THE LEVEL OF DISASTER PREPAREDNESS OF PANGASINAN STATE UNIVERSITY STUDENTS, LINGAYEN CAMPUS S. Y. 2012-2013 A Research Paper Presented to Dr. Lorna G. Urbiztondo In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Course ProfEd 117 (Introduction to Research) By: Ryan S. Oris March 2013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would to express my sincerest appreciation and gratitude to the people behind the success of this undertaking: * To Dr. Lorna G. Urbiztondo, Research Adviser for her very supportive and professional guidance and assistance; * To the Staff of PSU Library, for allowing me to borrow undergraduate thesis; * To Mrs.
Helen Braga Mabanta, registrar of PSU Lingayen Campus for giving me the total population of enrolled students in this university; * Most of all I would like thank my families, friends and classmates for their inspiration and understanding; * And finally the Eternal and Gracious God, for answering and providing the needed intellect, strength, spiritual guidance in the completion of this study. Phenomenal things happened because of this people. I wish that all blessings and love be showered upon them. Chapter 1 The Problem and It’s Background
I. Introduction Preparedness in time of disasters known to be critical for households, communities and businesses but many people remains unprepared. Mindanao’s are blown in the wind, deaths in flashfloods. A shocking news that Typhoon Pablo’ pounds Mindanao last December 2012. It was approximated that this typhoon killed nearly 2,000 people and wiped out their livelihood and also residential areas. More than 90 percent of infrastructures are destroyed in Compostela Valley, Davao Oriental and parts of the Agusan provinces (Inquirer News).
This disaster serves to emphasize the significance of the responsibility of individual, local coordination and effective plans to ensure the capacity to respond and cope from major unexpected events. Natural or man-made disaster may come in many forms, anytime, anywhere without advance notice. If we caught unprepared, it causes damage and devastation it brings to lives and properties. Disaster may strike in any place whether at home, in school, in church, in market, in the workplace or in the streets.
Furthermore, students are one of affected in case of these disasters- one reason why government promotes enhancing skills and knowledge as a major instrument to cope with any eventuality that might come in life. As government’s prime duty is to avert and safeguard people from incoming disaster and other forms of catastrophe (CWTS Coursebook, 2009). In school or community, there are volunteer groups; training service and programs promoting the effective and appropriate measures in order to abate dangers.
This research assesses the end result of training services and programs to students. The purpose of this research is to examine the current disaster preparedness level of campus students at Pangasinan State University, Lingayen Campus in order to explore strength and weaknesses to be used in future campus disaster preparedness plans. If the University already aware with this knowledge, the university will be able to more effective plan, develop, and implement procedures in order to move in an efficient manner to preserve life and property in the event of a disaster on campus.
This descriptive research used a quantitative survey to assess the following research questions: What is the profile of the PSU- Lingayen Campus students in terms of age, sex and civil status? What is the level of preparedness in terms of natural and man-made disasters? What are the problems encountered by the respondents in the preparedness of disasters in terms natural and man-made disasters? This research used questionnaires to explore the status of their preparedness for a disaster. Significance of the Study The output of this research is deemed significant to the following: * The Students.
They will able to know the level of disaster preparedness of Pangasinan State University students. They will be more active in training services and programs concerning to disaster preparedness. * The Teachers. This study will give a feedback to the teachers on teaching disaster preparedness especially to NSTP (National Service Training Program) teachers. * The University Administration. This study will make the university aware on the level of disaster preparedness of the students and will help them coin appropriate programs to cope with the necessity of the students. The Future Researchers. Result of this study would be beneficial as a basis for further studies related to this research and to be inspired to conduct more extensive and substantial study about level of disaster preparedness in bigger area. Scope and Delimitation This study primarily focused on the level of disaster preparedness of students. According to the registrar office of Pangasinan State University Lingayen Campus, there are 6,447 students who are enrolled in this university. From the total population, there are 1,793 freshmen, 1,642 sophomores, 1,584 juniors and 1,428 seniors.
