Personal Preparedness 

In America:

Findings From the 

Citizen Corps Survey of Four Urban Areas

June 2009

FEMA

CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page i of 69

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction 1 

Research Method 3 

Research Findings 

 Extent of Individual Preparedness 6 

 Disaster Supplies 6 

 Household Plan 8 

 Familiarity with Community Systems 9 

 Volunteerism 11 

 Knowledge of Immediate Response 12 

 Participation in Drills 14 

 Preparedness Training 15 

Preparedness Barriers 17 

 Barriers to Preparedness Activities 17 

 Barriers to Preparedness Training 18 

 Expectation of Reliance on Others 20 

 Reliance on Others During an Evacuation 21 

Perception of Risk and Utility of Preparedness 23 

 Perception of Risks 23 

 Utility of Advance Preparation 25 

 Confidence in Ability to Respond 28 

Stages of Change in Preparedness 30 

Preparedness Differences for Individuals with Disabilities 32 

Social Responsibility and Suspicious Behavior 34 

 Awareness of Federal Programs and Communication 

 Preferences 35 

 Awareness of Campaigns 35 

 Communication/Outreach 36 

Summary and Recommendations 38 

Conclusion and Next Steps 45 

Appendix A – Survey Respondents Profile 47 

Appendix B – Survey Script 51 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page ii of 69
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 1 of 69

INTRODUCTION 

Disaster preparedness became a renewed priority for our nation as a direct response to the 

devastation of September 11, 2001. Following the tragedies of that day, government at all levels 

has imbedded stronger collaboration with non-governmental civic and private sector 

organizations and the general public in policies and practices. The Citizen Corps grassroots 

model of community preparedness has spread across the country, and Americans have been 

asked to become fully aware, trained, and practiced on how to respond to potential threats and 

hazards. 

To evaluate the nation’s progress on personal preparedness, the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency’s (FEMA’s) Community Preparedness Division and Citizen Corps conduct national and 

urban area household surveys to measure the public’s knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors 

relative to preparing for a range of hazards. This report provides a summary of the findings from 

the 2007 Citizen Corps Urban Area Survey. 

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 

The research objectives and survey questions for the 2007 Citizen Corps National and Urban 

Area Surveys were developed based on previous research, preparedness modeling, and policy 

and guidance from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The urban area study included 

a sample of 2,000 respondents drawn from four Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) Urban 

Area Security Initiative (UASI) areas: Indianapolis, IN; New York City, NY; Houston, TX; and 

San Francisco, CA. Findings from this study provide the ability to analyze differences in 

different geographic areas and should be reviewed in conjunction with Personal Preparedness in 

America: Findings from the 2007 Citizen Corps National Survey.

2003 Citizen Corps National Survey

In 2003, Citizen Corps conducted a similar survey nationally that provided baseline data on 

individual preparedness for disasters. Several specific questions from this survey were retained 

in the 2007 survey to provide trend data. Comparisons between the findings from the 2003 and 

the 2007 surveys are noted throughout the report. 

Citizen Preparedness Reviews1

FEMA’s Community Preparedness Division periodically publishes the Citizen Preparedness 

Review to highlight specific areas of research regarding community preparedness and to 

summarize research findings from multiple sources. To assess the research landscape on 

preparedness, Citizen Corps has developed and maintains the Citizen Preparedness Surveys 

Database of surveys on personal and business preparedness conducted in the United States since 

September 11, 2001. Currently, the database contains 81 surveys on individual preparedness, 28 

surveys on business, and 10 surveys on school preparedness. Analyzing research from this wide 

variety of sources allows larger preparedness trends and research gaps to be identified. 

 

1

 The Citizen Preparedness Reviews and other preparedness research are available at: 

http://www.citizencorps.gov/ready/research.shtm 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 2 of 69

Citizen Preparedness Review Issue 3, Patterns in Current Research and Future Research 

Opportunities (published in summer 2006), made several recommendations for future research 

that were taken into consideration in the development of the 2007 Citizen Corps National and 

Urban Area Surveys including to: 

• More fully explore participants' knowledge of the correct preparedness measures and 

appropriate responses for different types of hazards. 

• Investigate a more comprehensive range of knowledge, supplies, and skills related to 

disaster preparedness, such as knowledge of warning systems, evacuation routes, and 

training for specific skills. 

• More fully explore motivational barriers to preparedness, such as degree of uncertainty 

about ability to perform recommended measures or perceptions that recommended 

measures will not make a difference in disaster situations. 

• Investigate demographic and contextual characteristics as they relate to preparedness 

including: prior experience with disasters, disability/ability factors, and community 

engagement. 

• Examine individuals' preparedness in multiple locations in addition to their homes, such 

as the school, workplace, and community. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 3 of 69

RESEARCH METHOD 

Under contract to FEMA’s Community Preparedness Division, Macro International Inc. 

(Macro), an applied research and consulting firm, supported the survey design, data collection 

and analysis and reporting of the 2003 and 2007 Citizen Corps Surveys.

Survey Design

The survey instrument consists of 55 items covering the following topics: 

• Severity/Efficacy • Prevention • Volunteering 

• Risk Awareness/Perception • Disaster Supplies • Disability 

• Stages of Change • Household Plan • Outreach 

• Reliance • Community Plan • Brand Awareness 

• Personal Response • Drills/Exercises • Demographics 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Approval and Implementation

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

approved a multi-year collection on May 18, 2007. The OMB Control Number for this survey is 

1670-0006. 

Institutional Review Board (IRB) Exemption Approval

In addition to OMB approval, the research survey was also granted Institutional Review Board 

(IRB) exemption from Macro International’s internal IRB under 45 CFR 46.101(b)(2b). 

Survey Administration

The 2007 Citizen Corps Urban Area Survey was fielded from July 2007 to November 2007. 

The survey was administered using Macro’s computer-assisted telephone interviewing system. 

Macro also provided Spanish interviewers as an option for Spanish-speaking respondents. 

Sampling

Macro conducted the survey with a sample size of 2,000 respondents from four urban areas (500 

respondents in each area). This provides overall results at +/–4 percent sampling error (at 95% 

confidence), while providing statistically valid segment-level results. Findings that have a higher 

percentage than the sampling error are unlikely to be inaccurate and are considered to be 

statistically significant. 

The sample was selected via random digit dialing (RDD) from a list-assisted sampling frame. 

The RDD sampling frame represents the non-institutionalized U.S. adult population residing in 

households equipped with land-line telephones. The frame excludes adults in penal, mental, or 

other institutions; adults living in other group quarters such as dormitories, barracks, convents, or 

boarding houses (with 10 or more unrelated residents); adults living in a household without a 

telephone; and/or adults who did not speak English or Spanish well enough to be interviewed in 

either language. 

Citizen Corps examined a variety of areas, considering several criteria in choosing the four urban 

areas to study: whether the area was designated as an UASI jurisdiction and received UASI-
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 4 of 69

related funds; what types of hazards the area was at high risk for (natural disaster, act of 

terrorism, hazardous materials accident, or disease outbreak); the geographic U.S. location (east, 

west, north, south); the relative population size of the area; and whether the area experienced a 

disaster recently. Using the FY2006 UASI designations, Citizen Corps determined that the urban 

areas of San Francisco Bay, CA, Houston, TX, Indianapolis, IN, and New York City, NY, 

provided the most variety among these criteria and also fulfilled the needs of the household 

survey. 

City UASI Hazard Type Geographic 

Location 

Relative 

Population 

Size 

New York Yes High Terrorism NE Large 

Houston Yes Hurricane, Flood, Tornado S Large 

San Francisco Yes Earthquake W Large 

Indianapolis Yes Tornado MW Small 

Macro used information from the DHS Web site regarding the 2006 UASI jurisdictions to 

identify the appropriate localities associated with each of the four urban areas. The following 

localities were identified as falling within the UASI jurisdictions for the four selected urban 

areas. 

San Francisco—Bay Area, CA

Cities of Oakland, San Francisco, and San Jose; counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, 

Marin, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, and Sonoma; incorporated 

cities including Berkeley, Daly City, Fremont, Hayward, Palo Alto, Richmond, 

Sunnyvale, and Vallejo 

New York City Area, NY 

Cities of New York and Yonkers; counties of Nassau, Suffolk, and Westchester 

Houston Area, TX

City of Houston; counties of Harris, Fort Bend, Montgomery, Brazoria, and Galveston 

Indianapolis Area, IN

City of Indianapolis; counties of Hamilton and Marion 

Weighting

Each telephone number in the sample areas had an equal chance of selection. However, 

operational aspects, such as non-response and landline saturation, may produce respondents that 

over-represent or under-represent certain population segments. Macro accounted for these 

potential biases by weighting the data according to geography, age, gender, and race. (See 

Appendix A for the survey respondents profile based on the weighted data). This adjusted the 

sample’s demographic distributions to match the distribution in the U.S. Census population 

estimates. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 5 of 69

Research Questions

Building on the findings of the 2003 Citizen Corps National Survey, the understanding of 

disaster preparedness garnered from citizen preparedness and the Community Preparedness and 

Participation Target Capability, the following research questions were developed to guide the 

design and analysis of this study: 

• To what extent are individuals prepared for disasters? What barriers do individuals 

perceive in preparing for disasters? 

• What is the perception of vulnerability to different types of disasters? How do people 

perceive the utility of preparedness? 

• In which stage of the Stages of Change Model (Precontemplation, Contemplation, 

Preparation, Action, Maintenance) are individuals relative to disaster preparedness? 

• How does disaster preparedness differ for individuals with disabilities? 

• What is the perceived social responsibility for reporting suspicious behavior? 

• How aware are individuals of specific Federally-sponsored community preparedness 

programs, and what are their communication preferences about these programs? 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 6 of 69

RESEARCH FINDINGS

Results from the 2007 Citizen Corps Urban Areas Survey are organized according to the research 

questions to further inform these critical aspects of preparedness. This section reports on the 

basic findings of the survey of the urban areas as well as how these findings are different from 

the 2007 Citizen Corps National Survey. (See Appendix B for the survey instrument). 

Statistically significant differences across different demographics and contextual variables such 

as religiousness or employment status are also provided. 

To What Extent Have Individuals Gathered Disaster Supplies?

The extent to which individuals report having gathered and maintained specific disaster supplies 

is an important identifier of actual preparedness (versus perceived preparedness). To assess 

individuals’ levels of preparedness, participants were asked about the existence of disaster 

preparedness supplies in their homes, workplaces, and cars. 

There were large differences among participants from the four areas surveyed having supplies set 

aside for a disaster. Slightly fewer participants from New York (50%) and Indianapolis (52%) 

had set aside supplies than participants nationally (53%). Houston had the highest percentage of 

participants that had set aside disaster supplies at 65 percent, and San Francisco was second with 

60 percent of individuals setting aside supplies. 

If participants indicated they had set supplies aside in their homes to be used only in the event of 

a disaster, they were asked to list what those supplies included. The supplies most frequently 

mentioned as being part of disaster supply kits included supplies of bottled water and packaged 

foods, with fewer respondents mentioning other essential supplies such as flashlights or a first 

aid kits. Fewer New York participants had bottled water and food set aside than participants in 

the other areas and nationally, while fewer San Francisco participants reported having flashlights 

and batteries (see Table 1 below for percentages). It is important to note that in the event of a 

disaster, participants may be without electricity, which will require individuals to have access to 

a battery-powered or crank radio to receive information about the disaster; despite the 

importance of this item, only 23 to 28 percent of participants had battery-powered radios in their 

kits. Participants in all of the four urban areas were more likely to have battery-powered radios, 

however, than those in the national sample. 

Three out of four participants with disaster supplies reported that they updated their supplies at 

least once a year. Nine percent of New York participants had never updated their supplies, while 

only 4 percent of Houston participants said that they had never updated their supplies. 

To What Extent Are Individuals Prepared for Disasters? 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 7 of 69

Table 1: Home Disaster Supply Kits* 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

A supply of bottled water 73% 74% 68% 77% 79%

A supply of packaged food 71% 71% 64% 68% 71%

A flashlight 40% 43% 45% 40% 38%

A first aid kit 34% 34% 35% 27% 30%

Batteries 25% 31% 24% 35% 22%

A portable, battery-powered radio 23% 29% 24% 28% 28%

Medications 9% 8% 10% 11% 10%

Cash 3% 1% 3% 3% 2%

Financial documents 2% 2% 2% 1% 2%

Eyeglasses 1% 2% 1% 1% 1%

Photocopies of personal identification 1% 2% 1% 0% 0%

Other 38% 34% 37% 27% 41%

*These responses were unaided and asked as part of a multiple response question. The results represent the total percent of 

respondents mentioning the existence of the particular item in their homes as part of their disaster preparedness kits.

