ppro
xim
atel
y 1
hour
) dur
ing
whi
ch W
orki
ng G
roup
mem
bers
can
sha
re
refle
ctio
ns o
n th
eir d
raft
sco
res,
cons
ider
any
add
ition
al
info
rmat
ion
gath
ered
from
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs
or o
ther
reso
urce
s in
the
mea
nwhi
le a
nd m
ake
final
sc
orin
g de
cisi
ons.
(App
roxi
mat
ely
2 w
eeks
aft
er th
e fir
st
scor
ing
mee
ting)
. A
t thi
s m
eetin
g in
itial
act
ion
plan
s to
str
engt
hen
resi
lienc
e ar
e al
so id
entifi
ed.
Sett
ing
up th
e m
eeti
ngs
The
Wor
king
Gro
up s
houl
d be
sch
edul
ed to
mee
t in
a co
nven
ient
loca
tion
that
has
com
fort
able
sea
ting
in a
ro
und
tabl
e ar
rang
emen
t, w
ith w
ater
and
pos
sibl
y co
ffee/
tea
avai
labl
e. L
ate
afte
rnoo
n or
ear
ly e
veni
ng ti
mes
may
be
bes
t to
acco
mm
odat
e th
e de
sire
d ra
nge
of m
embe
rs.
The
Wor
king
Cop
y of
the
Scor
ecar
d sh
ould
be
avai
labl
e fo
r ev
ery
mem
ber o
f the
gro
up, a
nd c
opie
s of
the
glos
sary
and
an
y ot
her r
esou
rce
mat
eria
l you
hav
e id
entifi
ed in
adv
ance
(s
uch
as a
rece
nt c
omm
unity
pla
nnin
g do
cum
ent o
r co
mm
unity
em
erge
ncy
plan
) sho
uld
be in
the
room
.
Scor
ing
For e
ach
ques
tion
on th
e Sc
orec
ard,
the
Scor
ecar
d W
orki
ng G
roup
mus
t agr
ee o
n a
scor
e, ra
ngin
g fro
m 1
(q
uite
un-
resi
lient
, or i
n th
e re
d zo
ne) t
o 5
(ver
y re
silie
nt,
the
gree
n zo
ne).
Whe
re th
e ite
m d
epen
ds o
n re
port
ed
stat
istic
al in
form
atio
n su
ch a
s th
e ce
nsus
, it i
s a
mat
ter o
f id
entif
ying
the
mos
t cur
rent
dat
a an
d ci
rclin
g th
e sc
ore
that
bes
t rep
rese
nts
the
loca
l situ
atio
n. F
or q
uite
a fe
w
of th
e ite
ms,
how
ever
, a c
onse
nsus
judg
emen
t is
calle
d fo
r. T
he W
orki
ng G
roup
Cha
ir m
ust e
nsur
e th
at a
ltern
ate
pers
pect
ives
on
the
scor
e ar
e ex
pres
sed,
and
dis
cuss
ion
allo
wed
bef
ore
dete
rmin
ing
the
scor
e. A
fter
com
plet
ing
a fir
st d
raft
of t
he S
core
card
the
Wor
king
Gro
up m
embe
rs
shou
ld th
ink
over
and
eve
n di
scus
s w
ith fr
iend
s an
d co
lleag
ues
thei
r vie
ws
befo
re th
e fin
al s
core
is a
ssig
ned.
Th
is s
tren
gthe
ns th
e pr
oces
s, an
d in
crea
ses
the
likel
ihoo
d th
at th
e sc
ore
final
ly s
elec
ted
repr
esen
ts th
e po
tent
ial
resi
lienc
e of
the
com
mun
ity.
If th
ere
is s
ubst
antia
l dis
agre
emen
t on
the
corr
ect s
core
, an
d th
ere
wel
l may
be,
set
ting
the
scor
e at
a lo
wer
leve
l (t
he le
ss re
silie
nt le
vel)
rath
er th
an a
hig
her o
ne w
ill b
e a
mor
e eff
ectiv
e w
ay o
f con
tinui
ng to
eng
age
mem
bers
of
the
com
mun
ity in
str
engt
heni
ng re
silie
nce.
Rem
embe
r, th
e Sc
orec
ard
resu
lts a
re n
ot fo
r any
one
outs
ide
of th
e co
mm
unity
: the
y ar
e yo
urs
to u
se a
s a
qual
ity im
prov
emen
t and
com
mun
icat
ion
tool
.
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 7
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 33 14/12/2012 12:04:14 PM
8M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 8
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
9M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Wor
king
Cop
y (f
or d
istr
ibut
ion
to e
ach
mem
ber
of t
he W
orki
ng G
roup
)
Com
mun
ity
Dis
aste
r R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd fo
r ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 9
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 34 14/12/2012 12:04:14 PM
8M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 8
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
9M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Wor
king
Cop
y (f
or d
istr
ibut
ion
to e
ach
mem
ber
of t
he W
orki
ng G
roup
)
Com
mun
ity
Dis
aste
r R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd fo
r ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 9
12/1
2/20
12
4:07
:00
PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 35 14/12/2012 12:04:14 PM
10M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
The
Com
mun
ity D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd is
one
to
ol a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith th
e A
ustr
alia
n N
atio
nal S
trat
egy
for
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce, a
s co
mm
uniti
es a
cros
s A
ustr
alia
are
be
ing
enco
urag
ed to
take
ste
ps to
str
engt
hen
com
mun
ity
resi
lienc
e in
the
face
of d
isas
ter.
Defi
nitio
n of
com
mun
ity d
isas
ter r
esili
ence
: Bey
ond
the
resi
lienc
e of
indi
vidu
als
or in
divi
dual
org
anis
atio
ns, y
our
com
mun
ity w
ill p
rove
resi
lient
in th
e ev
ent o
f a s
ever
e em
erge
ncy
or d
isas
ter w
hen
mem
bers
of t
he p
opul
atio
n ar
e co
nnec
ted
to o
ne a
noth
er a
nd w
ork
toge
ther
, so
that
th
ey a
re a
ble
to:
• fu
nctio
n an
d su
stai
n cr
itica
l sys
tem
s, ev
en u
nder
str
ess;
• ad
apt t
o ch
ange
s in
the
phys
ical
, soc
ial o
r eco
nom
ic
envi
ronm
ent;
• be
sel
f-rel
iant
if e
xter
nal r
esou
rces
are
lim
ited
or c
ut o
ff;
and
• le
arn
from
exp
erie
nce
to im
prov
e ov
er ti
me.
This
is y
our w
orki
ng c
opy
of th
e Sc
orec
ard,
and
you
sho
uld
use
it to
thin
k th
roug
h ho
w y
ou w
ould
sco
re e
ach
item
so
that
you
are
read
y to
con
trib
ute
to th
e W
orki
ng G
roup
pr
oces
s th
at w
ill a
rriv
e at
a fi
nal s
core
for y
our c
omm
unity
. M
ake
note
s, co
nsul
t with
nei
ghbo
rs, f
riend
s or
co-
wor
kers
, an
d ex
plor
e th
e su
gges
ted
info
rmat
ion
sour
ces.
It w
ill p
roba
bly
take
2-3
mee
tings
to th
ink
thro
ugh
the
item
s, ar
rive
at a
gree
men
t on
the
scor
ing,
and
iden
tify
thos
e ar
eas
mos
t in
need
of o
ngoi
ng a
tten
tion.
Eac
h co
mpo
nent
of r
esili
ence
is s
core
d fro
m 1
to 5
, with
5
bein
g th
e hi
ghes
t lev
el o
f res
ilien
ce.
In m
ost c
ases
, we
have
pro
vide
d a
defin
ition
or a
n ex
ampl
e of
wha
t mig
ht
lead
to e
ach
of th
ese
scor
ing
leve
ls, a
nd in
all
case
s, w
e ha
ve p
rovi
ded
som
e in
form
atio
n on
whe
re y
ou m
ight
lo
ok fo
r the
dat
a or
info
rmat
ion
requ
ired
to c
ompl
ete
the
Scor
ecar
d.
Be a
n ac
tive
part
icip
ant i
n th
e pr
oces
s. S
ince
the
Scor
ecar
d is
onl
y on
e st
ep in
hel
ping
incr
ease
com
mun
ity
disa
ster
resi
lienc
e, u
se it
to p
oint
tow
ard
need
ed a
ctio
n.
With
that
in m
ind,
it is
pro
babl
y he
lpfu
l to
err o
n th
e si
de o
f a
low
er th
an h
ighe
r sco
re w
hen
it is
diffi
cult
to d
ecid
e on
an
y on
e ite
m.
Wor
king
Cop
y fo
r ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
....
Tim
e
Value
SHO
CK o
r STR
ESS
Colla
pse
Resi
lienc
e
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
012
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
11M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e1.
1
Wha
t pro
port
ion
of y
our p
opul
atio
n is
eng
aged
with
org
anis
atio
ns (e
.g.,
club
s, se
rvic
e gr
oups
, spo
rts
team
s, ch
urch
es, l
ibra
ry)?
1 <
20%
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
Cens
us
1.2
D
o m
embe
rs o
f the
com
mun
ity h
ave
acce
ss to
a ra
nge
of c
omm
unic
atio
n sy
stem
s th
at a
llow
info
rmat
ion
to fl
ow
durin
g an
em
erge
ncy?
1 D
on’t
know
2 H
as li
mite
d ac
cess
to
a ra
nge
of
com
mun
icat
ion
3 H
as g
ood
acce
ss
to a
rang
e of
co
mm
unic
atio
n bu
t dam
age
resi
stan
ce n
ot
know
n
4 H
as v
ery
good
acc
ess
to a
rang
e of
co
mm
unic
atio
n an
d da
mag
e re
sist
ance
is
mod
erat
e
5 H
as w
ide
rang
e of
acc
ess
to d
amag
e-re
sist
ant
com
mun
icat
ion
Self
-Ass
essm
ent
1.3
W
hat i
s th
e le
vel o
f com
mun
icat
ion
betw
een
loca
l gov
erni
ng b
ody
and
popu
latio
n?
1 Pa
ssiv
e (g
over
nmen
t pa
rtic
ipat
ion
only
)
2 Co
nsul
tatio
n3
Enga
gem
ent
4 Co
llabo
ratio
n5
Act
ive
part
icip
atio
n (c
omm
unity
in
form
s go
vern
men
t on
wha
t is
need
ed)
Inte
rnat
iona
l Ass
ocia
tion
for P
ublic
Par
tici
pati
on
(IA
P2) S
pect
rum
http
://w
ww
.iap2
.org
/ass
ocia
tions
/474
8/fil
es/IA
P2%
20Sp
ectr
um_v
ertic
al.p
df
1.4
W
hat i
s th
e re
latio
nshi
p of
you
r co
mm
unity
with
the
larg
er re
gion
?1
No
netw
orks
w
ith o
ther
to
wns
/ re
gion
2 In
form
al
netw
orks
with
ot
her t
owns
/ re
gion
3 So
me
repr
esen
tatio
n at
regi
onal
m
eetin
gs
4 M
ultip
le
repr
esen
tatio
n at
regi
onal
m
eetin
gs
5 Re
gula
r pla
nnin
g an
d ac
tiviti
es
with
oth
er
tow
ns/
regi
on
Self
-Ass
essm
ent
1.5
W
hat i
s th
e de
gree
of c
onne
cted
ness
ac
ross
com
mun
ity g
roup
s? (e
.g.
ethn
iciti
es/s
ub-c
ultu
res/
age
grou
ps/
new
resi
dent
s no
t in
your
com
mun
ity
whe
n la
st d
isas
ter h
appe
ned)
1 Li
ttle
/no
atte
ntio
n to
su
bgro
ups
in
com
mun
ity
2 A
dver
tisin
g of
cu
ltura
l/cro
ss-
cultu
ral e
vent
s
3 Co
mpr
ehen
sive
in
vent
ory
of
cultu
ral i
dent
ity
grou
ps
4 Co
mm
unity
cr
oss-
cultu
ral
coun
cil
with
wid
e m
embe
rshi
p
5 Su
ppor
t for
an
d ac
tive
invo
lvem
ent i
n cu
ltura
l/cro
ss-
cultu
ral e
vent
s
(in a
dditi
on to
pr
evio
us)
Self
-Ass
essm
ent t
ied
to d
emog
raph
ic p
rofi
le; l
ocal
su
rvey
to a
sses
s
1. H
ow c
onne
cted
are
the
mem
ber
s of
you
r co
mm
unit
y?
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
112
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 36 14/12/2012 12:04:15 PM
10M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
The
Com
mun
ity D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd is
one
to
ol a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith th
e A
ustr
alia
n N
atio
nal S
trat
egy
for
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce, a
s co
mm
uniti
es a
cros
s A
ustr
alia
are
be
ing
enco
urag
ed to
take
ste
ps to
str
engt
hen
com
mun
ity
resi
lienc
e in
the
face
of d
isas
ter.
Defi
nitio
n of
com
mun
ity d
isas
ter r
esili
ence
: Bey
ond
the
resi
lienc
e of
indi
vidu
als
or in
divi
dual
org
anis
atio
ns, y
our
com
mun
ity w
ill p
rove
resi
lient
in th
e ev
ent o
f a s
ever
e em
erge
ncy
or d
isas
ter w
hen
mem
bers
of t
he p
opul
atio
n ar
e co
nnec
ted
to o
ne a
noth
er a
nd w
ork
toge
ther
, so
that
th
ey a
re a
ble
to:
• fu
nctio
n an
d su
stai
n cr
itica
l sys
tem
s, ev
en u
nder
str
ess;
• ad
apt t
o ch
ange
s in
the
phys
ical
, soc
ial o
r eco
nom
ic
envi
ronm
ent;
• be
sel
f-rel
iant
if e
xter
nal r
esou
rces
are
lim
ited
or c
ut o
ff;
and
• le
arn
from
exp
erie
nce
to im
prov
e ov
er ti
me.
This
is y
our w
orki
ng c
opy
of th
e Sc
orec
ard,
and
you
sho
uld
use
it to
thin
k th
roug
h ho
w y
ou w
ould
sco
re e
ach
item
so
that
you
are
read
y to
con
trib
ute
to th
e W
orki
ng G
roup
pr
oces
s th
at w
ill a
rriv
e at
a fi
nal s
core
for y
our c
omm
unity
. M
ake
note
s, co
nsul
t with
nei
ghbo
rs, f
riend
s or
co-
wor
kers
, an
d ex
plor
e th
e su
gges
ted
info
rmat
ion
sour
ces.
It w
ill p
roba
bly
take
2-3
mee
tings
to th
ink
thro
ugh
the
item
s, ar
rive
at a
gree
men
t on
the
scor
ing,
and
iden
tify
thos
e ar
eas
mos
t in
need
of o
ngoi
ng a
tten
tion.
Eac
h co
mpo
nent
of r
esili
ence
is s
core
d fro
m 1
to 5
, with
5
bein
g th
e hi
ghes
t lev
el o
f res
ilien
ce.
In m
ost c
ases
, we
have
pro
vide
d a
defin
ition
or a
n ex
ampl
e of
wha
t mig
ht
lead
to e
ach
of th
ese
scor
ing
leve
ls, a
nd in
all
case
s, w
e ha
ve p
rovi
ded
som
e in
form
atio
n on
whe
re y
ou m
ight
lo
ok fo
r the
dat
a or
info
rmat
ion
requ
ired
to c
ompl
ete
the
Scor
ecar
d.
Be a
n ac
tive
part
icip
ant i
n th
e pr
oces
s. S
ince
the
Scor
ecar
d is
onl
y on
e st
ep in
hel
ping
incr
ease
com
mun
ity
disa
ster
resi
lienc
e, u
se it
to p
oint
tow
ard
need
ed a
ctio
n.
With
that
in m
ind,
it is
pro
babl
y he
lpfu
l to
err o
n th
e si
de o
f a
low
er th
an h
ighe
r sco
re w
hen
it is
diffi
cult
to d
ecid
e on
an
y on
e ite
m.
Wor
king
Cop
y fo
r ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
....
Tim
e
Value
SHO
CK o
r STR
ESS
Colla
pse
Resi
lienc
e
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
012
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
11M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e1.
1
Wha
t pro
port
ion
of y
our p
opul
atio
n is
eng
aged
with
org
anis
atio
ns (e
.g.,
club
s, se
rvic
e gr
oups
, spo
rts
team
s, ch
urch
es, l
ibra
ry)?
1 <
20%
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
Cens
us
1.2
D
o m
embe
rs o
f the
com
mun
ity h
ave
acce
ss to
a ra
nge
of c
omm
unic
atio
n sy
stem
s th
at a
llow
info
rmat
ion
to fl
ow
durin
g an
em
erge
ncy?