It only covers the 10% of the total population. It was conducted during the second semester of S. Y. 20012-2013. Statement of the Problem This study aimed to determine the level of disaster preparedness of Pangasinan State University students, Lingayen Campus S. Y. 2012-2013. Specifically, it sought to answer the following sub-problems: 1. What is the profile of the PSU- Lingayen Campus students in terms of the following variables: a. Sex b. Age c. Section d. Civil Status? 2. What is the level of preparedness in terms of: a. Natural disasters . Man-made disasters? 3. What are the problems encountered by the respondents in the preparedness of disasters? Definition of Terms The study used some terms which the researchers defined for clearer understanding. The following terms are defined operationally: 1) Disaster. It refers to a natural or man-made hazard resulting disturbances and disruption of social and economic aspects, loss of life, and drastic change of environment may happen. It has great effects to Pangasinan State University students, Lingayen Campus. 2) Disaster preparedness.
It refers to PSU-LC student’s ability to respond and recover in the event of a disaster. It encompasses measures aimed at intensifying life safety when an emergency occur. 3) Level of disaster preparedness. It refers to the level of readiness or preparation for disaster of the PSU-LC students. 4) Natural disasters. These are disasters that brought by nature. 5) Man- made disaster. These are synthetic disasters that brought by man. Chapter 2 Review of Related Literature and Studies This chapter presents the related literature review and studies which served as springboard in the conceptualization of this study.
They are reviewed hereunder to show that these studies are consistent with the present concerns of this research. RELATED LITERATURE A. Foreign Disaster may strike anytime, anywhere resulting to great loss and misfortune. Disasters have two kinds, the natural and man-made disasters. Natural and man-made disasters, such as earthquakes, floods, plane crashes, high-rise building collapses, or major nuclear facility malfunctions, pose an ever-present danger challenge to public emergency services. According to The CDC (2007) the leading cause of death in the typical college age population is the unintentional injuries.
Annually, more than 30,000 deaths occur from unintentional injuries for those between the ages 15 and 35 (CDC, 2007). According to the reports, homicide and suicide are the next two most frequent causes of deaths in age group. From the reports of the U. S Census Bureau (2008), in 2006 with 17. 1 million undergraduate and 3. 4 million graduate students there are more than 20 million college students in the United States. This represents an increase in students by 3 million, or 17 percent, from the 2000 census information.
As stated by Aker (2007), colleges represent a significant target hazard for the communities that they serve with potential for staggering amounts of loss of life, economic resources, and future potential if an incident on campus was to occur. Gaull (1997) stated that the prevention of a dangerous occurrence is known as the most practical way to save life from an unintentional injury. In fire prevention practices since the days of Benjamin Franklin, the American fire service has participated. From one of his newspaper articles, Mr.
Franklin quotes “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”, actually was referring to the common hazard of carrying smoldering embers or coals through the home. The release of the America Burning Report in 1973, from the National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control, was the formal declaration to the seriousness of the fire problem in America (EACRR, 2009). NFPA (2011) reports that from 1977 to 2006 that the fire rate in America dropped from 3. 2 million fires to approximately 1. 6 million. Though that represents almost a 50% drop in fires, the firesafety. ov (2011) reports an increase in the number of campus related fire deaths. Since January 2000, 135 college students have been reported to be killed in fires (firesafty. gov, 2011). The H1N1 flu epidemic serves as a great example of new and emerging risk that can quickly have a significant impact on a college. From August to the end of September 2009, campuses had reported 13,434 cases of H1N1 and two student deaths (Park, 2009). Colleges across the country were forced to scramble to develop plans and implement counter measures to ensure the safety of their students and workers.
Some colleges such as Arizona State went so far as to stock up on medications such as Tamiflu to dispense to students, other schools prepared dorms to be used as quarantine locations for infected students (McGraw, 2009). Almost all colleges developed and implemented some sort of prevention education program to deal with the spread of the flu. Ultimately, the education and prophylactic measures proved to be the most successful measures (CDC, 2010) Campus safety is not only important to the lives of those on college campuses but to the reputation of the college which is tied to its enrolment and in turn its economic success (Clunn, 2010).