Participants were also asked if they had disaster preparedness kits in their cars and workplaces (if 

applicable, based on employment status). About one-quarter of participants or more said they 

had supplies set aside in their cars, and almost half of participants who were employed said they 

had supplies set aside in their workplaces. Fewer participants in New York reported having 

supplies in their cars, but likewise fewer participants there reported owning cars. San Francisco 

had the highest percentage of participants (51%) with supplies at work, while New York was 

much lower (37%). 

Table 2: Disaster Supply Kits in Multiple Locations 

 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

In your home 53% 52% 50% 65% 60%

In your car 30% 31% 23% 24% 30%

In your workplace 45% 47% 37% 46% 51%

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Geography: Suburban residents (69%) were significantly more likely than those living 

in rural areas (54%) to have disaster preparedness supplies set aside in their homes. 

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (70%) were significantly more 

likely than those with a high school education or less (52%) to have supplies set aside 

in their homes. Participants with a college education or more (82%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (61%) to have supplies of 

bottled water in their disaster supplies at home. 

• Household Income: Individuals who made $25K or less per year (77%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $50K to $74K per year (53%) to have 

supplies of packaged food in their disaster supplies at home. 

• Race: Non-Hispanics (27%) were significantly more likely than Hispanics (16%) to 

have disaster supplies set aside in their cars. 

Indianapolis • Household Income: Households making $50K to $74K per year (9%) were 

significantly more likely than those making $75K or more per year (0%) to have 

financial documents and photocopies of personal identification among their disaster 

supplies.

• Geography: Rural residents (64%) were significantly more likely than urban residents 

(42%) to have disaster supplies set aside. Rural residents (57%) were also 

significantly more likely than individuals who lived in suburban areas (36%) to update 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 8 of 69

these supplies more than once a year. 

• Gender: Women (37%) were significantly more likely than men (20%) to have 

portable, battery-powered radios among their disaster supplies. 

• Age: Individuals ages 35 to 54 (30%) were significantly more likely than older 

individuals (17%) to have portable battery-powered radios among their disaster 

supplies. 

New York • Age: Participants ages 35 to 54 (44%) were significantly more likely than older adults 

(19%) to have first aid kits in their homes. 

• Geography: Individuals living in suburban areas (82%) were significantly more likely 

than those living in urban areas (57%) to have supplies of bottled water in their 

homes. 

San 

Francisco 

• Geography: Suburban residents (84%) were significantly more likely than those who 

lived in urban areas (72%) to have supplies of bottled water in their homes in case of a 

disaster. 

• Age: Individuals who were age 55 or older (36%) were significantly more likely than 

individuals ages 18 to 34 (21%) to have supplies set aside in their cars. 

• Education: Respondents with a college education or more (33%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (18%) to have supplies set 

aside in their cars. 

To What Extent Do Individuals Have a Household Emergency Plan?

Overall, less than half of participants reported having household emergency plans that included 

instructions for household members about where to go and what to do in the event of a disaster. 

Over half (52%) of Houston residents reported having household plans, which measured above 

the national sample (42%). New York and San Francisco residents were considerably less likely 

to report having plans (32% and 36%, respectively). Most participants with plans had discussed 

these plans with other members of their households (84% to 89%). 

Participants were also asked if they had copies of important financial documents in a safe place 

that would help them rebuild or seek assistance after a disaster. Only 60 percent of New York 

and 62 percent of San Francisco participants disclosed that they had copies of important financial 

documents in a safe place, compared with 70 percent of Houston and 75 percent of Indianapolis 

participants. 

Table 3: Household Disaster Preparedness Plans 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Yes 42% 42% 32% 52% 36%

No 58% 58% 68% 48% 64%

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Education: Individuals with a college education or more (56%) were significantly more 

likely than those with a high school education or less (42%) to have household 

emergency plans.

• Gender: Of the participants with household emergency plans, women (95%) were 

significantly more likely than men (77%) to have discussed plans with other household 

members.

• Geography: Suburban residents (91%) were significantly more likely than urban 

residents (77%) to have discussed plans with other household members.

• Age: Individuals age 55 or more (81%) were significantly more likely than those ages 

35 to 54 (70%) and 18 to 34 (59%) to have copies of important financial and insurance 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 9 of 69

information in a safe place. 

Indianapolis • Age: Respondents between the ages of 35 and 54 (47%) were significantly more likely 

than respondents ages 18 to 34 (29%) to have household emergency plans.

• Geography: Rural (51%) and suburban (47%) respondents were significantly more 

likely than urban respondents (32%) to have household emergency plans.

• Household Income: Of the households who had household emergency plans, those 

who made $50K to $74K per year (97%) were significantly more likely than those who 

made $25K to $49K per year (81%) to have discussed plans with other members in 

their households. 

New York • Age: The 35 to 54 and 55 and older age groups were significantly more likely (33% 

and 37%, respectively) to have emergency plans in their homes than those in the 18 

to 34 age group (14%). Of the participants who had plans for their homes, the 

participants ages 35 to 54 and 55 and older were significantly more likely (61% and 

68%, respectively) than those ages 18 to 34 (44%) to have copies of important 

financial and insurance documents in a safe place.

• Education: Of the participants who had plans, those with a college education or 

higher were significantly more likely (88%) to have discussed that plan with other 

household members than those with a high school education or less (71%). 

Participants with a college education or more (63%) were also significantly more likely 

to have copies of important documents than participants with a high school education 

or less (50%).

• Geography: Suburban residents (69%) were significantly more likely than those living 

in urban areas (54%) to have copies of important financial and insurance documents 

in a safe place. 

San 

Francisco 

• Race: White respondents (40%) were significantly more likely than Asian respondents 

(20%) to have household emergency plans.

• Ethnicity: Non-Hispanics (65%) were significantly more likely than Hispanics (42%) to 

have copies of important financial and insurance documents in a safe place.

• Household Income: Individuals who made $75K or more per year (69%) were 

significantly more likely than individuals who made $25K or less per year (45%) to 

have copies of important financial and insurance information in a safe place.

• Education: Respondents with a college education or more (67%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (42%) to have copies of 

important financial and insurance documents in a safe place. 

How Familiar are Individuals with Their Community-based Disaster Preparedness 

Systems?

Participants were asked to rate their familiarity with various community-based disaster 

preparedness systems. Residents of the four urban areas differed substantially in their knowledge 

of community plans and systems. For example, there was a wide range of knowledge of alerts 

and warning systems in the four urban areas, with 59 percent of Indianapolis residents indicating 

familiarity, and only 26 percent familiarity indicated by residents of New York and 30 percent in 

San Francisco. Except for Houston, residents reported lower numbers than the national sample 

related to knowledge of shelter locations, evacuation routes, and how to get help relative to an 

evacuation. Only 13 percent of San Francisco participants and 17 percent of Indianapolis 

participants were familiar with shelter locations near them. Houston residents were more familiar 

with both shelter locations (52%) and community evacuation routes (41%). This finding may be 

due to Houston’s vulnerability to hurricanes and the resulting experience in evacuations and 

sheltering. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 10 of 69

The findings from the national survey indicated that 29 percent of participants were familiar with 

how to get help evacuating. More than twice the number of Houston residents than participants 

in the other areas was familiar with evacuating; respondents in New York (22%) and San 

Francisco (20%) were both below the national response (29%). Except for New York residents 

(46%), at least half of residents who had children attending school were aware of the details of 

the emergency or evacuation plans for their children’s schools, including where the schools plan 

to evacuate and how to get information about their children in the event of disaster (Houston 

50%, Indianapolis (52%), and San Francisco (53%). All the areas were below the national 

response (58%) in their awareness of the plans of their children’s schools. 

Table 4: Familiarity with Community Plans/Systems* 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Alerts and warning 

systems in your 

community? 

45% 59% 26% 44% 30%

Official sources of 

public safety 

information? 

34% 31% 26% 38% 26%

Shelter locations near 

you? 31% 23% 24% 29% 16%

How to get help with 

evacuating or getting 

to a shelter?

29% 25% 22% 41% 20%

Community 

evacuation routes? 26% 17% 25% 52% 13%

*Each percentage represents top-and-bottom-box scores, respectively. Those stating 4 or 5 (top-box, most familiar) and 1 or 2 

(bottom-box, least familiar) are measured on a scale of 1 to 5; with 5 being “very familiar” and 1 being “not at all familiar”.

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Geography: Rural residents (50%) were significantly more likely than urban 

residents (30%) to be very familiar with community evacuation routes. Rural 

residents (37%) were significantly more likely than individuals who lived in urban 

areas (19%) to be very familiar with how to get help evacuating or getting to a 

shelter. 

• Education: Individuals with a high school education or less (29%) were 

significantly more likely than those with a college education or more (17%) to be 

very familiar with nearby shelter locations. 

Indianapolis • Geography: Rural respondents (50%) were significantly more likely to be familiar 

with alerts and warning systems, compared with urban respondents (32%). Rural 

residents (15%) were also significantly more likely to be very familiar with 

community evacuation routes than were suburban residents (6%). 

• Household Income: Households making $25 to $49K per year (23%) were 

significantly more likely to be very familiar with shelter locations near them, than 

were households making $50 to $74K per year (7%) and households making 

$75K or more (8%). 

• Gender: Men (21%) were significantly more likely than women (11%) to be very 

familiar with official sources of public safety information. 

New York 

• Household Income: Participants who made $25K or less per year (25%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more per year (9%) to 

report that they were very familiar with how to get help evacuating or getting to a 

shelter.
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 11 of 69

• Geography: Individuals who lived in suburban areas (19%) were significantly 

more likely than those living in urban areas (8%) to say they were very familiar 

with community alerts and warning systems.

• Age: Those ages 55 or older (25%) were significantly more likely than those ages 

18 to 34 (6%) to be very familiar with nearby shelter locations. 

San 

Francisco 

• Race: White respondents (19%) were significantly more likely than Asian 

respondents (4%) to be very familiar with community alerts and warning systems. 

• Household Income: Individuals who made $25K to $49K per year (17%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more per year (7%) to be 

very familiar with how to get help evacuating or getting to a shelter. 

• Geography: Rural residents (27%) were significantly more likely than urban 

(11%) and suburban (13%) residents to be very familiar with official sources of 

public safety information. 

What Is the Extent of Volunteer Support for Emergency Responders/Community Safety?

Volunteerism was also investigated as part of this study in order to better understand residents’ 

willingness to engage in such activities. Residents of the different areas ranged in their time 

volunteered to support emergency responder organizations with a low of 15 percent and 17 

percent for New York and Houston, respectively, and 23 percent for both Indianapolis and San 

Francisco. The most frequently mentioned organizations that participants had volunteered with 

included Neighborhood Watch, the American Red Cross, and local fire and police departments. 

A greater percentage of participants had volunteered to help during a disaster (27% to 37%). 

Houston was particularly high at 37 percent, which could potentially be needs-related, per 

Hurricane Katrina. A majority of participants were willing to take a 20-hour disaster 

preparedness training course (65% to 72%), with participants in New York (72%) and San 

Francisco (72%) more willing than the other areas to take the 20-hour training course.

Table 5: Volunteering for Emergency Responder/Community Safety 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Yes 23% 23% 15% 17% 23%

No 77% 77% 85% 83% 77%

Table 6: Volunteering to Help in a Disaster 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Yes 32% 27% 26% 37% 27%

No 68% 73% 74% 63% 73%

Table 7: Willingness to Take a 20-hour Disaster Preparedness Training Course

 National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Yes 65% 68% 72% 65% 72%

No 35% 32% 28% 35% 28%
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 12 of 69

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Geography: Rural (29%) and suburban (23%) residents were significantly more 

likely than urban residents (8%) to have volunteered for an organization that 

focused on community safety in the past 12 months. Participants who lived in 

rural areas (81%) were significantly more likely than those who lived in suburban 

areas (63%) to be willing to take a 20-hour training course to be qualified to help 

their communities recover from disasters. 

• Gender: Men (46%) were significantly more likely than women (27%) to have 

ever volunteered to help in a disaster. 

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (44%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (18%) to have ever 

volunteered to help in a disaster. 

Indianapolis • Gender: Men (36%) were significantly more likely than women (19%) to have 

ever volunteered to help in a disaster. 