1 D
on’t
know
2 H
as li
mite
d ac
cess
to
a ra
nge
of
com
mun
icat
ion
3 H
as g
ood
acce
ss
to a
rang
e of
co
mm
unic
atio
n bu
t dam
age
resi
stan
ce n
ot
know
n
4 H
as v
ery
good
acc
ess
to a
rang
e of
co
mm
unic
atio
n an
d da
mag
e re
sist
ance
is
mod
erat
e
5 H
as w
ide
rang
e of
acc
ess
to d
amag
e-re
sist
ant
com
mun
icat
ion
Self
-Ass
essm
ent
1.3
W
hat i
s th
e le
vel o
f com
mun
icat
ion
betw
een
loca
l gov
erni
ng b
ody
and
popu
latio
n?
1 Pa
ssiv
e (g
over
nmen
t pa
rtic
ipat
ion
only
)
2 Co
nsul
tatio
n3
Enga
gem
ent
4 Co
llabo
ratio
n5
Act
ive
part
icip
atio
n (c
omm
unity
in
form
s go
vern
men
t on
wha
t is
need
ed)
Inte
rnat
iona
l Ass
ocia
tion
for P
ublic
Par
tici
pati
on
(IA
P2) S
pect
rum
http
://w
ww
.iap2
.org
/ass
ocia
tions
/474
8/fil
es/IA
P2%
20Sp
ectr
um_v
ertic
al.p
df
1.4
W
hat i
s th
e re
latio
nshi
p of
you
r co
mm
unity
with
the
larg
er re
gion
?1
No
netw
orks
w
ith o
ther
to
wns
/ re
gion
2 In
form
al
netw
orks
with
ot
her t
owns
/ re
gion
3 So
me
repr
esen
tatio
n at
regi
onal
m
eetin
gs
4 M
ultip
le
repr
esen
tatio
n at
regi
onal
m
eetin
gs
5 Re
gula
r pla
nnin
g an
d ac
tiviti
es
with
oth
er
tow
ns/
regi
on
Self
-Ass
essm
ent
1.5
W
hat i
s th
e de
gree
of c
onne
cted
ness
ac
ross
com
mun
ity g
roup
s? (e
.g.
ethn
iciti
es/s
ub-c
ultu
res/
age
grou
ps/
new
resi
dent
s no
t in
your
com
mun
ity
whe
n la
st d
isas
ter h
appe
ned)
1 Li
ttle
/no
atte
ntio
n to
su
bgro
ups
in
com
mun
ity
2 A
dver
tisin
g of
cu
ltura
l/cro
ss-
cultu
ral e
vent
s
3 Co
mpr
ehen
sive
in
vent
ory
of
cultu
ral i
dent
ity
grou
ps
4 Co
mm
unity
cr
oss-
cultu
ral
coun
cil
with
wid
e m
embe
rshi
p
5 Su
ppor
t for
an
d ac
tive
invo
lvem
ent i
n cu
ltura
l/cro
ss-
cultu
ral e
vent
s
(in a
dditi
on to
pr
evio
us)
Self
-Ass
essm
ent t
ied
to d
emog
raph
ic p
rofi
le; l
ocal
su
rvey
to a
sses
s
1. H
ow c
onne
cted
are
the
mem
ber
s of
you
r co
mm
unit
y?
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
112
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 37 14/12/2012 12:04:15 PM
12M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e2.
1
Wha
t are
the
know
n ris
ks o
f all
iden
tified
haz
ards
in y
our
com
mun
ity?
1 N
o lo
cal f
ocus
or
map
ping
on
risk
2 Lo
cal f
ocus
on
sing
le ri
sk (e
.g.,
fire)
but
no
map
ping
3 M
appi
ng o
f si
ngle
loca
l ris
k
4 W
idel
y av
aila
ble
map
ping
of
mul
tiple
po
tent
ial s
ourc
es
of ri
sk
5 W
idel
y av
aila
ble
map
ping
in
clud
es lo
w
prob
abili
ty/h
igh
impa
ct e
vent
s
Emer
genc
y Se
rvic
es re
sour
ces
and
com
mun
ity
info
rmat
ion
reso
urce
s
2.2
W
hat a
re th
e tr
ends
in re
lativ
e si
ze o
f the
per
man
ent
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
and
the
daily
pop
ulat
ion?
1
Resi
dent
po
pula
tion
is
<20
% o
f the
da
ytim
e (w
orke
r) po
pula
tion
2 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
21
-40%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
3 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
41
-60%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
4 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
61
-80%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
5 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n fo
rms
>80
% o
f the
da
ytim
e (w
orke
r) po
pula
tion
Cens
us o
r ABS
2.3
W
hat i
s th
e ra
te o
f the
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
chan
ge in
the
last
5 y
ears
?1
>30
%2
20-2
9%3
13-1
9%4
6-12
%5 <5%
Cens
us
2.4
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
the
popu
latio
n ha
s th
e ca
paci
ty
to in
depe
nden
tly m
ove
to s
afet
y? (
e.g.
, non
-in
stitu
tiona
lised
, mob
ile w
ith o
wn
vehi
cle,
adu
lt)
1 <
20%
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
ABS
, loc
al p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts
2.5
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
the
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
pref
ers
com
mun
icat
ion
in a
lang
uage
oth
er th
an E
nglis
h?1
>35
%2
25-3
4%3
15-2
4%4
5-14
%5 <5%
Cens
us
2.6
H
as th
e tr
ansi
ent p
opul
atio
n (e
.g.,
tour
ists
, tra
nsie
nt
wor
kers
) bee
n in
clud
ed in
pla
nnin
g fo
r res
pons
e an
d re
cove
ry?
1 N
o tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
incl
uded
2 Tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
iden
tified
3 <
50%
of p
lans
in
clud
e tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
4 51
-75%
of
orga
nisa
tion
plan
s in
clud
e
5 A
ll pl
ans
incl
ude
tran
sien
t po
pula
tions
Loca
l pla
nnin
g do
cum
ents
or l
ocal
su
rvey
2.7
W
hat i
s th
e ris
k th
at y
our c
omm
unity
cou
ld b
e is
olat
ed
durin
g an
em
erge
ncy
even
t?1
Not
con
side
red
in p
lann
ing
2 M
ap o
f all
acce
ss
rout
es/m
eans
av
aila
ble
to th
e po
pula
tion
3 M
ap d
istr
ibut
ed
with
requ
est t
o ha
ve p
erso
nal
plan
if a
cces
s is
se
vere
ly li
mite
d
4 Pe
rcen
tage
of
pop
ulat
ion
need
ing
tran
spor
t hel
p id
entifi
ed
5 Tr
ansp
ort p
lan
incl
udes
tho
se
with
out p
erso
nal
tran
spor
t &
supp
ort f
or
inco
min
g su
pplie
s
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
info
rmat
ion
acce
ssib
le w
ithi
n co
mm
unit
y
2. W
hat
is t
he le
vel o
f ris
k an
d v
ulne
rab
ility
in y
our
com
mun
ity?
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
212
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
13M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e3.
1
To w
hat e
xten
t and
leve
l are
hou
seho
lds
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
eng
aged
in p
lann
ing
for d
isas
ter r
espo
nse
and
reco
very
?
1 N
o ex
pect
atio
n th
at h
ouse
hold
s w
ill p
lan
for
emer
genc
y
2 H
ouse
hold
s ge
t inf
orm
atio
n ab
out
emer
genc
y pl
anni
ng
3 Co
mm
unity
ed
ucat
ion
sess
ions
are
co
nduc
ted
to
assi
st h
ouse
hold
em
erge
ncy
plan
ning
4 Co
llabo
ratio
n oc
curs
with
ho
useh
olds
in
plan
ning
the
com
mun
ity’s
disa
ster
resp
onse
5 A
ctiv
e pa
rtic
ipat
ion
by h
ouse
hold
s in
pla
nnin
g co
mm
unity
’s di
sast
er re
spon
se
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
revi
ew
of p
lans
/loc
al d
ocum
ents
; may
be
augm
ente
d by
loca
l sur
vey
3.2
A
re th
ere
plan
ned
activ
ities
to re
ach
the
entir
e co
mm
unity
abo
ut a
ll-ha
zard
s re
silie
nce?
1
No
plan
ned
activ
ities
2 G
roup
s en
cour
aged
to
do a
ctiv
ities
3 Tr
ansl
ated
m
ater
ials
/di
strib
utio
n to
id
entifi
ed g
roup
s at
risk
4 O
ccas
iona
l ac
tiviti
es fo
r se
lect
ed g
roup
s
5 A
t lea
st a
nnua
l cr
oss-
cultu
ral
com
mun
ity-
wid
e al
l haz
ards
ac
tivity
eng
agin
g m
ultip
le
orga
nisa
tions
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
loca
l pl
anni
ng d
ocum
ents
3.3
D
oes
the
com
mun
ity a
ctua
lly m
eet r
equi
rem
ents
for
disa
ster
read
ines
s?1
Unk
now
n le
vel
of a
war
enes
s by
com
mun
ity
mem
bers
2 Re
adin
ess
requ
irem
ents
sp
ecifi
ed b
ut n
ot
wid
ely
know
n
3 Re
side
nts
rout
inel
y in
form
ed a
bout
re
adin
ess
requ
irem
ents
4 Re
quire
men
ts
impl
emen
ted
whe
n at
tent
ion
is c
alle
d
5 Co
mm
unity
m
embe
rs a
ct o
n re
quire
men
ts
as c
omm
itmen
t to
resi
lienc
e en
forc
ed
Self
-Ass
essm
ent,
use
of l
ocal
do
cum
enta
tion
, loc
al s
urve
y
3.4
D
o po
st-d
isas
ter e
vent
ass
essm
ents
cha
nge
expe
ctat
ions
or
pla
ns?
1 Em
erge
ncy
Serv
ices
/Fire
/Po
lice
only
2 Po
st-e
vent
as
sess
men
t sh
ared
at p
ublic
m
eetin
g
3 Po
st-e
vent
qu
estio
ns
circ
ulat
ed to
al
l par
ts o
f co
mm
unity
4 Re
spon
ses
to q
uest
ions
co
llect
ed a
nd
repo
rted
5 Po
st-e
vent
ac
tion
plan
ba
sed
on
resp
onse
s in
clud
es a
ll co
mm
unity
el
emen
ts
(gov
ernm
ent/
busi
ness
es/
NG
O’s)
Revi
ew o
f loc
al p
ost-
even
t do
cum
ents
3. W
hat
pro
ced
ures
sup
por
t co
mm
unit
y d
isas
ter
pla
nnin
g, r
esp
onse
and
re
cove
ry?
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
312
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 38 14/12/2012 12:04:15 PM
12M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e2.
1
Wha
t are
the
know
n ris
ks o
f all
iden
tified
haz
ards
in y
our
com
mun
ity?
1 N
o lo
cal f
ocus
or
map
ping
on
risk
2 Lo
cal f
ocus
on
sing
le ri
sk (e
.g.,
fire)
but
no
map
ping
3 M
appi
ng o
f si
ngle
loca
l ris
k
4 W
idel
y av
aila
ble
map
ping
of
mul
tiple
po
tent
ial s
ourc
es
of ri
sk
5 W
idel
y av
aila
ble
map
ping
in
clud
es lo
w
prob
abili
ty/h
igh
impa
ct e
vent
s
Emer
genc
y Se
rvic
es re
sour
ces
and
com
mun
ity
info
rmat
ion
reso
urce
s
2.2
W
hat a
re th
e tr
ends
in re
lativ
e si
ze o
f the
per
man
ent
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
and
the
daily
pop
ulat
ion?
1
Resi
dent
po
pula
tion
is
<20
% o
f the
da
ytim
e (w
orke
r) po
pula
tion
2 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
21
-40%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
3 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
41
-60%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
4 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
61
-80%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
5 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n fo
rms
>80
% o
f the
da
ytim
e (w
orke
r) po
pula
tion
Cens
us o
r ABS
2.3
W
hat i
s th
e ra
te o
f the
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
chan
ge in
the
last
5 y
ears
?1
>30
%2
20-2
9%3
13-1
9%4
6-12
%5 <5%
Cens
us
2.4
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
the
popu
latio
n ha
s th
e ca
paci
ty
to in
depe
nden
tly m
ove
to s
afet
y? (
e.g.
, non
-in
stitu
tiona
lised
, mob
ile w
ith o
wn
vehi
cle,
adu
lt)
1 <
20%
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
ABS
, loc
al p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts
2.5
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
the
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
pref
ers
com
mun
icat
ion
in a
lang
uage
oth
er th
an E
nglis
h?1
>35
%2
25-3
4%3
15-2
4%4
5-14
%5 <5%
Cens
us
2.6
H
as th
e tr
ansi
ent p
opul
atio
n (e
.g.,
tour
ists
, tra
nsie
nt
wor
kers
) bee
n in
clud
ed in
pla
nnin
g fo
r res
pons
e an
d re
cove
ry?
1 N
o tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
incl
uded
2 Tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
iden
tified
3 <
50%
of p
lans
in
clud
e tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
4 51
-75%
of
orga
nisa
tion
plan
s in
clud
e
5 A
ll pl
ans
incl
ude
tran
sien
t po
pula
tions
Loca
l pla
nnin
g do
cum
ents
or l
ocal
su
rvey
2.7
W
hat i
s th
e ris
k th
at y
our c
omm
unity
cou
ld b
e is
olat
ed
durin
g an
em
erge
ncy
even
t?1
Not
con
side
red
in p
lann
ing
2 M
ap o
f all
acce
ss
rout
es/m
eans
av
aila
ble
to th
e po
pula
tion
3 M
ap d
istr
ibut
ed
with
requ
est t
o ha
ve p
erso
nal
plan
if a
cces
s is
se
vere
ly li
mite
d
4 Pe
rcen
tage
of
pop
ulat
ion
need
ing
tran
spor
t hel
p id
entifi
ed
5 Tr
ansp
ort p
lan
incl
udes
tho
se
with
out p
erso
nal
tran
spor
t &
supp
ort f
or
inco
min
g su
pplie
s
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
info
rmat
ion
acce
ssib
le w
ithi
n co
mm
unit
y
2. W
hat
is t
he le
vel o
f ris
k an
d v
ulne
rab
ility
in y
our
com
mun
ity?
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
212
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
13M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e3.
1
To w
hat e
xten
t and
leve
l are
hou
seho
lds
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
eng
aged
in p
lann
ing
for d
isas
ter r
espo
nse
and
reco
very
?
1 N
o ex
pect
atio
n th
at h
ouse
hold
s w
ill p
lan
for
emer
genc
y
2 H
ouse
hold
s ge
t inf
orm
atio
n ab
out
emer
genc
y pl
anni
ng
3 Co
mm
unity
ed
ucat
ion
sess
ions
are
co
nduc
ted
to
assi
st h
ouse
hold
em
erge
ncy
plan
ning
4 Co
llabo
ratio
n oc
curs
with
ho
useh
olds
in
plan
ning
the
com
mun
ity’s
disa
ster
resp
onse
5 A
ctiv
e pa
rtic
ipat
ion
by h
ouse
hold
s in
pla
nnin
g co
mm
unity
’s di
sast
er re
spon
se
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
revi
ew
of p
lans
/loc
al d
ocum
ents
; may
be
augm
ente
d by
loca
l sur
vey
3.2
A
re th
ere
plan
ned
activ
ities
to re
ach
the
entir
e co
mm
unity
abo
ut a
ll-ha
zard
s re
silie
nce?
1
No
plan
ned
activ
ities
2 G
roup
s en
cour
aged
to
do a
ctiv
ities
3 Tr
ansl
ated
m
ater
ials
/di
strib
utio
n to
id
entifi
ed g
roup
s at
risk
4 O
ccas
iona
l ac
tiviti
es fo
r se
lect
ed g
roup
s
5 A
t lea
st a
nnua
l cr
oss-
cultu
ral
com
mun
ity-
wid
e al
l haz
ards
ac
tivity
eng
agin
g m
ultip
le
orga
nisa
tions
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
loca
l pl
anni
ng d
ocum
ents
3.3
D
oes
the
com
mun
ity a
ctua
lly m
eet r
equi
rem
ents
for
disa
ster
read
ines
s?1
Unk
now
n le
vel
of a
war
enes
s by
com
mun
ity
mem
bers
2 Re
adin
ess
requ
irem
ents
sp
ecifi
ed b
ut n
ot
wid
ely
know
n
3 Re
side
nts
rout
inel
y in
form
ed a
bout
re
adin
ess
requ
irem
ents
4 Re
quire
men
ts
impl
emen
ted
whe
n at
tent
ion
is c
alle
d
5 Co
mm
unity
m
embe
rs a
ct o
n re
quire
men
ts
as c
omm
itmen
t to
resi
lienc
e en
forc
ed
Self
-Ass
essm
ent,
use
of l
ocal
do
cum
enta
tion
, loc
al s
urve
y
3.4
D
o po
st-d
isas
ter e
vent
ass
essm
ents
cha
nge
expe
ctat
ions
or
pla
ns?