It is recommended that individuals be prepared to take care of themselves for the first hours of an emergency or disaster (Bayless, 2011; FEMA, 2011). An interesting argument is how prepared college students are in the area of safety prevention. College Watch contended that a major reason for an increase in campus related fires is that the students’ knowledge level in regards to safety aspects is not proficient. For example, the number one factor found in campus fires was cooking accidents (Campus Fire Watch, 2011).
Cooking safety is a pretty common fire prevention topic in grade school so it is surprising that it would be the number one cause of fires on campus. According to Aschenbrener (2001), college campus students, faculty, and staff are at risk from thousands of different hazards. Prevention practices can teach the normal person how to live safer and how better be prepared for an emergency or disaster that may affect them and their family (Comeau, 2007). For college inhabitants to minimize their risk to death or injury from an unintentional injury they must have the knowledge and practice prevention strategies.
Preparedness is significant. According to White House (2003), preparedness is the existence of plans, procedures, policies, training, and equipment necessary at the federal, state, and local level to maximize the ability to prevent, respond to, and recover from major events. Meanwhile, National Incident Management System (2012) defined preparedness as a continuous cycle of planning, organizing, training, equipping, exercising, evaluating, and taking corrective action in an effort to ensure effective coordination during incident response.
This cycle is one element of a broader National Preparedness System in order abating dangers. B. Local The Philippines being a locus of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis and typhoons is a hotbed of disasters. Natural hazards have in? icted thousands of deaths and costly damage to property, not only natural disasters that has great impact to the lives of Filipino but also the human- induced or man-made disaster (Corresponding Author). In a report from Citizen’s Disaster Response Center (CDRC, 2011), a total of 431 natural and human-induced disasters were reported in the Philippines in 2011.
These killed 1,774 people, and affected more than 3 million families or 15. 3 million people, and caused over Php 26 billion in economic damages. Based on the EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database, of the 302 natural disasters that happened worldwide, 33 occurred in the Philippines and 21 in China. Last year, the country was only third on that list with only 14 natural disasters recorded. The Philippines also placed third in the list of countries most affected by natural disasters in 2011 with 11. 7 million people affected. Previously, the country placed only 5th on that list.
In terms of casualties, the Philippines is second to Japan with 1,924 people killed. In terms of frequency, flood topped the list with 121 reported incidents, or 28. 07% of the total number of disaster events monitored in 2011. This was followed by fire with 98 incidents –majority of which occurred in urban centers, particularly in congested urban poor communities. Meanwhile, earthquake occurred 78 times, while landslide 66 times, and tornado 23. Tropical Cyclones may not have made it to the top 5 most frequent disasters, but it affected the most number of people.
At least 10. 3 Million people were affected in 2011. The two most destructive tropical cyclones in 2011 are Tropical Storm Sendong (Washi) and Typhoon Pedring (Nesat). Prevention is doing always better than cure. Why wait for some predicted situations to happen when at first we are aware it will happen? Disasters and calamities though cannot be avoided but can be mitigated. These disasters may serve a lesson for us to become a disaster resilient. Furthermore, what we really need to do is to develop a culture of safety in order to prepare ourselves against any disaster.
It is not di? cult to demonstrate that we lack this culture, because examples can range from riding motorcycle bikes without helmets, to search and rescue teams not knowing where to ? nd rubber boats to save flood victims. According to Philippine Information Agency (PIA, 2011), during calamities, children are most vulnerable, reason to have education about disaster risk reduction. Since natural calamities are unpreventable, the best government can do is to reduce its disastrous effect through knowledge on disaster preparedness.
The provinces of Leyte, Southern Leyte and Eastern Samar in Eastern Visayas are the provinces specifically at high risk of natural calamities like landslide and flooding as the said provinces are located in the eastern seaboard of the country. As a preventive measure against disaster the Department of Education (DepEd), the Office of Civil Defense (OCD) and the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) have mandates to concretize disaster preparedness by integrating disaster reduction and management education in the curricula of the public secondary and tertiary schools.
It was learned that some schools in Eastern Visayas have started adopting introductory courses and modules on disaster risk reduction at the start of classes this year. The Regional Risk Reduction Management Council (RDRRMC) tied up with the DepEd in the conduct of a training and seminar for teachers expected to handle the subject. Some schools in Leyte have already included disaster risk reduction in their Earth Science subject even if the subject have yet to be formally ironed out between the National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council (NDRRMC) and the DepEd (PIA, 2011).