• Geography: Individuals who lived in rural areas (42%) were significantly more 

likely than those living in suburban areas (23%) to have ever volunteered to help 

in a disaster. 

• Household Income: Households that made $75K or more per year (78%) were 

significantly more likely than households with a yearly income of $50K to $74K 

(61%) to be willing to take a 20-hour training course to be qualified to help their 

communities recover from disasters. 

• Age: Individuals ages 18 to 34 (75%) and those ages 35 to 54 (77%) were 

significantly more likely than older individuals (56%) to be willing to take a 20-

hour training course to be qualified to help their communities recover from 

disasters. 

New York • Gender: Men were significantly more likely (77%) than women (67%) to say that 

they were willing to take the 20-hour training course. 

• Geography: Participants living in rural areas (37%) were significantly more likely 

to have volunteered for an emergency responder organization in the past 12 

months than suburban (14%) or urban (13%) participants. 

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (76%) were significantly 

more willing to take the course than those with a high school education or less 

(39%). 

San 

Francisco 

• Ethnicity: Non-Hispanic respondents (25%) were significantly more likely than 

Hispanic respondents (12%) to have volunteered for any emergency responder 

organizations in the past 12 months. 

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (31%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (11%) to have ever 

volunteered to help in a disaster. 

• Household Income: Individuals who made $75K or more per year (81%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $25K to $49K per year (67%) to be 

willing to take a 20-hour training course to be qualified to help their communities 

recover from disasters. 

Do Individuals Know What To Do in the First Five Minutes After Specific Types of 

Disasters (Natural, Radiological, Explosion, or Chemical Release)?

This survey sought to measure individuals’ perceptions of their abilities to know what to do in 

the first few minutes of a disaster (self-efficacy) as well as their belief that their actions could 

make a difference (response-efficacy). Participants were asked to rate their confidence in their 

own abilities as they related to a specific set of disasters. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 13 of 69

Participants overall felt most confident in their abilities to know what to do in the first 5 minutes 

of a sudden natural disaster such as an earthquake or tornado. Across areas, confidence dropped 

when dealing with a manmade disaster such as an explosion of a radiological or dirty bomb, 

release of a chemical agent, or an explosion or bomb. There were considerable differences in 

confidence levels across the areas. New York residents were less confident than other areas, 

especially when dealing with a chemical agent, an explosion or bomb, or natural disasters. 

Houston residents were more confident relative to the release of a chemical agent than were 

residents in other areas. Most areas felt the least confident dealing with a radiological or dirty 

bomb. 

Table 8: Knowledge of How to Respond in the First Five Minutes* 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Fransicso, CA

A sudden natural

disaster such as an

earthquake or

tornado

57% 62% 36% 56% 60%

An explosion or

bomb 33% 31% 24% 32% 28%

The release of a

chemical agent

23% 22% 15% 27% 21%

An explosion of a

radiological or dirty

bomb

19% 20% 16% 19% 19%

*Each percentage represents top-and-bottom-box scores, respectively. Those stating 4 or 5 (top-box, very confident) and 1 or 2 

(bottom-box, not very confident) on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being ‘very confident’ and 1 being ‘not very confident’ in their abilities to 

know what to do in the first 5 minutes following a disaster. 

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Gender: Men (21%) were significantly more likely than women (12%) to feel very 

confident in their abilities to know what to do in the first 5 minutes of an explosion 

or bomb.

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (36%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (25%) to feel very 

confident in their abilities to know what to do in the first 5 minutes of a sudden 

natural disaster. 

• Ethnicity: Hispanics (21%) were significantly more likely than non-Hispanics (4%) 

to feel not confident at all in their abilities to handle a disaster. 

Indianapolis • Household Income: Households who made $25K to $49K per year (25%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more per year (9%) to feel 

very confident in their abilities to know what to do in the first 5 minutes of an 

explosion or bomb.

• Gender: Men (24%) were significantly more likely than women (9%) to feel very 

confident in their abilities to know what to do in the first 5 minutes of an explosion 

or bomb.

• Geography: Urban residents (15%) were significantly more likely than suburban 

residents (4%) to feel very confident in their abilities to know what to do in the first 

5 minutes of the release of a chemical agent. 

New York • Gender: Men (16%) were significantly more confident in their abilities to know 

what to do in the first 5 minutes of any type of explosion or bomb than women 

(9%).

• Race: Blacks (15%) were significantly more likely than Whites (7%) to feel very 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 14 of 69

confident in knowing what to do in the first 5 minutes of a release of chemical 

agent.

• Age: Individuals age 55 or older (13%) were significantly more likely than those 

ages 18 to 34 (4%) and 35 to 54 (7%) to feel confident in their knowledge of what 

to do in the first 5 minutes of a radiological/dirty bomb. 

San 

Francisco 

• Gender: Men were significantly more confident than women in their abilities to 

know what to do in the first 5 minutes of every disaster listed.

• Race: White respondents (36%) were significantly more confident than Asian 

respondents (11%) in their abilities to know what to do in the first 5 minutes of a 

sudden natural disaster. 

• Geography: Rural respondents (51%) were significantly more confident in their 

abilities to know what to do in the first 5 minutes of a sudden natural disaster than 

both suburban and urban respondents (29% and 30%, respectively). 

What is the Extent of Participation in Preparedness Drills/Exercises?

Residents were asked if they had participated in a number of disaster preparedness drills in their 

homes, workplaces, or schools, aside from a fire drill. The most participants reported 

participating in a workplace evacuation drill, ranging from 37 to 43 percent depending on the 

area. Very few residents in the four areas surveyed had participated in a home evacuation (9% to 

13%, depending on area) or home shelter-in-place drill (6% to 13%, depending on area). New 

York residents had participated the least in home, workplace, school, and shelter-in-place drills. 

Overall, the responses from the four areas surveyed were close to the national response. 

Table 9: Participation in Drills 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

A workplace 

evacuation drill 41% 40% 40% 37% 43%

A workplace shelter-inplace drill 27% 33% 20% 25% 24%

A school evacuation 

drill 19% 23% 19% 15% 16%

A school shelter-inplace drill 14% 12% 8% 14% 12%

A home evacuation 

drill 13% 12% 10% 13% 9%

A home shelter-inplace drill 10% 9% 6% 13% 8%

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Geography: Rural residents (20%) were significantly more likely than urban 

residents (8%) to have participated in home shelter-in-place drills in the past 12 

months.

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (41%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (23%) to have 

participated in workplace evacuation drills in the past 12 months.

• Gender: Men (31%) were significantly more likely than women (18%) to have 

participated in workplace shelter-in-place drills in the past 12 months. 

Indianapolis • Gender: Men (13%) were significantly more likely than women (6%) to have 

participated in home shelter-in-place drills in the past 12 months. 

• Geography: Suburban residents (7%) were significantly less likely than urban 

residents (20%) and rural residents (17%) to have participated in home 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 15 of 69

evacuation drills in the past 12 months.

• Age: Individuals ages 35 to 54 (43%) were significantly more likely than older 

individuals (26%) to have participated in workplace evacuation drills in the past 

12 months. 

New York • Household Income: Participants who made less than $25K per year (82%) were 

significantly more likely to report not having participated in a workplace 

evacuation drill than those earning $25K or more (53% to 59%). Participants who 

made less than $25K per year (35%), however, were significantly more likely to 

have participated in a school evacuation drill than those earning $25K or more 

(6% to 21%). 

• Education: Those with a college education or more (43%) were much more likely 

to have participated in a workplace evacuation drill than those with a high school 

education or below (27%).

• Age: Those ages 18-34 (29%) were significantly more likely to have participated 

in a school evacuation drill than those older than 34 years of age (12% to 17%). 

San 

Francisco 

• Household Income: Individuals who made $25K to $74K per year (both 14%) 

were significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more per year (4%) 

to have participated in home evacuation drills.

• Gender: Men (49%) were significantly more likely than women (35%) to have 

participated in workplace evacuation drills.

• Geography: Urban residents (37%) were significantly more likely than suburban 

residents (18%) to have participated in workplace shelter-in-place drills. 

How Many Individuals Have Received Training in Preparation for a Disaster?

Because emergency skills are an important aspect of disaster preparedness, participants were 

asked if they had engaged in any sort of emergency-based training programs. For all areas, 

cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training was found to be the most common—taken by 

nearly one-third of participants (28% to 32%)—which was slightly lower than the national 

response (35%). New York residents had attended CPR training and first aid skills training less 

than residents in the other areas. However, fewer Indianapolis participants had attended 

preparedness meetings. Around 10 percent of participants in each area had attended Community 

Emergency Response Team (CERT) training, mirroring the national response. More San 

Francisco residents had attended CERT training (12%) than residents in other areas. 

Table 10: Preparedness Training Programs 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Attended CPR training 35% 32% 27% 32% 28%

Attended first aid skills 

training 33% 31% 22% 30% 29%

Attended a meeting on how to 

be better prepared for a 

disaster

23% 20% 23% 22% 26%

Attended training as part of a 

Community Emergency 

Response Team or CERT

10% 8% 8% 9% 12%

The majority of individuals taking preparedness classes or emergency training attributed their 

motivation to a mandatory function of their job or school (50% to 53%) for all areas. Other 

highly ranked motivations included being prepared and feeling concern for safety of family and 

others. San Francisco participants reported concern for personal safety (11%) as a motivator 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 16 of 69

more so than Houston (4%) or Indianapolis (6%) residents. Overall, the area responses were 

similar to the national response. 

Table 11: Motivators for Preparedness Training* 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Mandatory for job/school 51% 53% 50% 52% 50%

To be prepared 16% 10% 11% 14% 16%

Concern for safety of family or 

others 15% 12% 13% 14% 14%

Easy to sign up 7% 6% 8% 7% 8%

Concern for personal safety 7% 6% 7% 4% 11%

To have the necessary skills 

to help others 7% 6% 5% 8% 7%

General interest/hobby 6% 5% 6% 2% 4%

Because others (family or 

friends) did 4% 2% 4% 2% 4%

Other 5% 9% 6% 3% 6%

*These responses were unaided and asked as part of a multiple response question. The results represent the total percent of 

respondents mentioning the particular motivator from the list.
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 17 of 69

What Are the Barriers to Undertaking Disaster Preparedness Activities?

If participants had not yet prepared, they were asked about their perceived barriers to 

preparedness. They were asked—from a provided set of potential reasons—whether that was a 

primary reason, somewhat of a reason, or not a reason at all. Across the board, the greatest 

primary reason for not preparing was participants’ reliance on emergency responders such as 

fire, police, or emergency personnel to help them. This was greatest in New York and Houston 

(42% and 47%, respectively), and higher than the 37 percent reported nationally. 

Lack of knowledge continues to be a primary barrier, both nationally and across the areas. 

Almost 1 in 4 participants indicated not knowing what to do to prepare in Indianapolis and San 

Francisco, increasing to more than 3 in 10 in New York and Houston. 

Houston tended to rate more barriers as primary reasons than other surveyed urban areas. 

Besides reliance on responders, more than 25 percent of participants from Houston cited not 

having time, not knowing what to do, and not wanting to think about it as primary reasons, all 

greater than the national finding. 

San Francisco tended to have fewer participants cite the barriers provided as primary reasons for 

not preparing. Aside from reliance on responders, the only other barrier measuring greater than 

the national finding related to lack of time (32% versus 24%). 

There were differences related to self-efficacy (“I don’t think I’d be able to do it”) and response 

efficacy (“I don’t think it will make much of a difference”) across areas. Both New York and 

Houston indicated higher levels than the other areas relative to thinking that preparation would 

not make much of a difference (21% for both New York and Houston, compared with 12% for 

Indianapolis and 14% for San Francisco). Almost 2 in 10 respondents from Houston indicated 

that they did not think they would be able to prepare in advance. 

Table 12: Barriers to Preparedness 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

I think that emergency 

responders, such as fire, 

police, or emergency 

personnel, will help me.

37% 38% 42% 47% 40%

I don’t know what I'm 

supposed to do. 27% 24% 31% 33% 24%

I just haven't had the time. 24% 20% 27% 35% 32%

I don't want to think about it. 19% 15% 19% 26% 16%

It costs too much. 17% 7% 10% 23% 10%

I don't think it will make 

much of a difference. 17% 12% 21% 21% 14%

I don't think I'd be able to. 13% 10% 11% 19% 13%

What Barriers Do Individuals Perceive in Preparing for Disasters? 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 18 of 69

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Geography: Urban residents (45%) were significantly more likely than suburban 

residents (24%) to think that not having had the time was a primary reason for not 

having prepared.