1 Em
erge
ncy
Serv
ices
/Fire
/Po
lice
only
2 Po
st-e
vent
as
sess
men
t sh
ared
at p
ublic
m
eetin
g
3 Po
st-e
vent
qu
estio
ns
circ
ulat
ed to
al
l par
ts o
f co
mm
unity
4 Re
spon
ses
to q
uest
ions
co
llect
ed a
nd
repo
rted
5 Po
st-e
vent
ac
tion
plan
ba
sed
on
resp
onse
s in
clud
es a
ll co
mm
unity
el
emen
ts
(gov
ernm
ent/
busi
ness
es/
NG
O’s)
Revi
ew o
f loc
al p
ost-
even
t do
cum
ents
3. W
hat
pro
ced
ures
sup
por
t co
mm
unit
y d
isas
ter
pla
nnin
g, r
esp
onse
and
re
cove
ry?
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
312
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 39 14/12/2012 12:04:15 PM
14M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e4.
1
How
com
preh
ensi
ve is
the
loca
l in
frast
ruct
ure
emer
genc
y pr
otec
tion
plan
? (e
.g.,
wat
er s
uppl
y, s
ewer
age,
po
wer
sys
tem
)
1 N
o pl
an2
Infra
stru
ctur
es
iden
tified
but
no
prot
ectio
n p
lan
3 M
ost i
ndiv
idua
l in
frast
ruct
ure
com
pone
nts
have
pl
ans
for s
ome
emer
genc
ies
4 A
ll In
divi
dual
in
frast
ruct
ure
com
pone
nts
have
all
haza
rd p
lans
5 In
frast
ruct
ure
syst
em
is i
nteg
rate
d in
to a
n al
l ha
zard
s pr
otec
tion
plan
Loca
l and
sta
te g
over
nmen
t em
erge
ncy
man
agem
ent
plan
ning
doc
umen
ts
4.2
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
pop
ulat
ion
with
sk
ills
usef
ul in
em
erge
ncy
resp
onse
/re
cove
ry (e
.g.,
first
aid
, saf
e fo
od
hand
ling)
can
be
mob
ilise
d if
need
ed?
1 <
20%
(mos
tly re
late
d to
occ
upat
ion)
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
repr
esen
ting
all
subg
roup
s
Self
-Ass
essm
ent,
repo
rts
from
lo
cal o
rgan
isat
ions
, loc
al
surv
ey
4.3
To
wha
t ext
ent a
re a
ll ed
ucat
iona
l in
stitu
tions
(pub
lic/p
rivat
e sc
hool
s, al
l lev
els
incl
udin
g ea
rly c
hild
car
e)
enga
ged
in e
mer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss
educ
atio
n?
1 N
o ro
le k
now
n or
id
entifi
ed
2 M
ost s
choo
ls
prov
ide
emer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss
info
rmat
ion
to
teac
hers
and
st
uden
ts
3 M
ost s
choo
ls
prov
ide
emer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss
educ
atio
n to
te
ache
rs, s
tude
nts
and
pare
nts
4 Em
erge
ncy
prep
ared
ness
ed
ucat
ion
with
ac
tiviti
es o
ccur
s in
m
ost s
choo
ls w
ith
stud
ents
, tea
cher
s an
d pa
rent
s
5 M
ost s
choo
ls a
ctiv
ely
pa
rtic
ipat
e in
em
erge
ncy
prep
ared
ness
edu
catio
n at
co
mm
unity
leve
l
Doc
umen
tati
on fr
om s
choo
ls
abou
t pla
ns/a
ctiv
itie
s
4.4
H
ow a
re a
vaila
ble
med
ical
and
pub
lic
heal
th s
ervi
ces
incl
uded
in e
mer
genc
y pl
anni
ng?
1 N
o id
ea o
r the
re a
re
no s
ervi
ces
2 Ex
pect
to re
ly o
n ex
istin
g lo
cal s
ervi
ces
3 S
ome
loca
l se
rvic
es a
re a
ctiv
ely
enga
ged
in re
gion
al
emer
genc
y pl
anni
ng
4 A
ll lo
cal s
ervi
ces
activ
ely
enga
ged
in
regi
onal
em
erge
ncy
plan
ning
5 Pu
blic
hea
lth/m
edic
al
syst
emic
pla
n to
sup
port
re
spon
se a
nd re
cove
ry in
pl
ace
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
conv
ersa
tion
wit
h he
alth
re
sour
ces
4.5
A
re re
adily
acc
essi
ble
loca
tions
ava
ilabl
e as
eva
cuat
ion
or re
cove
ry c
entr
es (e
.g.,
scho
ol h
alls
, com
mun
ity o
r sho
ppin
g ce
ntre
s, po
st o
ffice
) and
incl
uded
in
resi
lienc
e st
rate
gy?
1 N
o in
vent
ory
of
plac
es
2 So
me
inve
ntor
y of
pl
aces
, but
loca
tions
no
t wel
l-pub
licis
ed
3 In
vent
ory
of a
ll pl
aces
, but
not
as
sess
ed fo
r su
itabi
lity
as a
n ev
acua
tion
cent
re
4 Si
tes
stoc
ked
and
know
n bu
t no
t suffi
cien
t for
es
timat
ed n
eed
5 W
ell-k
now
n, s
uffici
ent
site
s w
ith w
ater
/ fo
od/
info
rmat
ion
reso
urce
s w
idel
y ad
vert
ised
and
in
clud
ed in
all
plan
ning
Plan
ning
doc
umen
ts a
nd
publ
ic in
form
atio
n re
cord
s
4.6
W
hat i
s th
e le
vel o
f foo
d/w
ater
/fue
l re
adily
ava
ilabi
lity
in th
e co
mm
unity
?1
No
idea
2 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s de
pend
ent o
n da
ily
exte
rnal
food
/ w
ater
/ fu
el s
uppl
y
3 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve u
p to
2 d
ays
supp
ly o
f foo
d/
wat
er/
fuel
4 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve u
p to
4 d
ays
supp
ly o
f foo
d/
wat
er/
fuel
5 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve
over
5 d
ays
supp
ly o
f foo
d/
wat
er/
fuel
Loca
l pla
ns p
lus
loca
l sur
vey
4. W
hat
emer
genc
y p
lann
ing,
res
pon
se a
nd r
ecov
ery
reso
urce
s ar
e av
aila
ble
in
your
com
mun
ity?
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
412
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
15M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Mas
ter
Copy
(t
o b
e co
mp
lete
d a
t th
e co
nclu
sion
of t
he p
roce
ss, o
n b
ehal
f of t
he g
roup
)
Com
mun
ity
Dis
aste
r R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd fo
r ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
512
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 40 14/12/2012 12:04:15 PM
14M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e4.
1
How
com
preh
ensi
ve is
the
loca
l in
frast
ruct
ure
emer
genc
y pr
otec
tion
plan
? (e
.g.,
wat
er s
uppl
y, s
ewer
age,
po
wer
sys
tem
)
1 N
o pl
an2
Infra
stru
ctur
es
iden
tified
but
no
prot
ectio
n p
lan
3 M
ost i
ndiv
idua
l in
frast
ruct
ure
com
pone
nts
have
pl
ans
for s
ome
emer
genc
ies
4 A
ll In
divi
dual
in
frast
ruct
ure
com
pone
nts
have
all
haza
rd p
lans
5 In
frast
ruct
ure
syst
em
is i
nteg
rate
d in
to a
n al
l ha
zard
s pr
otec
tion
plan
Loca
l and
sta
te g
over
nmen
t em
erge
ncy
man
agem
ent
plan
ning
doc
umen
ts
4.2
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
pop
ulat
ion
with
sk
ills
usef
ul in
em
erge
ncy
resp
onse
/re
cove
ry (e
.g.,
first
aid
, saf
e fo
od
hand
ling)
can
be
mob
ilise
d if
need
ed?
1 <
20%
(mos
tly re
late
d to
occ
upat
ion)
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
repr
esen
ting
all
subg
roup
s
Self
-Ass
essm
ent,
repo
rts
from
lo
cal o
rgan
isat
ions
, loc
al
surv
ey
4.3
To
wha
t ext
ent a
re a
ll ed
ucat
iona
l in
stitu
tions
(pub
lic/p
rivat
e sc
hool
s, al
l lev
els
incl
udin
g ea
rly c
hild
car
e)
enga
ged
in e
mer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss
educ
atio
n?
1 N
o ro
le k
now
n or
id
entifi
ed
2 M
ost s
choo
ls
prov
ide
emer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss
info
rmat
ion
to
teac
hers
and
st
uden
ts
3 M
ost s
choo
ls
prov
ide
emer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss
educ
atio
n to
te
ache
rs, s
tude
nts
and
pare
nts
4 Em
erge
ncy
prep
ared
ness
ed
ucat
ion
with
ac
tiviti
es o
ccur
s in
m
ost s
choo
ls w
ith
stud
ents
, tea
cher
s an
d pa
rent
s
5 M
ost s
choo
ls a
ctiv
ely
pa
rtic
ipat
e in
em
erge
ncy
prep
ared
ness
edu
catio
n at
co
mm
unity
leve
l
Doc
umen
tati
on fr
om s
choo
ls
abou
t pla
ns/a
ctiv
itie
s
4.4
H
ow a
re a
vaila
ble
med
ical
and
pub
lic
heal
th s
ervi
ces
incl
uded
in e
mer
genc
y pl
anni
ng?
1 N
o id
ea o
r the
re a
re
no s
ervi
ces
2 Ex
pect
to re
ly o
n ex
istin
g lo
cal s
ervi
ces
3 S
ome
loca
l se
rvic
es a
re a
ctiv
ely
enga
ged
in re
gion
al
emer
genc
y pl
anni
ng
4 A
ll lo
cal s
ervi
ces
activ
ely
enga
ged
in
regi
onal
em
erge
ncy
plan
ning
5 Pu
blic
hea
lth/m
edic
al
syst
emic
pla
n to
sup
port
re
spon
se a
nd re
cove
ry in
pl
ace
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
conv
ersa
tion
wit
h he
alth
re
sour
ces
4.5
A
re re
adily
acc
essi
ble
loca
tions
ava
ilabl
e as
eva
cuat
ion
or re
cove
ry c
entr
es (e
.g.,
scho
ol h
alls
, com
mun
ity o
r sho
ppin
g ce
ntre
s, po
st o
ffice
) and
incl
uded
in
resi
lienc
e st
rate
gy?
1 N
o in
vent
ory
of
plac
es
2 So
me
inve
ntor
y of
pl
aces
, but
loca
tions
no
t wel
l-pub
licis
ed
3 In
vent
ory
of a
ll pl
aces
, but
not
as
sess
ed fo
r su
itabi
lity
as a
n ev
acua
tion
cent
re
4 Si
tes
stoc
ked
and
know
n bu
t no
t suffi
cien
t for
es
timat
ed n
eed
5 W
ell-k
now
n, s
uffici
ent
site
s w
ith w
ater
/ fo
od/
info
rmat
ion
reso
urce
s w
idel
y ad
vert
ised
and
in
clud
ed in
all
plan
ning
Plan
ning
doc
umen
ts a
nd
publ
ic in
form
atio
n re
cord
s
4.6
W
hat i
s th
e le
vel o
f foo
d/w
ater
/fue
l re
adily
ava
ilabi
lity
in th
e co
mm
unity
?1
No
idea
2 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s de
pend
ent o
n da
ily
exte
rnal
food
/ w
ater
/ fu
el s
uppl
y
3 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve u
p to
2 d
ays
supp
ly o
f foo
d/
wat
er/
fuel
4 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve u
p to
4 d
ays
supp
ly o
f foo
d/
wat
er/
fuel
5 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve
over
5 d
ays
supp
ly o
f foo
d/
wat
er/
fuel
Loca
l pla
ns p
lus
loca
l sur
vey
4. W
hat
emer
genc
y p
lann
ing,
res
pon
se a
nd r
ecov
ery
reso
urce
s ar
e av
aila
ble
in
your
com
mun
ity?
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
412
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
15M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Mas
ter
Copy
(t
o b
e co
mp
lete
d a
t th
e co
nclu
sion
of t
he p
roce
ss, o
n b
ehal
f of t
he g
roup
)
Com
mun
ity
Dis
aste
r R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd fo
r ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
512
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 41 14/12/2012 12:04:16 PM
16M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
For m
any
item
s a
cons
ensu
s ju
dgem
ent m
ust b
e m
ade
by
the
Wor
king
Gro
up.
The
Wor
king
Gro
up C
hair
mus
t ens
ure
that
alte
rnat
e pe
rspe
ctiv
es o
n th
e sc
ore
are
expr
esse
d,
and
disc
ussi
on a
llow
ed b
efor
e de
term
inin
g th
e sc
ore.
If
ther
e is
sub
stan
tial d
isag
reem
ent o
n th
e co
rrec
t sco
re, a
nd
ther
e w
ell m
ay b
e, s
ettin
g th
e sc
ore
at a
low
er le
vel (
the
less
resi
lient
leve
l) ra
ther
than
a h
ighe
r one
will
be
a m
ore
effec
tive
way
of c
ontin
uing
to e
ngag
e m
embe
rs o
f the
co
mm
unity
in s
tren
gthe
ning
resi
lienc
e. R
emem
ber,
this
is
your
tool
to u
se to
hel
p yo
ur c
omm
unity
.
This
Sco
reca
rd is
one
tool
ass
ocia
ted
with
the
Aus
tral
ian
Nat
iona
l Str
ateg
y fo
r Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce, a
s co
mm
uniti
es
acro
ss A
ustr
alia
are
bei
ng e
ncou
rage
d to
take
ste
ps to
st
reng
then
com
mun
ity re
silie
nce
in th
e fa
ce o
f dis
aste
r. Ea
ch c
ompo
nent
of r
esili
ence
is s
core
d fro
m 1
to 5
, with
5
bein
g th
e hi
ghes
t lev
el o
f res
ilien
ce.
The
tota
l sco
re a
dded
up
on
the
final
pag
e w
ill id
entif
y w
heth
er y
our c
omm
unity
is
in th
e gr
een
zone
(lik
ely
to b
ounc
e ba
ck),
the
red
zone
(v
ery
unlik
ely
to re
cove
r, or
reco
ver q
uick
ly),
or s
omew
here
in
bet
wee
n, a
cau
tious
am
ber z
one.
Dat
e Co
mp
lete
d ..
......
......
......
... C
onta
ct P
erso
n ...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.....
Att
ach
a m
ap o
f the
com
mun
ity
and
the
surr
ound
ing
regi
on h
ere
as a
rem
inde
r
Tim
e
Value
SHO
CK o
r STR
ESS
Colla
pse
Resi
lienc
e
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
612
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
17M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e1.
1
Wha
t pro
port
ion
of y
our p
opul
atio
n is
eng
aged
with
org
anis
atio
ns (e
.g.,
club
s, se
rvic
e gr
oups
, spo
rts
team
s, ch
urch
es, l
ibra
ry)?
1 <
20%
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
Cens
us
1.2
D
o m
embe
rs o
f the
com
mun
ity h
ave
acce
ss to
a ra
nge
of c
omm
unic
atio
n sy
stem
s th
at a
llow
info
rmat
ion
to fl
ow
durin
g an
em
erge
ncy?
1 D
on’t
know
2 H
as li
mite
d ac
cess
to
a ra
nge
of
com
mun
icat
ion
3 H
as g
ood
acce
ss
to a
rang
e of
co
mm
unic
atio
n bu
t dam
age
resi
stan
ce n
ot
know
n
4 H
as v
ery
good
acc
ess
to a
rang
e of
co
mm
unic
atio
n an
d da
mag
e re
sist
ance
is
mod
erat
e
5 H
as w
ide
rang
e of
acc
ess
to d
amag
e-re
sist
ant
com
mun
icat
ion
Self
-Ass
essm
ent
1.3
W
hat i
s th
e le
vel o
f com
mun
icat
ion
betw
een
loca
l gov
erni
ng b
ody
and
popu
latio
n?