The subject will also be taught in the National Service Training Program (NSTP) for tertiary schools, technical-vocational, indigenous learning and in out of school youth courses. (PIA-8) It is very helpful for students to have information about weather conditions in the Philippines. Good news from students and also to Filipino, Department of Science and Technology launched a mobile application based on its highly successful project called NOAH which stands for Nationwide Operational Assessment of Hazards. From the report, NOAH aims to provide reliable and authoritative information about weather conditions in the country.
It is designed to be a disaster preparedness system to reduce loss of lives, and damages to properties due to rain-triggered natural hazards. Now that it’s accessible via a mobile application, Filipinos will be able to access information relevant to current weather conditions right on the palm of their hands. Raymund Liboro, Department of Science and Technology project director for NOAH said, “When it comes to getting and accessing information, there is nothing more ubiquitous than the mobile phone”. A 2011 World Bank study showed that 80 percent of Filipino households have a mobile phone, making the application convenient and accessible.
Furthermore, the NOAH mobile application will initially be available only for Android smartphones. However, its sharing options will allow users to share information across different social media. Future enhancements include incorporating a flood forecasting system. “This will really help us give advance warning to residents of flood-prone areas [and] if there is a need to evacuate,” said Vic Malano, Deputy Administrator of the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services. RELATED STUDIES A. Foreign Kevin Kupietz conducted a research entitled Retention of Emergency Preparedness Knowledge at Halifax Community College.
According to him, there are more than 3. 5 million students attending more than 4,000 colleges and universities in America. These students, along with faculty and staff members could be at risk of injury or death from natural or manmade incidents and disasters on and off campus. It is known that how well prepared and the actions one takes during an emergency can have a significant impact on the events outcome. The problem is that the emergency preparedness knowledge of students, faculty, and staff of colleges, like Halifax Community College is unknown.
It is critical for emergency preparedness planning to understand the core knowledge of the group that intends to develop protection plans for. With this in mind the purpose of this descriptive study was to examine the current emergency preparedness knowledge of Halifax Community College students, faculty, and staff members. This study used a quantitative survey tool or a web based testing instrument to explore the following questions pertaining to campus students, faculty, and staff: What is their current of understanding of campus emergency procedures?
What is their current level of knowledge is in regards to basic emergency preparedness? What is their current level of emergency preparedness based on the prevention actions they have taken? Kupietz’ study found that overall knowledge towards preparedness and prevention was fair to good for those that participated. The study also indicated that while the knowledge may be possessed the prevention actions were not always put into place by participants. This study concluded that a college campus puts a large quantity of people together in a small geographical area.
This can create the risk of an event leading to multiple injuries and/or deaths. College campuses often represent a new world of freedom for young adults that may lead to reckless behaviors such as drinking in excess. These factors, singularly and combined, put the typical college campus at risk. Through prevention programs that are able to promote good information with high retention rates that inspire people to take preventative actions the risk can be greatly reduced.
Through further research providing foundational information for prevention specialists to work from great strides can be made to protect the students, faculty, and staff of not only Halifax Community College but of colleges across the country. B. Local There was an assessment of disaster preparedness in selected public schools in Luzon, Philippines. This study was conducted by Jonathan Guevarra, Caridad Ancheta, Jason Dela Pena, Adelwisa Ortega and Theresita Lariosa. This study will attempt to describe the disaster preparedness of selected public schools and also School’s disaster preparedness plan.
Furthermore, this study will also attempt to determine awareness of key school personnel on disaster preparedness programs (both local and national) and Department of Education (DepEd) disaster related policies. From their study, 37 key personnel from elementary and secondary schools were interviewed using an interview guide from January to March 2006. They secured the written permit from the Department of Education (DepEd) Division Superintendent. Prior to interview respondents, consent form was obtained. They were collected the school profile and data on each School’s disaster preparedness.