• Education: Individuals with a high school education or less (39% and 37%, 

respectively) were significantly more likely than those with a college education or 

more (19% and 12%, respectively) to feel that a primary reason for not preparing 

was that they did not want to think about it, or that they didn’t think it would make a 

difference. 

• Ethnicity: Hispanics (34%) were significantly more likely than non-Hispanics 

(17%) to feel that a primary reason for not preparing was that it costs too much.

• Household Income: Participants who made $25K or less per year (34%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more per year (7%) to feel 

that a primary reason for not preparing was that they didn’t think they would be 

able to take the necessary preparedness steps. 

Indianapolis • Education: Individuals with a high school education or less (46%) were 

significantly more likely than those with a college education or more (17%) to feel 

that not knowing what they were supposed to do in the event of a disaster was a 

primary reason for not having taken any disaster preparedness steps. 

• Gender: Men (71%) were significantly more likely than women (54%) to feel that 

not wanting to think about preparedness was not an adequate reason at all for not 

preparing. 

New York • Education: Individuals with a high school education or less (45% and 23%, 

respectively) were significantly more likely than those with a college education or 

more (26% and 5%, respectively) to feel that not knowing what they were 

supposed to do and feeling that it cost too much were primary reasons for why 

they had not taken any disaster preparedness steps. 

• Education: Those with a high school education or less (68%) were significantly 

more likely than participants with a college education or more (33%) to report that 

a primary reason for not taking any disaster preparedness steps was that they 

thought emergency responders would help them. 

San 

Francisco 

• Age: Individuals age 55 or older (52%) were significantly more likely than those 

ages 18 to 34 (21%) to feel that not having enough time was their primary reason 

for not taking disaster preparedness measures.

• Education: Respondents with a high school education or less (28% and 34%, 

respectively) were significantly more likely than those with a college education or 

more (9% and 7%, respectively) to state that primary reasons for not taking 

disaster preparedness steps were that they did not want to think about it and did 

not think it would make a difference.

• Geography: Respondents living in suburban areas were significantly more likely 

(84%) than those living in urban areas (67%) to feel that they would not be able to 

perform the necessary disaster preparedness steps. 

What Are the Barriers to Taking Preparedness Training?

When participants were asked about the barriers that kept them from taking any sort of 

preparedness training, time was a major factor. One in five residents of Houston, Indianapolis, 

and New York cited lack of time as a main reason, which was greater than the national finding of 

16 percent. Twenty-three percent of Houston and 22 percent of New York residents cited that it 

was difficult to get information on what to do, compared with 15 percent for the national finding. 

It is worth noting that 45 to 55 percent of respondents answered with “other” as their response, 

and a majority of those responses dealt with either not having heard of any available training, not 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 19 of 69

having been offered any preparedness training, or having taken training beyond the 2-year limit 

noted in the question. 

Table 13: Barriers to Preparedness Training* 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Lack of time 16% 21% 21% 21% 14%

Haven't thought about it 15% 10% 12% 9% 9%

Difficult to get information on 

what to do 15% 16% 22% 23% 19%

Don't think it is important 5% 3% 5% 3% 3%

Lack of money/Too expensive 2% 4% 2% 2% 1%

Don't think it will be effective 2% 3% 1% 2% 4%

Other 53% 54% 45% 47% 55%

*These responses were unaided and asked as part of a multiple response question. The results represent the total percent of 

respondents mentioning the particular motivator from the list. 

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Education: Individuals with a college education or more (28% and 37%, 

respectively) were significantly more likely than those with a high school 

education or less (5% and 9%, respectively) to have attended a meeting on how 

to be better prepared for a disaster and to have attended first aid skills training. 

• Household Income: Individuals who made $25K to $49K per year (36%), those 

who made $50K to $74K per year (31%), and those who made $75K or more per 

year (39%) were significantly more likely than those individuals who made $25K 

or less per year (10%) to have attended CPR training. 

• Gender: Women (30%) were significantly more likely than men (15%) to feel that 

the main reason they had not received any preparedness training was because 

information on what to do was too difficult to get. 

Indianapolis • Education: Individuals with a college education or more (36%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (16%) to have 

attended first aid skills training in the past 2 years. 

• Household Income: Households making $50 to $75K (31%) were significantly 

more likely to have attended a meeting on how to be better prepared for a 

disaster than were households making $25 to $49K (14%). 

• Geography: Rural residents (55%) were significantly more likely than urban 

residents (34%) and suburban residents (26%) to have attended CPR training in 

the past 2 years. Urban residents (14%) were significantly more likely than 

suburban residents (5%) to have attended training as part of a CERT in the past 

2 years. 

New York • Age: Individuals who were between the ages of 35 and 54 (31%) were 

significantly more likely than older adults (16%) to have attended first aid skills 

training. 

• Gender: Men (11%) were significantly more likely than women (5%) to have 

attended CERT training. Men (30%) were also significantly more likely than 

women (13%) to have reported lack of time as the main reason for not receiving 

any preparedness training. 

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (13%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (0%) to have reported 

their motivation for attending preparedness training as the desire to be prepared. 

• Household Income: Individuals who made $25K or less per year (33%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more per year (15%) to 

report that difficulty to get information on what to do was their main reason for not 

participating in any preparedness training.
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 20 of 69

San 

Francisco 

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (28%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (15%) to have 

attended a preparedness meeting in the past 2 years. Individuals with a high 

school education or less (31%) were significantly more likely than those with a 

college education or more (16%) to feel that difficulty to get information on what 

to do was their primary reason for not receiving any preparedness training.

• Household Income: Respondents who made $75K or more per year (34%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $25K or less per year (19%) to 

have attended CPR training in the past 2 years. 

Who Will Individuals Look To For Help During the First 72 Hours? 

Individuals’ expectations of reliance on others in the event of a disaster can also be important as 

they relate to individuals’ preparedness levels. Participants were asked to describe how much 

they would rely on certain groups of individuals for assistance in the first 72 hours following a 

disaster. 

Across the areas, mirroring the national survey response, there was overwhelming agreement 

amongst participants that they would expect to rely on household members. Individuals also 

placed high levels of reliance on fire, police, and emergency personnel. However, there were 

differences in the extent of that expectation, with 72 percent of respondents from New York 

indicating that they would expect to rely on emergency personnel for assistance in the first 

72 hours following a disaster, compared with 54 percent in San Francisco. 

Participants across the areas would also expect to rely on non-profit organizations and their faith 

communities, although the extent of that reliance differed by area. For example, in Indianapolis, 

participants showed relatively high levels of expected reliance on both non-profit organizations 

(43%) and their faith communities (44%). In contrast, participants from San Francisco were 

slightly lower than the national finding in their expected reliance on non-profit organizations 

(37% compared with 40%) and much lower in their expected reliance on their faith communities 

(25% compared with the national 39%). These findings are consistent with responses to how 

participants responded to the below question on religiosity. 

Table 14: Expectation of Reliance on Others* 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Household members 71% 69% 64% 72% 71%

Fire, police, emergency 

personnel 57% 62% 72% 61% 54%

People in my 

neighborhood 48% 47% 44% 41% 47%

Non-profit organizations 40% 43% 46% 41% 37%

My faith community, such 

as a congregation 39% 44% 34% 43% 25%

State and federal 

government agencies, 

including FEMA 

30% 32% 41% 37% 29%

*Each percentage represents top-box scores, respectively. Those stating 4 or 5 (top-box, most relied upon) are on a scale of 1 to 5, 

with 5 being “expect to rely on a great deal” and 1 being “do not expect to rely on at all” for assistance in the first 72 hours following 

a disaster. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 21 of 69

Overall, fewer participants would expect to rely on State and Federal government agencies, 

including the FEMA, in the first 72 hours following a disaster. More participants indicated that 

they would not expect to rely on State and Federal government agencies at all. 

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Gender: Women (31%) were significantly more likely to rely on non-profit 

organizations than men (17%). 

• Race: Hispanics (42%) were significantly more likely than non-Hispanics (19%) 

to rely on their faith communities. 

• Education: Individuals with a high school education or less (50%) were 

significantly more likely than those with a college education or more (33%) to rely 

a great deal on fire, police, and emergency. 

• Household Income: Individuals who made $25K or less per year (41%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more per year (7%) to rely 

a great deal on non-profit organizations. 

Indianapolis • Gender: Women (69%) were significantly more likely than men (57%) to expect 

to rely a great deal on household members for assistance during a disaster.

• Household Income: Households who made $25K or less per year (25%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $50K to $74K per year (7%) to 

expect to rely on State and Federal government agencies for assistance during a 

disaster.

• Age: Individuals ages 18 to 34 (44%) were significantly more likely than those 

age 55 or older (22%) to expect to rely on their faith communities a great deal. 

New York • Gender: Women (55%) were significantly more likely than men (43%) to expect 

to rely a great deal on fire, police, and emergency personnel.

• Race: Blacks (37%) were significantly more likely than Whites (21%) to expect to 

rely a great deal on non-profit organizations.

• Household Income: Individuals who made $25K or less per year (48%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more a year (15%) to 

expect to rely a great deal on non-profit organizations.

• Education: Individuals with a high school education or less (45%) were 

significantly more likely than those with a college education or more (22%) to 

expect to rely a great deal on non-profit organizations. 

San 

Francisco 

• Household Income: Individuals that made $25K or less per year were 

significantly more likely (37%) to rely on their faith communities in the event of 

disaster, than those who made $25K to $49K (13%), $50K to $74K (18%), and 

those who made more than $75K per year (11%). 

• Geography: Respondents who lived in rural areas were significantly more likely 

(40%) than suburban residents (19%) to expect to rely on people in their 

neighborhoods in the event of a disaster. 

• Gender: Women (60%) were significantly more likely than men (49%) to rely on 

household members in the event of a disaster. 

Do Individuals Expect to Need Help During an Evacuation?

Respondents were also asked specifically if they would expect to need help to evacuate or to get 

to a shelter in the event of a disaster. All the areas reported higher levels than the national finding 

of individuals expecting to need help evacuating. Almost half of respondents from San Francisco 

indicated they would need help in evacuating or getting to a shelter, and 6 of 10 respondents 

from New York City indicated that they expected to need help. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 22 of 69

Table 15: Reliance on Help from Others During in Evacuation 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Yes 38% 44% 62% 42% 49%

No 62% 56% 38% 58% 51%

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Gender: Women (49%) were significantly more likely than men (36%) to expect 

to need help evacuating in the event of a disaster. 

• Race/Ethnicity: Hispanics (63%) were significantly more likely than nonHispanics (33%) to expect to need help evacuating in the event of a disaster. . 

• Education: Individuals with a high school education or less (62%) were 

significantly more likely than those with a college education or more (35%) to 

expect to need help evacuating or finding shelter in the event of a disaster 

• Household Income: Individuals who made $25K or less per year (47%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more per year (25%) to 

expect to need help evacuating or finding shelter in the event of a disaster. 

Indianapolis • Gender: Women (53%) were significantly more likely than men (34%) to expect 

to need help evacuating or finding shelter during a disaster. 

• Household Income: Households who made $25K or less per year (52%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $50K to $74K per year (35%) to 

expect to need help evacuating or finding shelter in the event of a disaster. 

• Race/Ethnicity: Hispanics (73%) were significantly more likely than nonHispanics (42%) to expect to need help evacuating in the event of a disaster. 

Also, Blacks (59%) were significantly more likely than Whites (38%) to expect to 

need help evacuating. 

New York • Gender: Women (68%) were significantly more likely than men (57%) to expect 

to rely a great deal on fire, police, and emergency personnel.

• Race: Whites (55%) were significantly less likely than any other racial group 

(68% to 73%) to expect to need help evacuating or seeking shelter in the event of 

a disaster. 

• Household Income: Individuals who made $25K or less per year (86%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more a year (50%) to 

expect to need help evacuating or finding shelter in the event of a disaster. 

• Education: Individuals with a high school education or less (75%) were 

significantly more likely than those with a college education or more (59%) to 

expect to need help evacuating or finding shelter in the event of a disaster. 

San 

Francisco 

• Household Income: Individuals that made $25K or less per year were 

significantly more likely (72%) to rely on their faith communities in the event of 

disaster, than those who made $25K to $49K (57%), $50K to $74K (48%), and 

those who made more than $75K per year (35%). 

• Education: Individuals with a high school education or less (74%) were 

significantly more likely than those with a college education or more (43%) to 

expect to need help evacuating or finding shelter in the event of a disaster. 