1 Pa
ssiv
e (g
over
nmen
t pa
rtic
ipat
ion
only
)
2 Co
nsul
tatio
n3
Enga
gem
ent
4 Co
llabo
ratio
n5
Act
ive
part
icip
atio
n (c
omm
unity
in
form
s go
vern
men
t on
wha
t is
need
ed)
Inte
rnat
iona
l Ass
ocia
tion
for P
ublic
Par
tici
pati
on
(IA
P2) S
pect
rum
http
://w
ww
.iap2
.org
/ass
ocia
tions
/474
8/fil
es/IA
P2%
20Sp
ectr
um_v
ertic
al.p
df
1.4
W
hat i
s th
e re
latio
nshi
p of
you
r co
mm
unity
with
the
larg
er re
gion
?1
No
netw
orks
w
ith o
ther
to
wns
/ re
gion
2 In
form
al
netw
orks
with
ot
her t
owns
/ re
gion
3 So
me
repr
esen
tatio
n at
regi
onal
m
eetin
gs
4 M
ultip
le
repr
esen
tatio
n at
regi
onal
m
eetin
gs
5 Re
gula
r pla
nnin
g an
d ac
tiviti
es
with
oth
er
tow
ns/
regi
on
Self
-Ass
essm
ent
1.5
W
hat i
s th
e de
gree
of c
onne
cted
ness
ac
ross
com
mun
ity g
roup
s? (e
.g.
ethn
iciti
es/s
ub-c
ultu
res/
age
grou
ps/
new
resi
dent
s no
t in
your
com
mun
ity
whe
n la
st d
isas
ter h
appe
ned)
1 Li
ttle
/no
atte
ntio
n to
su
bgro
ups
in
com
mun
ity
2 A
dver
tisin
g of
cu
ltura
l/cro
ss-
cultu
ral e
vent
s
3 Co
mpr
ehen
sive
in
vent
ory
of
cultu
ral i
dent
ity
grou
ps
4 Co
mm
unity
cr
oss-
cultu
ral
coun
cil
with
wid
e m
embe
rshi
p
5 Su
ppor
t for
an
d ac
tive
invo
lvem
ent i
n cu
ltura
l/cro
ss-
cultu
ral e
vent
s
(in a
dditi
on to
pr
evio
us)
Self
-Ass
essm
ent t
ied
to d
emog
raph
ic p
rofi
le; l
ocal
su
rvey
to a
sses
s
Conn
ecte
dnes
s Sc
ore:
1. H
ow c
onne
cted
are
the
mem
ber
s of
you
r co
mm
unit
y?
25%
(5-1
0)26
-75%
(11-
29)
76-1
00%
(20-
25)
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
712
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 42 14/12/2012 12:04:16 PM
16M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
For m
any
item
s a
cons
ensu
s ju
dgem
ent m
ust b
e m
ade
by
the
Wor
king
Gro
up.
The
Wor
king
Gro
up C
hair
mus
t ens
ure
that
alte
rnat
e pe
rspe
ctiv
es o
n th
e sc
ore
are
expr
esse
d,
and
disc
ussi
on a
llow
ed b
efor
e de
term
inin
g th
e sc
ore.
If
ther
e is
sub
stan
tial d
isag
reem
ent o
n th
e co
rrec
t sco
re, a
nd
ther
e w
ell m
ay b
e, s
ettin
g th
e sc
ore
at a
low
er le
vel (
the
less
resi
lient
leve
l) ra
ther
than
a h
ighe
r one
will
be
a m
ore
effec
tive
way
of c
ontin
uing
to e
ngag
e m
embe
rs o
f the
co
mm
unity
in s
tren
gthe
ning
resi
lienc
e. R
emem
ber,
this
is
your
tool
to u
se to
hel
p yo
ur c
omm
unity
.
This
Sco
reca
rd is
one
tool
ass
ocia
ted
with
the
Aus
tral
ian
Nat
iona
l Str
ateg
y fo
r Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce, a
s co
mm
uniti
es
acro
ss A
ustr
alia
are
bei
ng e
ncou
rage
d to
take
ste
ps to
st
reng
then
com
mun
ity re
silie
nce
in th
e fa
ce o
f dis
aste
r. Ea
ch c
ompo
nent
of r
esili
ence
is s
core
d fro
m 1
to 5
, with
5
bein
g th
e hi
ghes
t lev
el o
f res
ilien
ce.
The
tota
l sco
re a
dded
up
on
the
final
pag
e w
ill id
entif
y w
heth
er y
our c
omm
unity
is
in th
e gr
een
zone
(lik
ely
to b
ounc
e ba
ck),
the
red
zone
(v
ery
unlik
ely
to re
cove
r, or
reco
ver q
uick
ly),
or s
omew
here
in
bet
wee
n, a
cau
tious
am
ber z
one.
Dat
e Co
mp
lete
d ..
......
......
......
... C
onta
ct P
erso
n ...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.....
Att
ach
a m
ap o
f the
com
mun
ity
and
the
surr
ound
ing
regi
on h
ere
as a
rem
inde
r
Tim
e
Value
SHO
CK o
r STR
ESS
Colla
pse
Resi
lienc
e
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
612
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
1 PM
17M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e1.
1
Wha
t pro
port
ion
of y
our p
opul
atio
n is
eng
aged
with
org
anis
atio
ns (e
.g.,
club
s, se
rvic
e gr
oups
, spo
rts
team
s, ch
urch
es, l
ibra
ry)?
1 <
20%
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
Cens
us
1.2
D
o m
embe
rs o
f the
com
mun
ity h
ave
acce
ss to
a ra
nge
of c
omm
unic
atio
n sy
stem
s th
at a
llow
info
rmat
ion
to fl
ow
durin
g an
em
erge
ncy?
1 D
on’t
know
2 H
as li
mite
d ac
cess
to
a ra
nge
of
com
mun
icat
ion
3 H
as g
ood
acce
ss
to a
rang
e of
co
mm
unic
atio
n bu
t dam
age
resi
stan
ce n
ot
know
n
4 H
as v
ery
good
acc
ess
to a
rang
e of
co
mm
unic
atio
n an
d da
mag
e re
sist
ance
is
mod
erat
e
5 H
as w
ide
rang
e of
acc
ess
to d
amag
e-re
sist
ant
com
mun
icat
ion
Self
-Ass
essm
ent
1.3
W
hat i
s th
e le
vel o
f com
mun
icat
ion
betw
een
loca
l gov
erni
ng b
ody
and
popu
latio
n?
1 Pa
ssiv
e (g
over
nmen
t pa
rtic
ipat
ion
only
)
2 Co
nsul
tatio
n3
Enga
gem
ent
4 Co
llabo
ratio
n5
Act
ive
part
icip
atio
n (c
omm
unity
in
form
s go
vern
men
t on
wha
t is
need
ed)
Inte
rnat
iona
l Ass
ocia
tion
for P
ublic
Par
tici
pati
on
(IA
P2) S
pect
rum
http
://w
ww
.iap2
.org
/ass
ocia
tions
/474
8/fil
es/IA
P2%
20Sp
ectr
um_v
ertic
al.p
df
1.4
W
hat i
s th
e re
latio
nshi
p of
you
r co
mm
unity
with
the
larg
er re
gion
?1
No
netw
orks
w
ith o
ther
to
wns
/ re
gion
2 In
form
al
netw
orks
with
ot
her t
owns
/ re
gion
3 So
me
repr
esen
tatio
n at
regi
onal
m
eetin
gs
4 M
ultip
le
repr
esen
tatio
n at
regi
onal
m
eetin
gs
5 Re
gula
r pla
nnin
g an
d ac
tiviti
es
with
oth
er
tow
ns/
regi
on
Self
-Ass
essm
ent
1.5
W
hat i
s th
e de
gree
of c
onne
cted
ness
ac
ross
com
mun
ity g
roup
s? (e
.g.
ethn
iciti
es/s
ub-c
ultu
res/
age
grou
ps/
new
resi
dent
s no
t in
your
com
mun
ity
whe
n la
st d
isas
ter h
appe
ned)
1 Li
ttle
/no
atte
ntio
n to
su
bgro
ups
in
com
mun
ity
2 A
dver
tisin
g of
cu
ltura
l/cro
ss-
cultu
ral e
vent
s
3 Co
mpr
ehen
sive
in
vent
ory
of
cultu
ral i
dent
ity
grou
ps
4 Co
mm
unity
cr
oss-
cultu
ral
coun
cil
with
wid
e m
embe
rshi
p
5 Su
ppor
t for
an
d ac
tive
invo
lvem
ent i
n cu
ltura
l/cro
ss-
cultu
ral e
vent
s
(in a
dditi
on to
pr
evio
us)
Self
-Ass
essm
ent t
ied
to d
emog
raph
ic p
rofi
le; l
ocal
su
rvey
to a
sses
s
Conn
ecte
dnes
s Sc
ore:
1. H
ow c
onne
cted
are
the
mem
ber
s of
you
r co
mm
unit
y?
25%
(5-1
0)26
-75%
(11-
29)
76-1
00%
(20-
25)
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
712
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 43 14/12/2012 12:04:16 PM
18M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e2.
1
Wha
t are
the
know
n ris
ks o
f all
iden
tified
haz
ards
in y
our
com
mun
ity?
1 N
o lo
cal f
ocus
or
map
ping
on
risk
2 Lo
cal f
ocus
on
sing
le ri
sk (e
.g.,
fire)
but
no
map
ping
3 M
appi
ng o
f si
ngle
loca
l ris
k
4 W
idel
y av
aila
ble
map
ping
of
mul
tiple
po
tent
ial s
ourc
es
of ri
sk
5 W
idel
y av
aila
ble
map
ping
in
clud
es lo
w
prob
abili
ty/h
igh
impa
ct e
vent
s
Emer
genc
y Se
rvic
es re
sour
ces
and
com
mun
ity
info
rmat
ion
reso
urce
s
2.2
W
hat a
re th
e tr
ends
in re
lativ
e si
ze o
f the
per
man
ent
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
and
the
daily
pop
ulat
ion?
1
Resi
dent
po
pula
tion
is
<20
% o
f the
da
ytim
e (w
orke
r) po
pula
tion
2 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
21
-40%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
3 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
41
-60%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
4 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
61
-80%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
5 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n fo
rms
>80
% o
f the
da
ytim
e (w
orke
r) po
pula
tion
Cens
us o
r ABS
2.3
W
hat i
s th
e ra
te o
f the
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
chan
ge in
the
last
5 y
ears
?1
>30
%2
20-2
9%3
13-1
9%4
6-12
%5 <5%
Cens
us
2.4
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
the
popu
latio
n ha
s th
e ca
paci
ty
to in
depe
nden
tly m
ove
to s
afet
y? (
e.g.
, non
-in
stitu
tiona
lised
, mob
ile w
ith o
wn
vehi
cle,
adu
lt)
1 <
20%
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
ABS
, loc
al p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts
2.5
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
the
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
pref
ers
com
mun
icat
ion
in a
lang
uage
oth
er th
an E
nglis
h?1
>35
%2
25-3
4%3
15-2
4%4
5-14
%5 <5%
Cens
us
2.6
H
as th
e tr
ansi
ent p
opul
atio
n (e
.g.,
tour
ists
, tra
nsie
nt
wor
kers
) bee
n in
clud
ed in
pla
nnin
g fo
r res
pons
e an
d re
cove
ry?
1 N
o tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
incl
uded
2 Tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
iden
tified
3 <
50%
of p
lans
in
clud
e tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
4 51
-75%
of
orga
nisa
tion
plan
s in
clud
e
5 A
ll pl
ans
incl
ude
tran
sien
t po
pula
tions
Loca
l pla
nnin
g do
cum
ents
or l
ocal
su
rvey
2.7
W
hat i
s th
e ris
k th
at y
our c
omm
unity
cou
ld b
e is
olat
ed
durin
g an
em
erge
ncy
even
t?1
Not
con
side
red
in p
lann
ing
2 M
ap o
f all
acce
ss
rout
es/m
eans
av
aila
ble
to th
e po
pula
tion
3 M
ap d
istr
ibut
ed
with
requ
est t
o ha
ve p
erso
nal
plan
if a
cces
s is
se
vere
ly li
mite
d
4 Pe
rcen
tage
of
pop
ulat
ion
need
ing
tran
spor
t hel
p id
entifi
ed
5 Tr
ansp
ort p
lan
incl
udes
tho
se
with
out p
erso
nal
tran
spor
t &
supp
ort f
or
inco
min
g su
pplie
s
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
info
rmat
ion
acce
ssib
le w
ithi
n co
mm
unit
y
Risk
/Vul
nera
bilit
y Sc
ore:
2. W
hat
is t
he le
vel o
f ris
k an
d v
ulne
rab
ility
in y
our
com
mun
ity?
25%
(7-1
3)26
-75%
(14-
28)
76-1
00%
(29-
35)
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
812
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
19M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e3.
1
To w
hat e
xten
t and
leve
l are
hou
seho
lds
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
eng
aged
in p
lann
ing
for d
isas
ter r
espo
nse
and
reco
very
?
1 N
o ex
pect
atio
n th
at h
ouse
hold
s w
ill p
lan
for
emer
genc
y
2 H
ouse
hold
s ge
t inf
orm
atio
n ab
out
emer
genc
y pl
anni
ng
3 Co
mm
unity
ed
ucat
ion
sess
ions
are
co
nduc
ted
to
assi
st h
ouse
hold
em
erge
ncy
plan
ning
4 Co
llabo
ratio
n oc
curs
with
ho
useh
olds
in
plan
ning
the
com
mun
ity’s
disa
ster
resp
onse
5 A
ctiv
e pa
rtic
ipat
ion
by h
ouse
hold
s in
pla
nnin
g co
mm
unity
’s di
sast
er re
spon
se
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
revi
ew
of p
lans
/loc
al d
ocum
ents
; may
be
augm
ente
d by
loca
l sur
vey
3.2
A
re th
ere
plan
ned
activ
ities
to re
ach
the
entir
e co
mm
unity
abo
ut a
ll-ha
zard
s re
silie
nce?
1
No
plan
ned
activ
ities
2 G
roup
s en
cour
aged
to
do a
ctiv
ities
3 Tr
ansl
ated
m
ater
ials
/di
strib
utio
n to
id
entifi
ed g
roup
s at
risk
4 O
ccas
iona
l ac
tiviti
es fo
r se
lect
ed g
roup
s
5 A
t lea
st a
nnua
l cr
oss-
cultu
ral
com
mun
ity-
wid
e al
l haz
ards
ac
tivity
eng
agin
g m
ultip
le
orga
nisa
tions
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
loca
l pl
anni
ng d
ocum
ents
3.3
D
oes
the
com
mun
ity a
ctua
lly m
eet r
equi
rem
ents
for
disa
ster
read
ines
s?1
Unk
now
n le
vel
of a
war
enes
s by
com
mun
ity
mem
bers
2 Re
adin
ess
requ
irem
ents
sp
ecifi
ed b
ut n
ot
wid
ely
know
n
3 Re
side
nts
rout
inel
y in
form
ed a
bout
re
adin
ess
requ
irem
ents
4 Re
quire
men
ts
impl
emen
ted
whe
n at
tent
ion
is c
alle
d
5 Co
mm
unity
m
embe
rs a
ct o
n re
quire
men
ts
as c
omm
itmen
t to
resi
lienc
e en
forc
ed
Self
-Ass
essm
ent,
use
of l
ocal
do
cum
enta
tion
, loc
al s
urve
y
3.4
D
o po
st-d
isas
ter e
vent
ass
essm
ents
cha
nge
expe
ctat
ions
or
pla
ns?
1 Em
erge
ncy
Serv
ices
/Fire
/Po
lice
only
2 Po
st-e
vent
as
sess
men
t sh
ared
at p
ublic
m
eetin
g
3 Po
st-e
vent
qu
estio
ns
circ
ulat
ed to
al
l par
ts o
f co
mm
unity
4 Re
spon
ses
to q
uest
ions
co
llect
ed a
nd
repo
rted
5 Po
st-e
vent
ac
tion
plan
ba
sed
on
resp
onse
s in
clud
es a
ll co
mm
unity
el
emen
ts
(gov
ernm
ent/
busi
ness
es/
NG
O’s)
Revi
ew o
f loc
al p
ost-
even
t do
cum
ents
Proc
edur
es S
core
:
3. W
hat
pro
ced
ures
sup
por
t co
mm
unit
y d
isas
ter
pla
nnin
g, r
esp
onse
and
re
cove
ry?
25%
(4-8
)26
-75%
(9-1
6)76
-100
% (1
7-20
)
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
912
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 44 14/12/2012 12:04:16 PM
18M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e2.
1
Wha
t are
the
know
n ris
ks o
f all
iden
tified
haz
ards
in y
our
com
mun
ity?
1 N
o lo
cal f
ocus
or
map
ping
on
risk
2 Lo
cal f
ocus
on
sing
le ri
sk (e
.g.,
fire)
but
no
map
ping
3 M
appi
ng o
f si
ngle
loca
l ris
k
4 W
idel
y av
aila
ble
map
ping
of
mul
tiple
po
tent
ial s
ourc
es
of ri
sk
5 W
idel
y av
aila
ble
map
ping
in
clud
es lo
w
prob
abili
ty/h
igh
impa
ct e
vent
s
Emer
genc
y Se
rvic
es re
sour
ces
and
com
mun
ity
info
rmat
ion
reso
urce
s
2.2
W
hat a
re th
e tr
ends
in re
lativ
e si
ze o
f the
per
man
ent
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
and
the
daily
pop
ulat
ion?
1
Resi
dent
po
pula
tion
is
<20
% o
f the
da
ytim
e (w
orke
r) po
pula
tion
2 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
21
-40%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
3 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
41
-60%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
4 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n is
61
-80%
of t
he
dayt
ime
(wor
ker)
popu
latio
n
5 Re
side
nt
popu
latio
n fo
rms
>80
% o
f the
da
ytim
e (w
orke
r) po
pula
tion
Cens
us o
r ABS
2.3
W
hat i
s th
e ra
te o
f the
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
chan
ge in
the
last
5 y
ears
?1
>30
%2
20-2
9%3
13-1
9%4
6-12
%5 <5%
Cens
us
2.4
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
the
popu
latio
n ha
s th
e ca
paci
ty
to in
depe
nden
tly m
ove
to s
afet
y? (
e.g.