Using descriptive statistics, data was analyzed. After a long period of time, they come up with the following results: of the 37 schools covered in the study, most (59%) of them came from the National Capital Region (NCR) and most of them were Elementary Schools. Thirty five schools (95%) reported to have formed disaster committees. However, less than one third (30%) of the respondent schools had disaster preparedness plans. The majority (95%) of the public schools conducted drills once a year. The most common type of drill conducted in these schools was fire and earthquake drills.
Fifty-one percent (51%) were not used as centers of evacuation during the disasters that occurred in the last five years. The majority (95%) of the public school key personnel were aware of the national local disaster management programs. All respondents were aware of disaster-related DepEd policies. The five researchers concluded that this study provided a glimpse of the efforts that teachers and students are preparing in times of emergencies and disasters. They recommend that specific hazards that affect schools may have to be addressed. “Chemical spills”, food poisoning and infectious disease outbreaks are examples of these.
These may also be considered the preparation of the School’s preparedness plans. As we reviewed the related literature from the local and foreign studies, it may help to understand the current study. From the local study- Assessment of Disaster Preparedness in Selected Public Schools in Luzon, Philippines, we knew already the status of elementary and secondary students of Luzon in preparing for disaster. In contrast, this current study focuses only to students of Pangasinan State University, Lingayen Campus in assessing also the level or status of their disaster preparedness.
Furthermore, this current study does not attempt to determine awareness of key school personnel on disaster preparedness programs but it is similar to the method to be used in analyzing data. From the foreign study entitled Disaster Preparedness; Concepts, Guidance, and Research, it has also a great help to my study. They gave summary of concepts, guidance and research about disaster preparedness. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK From the insights of the related studies and literatures presented earlier, certain concepts stood out as the source of the conceptual framework of this study.
Through this, the main intention of this study is to determine the level of disaster preparedness of PSU students in Lingayen Campus. The input variables of the study are the profile of the respondents which consist of age, gender, course and section, and civil status. The process is analyzing the information through the descriptive method using questionnaire. The output of this study is the level of disaster preparedness of PSU students in Lingayen Campus. The paradigm found on the succeeding page has guided the researcher in the conduct of this study. PARADIGM Analysis of the input through the descriptive survey method
Analysis of the input through the descriptive survey method 1. Personal Profile of the students in terms of: a. Sex b. Age c. Civil status 2. The level of preparedness in terms of: a. Natural Disasters b. Man-made Disasters 3. Problems Encountered by the respondents. 4. Personal Profile of the students in terms of: d. Sex e. Age f. Civil status 5. The level of preparedness in terms of: c. Natural Disasters d. Man-made Disasters 6. Problems Encountered by the respondents. Level of Disaster Preparedness of Pangasinan State University- Lingayen Campus S. Y 2012-2013
Level of Disaster Preparedness of Pangasinan State University- Lingayen Campus S. Y 2012-2013 INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT Figure 1: Paradigm of the study showing the relationship between the input- process and output of the study. Chapter 3 Research Methodology This chapter deals with the different approaches and techniques used by the researchers in gathering the important data to complete this study. It involves the research design, research locale, samples and sampling techniques, subject, research design, data gathering procedure, validation of instrument, data processing method and statistical treatment. Research Design
This study is basically descriptive research work. Descriptive research deals with the description, recording, analysis and interpretation of the phenomena that already exist (Calderon, 1993). The data were presented and discussed using descriptive and inferential analysis technique. Population and Sample of the Study There are 6,447 students enrolled in PSU Lingayen Campus. Ten percent (10%) of the total number of students will be chosen as respondents using stratified random sampling. The distribution is shown in Figure 2. YEAR LEVEL| NUMBER OF ENROLLED STUDENTS| 10%| First year| 1,793| 179| Second year| 1,642| 164|
Third year| 1,584| 158| Fourth year| 1,428| 143| TOTAL| 6,447| 645| Figure 2. Distribution of the Respondents of the Study Research Locale The study on the Level of Disaster Preparedness of PSU students, Lingayen Campus was conducted at Pangasinan State University, Lingayen Campus S. Y 2012-2013 Research Instrument The researchers employed questionnaires in gathering data from the respondents. Questionnaire is defined as the document containing a list of questions related to particular topic. The data which will be obtained from the returned questionnaires will be carefully studied to come up with an appropriate output.