• Gender: Women (56%) were significantly more likely than men (42%) to expect 

to need help evacuating during a disaster. 

• Race/Ethnicity: Whites (34%) were significantly less likely than any other racial 

group (67% to 74%) to expect to need help evacuating or seeking shelter in the 

event of a disaster. Also, Hispanics (79%) were significantly more likely than nonHispanics (42%) to expect to need help evacuating.
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 23 of 69

What Are Individuals’ Perception of Risks of Different Types of Disasters?

Risk perception was assessed in two different ways. First, participants were asked to state how 

likely (using a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 meaning not very likely and 5 meaning very likely) they 

thought it was that a specific type of disaster would occur in their community in the next 12 

months. Then they were asked how likely they believed the disaster would ever occur in their 

communities. 

The survey demonstrated large differences in risk perceptions. Of the disaster types, a natural 

disaster such as an earthquake, flood, hurricane, tornado, or wildfire, was rated as the disaster 

most likely to occur for three of the four areas (Indianapolis, Houston, and San Francisco). 

Respondents from Houston and San Francisco indicated greater perceptions of vulnerability to 

natural disaster, with over 3 in 10 indicating the likelihood of a natural disaster affecting their 

communities in the short term (12 months), compared with 2 in 10 for the national survey; 

furthermore, over 5 in 10 reported a belief that a natural disaster would affect their community at 

some time, compared with more than 3 in 10 of the national respondents. 

Of the four areas studied, most areas indicated a similar sense of vulnerability to an act of 

terrorism in the short term, with about 1 in 10 indicating that they felt such a disaster might occur 

in the next 12 months—except for New York, where one-quarter of the respondents felt that a 

terrorist attack might occur in the next 12 months. More New York area respondents thought a 

terrorist attack might ever occur in their communities, with 38 percent indicating that this was 

likely. It is worth noting that a disaster from a terrorist attack is felt to be more likely for the New 

York urban area than a natural disaster, both in the short term and in the long term. 

 

Participants from Houston were the most likely to feel that a hazardous materials (HAZMAT) 

accident was likely to happen in the next 12 months or ever (22% and 29%, respectively), more 

so than national respondents (13% and 22%, respectively) and all the other areas. 

Figure 1: Perception of Risk of a Natural Disaster* 

*Likeliness each disaster would occur, top-box scores (those stating 4 or 5, on a scale of 1 to 5; 5 being “very likely” that the disaster 

would occur and 1 being “not very likely” that the disaster would occur) 

21%

18%

34%

34%

25%

37%

30%

52%

38%

59%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

National

New York, NY

San Francisco, CA

Houston, TX

Indianapolis, IN

Natural DisasterEver

Natural Disaster12 months

What Is the Perception of Vulnerability to Different Types of Disasters? How 

Do People Perceive the Utility of Preparedness? 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 24 of 69

Figure 2: Perception of Risk of an Act of Terrorism* 

10%

25%

10%

11%

11%

19%

38%

16%

24%

20%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

National

New York, NY

San Francisco, CA

Houston, TX

Indianapolis, IN

Act of TerrorismEver

Act of Terrorism12 months

*Likeliness each disaster would occur, top-box scores (those stating 4 or 5, on a scale of 1 to 5; 5 being “very likely” that the disaster 

would occur and 1 being “not very likely” that the disaster would occur)

Figure 3: Perception of Risk of Hazardous Materials Accident* 

13%

17%

14%

22%

11%

22%

24%

25%

29%

20%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

National

New York, NY

San Francisco, CA

Houston, TX

Indianapolis, IN

Hazardous

Materials

Accident- Ever

Hazardous

Materials

Accident- 12

months

*Likeliness each disaster would occur, top-box scores (those stating 4 or 5, on a scale of 1 to 5; 5 being “very likely” that the disaster 

would occur and 1 being “not very likely” that the disaster would occur) 

Figure 4: Perception of Risk of a Severe Disease Outbreak* 

9%

14%

11%

10%

10%

20%

24%

21%

18%

18%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

National

New York, NY

San Francisco, CA

Houston, TX

Indianapolis, IN

Severe Disease

Outbreak- Ever

Severe Disease

Outbreak- 12

months

*Likeliness each disaster would occur, top-box scores (those stating 4 or 5, on a scale of 1 to 5; 5 being “very likely” that the disaster 

would occur and 1 being “not very likely” that the disaster would occur)
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 25 of 69

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Ethnicity: Non-Hispanics (40%) were significantly more likely than Hispanics 

(22%) to think that a natural disaster was very likely to ever hit Houston. 

• Geography: Suburban residents (50%) were significantly more likely than urban 

(28%) and rural (19%) residents to think that a natural disaster was very likely to 

ever happen in Houston. 

• Household Income: Individuals who made $75K or more per year (24%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $25K to $49K per year (10%) and 

those who made $50K to $74K per year (7%) to think that a hazardous materials 

accident was very likely to ever hit Houston. Participants who made $25K per year 

or less (17%) were significantly more likely than those who made $75K per year 

or more (3%) to think that a terrorist attack was very likely to happen in Houston in 

the next 12 months. 

Indianapolis • Gender: Men (32%) were significantly more likely than women (20%) to think that 

a natural disaster was very unlikely to happen in the next 12 months.

• Geography: Urban residents (24%) were significantly more likely than suburban 

(8%) and rural (6%) residents to think that it was very likely that a natural disaster 

would hit in the next 12 months.

• Education: Individuals with a college education (15%) were significantly more 

likely than those with a high school education (4%) to think that there would be a 

terrorist attack in the next 12 months.

• Age: Individuals age 55 or older (27%) were significantly more likely than those 

ages 35 to 54 (17%) to think that a hazardous materials accident was very 

unlikely to ever happen in the Indianapolis area. 

New York • Geography: Individuals who lived in urban areas (19%) were significantly more 

likely to rate terrorist attacks as very likely in the next 12 months, or ever, than 

suburban areas (8%). 

• Household Income: Households earning less than $25K a year (23%) were 

significantly more likely to rate HAZMAT accidents as very likely within the next 12 

months than individuals with higher incomes (5%). 

• Education: Individuals with a high school degree (21%) or less were significantly 

more likely to rate natural disaster, terrorist attacks, hazardous materials 

accidents, and disease outbreak as very likely to occur in the next 12 months than 

those with a college degree or more (13%). 

San 

Francisco 

• Gender: Women were significantly more likely (21%) than men (11%) to say that 

a natural disaster was very likely to occur in the next 12 months. 

• Income: Individuals who made $25K or less per year were significantly more 

likely (14%) than those who made $75K or more per year (4%) to think that a 

terrorist attack was very likely to ever occur in San Francisco. 

• Education: Respondents with a college education or more were significantly 

more likely (48%) to believe that natural disaster would ever hit San Francisco 

than those with a high school education or less (21%). 

What Is the Perceived Effect of the Utility of Advance Preparation for Different Types of 

Disasters?

The survey sought to measure individuals’ perceptions of the efficacy or utility of preparing in 

advance of a disaster. Participants were asked separately about natural disasters, acts of 

terrorism, hazardous materials accidents, and severe disease outbreaks. When compared with 

national survey responses, the respondents from the four urban areas indicated slightly greater 

beliefs that preparation, planning, and emergency supplies would help them handle a natural 

disaster, with San Francisco showing the greatest difference (85% compared with 78%). 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 26 of 69

Similar to the national response, the surveys reported much lower levels of efficacy for the other 

types of disasters surveyed, with an act of terrorism demonstrating a much greater belief that 

preparing in advance would not help in the situation. New York City and San Francisco 

respondents had the lowest levels of efficacy relative to acts of terrorism (59% and 58%, 

respectively) and the highest percentages indicating that nothing done to prepare would help 

handle the situation (37% and 38%, respectively). 

Participants indicated greater response efficacy for incidents such as severe disease outbreak and 

hazardous materials accidents, with most areas having higher levels of response efficacy than the 

national finding. More than 1 in 5, however, still believed that nothing would help them in those 

situations either. Of interest is that Indianapolis was the only area to report a lower level of 

efficacy relative to a hazardous materials accident, with 63 percent of respondents indicating a 

belief that preparation in advance would be beneficial in the situation compared with the national 

finding of 67 percent. 

Table 16: Utility of Advance Preparations for a Natural Disaster 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

I can handle the situation without 

any preparation. 14% 12% 9% 13% 9%

Preparation, planning, and 

emergency supplies will help me 

handle the situation.

78% 83% 82% 82% 85%

Nothing I do to prepare will help 

me handle the situation. 8% 5% 9% 5% 6%

Table 17: Utility of Advance Preparations for an Act of Terrorism 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

I can handle the situation without 

any preparation. 4% 2% 4% 4% 3%

Preparation, planning, and 

emergency supplies will help me 

handle the situation.

61% 62% 59% 61% 58%

Nothing I do to prepare will help 

me handle the situation. 35% 36% 37% 34% 38%

Table 18: Utility of Advance Preparations for a Hazardous Materials Accident 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

I can handle the situation without 

any preparation. 10% 8% 7% 9% 9%

Preparation, planning, and 

emergency supplies will help me 

handle the situation.

67% 63% 69% 70% 70%

Nothing I do to prepare will help 

me handle the situation. 23% 29% 24% 22% 21%
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 27 of 69

Table 19: Utility of Advance Preparations for a Severe Disease Outbreak 

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Education: Individuals with a college education or more (15%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (7%) to think that they 

could handle a natural disaster without any preparation. 

• Geography: Suburban residents (86%) were significantly more likely than 

individuals who lived in urban areas (76%) to think that preparation, planning and 

emergency supplies would help them with a natural disaster; however, these 

individuals were significantly more likely than rural residents (11%) to think that 

nothing they did to prepare would help them in the event of a hazardous 

materials accident. Urban residents (13%) were significantly more likely than 

suburban (6%) and rural (1%) residents to think that they could handle a severe 

disease outbreak without any preparation. 

Indianapolis • Gender: Men (16%) were significantly more likely than women (8%) to feel that 

they could handle a natural disaster without any preparation. 

• Age: Individuals aged 55 or older (9%) were significantly more likely than those 

ages 18 to 34 (1%) to think that nothing they could do to prepare would help them 

handle a natural disaster. 

New York • Age: The 18- to 34-year-old age group was significantly more likely (16%) than 

the 35 to 54 age groups (6%) to believe that there was nothing they could do to 

prepare for a natural disaster. The oldest age group (55 and older) was 

significantly more likely (15%) than younger age groups (18–34: 4%; 35–54: 6%) 

to think that they could handle a natural disaster without any preparation.

• Household Income: Individuals who made $25K or less per year were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more to believe that 

preparation, planning, and emergency supplies would help them handle a 

terrorist act (73% and 56%, respectively).

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (28%) were significantly 

more likely to think there was nothing they could do to prepare for a hazardous 

materials accident when compared with those with a high school education or 

less (12%).

• Geography: Individuals who lived in urban areas (75%) were significantly more 

likely than those who lived in rural areas (57%) to think that preparation, planning, 

and emergency supplies would help them in a severe disease outbreak. 

San 

Francisco 

• Gender: Men were significantly more likely than women to report feeling that they 

could handle a natural disaster without any preparation (13% of men over 5% of 

women). 

• Geography: Respondents living in rural areas were significantly more likely 

(15%) to feel that they could handle a natural disaster without any preparation 

than those living in suburban areas (5%). 

• Education: Individuals with a high school education or less were significantly 

more likely (15%) than those with a college education or more (4%) to think that 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

I can handle the situation without

any preparation. 8% 4% 6% 8% 5%

Preparation, planning, and

emergency supplies will help me

handle the situation.

69% 74% 73% 69% 69%

Nothing I do to prepare will help

me handle the situation. 23% 22% 21% 23% 26%
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 28 of 69

nothing they did to prepare would help them handle a natural disaster. 

• Household Income: Individuals who made less than $25K a year were 

significantly more likely (11% and 16%, respectively) than those who made more 

than $25K a year (3% and 7%, respectively) to believe they could handle a 

terrorist attack or a hazardous materials accident without any preparation. 

What Is the Perceived Effect of Advance Preparation on Ability to Respond to Disasters?

As a follow-up to the questions related to their confidence in knowing what to do in the first 

5 minutes of a disaster, participants where then asked how much preparing in advance would 

help them handle a disaster. For all areas, over half of participants said preparing for a disaster 

would help them (54% to 58% said “very much”, depending on area). 