, non
-in
stitu
tiona
lised
, mob
ile w
ith o
wn
vehi
cle,
adu
lt)
1 <
20%
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
ABS
, loc
al p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts
2.5
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
the
resi
dent
pop
ulat
ion
pref
ers
com
mun
icat
ion
in a
lang
uage
oth
er th
an E
nglis
h?1
>35
%2
25-3
4%3
15-2
4%4
5-14
%5 <5%
Cens
us
2.6
H
as th
e tr
ansi
ent p
opul
atio
n (e
.g.,
tour
ists
, tra
nsie
nt
wor
kers
) bee
n in
clud
ed in
pla
nnin
g fo
r res
pons
e an
d re
cove
ry?
1 N
o tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
incl
uded
2 Tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
iden
tified
3 <
50%
of p
lans
in
clud
e tr
ansi
ent
popu
latio
ns
4 51
-75%
of
orga
nisa
tion
plan
s in
clud
e
5 A
ll pl
ans
incl
ude
tran
sien
t po
pula
tions
Loca
l pla
nnin
g do
cum
ents
or l
ocal
su
rvey
2.7
W
hat i
s th
e ris
k th
at y
our c
omm
unity
cou
ld b
e is
olat
ed
durin
g an
em
erge
ncy
even
t?1
Not
con
side
red
in p
lann
ing
2 M
ap o
f all
acce
ss
rout
es/m
eans
av
aila
ble
to th
e po
pula
tion
3 M
ap d
istr
ibut
ed
with
requ
est t
o ha
ve p
erso
nal
plan
if a
cces
s is
se
vere
ly li
mite
d
4 Pe
rcen
tage
of
pop
ulat
ion
need
ing
tran
spor
t hel
p id
entifi
ed
5 Tr
ansp
ort p
lan
incl
udes
tho
se
with
out p
erso
nal
tran
spor
t &
supp
ort f
or
inco
min
g su
pplie
s
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
info
rmat
ion
acce
ssib
le w
ithi
n co
mm
unit
y
Risk
/Vul
nera
bilit
y Sc
ore:
2. W
hat
is t
he le
vel o
f ris
k an
d v
ulne
rab
ility
in y
our
com
mun
ity?
25%
(7-1
3)26
-75%
(14-
28)
76-1
00%
(29-
35)
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
812
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
19M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e3.
1
To w
hat e
xten
t and
leve
l are
hou
seho
lds
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
eng
aged
in p
lann
ing
for d
isas
ter r
espo
nse
and
reco
very
?
1 N
o ex
pect
atio
n th
at h
ouse
hold
s w
ill p
lan
for
emer
genc
y
2 H
ouse
hold
s ge
t inf
orm
atio
n ab
out
emer
genc
y pl
anni
ng
3 Co
mm
unity
ed
ucat
ion
sess
ions
are
co
nduc
ted
to
assi
st h
ouse
hold
em
erge
ncy
plan
ning
4 Co
llabo
ratio
n oc
curs
with
ho
useh
olds
in
plan
ning
the
com
mun
ity’s
disa
ster
resp
onse
5 A
ctiv
e pa
rtic
ipat
ion
by h
ouse
hold
s in
pla
nnin
g co
mm
unity
’s di
sast
er re
spon
se
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
revi
ew
of p
lans
/loc
al d
ocum
ents
; may
be
augm
ente
d by
loca
l sur
vey
3.2
A
re th
ere
plan
ned
activ
ities
to re
ach
the
entir
e co
mm
unity
abo
ut a
ll-ha
zard
s re
silie
nce?
1
No
plan
ned
activ
ities
2 G
roup
s en
cour
aged
to
do a
ctiv
ities
3 Tr
ansl
ated
m
ater
ials
/di
strib
utio
n to
id
entifi
ed g
roup
s at
risk
4 O
ccas
iona
l ac
tiviti
es fo
r se
lect
ed g
roup
s
5 A
t lea
st a
nnua
l cr
oss-
cultu
ral
com
mun
ity-
wid
e al
l haz
ards
ac
tivity
eng
agin
g m
ultip
le
orga
nisa
tions
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
loca
l pl
anni
ng d
ocum
ents
3.3
D
oes
the
com
mun
ity a
ctua
lly m
eet r
equi
rem
ents
for
disa
ster
read
ines
s?1
Unk
now
n le
vel
of a
war
enes
s by
com
mun
ity
mem
bers
2 Re
adin
ess
requ
irem
ents
sp
ecifi
ed b
ut n
ot
wid
ely
know
n
3 Re
side
nts
rout
inel
y in
form
ed a
bout
re
adin
ess
requ
irem
ents
4 Re
quire
men
ts
impl
emen
ted
whe
n at
tent
ion
is c
alle
d
5 Co
mm
unity
m
embe
rs a
ct o
n re
quire
men
ts
as c
omm
itmen
t to
resi
lienc
e en
forc
ed
Self
-Ass
essm
ent,
use
of l
ocal
do
cum
enta
tion
, loc
al s
urve
y
3.4
D
o po
st-d
isas
ter e
vent
ass
essm
ents
cha
nge
expe
ctat
ions
or
pla
ns?
1 Em
erge
ncy
Serv
ices
/Fire
/Po
lice
only
2 Po
st-e
vent
as
sess
men
t sh
ared
at p
ublic
m
eetin
g
3 Po
st-e
vent
qu
estio
ns
circ
ulat
ed to
al
l par
ts o
f co
mm
unity
4 Re
spon
ses
to q
uest
ions
co
llect
ed a
nd
repo
rted
5 Po
st-e
vent
ac
tion
plan
ba
sed
on
resp
onse
s in
clud
es a
ll co
mm
unity
el
emen
ts
(gov
ernm
ent/
busi
ness
es/
NG
O’s)
Revi
ew o
f loc
al p
ost-
even
t do
cum
ents
Proc
edur
es S
core
:
3. W
hat
pro
ced
ures
sup
por
t co
mm
unit
y d
isas
ter
pla
nnin
g, r
esp
onse
and
re
cove
ry?
25%
(4-8
)26
-75%
(9-1
6)76
-100
% (1
7-20
)
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 1
912
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 45 14/12/2012 12:04:16 PM
20M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e4.
1
How
com
preh
ensi
ve is
the
loca
l in
frast
ruct
ure
emer
genc
y pr
otec
tion
plan
? (e
.g.,
wat
er s
uppl
y, s
ewer
age,
po
wer
sys
tem
)
1 N
o pl
an2
Infra
stru
ctur
es
iden
tified
but
no
prot
ectio
n p
lan
3 M
ost i
ndiv
idua
l in
frast
ruct
ure
com
pone
nts
have
pla
ns
for s
ome
emer
genc
ies
4 A
ll In
divi
dual
in
frast
ruct
ure
com
pone
nts
have
all
haza
rd p
lans
5 In
frast
ruct
ure
syst
em
is i
nteg
rate
d in
to a
n al
l ha
zard
s pr
otec
tion
plan
Loca
l and
sta
te g
over
nmen
t em
erge
ncy
man
agem
ent
plan
ning
doc
umen
ts
4.2
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
pop
ulat
ion
with
sk
ills
usef
ul in
em
erge
ncy
resp
onse
/re
cove
ry (e
.g.,
first
aid
, saf
e fo
od
hand
ling)
can
be
mob
ilise
d if
need
ed?
1 <
20%
(mos
tly
rela
ted
to
occu
patio
n)
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
repr
esen
ting
all
subg
roup
s
Self
-Ass
essm
ent,
repo
rts
from
lo
cal o
rgan
isat
ions
, loc
al
surv
ey
4.3
To
wha
t ext
ent a
re a
ll ed
ucat
iona
l in
stitu
tions
(pub
lic/p
rivat
e sc
hool
s, al
l lev
els
incl
udin
g ea
rly c
hild
car
e)
enga
ged
in e
mer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss
educ
atio
n?
1 N
o ro
le k
now
n or
iden
tified
2 M
ost s
choo
ls
prov
ide
emer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss
info
rmat
ion
to
teac
hers
and
st
uden
ts
3 M
ost s
choo
ls
prov
ide
emer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss e
duca
tion
to te
ache
rs, s
tude
nts
and
pare
nts
4 Em
erge
ncy
prep
ared
ness
ed
ucat
ion
with
ac
tiviti
es o
ccur
s in
m
ost s
choo
ls w
ith
stud
ents
, tea
cher
s an
d pa
rent
s
5 M
ost s
choo
ls a
ctiv
ely
pa
rtic
ipat
e in
em
erge
ncy
prep
ared
ness
edu
catio
n at
co
mm
unity
leve
l
Doc
umen
tati
on fr
om s
choo
ls
abou
t pla
ns/a
ctiv
itie
s
4.4
H
ow a
re a
vaila
ble
med
ical
and
pub
lic
heal
th s
ervi
ces
incl
uded
in e
mer
genc
y pl
anni
ng?
1 N
o id
ea o
r the
re
are
no s
ervi
ces
2 Ex
pect
to re
ly o
n ex
istin
g lo
cal s
ervi
ces
3 S
ome
loca
l ser
vice
s ar
e ac
tivel
y en
gage
d in
regi
onal
em
erge
ncy
plan
ning
4 A
ll lo
cal s
ervi
ces
activ
ely
enga
ged
in
regi
onal
em
erge
ncy
plan
ning
5 Pu
blic
hea
lth/m
edic
al
syst
emic
pla
n to
sup
port
re
spon
se a
nd re
cove
ry in
pl
ace
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
conv
ersa
tion
wit
h he
alth
re
sour
ces
4.5
A
re re
adily
acc
essi
ble
loca
tions
ava
ilabl
e as
eva
cuat
ion
or re
cove
ry c
entr
es (e
.g.,
scho
ol h
alls
, com
mun
ity o
r sho
ppin
g ce
ntre
s, po
st o
ffice
) and
incl
uded
in
resi
lienc
e st
rate
gy?
1 N
o in
vent
ory
of
plac
es
2 So
me
inve
ntor
y of
pl
aces
, but
loca
tions
no
t wel
l-pub
licis
ed
3 In
vent
ory
of a
ll pl
aces
, bu
t not
ass
esse
d fo
r sui
tabi
lity
as a
n ev
acua
tion
cent
re
4 Si
tes
stoc
ked
and
know
n bu
t no
t suffi
cien
t for
es
timat
ed n
eed
5 W
ell-k
now
n, s
uffici
ent
site
s w
ith w
ater
/ fo
od/
info
rmat
ion
reso
urce
s w
idel
y ad
vert
ised
and
in
clud
ed in
all
plan
ning
Plan
ning
doc
umen
ts a
nd
publ
ic in
form
atio
n re
cord
s
4.6
W
hat i
s th
e le
vel o
f foo
d/w
ater
/fue
l re
adily
ava
ilabi
lity
in th
e co
mm
unity
?1
No
idea
2 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s de
pend
ent o
n da
ily
exte
rnal
food
/ w
ater
/ fu
el s
uppl
y
3 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve
up to
2 d
ays
supp
ly o
f fo
od/
wat
er/
fuel
4 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve u
p to
4 d
ays
supp
ly o
f foo
d/
wat
er/
fuel
5 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve
over
5 d
ays
supp
ly o
f foo
d/
wat
er/
fuel
Loca
l pla
ns p
lus
loca
l sur
vey
4. W
hat
emer
genc
y p
lann
ing,
res
pon
se a
nd r
ecov
ery
reso
urce
s ar
e av
aila
ble
in
your
com
mun
ity?
25%
(6-1
1)26
-75%
(12-
24)
76-1
00%
(25-
30)
Reso
urce
s Sc
ore:
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
012
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
21M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Conn
ecte
dnes
s
Risk
/vul
nera
bilit
y
Proc
edur
es
Reso
urce
s
TOTA
L SC
OR
E:
If yo
ur o
vera
ll sc
ore
is th
e nu
mbe
r 99
or h
ighe
r, yo
ur
com
mun
ity is
like
ly to
be
extr
emel
y re
silie
nt to
any
di
sast
er.
If yo
ur o
vera
ll sc
ore
is b
elow
the
num
ber 3
3,
your
com
mun
ity is
like
ly to
suff
er g
reat
ly in
a d
isas
ter o
r ha
ve g
reat
diffi
culty
reco
verin
g. P
ay c
aref
ul a
tten
tion
to
the
scor
es in
the
four
com
pone
nts
of re
silie
nce.
If t
he
indi
vidu
al s
core
s in
one
are
a te
nd to
be
muc
h lo
wer
than
in
the
othe
r thr
ee, t
hat a
spec
t of r
esili
ence
sho
uld
prob
ably
be
the
high
est p
riorit
y fo
r com
mun
ity a
ctio
n.
All
scor
es c
an b
e ve
ry u
sefu
l in
high
light
ing
thos
e as
pect
s of
resi
lienc
e th
at m
ost n
eed
atte
ntio
n fr
om c
omm
unit
y m
embe
rs, l
eade
rs
and
deci
sion
-mak
ers.
Each
sec
tion
is s
core
d at
the
bott
om o
f the
pag
e. N
ow
that
all
part
s ar
e do
ne, a
dd u
p al
l poi
nts
from
the
indi
vidu
al
elem
ents
.
Red
Zone
Caut
ion
Zone
Goi
ng W
ell
Ove
rall
scor
e25
%
(22-
33)
26-7
5%
(34-
98)
76-1
00%
(9
9-11
0)
Conn
ecte
dnes
s25
% (5
-10)
26-7
5%
(11-
19)
76-1
00%
(2
0-25
)
Risk
/Vul
nera
bilit
y 25
% (7
-13)
262-
75%
(1
4-28
)76
-100
%
(29-
35)
Proc
edur
es25
% (4
-8)
26-7
5%
(9-1
6)76
-100
%
(17-
20)
Reso
urce
s25
% (6
-11)
26-7
5%
(12-
24)
76-1
00%
(2
5-30
)
Rev
iew
ing
the
Scor
ecar
d a
nd N
ext
Step
s
At t
he fi
nal m
eetin
g of
the
Wor
king
Gro
up, t
he S
core
card
to
tal s
core
will
iden
tify
the
likel
y re
silie
nce
of th
e co
mm
unity
, an
d th
e to
tal f
or e
ach
of th
e fo
ur c
ompo
nent
s w
ill id
entif
y th
e co
mpo
nent
are
a(s)
mos
t in
need
of a
tten
tion.
Bas
ed o
n th
at, t
he m
embe
rs o
f the
Sco
reca
rd W
orki
ng G
roup
, the
loca
l go
vern
men
t and
oth
er c
omm
unity
mem
bers
may
und
erta
ke
one
or m
ore
of th
e fo
llow
ing
step
s:
• D
isse
min
atio
n an
d di
scus
sion
of t
he c
omm
unity
dis
aste
r re
silie
nce
scor
e w
ith c
omm
unity
mem
bers
.
• D
evel
opm
ent o
f a C
omm
unity
Res
ilien
ce A
ctio
n Pl
an to
ra
ise
the
scor
e fo
r any
item
s in
the
red
or a
mbe
r sco
ring
area
s. P
artic
ular
att
entio
n sh
ould
be
paid
to a
ny it
ems
abou
t whi
ch th
ere
was
sub
stan
tial d
isag
reem
ent o
n sc
orin
g le
vel d
urin
g th
e W
orki
ng G
roup
pro
cess
.
• Pr
ovis
ion
of in
form
atio
n to
all
loca
l bus
ines
ses,
orga
nisa
tions
and
fam
ilies
abo
ut s
teps
that
wou
ld ra
ise
the
scor
e ov
er ti
me,
with
enc
oura
gem
ent t
o fo
llow
th
roug
h on
the
reco
mm
ende
d ac
tions
.
• D
evel
opm
ent o
f a p
lan
for c
omm
unity
-leve
l sur
veys
that
pr
ovid
e m
ore
deta
iled
info
rmat
ion
abou
t com
pone
nts
of th
e Sc
orec
ard,
suc
h as
way
s in
whi
ch tr
ansi
ent
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs a
re b
eing
incl
uded
in p
lans
, or t
he
leve
l of m
eani
ngfu
l vol
unte
eris
m in
the
com
mun
ity.
• D
ecis
ion
abou
t whe
n to
repe
at th
e Sc
orec
ard
proc
ess
(pro
babl
y 12
mon
ths)
.
Com
mun
ity
Dis
aste
r R
esili
ence
Sco
re fo
r: .
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
112
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 46 14/12/2012 12:04:17 PM
20M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Que
stio
nSc
ore
Info
rmat
ion
Res
ourc
e4.