This study covers research questionnaires as data gathering instrument. The questionnaire is divided into three parts. The first research questionnaire was made to gather information about personal profile of the respondents such as age, sex, and others. The second questionnaire was intended to obtain data on the disaster preparedness of the respondents. The third questionnaire was intended also to determine the problems encountered by the respondents in disaster preparedness. Validation of the Instrument The instrument used in this study will be valid until School Year 2012-2013.
Data Gathering Procedure The researcher was able to gather data thru questionnaire that was given to the respondents. This questionnaire during the time that the respondent answering the questionnaire, the researcher was able to have small informal interviews with the respondents and ask something related to the research problem. Data Processing Method Through descriptive method, data were analyzed. Statistical Tools and Treatment The data that were obtained using the questionnaires and the tests were subjected to statistical procedures as follows:
Part 1 on the profile of the respondents are measured and analyzed by percentages, and frequency. The formula is as follows: P= fN x 100 Where: P= percentage f= frequency N= number of respondents For problem No. 2, average weighted mean was used in determining the level of disaster preparedness in terms of hazard knowledge The formula in calculating the average weighted mean is shown below: AWM= ? fxN Where= Average Weighted Mean ?= summation of f= frequency x= the number that corresponding to the level of preparedness N= total number of respondents
The results will be interpreted using the Lickert Scale which is described below: Range| Scale| Descriptive Rating| 5| 4. 21- 5. 00| Very much prepared (VMP)| 4| 3. 41-4. 20| Much prepared (MP)| 3| 2. 61-3. 40| Moderately prepared (MP)| 2| 1. 81-2. 60| Fairly prepared (FP)| 1| 1. 0-1. 80| Not prepared (NP)| For Problem No. 3, the problems encountered by the students on the disaster preparedness had been computed by using frequency count and ranking. BIBLIOGRAPHY Africa. Carla, “Philippine Disasters” 9 November 2012. http://www. academia. edu/693831/Lessons_from_recent_Philippine_disasters
Aschenbrener, M. (2001). In Twombly S. (Ed. ), How colleges and Universities respond to natural disaster. United States- Kansas: The University of Kansas. Retrieved from http://www. npr. org/templates/story/story. php? storyId=9603275 Campus Fire Watch (2011, April 11). ” Current fire information”. Retrieved from http://www. campus-firewatch. com/resources%20center/currentinfo. html CDC (2007). “10 leading causes of death by age group”, United States-2007. Retrieved from http://cdc. gov/injury/leadingcauses. html Clunn N. (2010. October, 22). “Students need lessons in off-campus safety”.
NorthJersey. com. Retrieved from http://www. northjersey. com/news/crime_courts/105505788Students_need_lessons_in_off-campus_safety. html FEMA (2011). “Emergency response action steps”. Retrieved from http://www. fema. gov/plan/ehp/response. shtm Gaull, E. (1997, May). Show me the results! Fire Chief. HCC (2010). Halifax Community College’s annual report 2010. Retrieved from http://www. halifaxcc. edu/AnnualReport/annualreport2010. pdf Mowrer, F. W. (1999). “Fire safe student housing a guide for campus housing administrators”. Emmitsburg, MD: United States Fire Administration. Park, M. 2009, September, 22). ” Students ad H1N1 mingle on campus. CNN”. Retrieved from http://articles. cnn. com. /2009-09-22/health/h1n1. flu,college. students_1_h_1 _n_1-flu-prevention-seasonal-flu? _s=PM:HEALT http://upmcphresearchoffice. weebly. com http://www. futuregov. asia/articles/2012/nov/09/philippines-launches-mobile-app-disaster-preparedn/ http://www. universityworldnews. com/article. php? story=20120518132734905 http://www. academia. edu/1936994/An_Analysis_on_Environmental_Management_Polic y_in_the_Philippines APPENDICES APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE LEVEL OF DISASTER PREPAREDNESS
I. RESPONDENTS’ PERSONAL PROFILE DIRECTION: Please check your appropriate answers honestly. Your response will be of strict confidentiality. 1. Name: ____________________________ (optional) 2. Gender:( ) Male ( ) Female 3. Age:( ) 16-18 years old( ) 22-24 years old ( ) 19-21 years old( ) 25 above 4. Civil Status:( ) Single( ) Married II. LEVEL OF DISASTER PREPAREDNESS Direction: Please check on the column that describes the level of disaster preparedness. Numerical ValueDescriptive Equivalent 5very much prepared 4much prepared 3averagely prepared 2fairly prepared 1not prepared . Natural Disasters | 5| 4| 3| 2| 1| Climactic Variability (La Nina, El Nino)| | | | | | Coastal Erosion| | | | | | Drought| | | | | | Earthquake| | | | | | Flood| | | | | | Landslide| | | | | | Tsunami| | | | | | Typhoon and Tropical Surges| | | | | | Volcanic Eruption| | | | | | Wildfire| | | | | | Disease Epidemic| | | | | | 2. Man-made Disasters | 5| 4| 3| 2| 1| Fire Incident| | | | | | Structural Collapse| | | | | | Hazardous Spills| | | | | | Water Breakdown| | | | | | Food Scarcity| | | | | | Pollution| | | | | | Direction: Put a check on the answer you perceived most. 1.