Respondents were also asked whether they had spoken with others about the need to be prepared 

for disasters. Over half of San Francisco participants (53%) said they had talked to someone 

about preparing, which was higher than the other areas. For those who had talked to others about 

preparing in advance, residents of Houston had talked to household members more so than the 

other areas (49%). Residents of Indianapolis (10%) and Houston (9%) had talked to their faith 

communities more than residents of New York (5%) and San Francisco (7%). 

Table 20: Perception of Effectiveness of Advance Preparations 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Very much 55% 56% 54% 57% 58%

Somewhat 34% 33% 32% 30% 34%

Very little 8% 9% 10% 10% 6%

Not at all 3% 1% 4% 2% 3%

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Geography: Rural residents (75%) were significantly more likely than urban 

residents (49%) to think that preparing for a disaster would help them handle the 

disaster. 

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (49%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (24%) to have talked 

with someone about the need to be prepared for disasters that may affect their 

communities. 

• Gender: Men (23%) were significantly more likely than women (11%) to have 

talked to people from work/school about the need to be prepared. 

Indianapolis • Age: Individuals who were age 55 or more (13%) were significantly more likely 

than those ages 35 to 54 (6%) to think that preparing for a disaster would do very 

little to help them handle the disaster. Individuals ages 35 to 54 (34%) and 55 or 

more (44%) were significantly more likely than those ages 18 to 34 (18%) to think 

that preparing for a disaster would somewhat help them handle the disaster. 

New York • Race: Blacks (63%) were significantly more likely than Whites (49%) to think that 

preparing for a disaster would help them to handle the disaster. 

• Gender: Women (48%) were significantly more likely than men (23%) to have 

talked to household members about the need to be prepared. 

• Age: Individuals ages 35 to 54 (20%) were significantly more likely than older 

adults (4%) to have talked to people from work/school about the need to be 

prepared. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 29 of 69

San 

Francisco

• Income: Individuals who made $25K to $49K per year (73%) were significantly 

more likely than those who made $50K to $75K per year (44%) to think that 

preparing for a disaster would help them handle the disaster. 

• Geography: Rural residents (69%) were significantly more likely than suburban 

residents or urban residents (55% to 57%) to feel that preparing for a disaster 

would help them to handle the disaster. 

• Education: Individuals with a high school education or less (63%) were 

significantly more likely than those with a college education or more (56%) to feel 

that preparing for a disaster would help them handle the disaster. 

• Ethnicity: Non-Hispanics (56%) were significantly more likely than Hispanics to 

have talked to someone about the need to be prepared for disasters. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 30 of 69

Developed by Prochaska and DiClemente, the Stages of Change Model or Transtheoretical 

Model of Behavior Change2

 states that behavior change is not an event, but rather a process. In 

this conceptualization, individuals move through five distinct stages that indicate their readiness 

to attempt, make, or sustain behavior change. These five stages are precontemplation, 

contemplation, preparation, action, and maintenance. The stages are not linear, as individuals do 

not necessarily progress from one stage to the next, but instead individuals may relapse to earlier 

stages and begin the process again. Often, social marketing campaigns are targeted toward 

individuals in the contemplation stage, as these individuals may be more readily prompted to 

take action if given assistance. 

Figure 5: Stages of Change Model

The survey asked participants to rate their individual levels of preparedness for a major disaster3

. 

Nearly 4 out of 10 participants (39%) stated that they had been prepared for at least the past 6 

months. Thirty-two percent of respondents indicated their intention to begin preparing either in 

the next month or in the next 6 months. Fifteen percent said they were not planning to do 

anything about preparing at all. Houston and San Francisco area respondents were more likely to 

indicate that they had been prepared for at least 6 months than national respondents (39% and 

42%, compared with 32%). Similarly, both those areas had smaller numbers of individuals not 

planning to do anything about preparing, than the national finding. Thirteen percent of 

respondents from San Francisco and 15 percent of respondents from Houston indicated that they 

were not planning to do anything about preparing for a major disaster, compared with 27 percent 

nationally. 

Both Indianapolis and New York participants reported lower levels of preparedness (26% and 

23%, respectively) than the national finding of 32 percent. However, in these areas there were 

 

2

 Prochaska, J. O., and C. C. DiClemente. (1982). Transtheoretical therapy: Toward a more integrative model of 

change. Psychotherapy: Theory, research and practice, 20, 161–173. 3

 The question on Stages of Change originated from and was used with the permission of the National Center for 

Disaster Preparedness (NCDP). 2007. The American Preparedness Project: Where the US public stands in 2007 on 

terrorism, security, and disaster preparedness. New York, NY: NCDP. 

In Which Stage of the Stages of Change Model (Precontemplation, 

Contemplation, Preparation, Action, Maintenance) 

Are Individuals Relative to Disaster Preparedness? 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 31 of 69

more individuals in the various stages of contemplation and preparation than those in 

precontemplation (not intending to change). 

Table 21: Stages of Change Preparedness 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

I have not yet prepared but I intend 

to in the next 6 months 20% 20% 24% 20% 21%

I have not yet prepared but I intend 

to in the next month 7% 8% 10% 12% 9%

I just recently began preparing 14% 19% 15% 13% 15%

I have been prepared for at least the 

past 6 months 32% 26% 23% 39% 42%

I am not planning to do anything 

about preparing 27% 27% 28% 15% 13%

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Ethnicity: Non-Hispanics (45%) were significantly more likely than Hispanics 

(22%) to have been prepared for the past 6 months. 

• Geography: Urban residents (17%) were significantly more likely than suburban 

(8%) to have not yet prepared but intend to in the next month. 

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (45%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (22%) to have been 

prepared for the past 6 months. 

• Household Income: Participants who made $25K or less per year (22%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more per year (2%) to have 

not yet prepared but intend to in the next month. 

Indianapolis • Geography: Rural residents (38%) were significantly more likely than urban 

residents (19%) to have been prepared for at least the past 6 months. 

• Age: Individuals ages 35 to 54 (25%) were significantly more likely than older 

adults (13%) to have not yet prepared but intend to in the next 6 months. 

New York • Gender: Men (34%) were significantly more likely than women (24%) to not have 

done anything at all about preparing. 

• Age: Individuals ages 18 to 34 (16%) were significantly more likely than the older 

age groups (8% and 7%) to not have anything yet prepared but intend to in the 

next month. 

• Household Income: Individuals making $25K or less per year (39%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made more than $25K per year (21%) to 

not have yet prepared but intend to in the next 6 months. 

• Education: Individuals with a college education (32%) or more were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education (18%) or less to have not done 

anything at all about preparing. 

• Geography: Participants living in suburban areas (31%) were significantly more 

likely than those living in urban areas (19%) to have been prepared for at least the 

last 6 months. 

San 

Francisco 

• Gender: Men were significantly more likely (18%) to not plan on doing anything 

about preparing than women (8%). 

• Age: Individuals age 55 or older were significantly more likely (52%) than those 

ages 18 to 34 (24%) to have been prepared for at least 6 months. 

• Household Income: Respondents who made $25K or less per year (18%) were 

significantly more likely to have not yet prepared but intend to in the next month, 

than those who make $75K or more per year (5%). 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 32 of 69

 

What Is the Potential Impact of Disability on Disaster Preparedness?

In the event of a disaster, individuals with physical or mental disabilities may have unique 

challenges relative to their abilities to respond to the event. Most regions reported almost 1 in 5 

residents having a physical or other disability that would affect their capacity to respond to an 

emergency, consistent with the national average of 19 percent. These participants were then 

asked if they had received training or made special preparations that would allow them to better 

respond. Responses ranged from a low of 15 percent for New York City residents with a 

disability, to 33 percent of Houston residents. Another 10 to 16 percent of residents currently 

lived with or cared for someone with a physical or other disability, including frail older adults. 

New York was the highest in this category at 16 percent. Of these individuals, 20 percent (New 

York) to 36 percent (Indianapolis) reported having received specific information or training in 

order to assist that person in the event of a disaster. Although most regions fell close to the 

national sample in responses (30%), New York was well below the national average at 20 

percent. When combined (individuals having a disability or caring for someone with a 

disability), close to one-third of the residents in these areas would need extra help for themselves 

or those they cared for in the event of a disaster. 

Table 22: Disability’s Affect on the Capacity to Respond 

   National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Yes 19% 19% 19% 12% 18%

No 81% 81% 81% 88% 82%

Table 23: Preparedness Training/Preparations Specific to Your Handicap 

   National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Yes 24% 36% 15% 33% 24%

No 76% 64% 85% 67% 76%

Table 24: Living with Someone with a Disability 

   National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Yes 13% 10% 16% 13% 11%

No 87% 90% 84% 87% 89%

Table 25: Received a Disability-Specific Training 

   National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Yes 30% 36% 20% 29% 30%

No 70% 64% 80% 71% 70%

How Does Disaster Preparedness Differ for Individuals with Disabilities? 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 33 of 69

Demographic Differences 

Houston • There were no significant demographic differences in this grouping. 

Indianapolis • There were no significant demographic differences in this grouping. 

New York • Geography: Suburban participants were significantly more likely (24%) 

to have received training specific to their own disability than those living 

in urban areas (7%). 

San 

Francisco 

• There were no significant demographic differences in this grouping. 

For disaster profiles based on other demographics at the national level, please see the 2007 

Citizen Corps National Survey for findings related to this research question. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 34 of 69

 

What Is the Willingness to Report Suspicious Behavior?

The survey explored participants’ past experiences observing suspicious behavior or 

circumstances and their subsequent actions. Despite only 8 to 12 percent of participants across 

the various areas having seen any suspicious behavior or circumstances in the past 12 months, 94 

to 98 percent agreed that they have a personal responsibility to report such behavior to the 

authorities. When participants who had seen suspicious behavior or circumstances were asked 

what they did in response to the behavior, 38 to 49 percent reported having taken proactive 

action (called police or neighbor/friend) to deal with the suspicious circumstance. San Francisco 

residents were most proactive overall while Houston was least proactive. However, 16 to 30 

percent of respondents in all areas reported not taking any action (waited for someone else, left 

the area, or did nothing). “Other” responses, which made up 24 to 46 percent of responses, were 

composed primarily of responses that related to taking action, although not necessarily in the 

same ways that were pre-coded in the survey. 

Table 26: Observation of Suspicious Behavior 

   National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Yes 10% 8% 10% 9% 12%

No 90% 92% 90% 91% 88%

Table 27: Reaction to Suspicious Behavior 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Called police and/or a 

tipline 40% 35% 39% 35% 44%

Nothing 20% 20% 18% 9% 22%

Called neighbor/friend 7% 5% 3% 3% 5%

Left the 

area/situation/event 7% 0% 12% 7% 4%

Waited for someone else 

to do something 1% 1% 0% 0% 0%

Other 29% 41% 28% 46% 24%

Demographic Differences 

Houston • There were no significant demographic differences in this grouping. 

Indianapolis • There were no significant demographic differences in this grouping. 

New York • There were no significant demographic differences in this grouping. 

San 

Francisco 

• Ethnicity: Hispanics were significantly more likely (13%) than non-Hispanics not 

to feel a personal responsibility to report suspicious behavior to the authorities. 

• Household Income: Individuals who made $75K or more per year (99%) and 

those who made $25K to $49K per year (98%) were significantly more likely than 

those who made $50K to $74K (87%) and those who made $25K or less per year 

(85%) to feel a personal responsibility to report suspicious behavior to the 

authorities. 

What Is the Perceived Social Responsibility for Reporting 

Suspicious Behavior? 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 35 of 69

What Are Individuals’ Awareness of Preparedness Campaigns and Programs?

Respondent awareness of the community-based preparedness organizations varied. While 35 to 

52 percent of participants recalled having heard of CERT, only 8 to 13 percent of individuals 

expressed awareness of Citizen Corps. New York was much less familiar with CERT than the 

other areas, while Indianapolis was higher than the national finding. Indianapolis respondents 

also reported having heard of Ready.gov more than other areas. Many of the participants weren’t 

exactly sure what role and purpose these organizations actually played in their communities. 

Some related these to volunteers based in their communities. Some residents were able to 

identify Ready.gov as a Web site that helps inform residents about emergency preparedness 

steps. 

Table 28: Awareness of Federally-Sponsored Programs 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Citizen Corps 11% 12% 8% 13% 10%

Community Emergency 

Response Teams (CERT) 50% 52% 35% 44% 49%

Ready.gov 16% 23% 13% 13% 14%

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Ethnicity: Non-Hispanics (49%) were significantly more likely than Hispanics 

(30%) to have ever heard of CERT.

• Geography: Suburban (53%) and rural (58%) residents were significantly more 

likely than urban residents (30%) to have ever heard of CERT.