1
How
com
preh
ensi
ve is
the
loca
l in
frast
ruct
ure
emer
genc
y pr
otec
tion
plan
? (e
.g.,
wat
er s
uppl
y, s
ewer
age,
po
wer
sys
tem
)
1 N
o pl
an2
Infra
stru
ctur
es
iden
tified
but
no
prot
ectio
n p
lan
3 M
ost i
ndiv
idua
l in
frast
ruct
ure
com
pone
nts
have
pla
ns
for s
ome
emer
genc
ies
4 A
ll In
divi
dual
in
frast
ruct
ure
com
pone
nts
have
all
haza
rd p
lans
5 In
frast
ruct
ure
syst
em
is i
nteg
rate
d in
to a
n al
l ha
zard
s pr
otec
tion
plan
Loca
l and
sta
te g
over
nmen
t em
erge
ncy
man
agem
ent
plan
ning
doc
umen
ts
4.2
W
hat p
ropo
rtio
n of
pop
ulat
ion
with
sk
ills
usef
ul in
em
erge
ncy
resp
onse
/re
cove
ry (e
.g.,
first
aid
, saf
e fo
od
hand
ling)
can
be
mob
ilise
d if
need
ed?
1 <
20%
(mos
tly
rela
ted
to
occu
patio
n)
2 21
-40%
3 41
-60%
4 61
-80%
5 >
81%
repr
esen
ting
all
subg
roup
s
Self
-Ass
essm
ent,
repo
rts
from
lo
cal o
rgan
isat
ions
, loc
al
surv
ey
4.3
To
wha
t ext
ent a
re a
ll ed
ucat
iona
l in
stitu
tions
(pub
lic/p
rivat
e sc
hool
s, al
l lev
els
incl
udin
g ea
rly c
hild
car
e)
enga
ged
in e
mer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss
educ
atio
n?
1 N
o ro
le k
now
n or
iden
tified
2 M
ost s
choo
ls
prov
ide
emer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss
info
rmat
ion
to
teac
hers
and
st
uden
ts
3 M
ost s
choo
ls
prov
ide
emer
genc
y pr
epar
edne
ss e
duca
tion
to te
ache
rs, s
tude
nts
and
pare
nts
4 Em
erge
ncy
prep
ared
ness
ed
ucat
ion
with
ac
tiviti
es o
ccur
s in
m
ost s
choo
ls w
ith
stud
ents
, tea
cher
s an
d pa
rent
s
5 M
ost s
choo
ls a
ctiv
ely
pa
rtic
ipat
e in
em
erge
ncy
prep
ared
ness
edu
catio
n at
co
mm
unity
leve
l
Doc
umen
tati
on fr
om s
choo
ls
abou
t pla
ns/a
ctiv
itie
s
4.4
H
ow a
re a
vaila
ble
med
ical
and
pub
lic
heal
th s
ervi
ces
incl
uded
in e
mer
genc
y pl
anni
ng?
1 N
o id
ea o
r the
re
are
no s
ervi
ces
2 Ex
pect
to re
ly o
n ex
istin
g lo
cal s
ervi
ces
3 S
ome
loca
l ser
vice
s ar
e ac
tivel
y en
gage
d in
regi
onal
em
erge
ncy
plan
ning
4 A
ll lo
cal s
ervi
ces
activ
ely
enga
ged
in
regi
onal
em
erge
ncy
plan
ning
5 Pu
blic
hea
lth/m
edic
al
syst
emic
pla
n to
sup
port
re
spon
se a
nd re
cove
ry in
pl
ace
Self
-Ass
essm
ent b
ased
on
conv
ersa
tion
wit
h he
alth
re
sour
ces
4.5
A
re re
adily
acc
essi
ble
loca
tions
ava
ilabl
e as
eva
cuat
ion
or re
cove
ry c
entr
es (e
.g.,
scho
ol h
alls
, com
mun
ity o
r sho
ppin
g ce
ntre
s, po
st o
ffice
) and
incl
uded
in
resi
lienc
e st
rate
gy?
1 N
o in
vent
ory
of
plac
es
2 So
me
inve
ntor
y of
pl
aces
, but
loca
tions
no
t wel
l-pub
licis
ed
3 In
vent
ory
of a
ll pl
aces
, bu
t not
ass
esse
d fo
r sui
tabi
lity
as a
n ev
acua
tion
cent
re
4 Si
tes
stoc
ked
and
know
n bu
t no
t suffi
cien
t for
es
timat
ed n
eed
5 W
ell-k
now
n, s
uffici
ent
site
s w
ith w
ater
/ fo
od/
info
rmat
ion
reso
urce
s w
idel
y ad
vert
ised
and
in
clud
ed in
all
plan
ning
Plan
ning
doc
umen
ts a
nd
publ
ic in
form
atio
n re
cord
s
4.6
W
hat i
s th
e le
vel o
f foo
d/w
ater
/fue
l re
adily
ava
ilabi
lity
in th
e co
mm
unity
?1
No
idea
2 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s de
pend
ent o
n da
ily
exte
rnal
food
/ w
ater
/ fu
el s
uppl
y
3 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve
up to
2 d
ays
supp
ly o
f fo
od/
wat
er/
fuel
4 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve u
p to
4 d
ays
supp
ly o
f foo
d/
wat
er/
fuel
5 M
ost h
ouse
hold
s ha
ve
over
5 d
ays
supp
ly o
f foo
d/
wat
er/
fuel
Loca
l pla
ns p
lus
loca
l sur
vey
4. W
hat
emer
genc
y p
lann
ing,
res
pon
se a
nd r
ecov
ery
reso
urce
s ar
e av
aila
ble
in
your
com
mun
ity?
25%
(6-1
1)26
-75%
(12-
24)
76-1
00%
(25-
30)
Reso
urce
s Sc
ore:
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
012
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
21M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Conn
ecte
dnes
s
Risk
/vul
nera
bilit
y
Proc
edur
es
Reso
urce
s
TOTA
L SC
OR
E:
If yo
ur o
vera
ll sc
ore
is th
e nu
mbe
r 99
or h
ighe
r, yo
ur
com
mun
ity is
like
ly to
be
extr
emel
y re
silie
nt to
any
di
sast
er.
If yo
ur o
vera
ll sc
ore
is b
elow
the
num
ber 3
3,
your
com
mun
ity is
like
ly to
suff
er g
reat
ly in
a d
isas
ter o
r ha
ve g
reat
diffi
culty
reco
verin
g. P
ay c
aref
ul a
tten
tion
to
the
scor
es in
the
four
com
pone
nts
of re
silie
nce.
If t
he
indi
vidu
al s
core
s in
one
are
a te
nd to
be
muc
h lo
wer
than
in
the
othe
r thr
ee, t
hat a
spec
t of r
esili
ence
sho
uld
prob
ably
be
the
high
est p
riorit
y fo
r com
mun
ity a
ctio
n.
All
scor
es c
an b
e ve
ry u
sefu
l in
high
light
ing
thos
e as
pect
s of
resi
lienc
e th
at m
ost n
eed
atte
ntio
n fr
om c
omm
unit
y m
embe
rs, l
eade
rs
and
deci
sion
-mak
ers.
Each
sec
tion
is s
core
d at
the
bott
om o
f the
pag
e. N
ow
that
all
part
s ar
e do
ne, a
dd u
p al
l poi
nts
from
the
indi
vidu
al
elem
ents
.
Red
Zone
Caut
ion
Zone
Goi
ng W
ell
Ove
rall
scor
e25
%
(22-
33)
26-7
5%
(34-
98)
76-1
00%
(9
9-11
0)
Conn
ecte
dnes
s25
% (5
-10)
26-7
5%
(11-
19)
76-1
00%
(2
0-25
)
Risk
/Vul
nera
bilit
y 25
% (7
-13)
262-
75%
(1
4-28
)76
-100
%
(29-
35)
Proc
edur
es25
% (4
-8)
26-7
5%
(9-1
6)76
-100
%
(17-
20)
Reso
urce
s25
% (6
-11)
26-7
5%
(12-
24)
76-1
00%
(2
5-30
)
Rev
iew
ing
the
Scor
ecar
d a
nd N
ext
Step
s
At t
he fi
nal m
eetin
g of
the
Wor
king
Gro
up, t
he S
core
card
to
tal s
core
will
iden
tify
the
likel
y re
silie
nce
of th
e co
mm
unity
, an
d th
e to
tal f
or e
ach
of th
e fo
ur c
ompo
nent
s w
ill id
entif
y th
e co
mpo
nent
are
a(s)
mos
t in
need
of a
tten
tion.
Bas
ed o
n th
at, t
he m
embe
rs o
f the
Sco
reca
rd W
orki
ng G
roup
, the
loca
l go
vern
men
t and
oth
er c
omm
unity
mem
bers
may
und
erta
ke
one
or m
ore
of th
e fo
llow
ing
step
s:
• D
isse
min
atio
n an
d di
scus
sion
of t
he c
omm
unity
dis
aste
r re
silie
nce
scor
e w
ith c
omm
unity
mem
bers
.
• D
evel
opm
ent o
f a C
omm
unity
Res
ilien
ce A
ctio
n Pl
an to
ra
ise
the
scor
e fo
r any
item
s in
the
red
or a
mbe
r sco
ring
area
s. P
artic
ular
att
entio
n sh
ould
be
paid
to a
ny it
ems
abou
t whi
ch th
ere
was
sub
stan
tial d
isag
reem
ent o
n sc
orin
g le
vel d
urin
g th
e W
orki
ng G
roup
pro
cess
.
• Pr
ovis
ion
of in
form
atio
n to
all
loca
l bus
ines
ses,
orga
nisa
tions
and
fam
ilies
abo
ut s
teps
that
wou
ld ra
ise
the
scor
e ov
er ti
me,
with
enc
oura
gem
ent t
o fo
llow
th
roug
h on
the
reco
mm
ende
d ac
tions
.
• D
evel
opm
ent o
f a p
lan
for c
omm
unity
-leve
l sur
veys
that
pr
ovid
e m
ore
deta
iled
info
rmat
ion
abou
t com
pone
nts
of th
e Sc
orec
ard,
suc
h as
way
s in
whi
ch tr
ansi
ent
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs a
re b
eing
incl
uded
in p
lans
, or t
he
leve
l of m
eani
ngfu
l vol
unte
eris
m in
the
com
mun
ity.
• D
ecis
ion
abou
t whe
n to
repe
at th
e Sc
orec
ard
proc
ess
(pro
babl
y 12
mon
ths)
.
Com
mun
ity
Dis
aste
r R
esili
ence
Sco
re fo
r: .
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
112
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 47 14/12/2012 12:04:17 PM
22M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
CEN
SUS
– Th
e Ce
nsus
pro
vide
s a
snap
shot
of t
he n
atio
n,
with
dat
a av
aila
ble
at th
e po
stal
cod
e le
vel.
Dat
a ar
e ke
pt
by th
e A
BS a
nd a
re a
cces
sibl
e at
<ht
tp://
ww
w.a
bs.g
ov.a
u/ce
nsus
>
Com
mun
ity
– A
gro
up o
f peo
ple
livin
g to
geth
er w
ithin
de
fined
geo
grap
hica
l and
geo
polit
ical
are
a su
ch a
s a
tow
n,
dist
rict o
r cou
ncil.
Com
mun
icat
ion
Syst
ems
– A
ny te
chni
cally
sup
port
ed
netw
ork
that
allo
ws
peop
le to
mai
ntai
n co
ntac
t whe
n no
t in
phys
ical
pro
xim
ity, s
uch
as la
nd li
ne a
nd m
obile
te
leph
one
syst
ems,
inte
rnet
-bas
ed s
yste
m, r
adio
or w
alki
e-ta
lkie
sys
tem
s.
Conn
ecte
dnes
s –
The
degr
ee to
whi
ch s
ocia
l coh
esio
n an
d su
ppor
t are
offe
red
from
one
mem
ber o
f the
co
mm
unity
to a
noth
er.
Dai
ly P
opul
atio
n –
The
num
ber o
f ind
ivid
uals
in th
e co
mm
unity
dur
ing
the
usua
l wor
k da
y. T
his
incl
udes
co
mm
uter
s co
min
g in
to th
e co
mm
unity
for d
aily
wor
k ac
tiviti
es, b
ut d
oes
not c
ount
mem
bers
of t
he re
side
nt
popu
latio
n w
ho le
ave
the
com
mun
ity re
gula
rly fo
r dai
ly
wor
k ac
tiviti
es.
Emer
genc
y se
rvic
es –
Gov
ernm
ent a
nd v
olun
teer
or
gani
satio
ns e
stab
lishe
d to
pro
mot
e an
d en
sure
pub
lic
safe
ty, i
nclu
ding
pol
ice,
Cou
ntry
Fire
Ser
vice
(CFS
), St
ate
Emer
genc
y Se
rvic
es (S
ES),
and
St. J
ohn
Am
bula
nce.
ABS
– A
ustr
alia
n Bu
reau
of S
tatis
tics,
Aus
tral
ia’s
inde
pend
ent a
nd o
ffici
al s
tatis
tical
org
anis
atio
n. A
cces
sibl
e at
<w
ww
.abs
.gov
.au>
All-
haza
rds
– Th
e ap
proa
ch to
pla
nnin
g fo
r pot
entia
l em
erge
ncie
s an
d di
sast
ers
that
is in
clus
ive
of a
ny ty
pe
of in
cide
nt, n
atur
al o
r man
mad
e, th
at w
arra
nts
actio
n to
pr
otec
t life
, pro
pert
y, e
nviro
nmen
t, an
d pu
blic
hea
lth o
r sa
fety
, and
to m
inim
ise
disr
uptio
ns o
f gov
ernm
ent,
soci
al,
or e
cono
mic
act
iviti
es.
AN
DRS
– A
ustr
alia
n N
atio
nal S
trat
egy
for D
isas
ter
Resi
lienc
e, th
e na
tiona
l pol
icy
behi
nd th
e Co
mm
unity
D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd, w
ith a
goa
l of m
akin
g al
l of
Aus
tral
ia re
silie
nt w
hen
face
d w
ith a
ny ty
pe o
f dis
aste
r. T
he
com
plet
e st
rate
gy is
acc
essi
ble
at <
http
://w
ww
.coa
g.go
v.au
/coa
g_m
eetin
g_ou
tcom
es/2
0110
213/
docs
/nat
iona
l_st
rate
gy_d
isas
ter_
resi
lienc
e.pd
f>
Aus
tral
ian
Com
mun
ity
Indi
cato
rs N
etw
ork
– Th
e ex
tens
ive
grou
p of
org
anis
atio
ns li
nkin
g da
ta a
t the
st
ate
and
loca
l lev
el to
ena
ble
mon
itorin
g of
cha
nge
in
com
mun
ities
. A
cces
sibl
e at
<ht
tp://
mc2
.vic
net.n
et.a
u/ho
me/
acin
/web
/Fro
ntpa
ge.h
tml>
Aus
tral
ian
Nat
iona
l Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce F
ram
ewor
k –
The
conc
eptu
al b
asis
for t
he A
ND
RS, a
cces
sibl
e at
: <ht
tp://
ww
w.e
m.g
ov.a
u/Pu
blic
atio
ns/P
rogr
am%
20pu
blic
atio
ns/
Page
s/N
atio
nalD
isas
terR
esili
ence
Fram
ewor
k.as
px>
Enga
ged
(Com
mun
ity
Enga
gem
ent)
– T
he e
xten
t to
whi
ch th
e m
embe
rs o
f a c
omm
unity
are
invo
lved
in
proj
ects
whi
ch a
re b
enefi
cial
for t
he lo
cal s
ocie
ty.
Hea
lth
reso
urce
s –
The
com
plet
e sp
ectr
um o
f or
gani
satio
ns a
nd w
orke
rs p
rovi
ding
ser
vice
s di
rect
ed
tow
ard
mai
ntai
ning
or i
mpr
ovin
g he
alth
sta
tus
and
resp
ondi
ng to
illn
ess
or in
jury
, inc
ludi
ng h
ospi
tals
, men
tal
heal
th w
orke
rs, g
ener
al p
ract
ition
ers,
publ
ic h
ealth
w
orke
rs, a
mbu
lanc
e, c
omm
unity
nur
ses
and
allie
d he
alth
pr
ofes
sion
als.
IAP2
Spe
ctru
m –
A m
odel
dev
elop
ed b
y th
e In
tern
atio
nal
Ass
ocia
tion
for P
ublic
Par
ticip
atio
n to
mea
sure
the
leve
l of
pub
lic p
artic
ipat
ion
with
in a
com
mun
ity.
Acc
essi
ble
at
<ht
tp://
ww
w.ia
p2.o
rg/a
ssoc
iatio
ns/4
748/
files
/IAP2
%20
Spec
trum
_ver
tical
>
NBN
– N
atio
nal B
road
band
Net
wor
k, th
e ne
twor
k of
hig
h sp
eed
broa
dban
d co
nnec
tions
aim
ed a
t ass
urin
g in
tern
et
acce
ss to
all
Aus
tral
ian
prem
ises
.