Are you aware of the types of emergencies/ hazards that can potentially affect your area? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 2. Do you think that your family is relatively well-prepared for a disaster? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 3. Do you believe that the community you live in is relatively well- prepared for a disaster? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 4. Have you discussed disaster preparedness with your family, friends, classmates and neighbors? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 5. Do you know how to call for help? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 6. Are you aware with the contact number of different authorities (police hotline)? ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 7. Have you conducted a hazard, impact, and vulnerability assessments? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 8. Do you have a Family Disaster Supply Kit? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 9. Are you current in First-Aid training (trained in the last 3 years)? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 10. Do you participate in any seminars related to Disaster Preparedness? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 11. Are you responsible in CPR (Cardio-Pulmonary? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 12. Do you know how to operate or use the fire extinguisher? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 13. Do you monitor TV and radio reports? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 4. Do you know where your family records are? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 15. Do you stay calm and remember what it is that you know and how it is going to get you through the situation you’re in? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 16. Are you aware where your family will meet outside your home in case of an emergency? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 17. Have you practiced an emergency drill in your home or school within the past year? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 18. Do you know about disaster plans at your school? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 19. Are you aware with the precautionary measures in case of disasters? ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 20. Some family members have special needs, for example the elderly, mobility impaired or sick. Do you have a plan for making sure these members will be safe during a disaster? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 21. Do you have plan for your pets? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 22. Do you prepare a recovery plans? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 23. Do you secure your important documents and properties? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe 24. Do you have the mobile application Project NOAH (Nationwide Operational Assessment of Hazards)? ( ) Yes( ) No( ) Maybe III.
PROBLEM ENCOUNTERED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN THE DISASTER PREPAREDNESS Direction: Please put a check on the space provided for which is you think is the most problem that you encounter in the disaster preparedness. _____ Lack of conducting hazard, impact, and vulnerability assessments _____Lack of appreciation and support to the Disaster Preparedness _____Lack of Disaster Coordinating Council at the local level _____Erroneous disaster reporting and monitoring _____ Difficult to measure the effects _____ Lack of disaster information material _____ Inadequate training in disaster preparedness by key barangay people _____ Lack of facilities ____ Lack of evacuation plans _____ Lack of time to prepare CURRICULUM VITAE RYAN SANCHEZ ORIS #235Barangay Lasip, Lingayen, Pangasinan 09077996587 [email protected] com I. Personal Background Age:18 Date of Birth:August 6, 1994 Place of Birth:Pangasinan Gender:Male Civil Status:Single Nationality:Filipino Height: Weight: II. Educational Background TertiaryBachelor of Secondary Education (Physical Science) Pangasinan State University Alvear St. Brgy. Poblacion, Lingayen, Pangasinan 2011-present SecondaryLasip National High School Lasip. Lingayen, Pangasinan Salutatorian 2007-2011