• Household Income: Individuals who made $75K or more per year (18%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $25K to $49K per year (7%) to 

have ever heard of Ready.gov. 

Indianapolis • Age: Respondents ages 18 to 34 were significantly more likely to have heard of 

Citizen Corps (24%) than were respondents ages 35 to 54 (9%) and 55 or over 

(7%). Individuals age 55 or older (10%) were significantly less likely than those 

ages 18 and above (21% to 39%) to have heard of Ready.gov.

• Education: Respondents with a college education or more (58%) were 

significantly more likely to have heard of CERTs than those with a high school 

education or less (36%). 

New York • Education: Individuals with a high school education or less (14%) were 

significantly more likely to have heard of Citizen Corps than those with a college 

education or more (6%).

• Geography: Participants living in suburban areas (40%) were significantly more 

likely to have heard of CERT than those living in urban areas (30%). 

San 

Francisco 

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (53%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (33%) to have heard 

of CERT.

• Age: Adults aged 55 or older (59%) were significantly more likely than those 

ages 18 to 34 (35%) to have heard of CERT. Individuals ages 18 to 34 (21%) 

were significantly more likely than those age 55 or older (8%) to have heard of 

Ready.gov. 

How Aware Are Individuals of Specific Federally-Sponsored Community 

Preparedness Programs and What Are Their Community Preferences 

About These Programs? 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 36 of 69

What Are the Preferred Methods of Communication/Outreach?

Regular mail was the most commonly preferred method of receiving information on 

preparedness training to help make residents safer in a disaster. All the areas were similar to the 

national response (48%) except for Indianapolis, which was higher at 58 percent. E-mail, 

Internet, TV or radio broadcasts, and personal contact by phone or in person were also identified 

as preferred vehicles to reach individuals. San Francisco was slightly higher in indicating e-mail 

as a preferred method, and Houston indicated TV or radio broadcasts more so than the other 

areas. Overall, the areas and the national responses were similar. 

Table 29: Communication Preferences* 

National Indianapolis, IN New York, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA

Regular mail 48% 58% 48% 48% 47%

TV or Radio broadcasts 17% 16% 14% 21% 14%

E-mail 12% 14% 14% 11% 15%

Personal contact by 

phone or in person 12% 13% 16% 14% 11%

Internet 9% 9% 9% 11% 14%

Local newspaper 8% 8% 5% 7% 8%

Community events 8% 7% 8% 9% 8%

Information placed at 

local businesses, 

libraries, post offices

4% 3% 4% 2% 4%

Schools 3% 2% 3% 3% 2%

Place of worship 2% 2% 2% 3% 2%

Place of employment 2% 3% 1% 2% 3%

Other 17% 15% 17% 11% 19%

*These responses were unaided and asked as part of a multiple response question. The results represent the total percent of 

respondents mentioning the particular communication preference from the list.

Demographic Differences 

Houston • Household Income: Individuals who made $25K or less per year (62%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $75K or more per year (44%) to 

prefer receiving preparedness information by regular mail. Participants who made 

$25K or less per year (26%) were also significantly more likely than those who 

made $50K to $74K per year (13%) and those who made $75K or more per year 

(12%) to prefer to receive preparedness information by personal contact (phone 

or in person).

• Geography: Rural residents (16%) were significantly more likely than urban 

residents (5%) to prefer to receive preparedness information through the local 

newspaper.

• Education: Individuals with a college education or more (13%) were significantly 

more likely than those with a high school education or less (4%) to prefer to 

receive preparedness information through e-mail. 

Indianapolis • Household Income: Respondents from households making $75K or more per 

year (24%) were significantly more likely than those making $25K to $49K per 

year (8%) to prefer e-mail as the best way to receive disaster preparedness 

information. 

• Gender: Women (5%) were significantly more likely than men (0%) to think that 

place of employment was the best way to receive disaster preparedness 

information.
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 37 of 69

New York • Gender: Women were significantly more likely (63%) to prefer to receive 

information through regular mail than men (42%).

• Age: Participants ages 35 to 54 were significantly more likely (21%) to prefer to 

receive information by e-mail than participants age 55 or older (5%).

• Household Income: Individuals who made $75K or more per year (20%) were 

significantly more likely than those who made $25K or less per year (2%) to 

prefer to receive information by e-mail.

• Education: Participants with a college education or more (17%) were 

significantly more likely to prefer to receive information by e-mail than those with 

a high school education or less (6%). 

San 

Francisco 

• Gender: Women (52%) were significantly more likely than men (41%) to prefer to 

receive disaster preparedness information through regular mail.

• Geography: Suburban residents (22%) were significantly more likely than urban 

(8%) and rural (7%) residents to prefer to receive disaster preparedness 

information through e-mail.

• Geography: Individuals who lived in rural areas (24%) were significantly more 

likely than those who lived in urban areas (10%) to prefer to receive information 

about disaster preparedness through TV or radio broadcasts. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 38 of 69

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

The following recommendations are based on findings from the 2007 Citizen Corps Urban Area 

Survey that highlight differences in personal preparedness and civic engagement among the four 

surveyed areas. These findings and recommendations are intended to be reviewed in conjunction 

with Personal Preparedness in America: Findings from the 2007 Citizen Corps National Survey. 

Researchers and practitioners are encouraged to use these recommendations in their efforts to 

increase community resilience. 

• Individuals generally did not feel that disasters of any type were 

likely to occur in their communities. There were, however, 

noteworthy differences among the four urban areas surveyed by 

type of hazard. The public should have a baseline understanding of 

how to respond to any hazard, but should be specifically trained in 

response skills and preparedness measures for the hazards most 

likely to occur in their communities.

The overall perceptions of the likelihood of a near term disaster (next 12 months) nationally 

and within the surveyed urban areas were low (no greater than 35% for any type of disaster). 

There were, however, some noteworthy differences among the four regions. In the Houston 

and San Francisco areas, 34 percent of residents were much more likely to perceive that a 

natural disaster would impact their communities in the next 12 months than residents in 

Indianapolis (25%) and New York (18%). In turn, New York residents (25%) perceived a 

higher risk of a terrorist attack than participants in any of the other urban areas (Houston and 

Indianapolis, 11%; San Francisco, 10%). Also, Houston residents (22%) perceived a greater 

threat of the occurrence of a hazardous material accident than participants in other regions 

(New York, 17%; San Francisco, 14%; and Indianapolis, 11%). 

Findings of the national survey demonstrate that awareness of vulnerability is strongest for 

natural hazards, which suggests that increasing awareness of susceptibility for natural 

hazards may increase motivation to prepare. Increasing motivation to prepare for terrorism, 

hazardous materials accidents and disease outbreak may need to focus on the response 

efficacy of the preparedness actions. In addition, because people are frequently traveling to 

areas with different risk profiles than their home communities, it is important that everyone 

have a baseline understanding of appropriate immediate response protocols for any hazard. 

• Many individuals did not believe that preparing for terrorist attacks 

would make a difference in an actual event. Preparedness and 

response education must contain messages about response 

efficacy for the recommended actions for each hazard. A particular 

emphasis on response efficacy is needed for hazards that are less 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 39 of 69

understood by the public (hazardous materials accidents, severe 

disease outbreaks, and terrorist attacks).

Nationally and in the urban areas surveyed, most individuals perceived that preparing in 

advance would help them in the event of a natural disaster (82% to 85%, depending on area). 

Fewer believed in the utility of preparing for a hazardous materials accident (63% to 70%, 

depending area) and fewer still for an act of terrorism (58% to 61%, depending on area). In 

fact, a large number of individuals (34% to 38%, depending on area) indicated that nothing 

they did could prepare them for an act of terrorism—including New York (37%), which 

experienced the terrorist attacks of February 1993 and September 2001. 

Due to dense populations, urban areas are more vulnerable to terrorist acts and to the rapid 

spread of infectious diseases. Because the majority of the U.S. population lives in or near an 

urban center, social marketing and disaster preparedness education efforts need to underscore 

the effectiveness of preparedness measures and response skills for these events. 

Communications and training must highlight the specific preparations and skills necessary to 

survive and minimize health effects for events such as explosions, chemical releases, dirty 

bombs, and disease outbreaks. 

• Many individuals lacked confidence in their abilities to know what 

to do in the first few minutes of different types of disasters. 

Communication and outreach strategies should educate 

individuals about specific response skills needed for natural 

hazards most likely to occur in their communities and include a 

particular emphasis on less understood hazards, such as an 

explosion, chemical release, or dirty bomb. 

In Houston, San Francisco, and Indianapolis, approximately twice as many people reported 

being confident in their ability to know what to do in the first five minutes of a natural 

disaster versus responding to an explosion, release of a chemical agent, or a dirty bomb. Yet 

while the numbers were higher for a natural disaster, there were still many individuals who 

lacked confidence in their abilities. For example, in San Francisco 4 in 10 residents were not 

confident in their knowledge of what to do in the immediate aftermath of a natural disaster 

(described as an earthquake or tornado). Residents of New York were less confident in their 

abilities to respond to any type of disaster compared to the other three urban areas and 

nationally. Only 36 percent of New Yorkers reported confidence in their abilities to respond 

in the first five minutes of a natural disaster versus 57 percent for the nation and 62 percent 

for Indianapolis, the highest of the urban areas surveyed. Less than a quarter of New Yorkers 

reported confidence responding to an explosion, release of a chemical agent, or dirty bomb 

(24%, 15%, and 16%, respectively). Residents in the other urban areas reported confidence 

levels closer to the national findings (33%, 23% and 19%, respectively). 

Because densely populated urban areas are more vulnerable to hazards for which the public is 

least confident in responding, communication strategies in urban areas should focus on these 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 40 of 69

less understood hazards as well the most likely natural hazards. Public education needs to be 

tailored to specific attributes of the urban area and to address hazard-specific knowledge, 

skills, training, and exercises. Ongoing evaluation of communication and training activities is 

necessary to better assess ways to make outreach more effective and to identify where new 

approaches may be necessary. 

• While individuals in all the urban areas had similar perceived 

impediments to preparedness, important differences need to be 

taken into account when planning local communication and 

outreach activities. Realistic expectations of emergency response 

capabilities must be communicated. 

Similar to the national sample, the majority of participants in all four urban areas surveyed 

indicated that they had not prepared because they believed that emergency personnel would 

help them in the event of a disaster (38% to 47%, depending on area). Individuals in Houston 

indicated a wider range of primary barriers and had higher percentages for all of the barriers 

asked about than residents in any other urban area or nationally. For example, 35 percent 

cited they hadn’t had the time, compared to 24 percent nationally. 

Communication at all levels must address the nationwide misperception that emergency 

responders will be able to assist everyone immediately in the event of a disaster. Especially 

in the case of large-scale disasters, response personnel will be stretched thin and will not be 

able to assist everyone in need in the immediate aftermath. The public needs to have a more 

realistic understanding of the capacity of community emergency services and to understand 

their responsibility for personal preparedness. To achieve more realistic expectations of 

emergency responders, communities should consider using local emergency responders to 

communicate the message that preparedness is a shared responsibility between government 

and the public. Local preparedness education and training outreach strategies should also 

address the specific barriers identified by community residents, such as lack of time, by 

embedding training and exercises in existing social network activities. 

• Expectations of reliance on non-profit organizations and faith 

communities differed by urban area. Organizations that the public 

expects to rely on in a disaster must be integrated into the 

community’s emergency planning, training and exercises. 

Understanding the extent to which their constituencies will look to 

them for help in a disaster may encourage these organizations to 

take a stronger role in community preparedness. 

The 2007 Citizen Corps Urban Area Survey findings demonstrated that the degree to which 

individuals would look to non-profit organizations and their faith communities differed 

among the urban areas surveyed. New York residents were more likely to rely on non-profit 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 41 of 69

organizations than San Francisco residents (46% and 37%, respectively). On the other hand, 

residents in Indianapolis were more likely (44%) to rely on their faith communities than 

either New York (34%) or San Francisco (25%). 

While non-profit and faith-based sectors have a role to play in all disasters and should be 

integrated into community emergency operations plans, understanding regional differences 

can help prioritize these efforts. Local emergency planning officials and leaders in the faith 

and non-profit communities should understand the degree to which their residents will look 

to them for information and support in the event of a disaster. 