Out
reac
h –
The
degr
ee to
whi
ch a
n or
gani
satio
n or
gov
ernm
ent t
akes
act
ion
to m
ake
prog
ram
s an
d in
form
atio
n ea
sily
acc
essi
ble
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
.
Post
-eve
nt a
sses
smen
t – T
he s
yste
mat
ic g
athe
ring
and
criti
quin
g of
info
rmat
ion
rega
rdin
g th
e pr
epar
atio
n fo
r an
impe
ndin
g di
sast
er e
vent
, the
dam
age
done
by
the
even
t, th
e im
med
iate
resp
onse
to th
e ev
ent,
and
the
step
s ta
ken
to re
turn
to th
e pr
e-ev
ent o
r hig
her l
evel
of f
unct
ioni
ng.
Ap
pen
dix
1: G
loss
ary
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
212
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
23M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
TRI –
Tor
rens
Res
ilien
ce In
stitu
te, a
col
labo
ratio
n of
the
Uni
vers
ity o
f Ade
laid
e, F
linde
rs U
nive
rsity
, Uni
vers
ity o
f So
uth
Aus
tral
ia a
nd C
ranfi
eld
Uni
vers
ity e
stab
lishe
d to
im
prov
e th
e ca
paci
ty o
f org
anis
atio
ns a
nd s
ocie
ties
to
resp
ond
to d
isru
ptiv
e ch
alle
nges
whi
ch h
ave
the
pote
ntia
l to
ove
rwhe
lm lo
cal d
isas
ter m
anag
emen
t cap
abili
ties
and
plan
s. In
form
atio
n ac
cess
ible
at <
http
://w
ww
.to
rren
sres
ilien
ce.o
rg>
Resi
dent
Pop
ulat
ion
– In
divi
dual
s or
fam
ilies
livi
ng fu
ll-tim
e in
the
com
mun
ity (b
oth
hom
e ow
ners
and
rent
ers)
.
Resi
lienc
e –
A c
omm
unity
is re
silie
nt w
hen
mem
bers
of
the
popu
latio
n ar
e co
nnec
ted
to o
ne a
noth
er a
nd w
ork
toge
ther
, so
that
they
are
abl
e to
func
tion
and
sust
ain
criti
cal s
yste
ms,
even
und
er s
tres
s; ad
apt t
o ch
ange
s in
th
e ph
ysic
al, s
ocia
l or e
cono
mic
env
ironm
ent;
be s
elf-
relia
nt if
ext
erna
l res
ourc
es a
re li
mite
d or
cut
off
; and
lear
n fro
m e
xper
ienc
e to
impr
ove
itsel
f ove
r tim
e. C
omm
unity
re
silie
nce
is m
ore
than
the
resi
lienc
e of
indi
vidu
als,
fam
ilies
or
spe
cific
org
anis
atio
ns, t
houg
h al
l of t
hose
are
key
co
mpo
nent
s of
com
mun
ity re
silie
nce.
Soci
al in
dex
– A
ny n
umer
ical
sca
le u
sed
to c
ompa
re s
ocia
l va
riabl
es w
ith o
ne a
noth
er o
r with
a re
fere
nce
num
ber.
Soci
al m
edia
– W
eb-b
ased
and
mob
ile te
chno
logi
es o
r ap
plic
atio
ns u
sed
for t
he p
urpo
se o
f com
mun
icat
ion
and
netw
orki
ng w
ith o
ther
s.
Soci
o-ec
onom
ic In
dica
tors
– L
inke
d in
form
atio
n m
aint
aine
d by
ABS
on
soci
al s
ituat
ion
and
econ
omic
s th
at
can
info
rm p
olic
y-m
akin
g an
d de
cisi
ons.
Acc
essi
ble
at
<ht
tp://
ww
w.a
bs.g
ov.a
u/w
ebsi
tedb
s/D
3310
114.
nsf/
hom
e/Se
ifa_e
ntry
_pag
e>
Tra
nsie
nt P
opul
atio
n –
Peop
le w
ho s
tay
or w
ork
in a
pl
ace
tem
pora
rily
or fo
r a s
hort
tim
e, in
clud
ing
but n
ot
limite
d to
trav
elle
rs, t
ouris
ts, t
empo
rary
wor
kers
, stu
dent
s, co
nfer
ence
or r
ally
att
ende
es.
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
312
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 48 14/12/2012 12:04:17 PM
22M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
CEN
SUS
– Th
e Ce
nsus
pro
vide
s a
snap
shot
of t
he n
atio
n,
with
dat
a av
aila
ble
at th
e po
stal
cod
e le
vel.
Dat
a ar
e ke
pt
by th
e A
BS a
nd a
re a
cces
sibl
e at
<ht
tp://
ww
w.a
bs.g
ov.a
u/ce
nsus
>
Com
mun
ity
– A
gro
up o
f peo
ple
livin
g to
geth
er w
ithin
de
fined
geo
grap
hica
l and
geo
polit
ical
are
a su
ch a
s a
tow
n,
dist
rict o
r cou
ncil.
Com
mun
icat
ion
Syst
ems
– A
ny te
chni
cally
sup
port
ed
netw
ork
that
allo
ws
peop
le to
mai
ntai
n co
ntac
t whe
n no
t in
phys
ical
pro
xim
ity, s
uch
as la
nd li
ne a
nd m
obile
te
leph
one
syst
ems,
inte
rnet
-bas
ed s
yste
m, r
adio
or w
alki
e-ta
lkie
sys
tem
s.
Conn
ecte
dnes
s –
The
degr
ee to
whi
ch s
ocia
l coh
esio
n an
d su
ppor
t are
offe
red
from
one
mem
ber o
f the
co
mm
unity
to a
noth
er.
Dai
ly P
opul
atio
n –
The
num
ber o
f ind
ivid
uals
in th
e co
mm
unity
dur
ing
the
usua
l wor
k da
y. T
his
incl
udes
co
mm
uter
s co
min
g in
to th
e co
mm
unity
for d
aily
wor
k ac
tiviti
es, b
ut d
oes
not c
ount
mem
bers
of t
he re
side
nt
popu
latio
n w
ho le
ave
the
com
mun
ity re
gula
rly fo
r dai
ly
wor
k ac
tiviti
es.
Emer
genc
y se
rvic
es –
Gov
ernm
ent a
nd v
olun
teer
or
gani
satio
ns e
stab
lishe
d to
pro
mot
e an
d en
sure
pub
lic
safe
ty, i
nclu
ding
pol
ice,
Cou
ntry
Fire
Ser
vice
(CFS
), St
ate
Emer
genc
y Se
rvic
es (S
ES),
and
St. J
ohn
Am
bula
nce.
ABS
– A
ustr
alia
n Bu
reau
of S
tatis
tics,
Aus
tral
ia’s
inde
pend
ent a
nd o
ffici
al s
tatis
tical
org
anis
atio
n. A
cces
sibl
e at
<w
ww
.abs
.gov
.au>
All-
haza
rds
– Th
e ap
proa
ch to
pla
nnin
g fo
r pot
entia
l em
erge
ncie
s an
d di
sast
ers
that
is in
clus
ive
of a
ny ty
pe
of in
cide
nt, n
atur
al o
r man
mad
e, th
at w
arra
nts
actio
n to
pr
otec
t life
, pro
pert
y, e
nviro
nmen
t, an
d pu
blic
hea
lth o
r sa
fety
, and
to m
inim
ise
disr
uptio
ns o
f gov
ernm
ent,
soci
al,
or e
cono
mic
act
iviti
es.
AN
DRS
– A
ustr
alia
n N
atio
nal S
trat
egy
for D
isas
ter
Resi
lienc
e, th
e na
tiona
l pol
icy
behi
nd th
e Co
mm
unity
D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd, w
ith a
goa
l of m
akin
g al
l of
Aus
tral
ia re
silie
nt w
hen
face
d w
ith a
ny ty
pe o
f dis
aste
r. T
he
com
plet
e st
rate
gy is
acc
essi
ble
at <
http
://w
ww
.coa
g.go
v.au
/coa
g_m
eetin
g_ou
tcom
es/2
0110
213/
docs
/nat
iona
l_st
rate
gy_d
isas
ter_
resi
lienc
e.pd
f>
Aus
tral
ian
Com
mun
ity
Indi
cato
rs N
etw
ork
– Th
e ex
tens
ive
grou
p of
org
anis
atio
ns li
nkin
g da
ta a
t the
st
ate
and
loca
l lev
el to
ena
ble
mon
itorin
g of
cha
nge
in
com
mun
ities
. A
cces
sibl
e at
<ht
tp://
mc2
.vic
net.n
et.a
u/ho
me/
acin
/web
/Fro
ntpa
ge.h
tml>
Aus
tral
ian
Nat
iona
l Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce F
ram
ewor
k –
The
conc
eptu
al b
asis
for t
he A
ND
RS, a
cces
sibl
e at
: <ht
tp://
ww
w.e
m.g
ov.a
u/Pu
blic
atio
ns/P
rogr
am%
20pu
blic
atio
ns/
Page
s/N
atio
nalD
isas
terR
esili
ence
Fram
ewor
k.as
px>
Enga
ged
(Com
mun
ity
Enga
gem
ent)
– T
he e
xten
t to
whi
ch th
e m
embe
rs o
f a c
omm
unity
are
invo
lved
in
proj
ects
whi
ch a
re b
enefi
cial
for t
he lo
cal s
ocie
ty.
Hea
lth
reso
urce
s –
The
com
plet
e sp
ectr
um o
f or
gani
satio
ns a
nd w
orke
rs p
rovi
ding
ser
vice
s di
rect
ed
tow
ard
mai
ntai
ning
or i
mpr
ovin
g he
alth
sta
tus
and
resp
ondi
ng to
illn
ess
or in
jury
, inc
ludi
ng h
ospi
tals
, men
tal
heal
th w
orke
rs, g
ener
al p
ract
ition
ers,
publ
ic h
ealth
w
orke
rs, a
mbu
lanc
e, c
omm
unity
nur
ses
and
allie
d he
alth
pr
ofes
sion
als.
IAP2
Spe
ctru
m –
A m
odel
dev
elop
ed b
y th
e In
tern
atio
nal
Ass
ocia
tion
for P
ublic
Par
ticip
atio
n to
mea
sure
the
leve
l of
pub
lic p
artic
ipat
ion
with
in a
com
mun
ity.
Acc
essi
ble
at
<ht
tp://
ww
w.ia
p2.o
rg/a
ssoc
iatio
ns/4
748/
files
/IAP2
%20
Spec
trum
_ver
tical
>
NBN
– N
atio
nal B
road
band
Net
wor
k, th
e ne
twor
k of
hig
h sp
eed
broa
dban
d co
nnec
tions
aim
ed a
t ass
urin
g in
tern
et
acce
ss to
all
Aus
tral
ian
prem
ises
.
Out
reac
h –
The
degr
ee to
whi
ch a
n or
gani
satio
n or
gov
ernm
ent t
akes
act
ion
to m
ake
prog
ram
s an
d in
form
atio
n ea
sily
acc
essi
ble
with
in th
e co
mm
unity
.
Post
-eve
nt a
sses
smen
t – T
he s
yste
mat
ic g
athe
ring
and
criti
quin
g of
info
rmat
ion
rega
rdin
g th
e pr
epar
atio
n fo
r an
impe
ndin
g di
sast
er e
vent
, the
dam
age
done
by
the
even
t, th
e im
med
iate
resp
onse
to th
e ev
ent,
and
the
step
s ta
ken
to re
turn
to th
e pr
e-ev
ent o
r hig
her l
evel
of f
unct
ioni
ng.
Ap
pen
dix
1: G
loss
ary
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
212
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
23M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
TRI –
Tor
rens
Res
ilien
ce In
stitu
te, a
col
labo
ratio
n of
the
Uni
vers
ity o
f Ade
laid
e, F
linde
rs U
nive
rsity
, Uni
vers
ity o
f So
uth
Aus
tral
ia a
nd C
ranfi
eld
Uni
vers
ity e
stab
lishe
d to
im
prov
e th
e ca
paci
ty o
f org
anis
atio
ns a
nd s
ocie
ties
to
resp
ond
to d
isru
ptiv
e ch
alle
nges
whi
ch h
ave
the
pote
ntia
l to
ove
rwhe
lm lo
cal d
isas
ter m
anag
emen
t cap
abili
ties
and
plan
s. In
form
atio
n ac
cess
ible
at <
http
://w
ww
.to
rren
sres
ilien
ce.o
rg>
Resi
dent
Pop
ulat
ion
– In
divi
dual
s or
fam
ilies
livi
ng fu
ll-tim
e in
the
com
mun
ity (b
oth
hom
e ow
ners
and
rent
ers)
.
Resi
lienc
e –
A c
omm
unity
is re
silie
nt w
hen
mem
bers
of
the
popu
latio
n ar
e co
nnec
ted
to o
ne a
noth
er a
nd w
ork
toge
ther
, so
that
they
are
abl
e to
func
tion
and
sust
ain
criti
cal s
yste
ms,
even
und
er s
tres
s; ad
apt t
o ch
ange
s in
th
e ph
ysic
al, s
ocia
l or e
cono
mic
env
ironm
ent;
be s
elf-
relia
nt if
ext
erna
l res
ourc
es a
re li
mite
d or
cut
off
; and
lear
n fro
m e
xper
ienc
e to
impr
ove
itsel
f ove
r tim
e. C
omm
unity
re
silie
nce
is m
ore
than
the
resi
lienc
e of
indi
vidu
als,
fam
ilies
or
spe
cific
org
anis
atio
ns, t
houg
h al
l of t
hose
are
key
co
mpo
nent
s of
com
mun
ity re
silie
nce.
Soci
al in
dex
– A
ny n
umer
ical
sca
le u
sed
to c
ompa
re s
ocia
l va
riabl
es w
ith o
ne a
noth
er o
r with
a re
fere
nce
num
ber.
Soci
al m
edia
– W
eb-b
ased
and
mob
ile te
chno
logi
es o
r ap
plic
atio
ns u
sed
for t
he p
urpo
se o
f com
mun
icat
ion
and
netw
orki
ng w
ith o
ther
s.
Soci
o-ec
onom
ic In
dica
tors
– L
inke
d in
form
atio
n m
aint
aine
d by
ABS
on
soci
al s
ituat
ion
and
econ
omic
s th
at
can
info
rm p
olic
y-m
akin
g an
d de
cisi
ons.
Acc
essi
ble
at
<ht
tp://
ww
w.a
bs.g
ov.a
u/w
ebsi
tedb
s/D
3310
114.
nsf/
hom
e/Se
ifa_e
ntry
_pag
e>
Tra
nsie
nt P
opul
atio
n –
Peop
le w
ho s
tay
or w
ork
in a
pl
ace
tem
pora
rily
or fo
r a s
hort
tim
e, in
clud
ing
but n
ot
limite
d to
trav
elle
rs, t
ouris
ts, t
empo
rary
wor
kers
, stu
dent
s, co
nfer
ence
or r
ally
att
ende
es.
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
312
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 49 14/12/2012 12:04:17 PM
24M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Ap
pen
dix
2: S
amp
le le
tter
of i
nvit
atio
n to
the
Sco
reca
rd W
orki
ng G
roup
Dea
r XXX
:
[Tow
n na
me]
is in
tere
sted
in a
ssur
ing
the
high
est p
ossi
ble
leve
l of c
omm
unity
resi
lienc
e, s
houl
d an
em
erge
ncy
or d
isas
ter s
trik
e.
As
a be
ginn
ing
step
, it i
s im
port
ant t
o id
entif
y ou
r cur
rent
leve
l of r
esili
ence
, and
thos
e ar
eas
in w
hich
we
shou
ld ta
ke a
ctio
n.
To th
at e
nd, w
e w
ill b
e co
mpl
etin
g th
e Co
mm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce S
core
card
, rec
ently
dev
elop
ed b
y th
e To
rren
s Re
silie
nce
Inst
itute
in p
artn
ersh
ip w
ith th
e N
atio
nal E
mer
genc
y M
anag
emen
t Com
mitt
ee.
The
Scor
ecar
d is
not
a re
port
to a
nyon
e ou
tsid
e ou
r com
mun
ity, n
or w
ill w
e be
com
pare
d to
oth
er c
omm
uniti
es: i
t is
a to
ol fo
r our
use
as
we
wor
k to
geth
er to
war
d re
silie
nce.
You
are
invi
ted
to b
ecom
e a
mem
ber o
f the
{tow
n na
me]
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce S
core
card
Wor
king
Gro
up, w
hich
will
hav
e its
firs
t or
ient
atio
n m
eetin
g on
day
/mon
th a
t XX
o’cl
ock
at [l
ocat
ion]
. You
r com
mitm
ent w
ould
be
part
icip
atio
n in
this
orie
ntat
ion,
plu
s tw
o ad
ditio
nal m
eetin
gs o
ver t
he n
ext 6
-9 w
eeks
. Th
e fir
st tw
o m
eetin
gs w
ill b
e no
mor
e th
an tw
o ho
urs
in le
ngth
and
the
final
m
eetin
g ap
prox
imat
ely
one
hour
long
. In
add
ition
, you
may
be
aske
d to
hel
p lo
cate
impo
rtan
t inf
orm
atio
n ab
out o
ur c
omm
unity
be
twee
n m
eetin
gs.
I hop
e th
at y
ou w
ill a
ccep
t thi
s in
vita
tion.
If y
ou h
ave
ques
tions
bef
ore
mak
ing
a de
cisi
on, p
leas
e co
ntac
t me
or X
XXX,
who
is
coor
dina
ting
the
effor
t for
us.
Tha
nk y
ou fo
r you
r ong
oing
con
trib
utio
ns to
our
com
mun
ity li
ves.
Sinc
erel
y,
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
412
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
25M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Ap
pen
dix
3: S
amp
le le
tter
of i
nvit
atio
n to
Wor
king
Gro
up C
hair
Dea
r XXX
:
Than
k yo
u fo
r agr
eein
g to
ser
ve o
n th
e [t
own
nam
e] D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd W
orki
ng G
roup
. I h
ope
that
you
will
ac
cept
this
furt
her i
nvita
tion
to s
erve
as
Cha
ir of
the
Wor
king
Gro
up. Y
our k
now
ledg
e of
our
tow
n an
d yo
ur a
bilit
y to
hel
p a
grou
p st
ay o
n ta
rget
and
on
time
mak
e yo
u an
idea
l can
dida
te fo
r thi
s ro
le.
As
you
know
, the
Wor
king
Gro
up w
ill b
e m
eetin
g ju
st 3
tim
es o
ver t
he n
ext f
ew w
eeks
. A
s C
hair,
you
wou
ld b
e ex
pect
ed to
he
lp th
e gr
oup
mem
bers
focu
s on
the
issu
es ra
ised
by
the
Scor
ecar
d, u
se c
lear
term
inol
ogy
(avo
idin
g ac
rony
ms)
, ass
ure
that
th
e vi
ewpo
ints
of a
ll m
embe
rs a
re h
eard
, fac
ilita
te c
onse
nsus
on
the
scor
e to
be
assi
gned
to e
ach
elem
ent,
and
sum
mar
ise
the
area
s of
gre
ates
t con
cern
for f
utur
e ac
tion.
You
may
als
o be
ask
ed to
pre
sent
a s
umm
ary
of th
e W
orki
ng G
roup
’s fin
al d
ecis
ions
to th
e [t
own
coun
cil/t
own
mee
ting/
othe
r] fo
llow
ing
the
final
mee
ting
of th
e W
orki
ng G
roup
.
I hop
e th
at y
ou w
ill a
ccep
t thi
s ro
le.
If yo
u ha
ve a
ny q
uest
ions
, ple
ase
cont
act m
e or
XXX
X, w
ho is
coo
rdin
atin
g th
e eff
ort f
or
us. Y
our o
ngoi
ng e
ffort
s on
beh
alf o
f the
resi
dent
s of
[tow
n] a
re g
reat
ly a
ppre
ciat
ed.
Sinc
erel
y,
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
512
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 50 14/12/2012 12:04:17 PM
24M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Ap
pen
dix
2: S
amp
le le
tter
of i
nvit
atio
n to
the
Sco
reca
rd W
orki
ng G
roup
Dea
r XXX
:
[Tow
n na
me]
is in
tere
sted
in a
ssur
ing
the
high
est p
ossi
ble
leve
l of c
omm
unity
resi
lienc
e, s
houl
d an
em
erge
ncy
or d
isas
ter s
trik
e.
As
a be
ginn
ing
step
, it i
s im
port
ant t
o id
entif
y ou
r cur
rent
leve
l of r
esili
ence
, and
thos
e ar
eas
in w
hich
we
shou
ld ta
ke a
ctio
n.
To th
at e
nd, w
e w
ill b
e co
mpl
etin
g th
e Co
mm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce S
core
card
, rec
ently
dev
elop
ed b
y th
e To
rren
s Re
silie
nce
Inst
itute
in p
artn
ersh
ip w
ith th
e N
atio
nal E
mer
genc
y M
anag
emen
t Com
mitt
ee.
The
Scor
ecar
d is
not
a re
port
to a
nyon
e ou
tsid
e ou
r com
mun
ity, n
or w
ill w
e be
com
pare
d to
oth
er c
omm
uniti
es: i
t is
a to
ol fo
r our
use
as
we
wor
k to
geth
er to
war
d re
silie
nce.
You
are
invi
ted
to b
ecom
e a
mem
ber o
f the
{tow
n na
me]
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce S
core
card
Wor
king
Gro
up, w
hich
will
hav
e its
firs
t or
ient
atio
n m
eetin
g on
day
/mon
th a
t XX
o’cl
ock
at [l
ocat
ion]
. You
r com
mitm
ent w
ould
be
part
icip
atio
n in
this
orie
ntat
ion,
plu
s tw
o ad
ditio
nal m
eetin
gs o
ver t
he n
ext 6
-9 w
eeks
. Th
e fir
st tw
o m
eetin
gs w
ill b
e no
mor
e th
an tw
o ho
urs
in le
ngth
and
the
final
m
eetin
g ap
prox
imat
ely
one
hour
long
. In
add
ition
, you
may
be
aske
d to
hel
p lo
cate
impo
rtan
t inf
orm
atio
n ab
out o
ur c
omm
unity
be
twee
n m
eetin
gs.
I hop
e th
at y
ou w
ill a
ccep
t thi
s in
vita
tion.
If y
ou h
ave
ques
tions
bef
ore
mak
ing
a de
cisi
on, p
leas
e co
ntac
t me
or X
XXX,
who
is
coor
dina
ting
the
effor
t for
us.
Tha
nk y
ou fo
r you
r ong
oing
con
trib
utio
ns to
our
com
mun
ity li
ves.
Sinc
erel
y,
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
412
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
25M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
Ap
pen
dix
3: S
amp
le le
tter
of i
nvit
atio
n to
Wor
king
Gro
up C
hair
Dea
r XXX
:
Than
k yo
u fo
r agr
eein
g to
ser
ve o
n th
e [t
own
nam
e] D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
Sco
reca
rd W
orki
ng G
roup
. I h
ope
that
you
will
ac
cept
this
furt
her i
nvita
tion
to s
erve
as
Cha
ir of
the
Wor
king
Gro
up. Y
our k
now
ledg
e of
our
tow
n an
d yo
ur a
bilit
y to
hel
p a
grou
p st
ay o
n ta
rget
and
on
time
mak
e yo
u an
idea
l can
dida
te fo
r thi
s ro
le.
As
you
know
, the
Wor
king
Gro
up w
ill b
e m
eetin
g ju
st 3
tim
es o
ver t
he n
ext f
ew w
eeks
. A
s C
hair,
you
wou
ld b
e ex
pect
ed to
he
lp th
e gr
oup
mem
bers
focu
s on
the
issu
es ra
ised
by
the
Scor
ecar
d, u
se c
lear
term
inol
ogy
(avo
idin
g ac
rony
ms)
, ass
ure
that
th
e vi
ewpo
ints
of a
ll m
embe
rs a
re h
eard
, fac
ilita
te c
onse
nsus
on
the
scor
e to
be
assi
gned
to e
ach
elem
ent,
and
sum
mar
ise
the
area
s of
gre
ates
t con
cern
for f
utur
e ac
tion.
You
may
als
o be
ask
ed to
pre
sent
a s
umm
ary
of th
e W
orki
ng G
roup
’s fin
al d
ecis
ions
to th
e [t
own
coun
cil/t
own
mee
ting/
othe
r] fo
llow
ing
the
final
mee
ting
of th
e W
orki
ng G
roup
.
I hop
e th
at y
ou w
ill a
ccep
t thi
s ro
le.
If yo
u ha
ve a
ny q
uest
ions
, ple
ase
cont
act m
e or
XXX
X, w
ho is
coo
rdin
atin
g th
e eff
ort f
or
us. Y
our o
ngoi
ng e
ffort
s on
beh
alf o
f the
resi
dent
s of
[tow
n] a
re g
reat
ly a
ppre
ciat
ed.
Sinc
erel
y,
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
512
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 51 14/12/2012 12:04:17 PM
26M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
2.
DRA
FT A
GEN
DA
: MEE
TIN
G T
WO
(FIR
ST S
CORI
NG
M
EETI
NG
)
I. W
elco
me
and
revi
ew o
f int
rodu
ctio
ns (i
f nee
ded)
II.
Rem
inde
r of p
urpo
se o
f Sco
reca
rd
III.
Plan
for d
iscu
ssio
n of
item
s
a.
Ann
ounc
e ite
m
b.
Ask
for s
how
of h
ands
on
scor
e
c.
If al
l agr
ee, m
ove
on
d.
If di
sagr
ee, a
llow
up
to 1
0 m
inut
es fo
r di
scus
sion
e.
If st
ill u
nabl
e to
agr
ee, i
dent
ify th
e ra
nge
of
desi
red
scor
es a
nd le
ave
for fi
nal m
eetin
g
IV.
Dis
cuss
eac
h ite
m in
turn
V.
Iden
tify
any
item
s on
whi
ch a
gree
men
t was
not
re
ache
d
a.
If fu
rthe
r inf
orm
atio
n w
ould
be
help
ful,
iden
tify
som
eone
to g
athe
r nee
ded
info
b.
Requ
est t
houg
htfu
l con
side
ratio
n by
all
prio
r to
final
mee
ting
VI.
Adj
ourn
men
t
1.
DRA
FT A
GEN
DA
: M
EETI
NG
ON
E (O
RIEN
TATI
ON
)
I. W
elco
me
and
intr
oduc
tions
o In
trod
uctio
n of
wor
king
gro
up c
hair
by M
ayor
II.
Ove
rvie
w o
f Com
mun
ity D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
III.
Intr
oduc
tion
of th
e Sc
orec
ard
purp
ose
IV.
Brie
f Rev
iew
of S
core
card
V.
Dec
isio
ns a
bout
dat
a ga
ther
ing/
assi
gnm
ents
VI.
Oth
er d
iscu
ssio
n
3.
DRA
FT A
GEN
DA
: FIN
AL
SCO
RIN
G M
EETI
NG
I. W
elco
me
and
revi
ew o
f pur
pose
of S
core
card
for
com
mun
ity
II.
Qui
ck re
view
of a
ll ite
ms
on w
hich
agr
eem
ent w
as
reac
hed
at p
rior m
eetin
g
III.
Dis
cuss
ion
of it
ems
on w
hich
agr
eem
ent w
as n
ot
reac
hed:
a.
For a
ny it
em o
n w
hich
agr
eem
ent c
anno
t be
reac
hed,
sco
re a
t low
est l
evel
und
er
cons
ider
atio
n
IV.
Calc
ulat
e nu
mer
ic s
core
for e
ach
com
pone
nt o
f the
Sc
orec
ard,
and
the
over
all s
core
V.
Iden
tify
thos
e ar
eas
that
mos
t sug
gest
lim
ited
or
lack
of r
esili
ence
, and
dis
cuss
act
ion
step
s th
at
can
be ta
ken
to s
tren
gthe
n th
ose
area
s, w
ith
assi
gnm
ents
VI.
Det
erm
ine
timel
ine
for a
ny s
elec
ted
follo
w u
p ac
tiviti
es
VII.
Det
erm
ine
best
met
hod
for s
harin
g Sc
orec
ard
info
rmat
ion
with
the
com
mun
ity
VIII.
Eva
luat
ion
of th
e Sc
orec
ard
a.
Intr
oduc
tion
of th
e se
lf-as
sess
men
t she
et a
nd
requ
est S
core
card
Wor
king
Gro
up m
embe
rs to
se
nd it
to T
RI w
ithin
a fo
rtni
ght i
n th
e en
velo
p pr
ovid
ed
b.
Gro
up d
iscu
ssio
n on
the
eval
uatio
n of
the
Scor
ecar
d
IX.
Than
ks to
all
and
adjo
urnm
ent.
Ap
pen
dix
4: S
amp
le a
gend
as fo
r Wor
king
Gro
up M
eeti
ngs
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
612
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
Not
es:
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
712
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 52 14/12/2012 12:04:18 PM
26M
odel
and
Tool
for C
omm
unity
Dis
aste
r Res
ilien
ce
2.
DRA
FT A
GEN
DA
: MEE
TIN
G T
WO
(FIR
ST S
CORI
NG
M
EETI
NG
)
I. W
elco
me
and
revi
ew o
f int
rodu
ctio
ns (i
f nee
ded)
II.
Rem
inde
r of p
urpo
se o
f Sco
reca
rd
III.
Plan
for d
iscu
ssio
n of
item
s
a.
Ann
ounc
e ite
m
b.
Ask
for s
how
of h
ands
on
scor
e
c.
If al
l agr
ee, m
ove
on
d.
If di
sagr
ee, a
llow
up
to 1
0 m
inut
es fo
r di
scus
sion
e.
If st
ill u
nabl
e to
agr
ee, i
dent
ify th
e ra
nge
of
desi
red
scor
es a
nd le
ave
for fi
nal m
eetin
g
IV.
Dis
cuss
eac
h ite
m in
turn
V.
Iden
tify
any
item
s on
whi
ch a
gree
men
t was
not
re
ache
d
a.
If fu
rthe
r inf
orm
atio
n w
ould
be
help
ful,
iden
tify
som
eone
to g
athe
r nee
ded
info
b.
Requ
est t
houg
htfu
l con
side
ratio
n by
all
prio
r to
final
mee
ting
VI.
Adj
ourn
men
t
1.
DRA
FT A
GEN
DA
: M
EETI
NG
ON
E (O
RIEN
TATI
ON
)
I. W
elco
me
and
intr
oduc
tions
o In
trod
uctio
n of
wor
king
gro
up c
hair
by M
ayor
II.
Ove
rvie
w o
f Com
mun
ity D
isas
ter R
esili
ence
III.
Intr
oduc
tion
of th
e Sc
orec
ard
purp
ose
IV.
Brie
f Rev
iew
of S
core
card
V.
Dec
isio
ns a
bout
dat
a ga
ther
ing/
assi
gnm
ents
VI.
Oth
er d
iscu
ssio
n
3.
DRA
FT A
GEN
DA
: FIN
AL
SCO
RIN
G M
EETI
NG
I. W
elco
me
and
revi
ew o
f pur
pose
of S
core
card
for
com
mun
ity
II.
Qui
ck re
view
of a
ll ite
ms
on w
hich
agr
eem
ent w
as
reac
hed
at p
rior m
eetin
g
III.
Dis
cuss
ion
of it
ems
on w
hich
agr
eem
ent w
as n
ot
reac
hed:
a.
For a
ny it
em o
n w
hich
agr
eem
ent c
anno
t be
reac
hed,
sco
re a
t low
est l
evel
und
er
cons
ider
atio
n
IV.
Calc
ulat
e nu
mer
ic s
core
for e
ach
com
pone
nt o
f the
Sc
orec
ard,
and
the
over
all s
core
V.
Iden
tify
thos
e ar
eas
that
mos
t sug
gest
lim
ited
or
lack
of r
esili
ence
, and
dis
cuss
act
ion
step
s th
at
can
be ta
ken
to s
tren
gthe
n th
ose
area
s, w
ith
assi
gnm
ents
VI.
Det
erm
ine
timel
ine
for a
ny s
elec
ted
follo
w u
p ac
tiviti
es
VII.
Det
erm
ine
best
met
hod
for s
harin
g Sc
orec
ard
info
rmat
ion
with
the
com
mun
ity
VIII.
Eva
luat
ion
of th
e Sc
orec
ard
a.
Intr
oduc
tion
of th
e se
lf-as
sess
men
t she
et a
nd
requ
est S
core
card
Wor
king
Gro
up m
embe
rs to
se
nd it
to T
RI w
ithin
a fo
rtni
ght i
n th
e en
velo
p pr
ovid
ed
b.
Gro
up d
iscu
ssio
n on
the
eval
uatio
n of
the
Scor
ecar
d
IX.
Than
ks to
all
and
adjo
urnm
ent.
Ap
pen
dix
4: S
amp
le a
gend
as fo
r Wor
king
Gro
up M
eeti
ngs
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
612
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
Not
es:
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
712
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 53 14/12/2012 12:04:18 PM
Not
es:
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
712
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 54 14/12/2012 12:04:18 PM
Not
es:
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
.......
TRI_
Tool
kitR
epor
t.ind
d 2
712
/12/
2012
4:
07:0
2 PM
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 55 14/12/2012 12:04:18 PM
Torrens Resilience Institute Torrens Building 220 Victoria Square Adelaide SA 5000 Australia
Tel: +61 8 8221 5440 Email: [email protected]
www.torrensresilience.org
TRI_Report_Toolkit_print.indd 56 14/12/2012 12:04:19 PM