• Residents in the four surveyed urban areas who perceived they 

were more vulnerable to a natural disaster were more likely to have 

disaster supplies set aside in their homes than respondents 

nationwide, but the specific supplies were still inadequate. Greater 

efforts must be made to help individuals understand the reasons 

for stocking supplies beyond food and water, such as radios, 

flashlights, batteries, first aid kits, and personal documents, and 

the need to have supplies in multiple locations. 

More residents in Houston (65%) and San Francisco (60%) indicated having set aside 

supplies in their homes than did the national sample (53%) or the other urban areas 

(Indianapolis, 52%; New York, 50%). This finding likely reflects residents’ relatively higher 

expectations of the potential occurrence of a natural disaster in their community. In both 

Houston and San Francisco, 34 percent of residents in each area indicated they felt that a 

natural disaster might occur in the next 12 months compared to the national sample (21%). 

Unfortunately, this expectation did not result in these residents stocking a more complete set 

of supplies. Similar to the national findings, the specific items identified as disaster supplies 

by residents of all four surveyed urban areas were also incomplete. 

Communications and outreach with the public should explain the reasons why specific items 

and supplies need to be set aside and maintained for use only in disasters. Explaining why 

these items are necessary relative to the potential impact of likely hazards for the community 

may have a greater motivating affect and may help individuals to perceive greater self- and 

response-efficacy. Because disasters can occur at any time, residents should be encouraged to 

keep supplies in multiple locations, including workplaces and vehicles. 

 

• Important differences existed among the urban areas surveyed 

regarding having a household emergency plan. In addition, 

individuals who reported being prepared often lacked a household 

plan. Communications efforts should explain the importance of 

having a household plan, the components of a plan, and the need 

to discuss and practice the plan. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 42 of 69

There were considerable differences among the urban areas on who had a household plan. 

Compared to respondents nationwide (42%), Houston residents (52%) were significantly 

more likely to have a household plan and Indianapolis was at the same level (42%), while 

San Francisco (36%) and New York (32%) fell below the national mark. Surprisingly, while 

42 percent of residents from San Francisco indicated they had been prepared for the last 6 

months, only 36 percent indicated they had household emergency plans. This indicated that 

many who felt they were prepared may not have completed some of the most basic aspects of 

preparedness. 

It is essential to continue to educate individuals on the importance of a household plan as a 

critical element of preparedness. Real life examples of people who have experienced a 

disaster with and without a plan may increase the sense of relevance for the public. Social 

networks, such as the workplace, schools, neighborhoods, and faith communities, should be 

tapped to provide a familiar, supportive environment to walk people through the planning 

process and to assist households with testing their plans. 

• Most individuals in the four surveyed urban areas did not know 

where to find official sources of information in the event of a 

disaster and were not familiar with local alerts and warnings, 

evacuation routes, and shelter locations. Greater education on 

community plans and resources is needed. 

Individuals indicated a concerning lack of familiarity with critical elements of local 

emergency plans. Responses also highlighted differences in preparedness knowledge in 

these urban areas. Fewer residents in New York and San Francisco (both 26%) were familiar 

with official sources of public information than the national sample (34%). Perhaps due to 

the recent sheltering and evacuation during hurricane activity, a significantly higher 

percentage of Houston residents were knowledgeable about evacuation routes and how to get 

help with evacuating/sheltering (52% and 41%, respectively) than respondents nationwide 

(26% and 29%, respectively), yet only 29 percent were familiar with shelter locations, less 

than the national finding (31%). Houston residents (52%) were approximately twice as 

familiar with their community evacuation routes as the other three urban areas (New York, 

25%; Indianapolis, 17%; San Francisco, 13%). Significantly fewer New York (26%) and San 

Francisco residents (30%) were aware of alerts and warnings than the national sample (45%), 

and at 59 percent, Indianapolis residents were the most familiar with local alerts and 

warnings. 

Communicators should look to understand gaps in knowledge of their residents relative to 

critical community response protocols including alerts and warnings, shelter locations and 

evacuation routes, and how to obtain assistance with evacuations and sheltering. Outreach 

activities should specifically address these shortfalls and include specific information on 

these topics. Community awareness and readiness should be tested and evaluated through 

community exercises that effectively include the public. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 43 of 69

• Participation in preparedness drills/exercises was insufficient. 

Prior practice is crucial for effective execution. Drills are needed in 

the workplace, in schools, and at home, and should be integrated 

into social networks. 

With a few exceptions, the residents of the surveyed urban areas had participated in fewer 

drills of any kind than respondents nationwide. San Franciscans had participated slightly 

more in workplace evacuation drills (43%) versus the national sample (41%); residents of 

Indianapolis had participated in more workplace shelter-in-place and school evacuation drills 

(33% and 23% respectively) than the national sample (27% and 19%, respectively); and 

Houston residents had conducted more home-based shelter-in-place drills (13%) than the 

national sample (10%). The higher level of participation in workplace shelter-in-place drills 

in Indianapolis may be because Indianapolis is more tornado-prone than the other surveyed 

urban areas. Interestingly, though, Indianapolis residents were less likely to report having 

conducted a home shelter-in-place drill (9%) than Houston (13%) or respondents nationwide 

(10%). 

Social networks, such as workplaces, schools, faith communities, and neighborhoods, should 

be encouraged to incorporate a variety of drills into their preparedness plans, including 

shelter-in-place and evacuation drills. Special emphasis should be placed on the importance 

of school and home-based drills, as too few individuals have practiced how to undertake lifesaving response activities for these locations. 

• Urban areas differed with respect to whether individuals with a 

disability or those who cared for someone with a disability had 

made special preparations that would help them better respond to 

a disaster. Education and training opportunities must be more 

accessible to people with disabilities, and preparedness outreach 

should include considerations for people with disabilities and their 

caregivers. 

In general, the urban areas had around the same percentage of residents with a disability that 

would affect their capacity to respond to a disaster as the national sample—about 1 in 5 

residents. There were, however, considerable differences among the surveyed urban areas in 

terms of the preparations of those individuals, or of their caregivers, for responding to a 

disaster. Of those with disabilities, significantly fewer residents in the New York area (15%) 

had participated in disaster preparedness training related to their disability than Indianapolis 

(36%) or Houston (33%). Additionally, although there were more residents in New York 

who cared for or lived with someone with a disability than in the other urban areas, fewer of 

these individuals in New York (20%) had completed any type of disaster training relative to 

that person’s disability compared to the other regions (Indianapolis, 36%; San Francisco, 

30%; and Houston , 29%). 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 44 of 69

More must be done to provide information, resources, and training to individuals with 

specific disabilities, as well as to their family members and those who care for them. 

Training should include how their disabilities could impact them in the event of a disaster 

and the actions they could take now to prepare. Greater understanding of why there are more 

individuals with disabilities and their caregivers taking the steps necessary to prepare for a 

disaster in some areas, may help improve the effectiveness of outreach efforts in other 

locations, and should be explored. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 45 of 69

CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS 

FEMA’s Community Preparedness Division 2007 Citizen Corps Urban Area Survey highlights 

areas of similarity and important differences in thoughts, perceptions, and behaviors on personal 

preparedness and community safety among four surveyed urban areas and compared to the 

national findings. Survey questions addressed several critical areas in the field of disaster 

preparedness research, including elements of personal preparedness such as stocked supplies, 

plans, knowledge of community protocols, and training; perceptions of risk for different hazards 

and perceived ability to respond; and barriers and motivators to preparedness. 

The differences revealed by surveying specific urban areas demonstrate the importance of 

understanding the unique attributes of each community. While national statistics are useful to 

capture trends over time and to have an assessment of national attitudes and perceptions, it is 

clear that there are important geographical differences with respect to community preparedness 

and self-sufficiency. Research at the local or regional level is needed to provide an understanding 

of the attitudes, behaviors, and needs of community members to develop better, more targeted 

outreach and educational efforts and to set priorities. Research on specific actions such as 

understanding evacuation routes or shelter locations can provide critical insight for government 

officials to work with community organizations and the public to improve planning and 

communication. Furthermore, surveys targeted to local populations can test actual knowledge of 

local plans and protocols at a more specific level than a national survey. 

Both the national findings and the urban area findings from this research demonstrate that 

effective strategies for community preparedness must couple national leadership with effective 

implementation at the community level through social networks. Since September 11, 2001, 

DHS and FEMA national policy and guidelines have recognized the importance of government 

collaboration with non-government sectors and the importance of supporting grassroots efforts 

such as Citizen Corps. State and local governments have also embraced this strategy. While 

there has been significant progress, we must continue to adapt and improve our outreach, 

education, training, and exercises to achieve a true culture of preparedness where everyone in 

America is an active participant. 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 46 of 69
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 47 of 69

APPENDIX A

Survey Respondents Profile 

The following charts display the distribution of demographics across the four sample urban 

areas: 

In your current residence, do you live...? National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

With family members 75% 72% 74% 79% 71% 

With roommates (including 

boyfriend/girlfriend) 5% 4% 6% 4% 9% 

With both family members and 

roommates 2% 1% 0% 2% 2% 

Alone 18% 23% 20% 15% 18% 

 

Are there children under the age of 18 

living in your residence? National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Yes 52% 51% 46% 55% 48% 

No 48% 49% 54% 45% 52% 

 

Does at least one of the children 

currently attend a school outside of your 

home, including day care or part-time 

kindergarten? 

National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Yes 79% 77% 84% 78% 81% 

No 21% 23% 16% 22% 19% 

 

Which best describes your job status? National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Work full-time 47% 54% 51% 53% 50% 

Work part-time 10% 10% 10% 10% 11% 

Student 6% 5% 4% 4% 5% 

Unemployed 7% 5% 6% 10% 7% 

Retired 21% 21% 24% 15% 19% 

Other 11% 7% 6% 10% 8% 

 

Would you describe the location of your 

residence as...? National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Urban 28% 29% 52% 40% 39% 

Suburban 43% 57% 41% 48% 53% 

Rural 29% 13% 7% 12% 7% 

 

Do you generally use public 

transportation, such as subways or buses, 

to get to school or work? 

National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Yes 11% 8% 53% 11% 18% 

No 89% 92% 47% 89% 82% 

 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 48 of 69

Do you feel that, based on the type or 

location of your job, you are at higher 

risk for certain types of disasters or 

emergencies? 

National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Yes 42% 38% 61% 46% 48% 

No 58% 62% 39% 54% 52% 

 

Do you feel that, based on the type or 

location of your job, you will have a 

higher level of responsibility in the event 

of certain types of disasters or 

emergencies? 

National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Yes 59% 55% 67% 58% 54% 

No 41% 45% 33% 42% 46% 

 

Does your household have a pet or 

service animal? National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Yes 51% 47% 34% 48% 40% 

No 49% 53% 66% 52% 60% 

 

What is the highest level of education 

you have received? National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Less than 12th grade 7% 5% 9% 11% 8% 

High School Graduate or GED 24% 20% 16% 16% 11% 

Some College but No Degree 23% 25% 19% 24% 17% 

Associate Degree in College 11% 10% 13% 10% 9% 

Bachelor's Degree 20% 25% 22% 22% 29% 

Masters Degree 11% 12% 16% 12% 20% 

Doctorate Degree 3% 2% 6% 6% 6% 

 

How religious would you say you are? 

Would you say... National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Very Religious 37% 44% 27% 44% 24% 

Somewhat Religious 43% 42% 44% 38% 37% 

Barely Religious 11% 9% 12% 11% 17% 

Not at all religious 10% 4% 16% 7% 23% 

 

Which of the following best describes 

your race? Would you consider yourself 

to be...? 

National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

White 75% 72% 52% 58% 56% 

Black or African American 12% 23% 23% 18% 7% 

Asian 2% 1% 6% 3% 16% 

American Indian or Alaska Native 2% 1% 2% 3% 3% 

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific 

Islander 1% 0% 1% 1% 4% 

Something Else 9% 4% 17% 18% 16% 

 

Are you of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish 

origin? National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Yes 13% 4% 23% 29% 19% 

No 87% 96% 77% 71% 81% 

 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 49 of 69

Age National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

18-24 13% 6% 6% 13% 10% 

25-34 18% 18% 18% 20% 16% 

35-44 20% 23% 20% 20% 20% 

45-54 19% 22% 21% 22% 21% 

55-64 14% 14% 16% 14% 16% 

65 and over 16% 16% 19% 12% 17% 

 

Which of the following income ranges 

represents your annual household income 

in 2006? 

National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Less than $25,000 20% 14% 21% 18% 16% 

$25,000 to less than $50,000 27% 28% 21% 27% 17% 

$50,000 to less than $75,000 22% 20% 19% 16% 18% 

$75,000 or more 30% 38% 40% 40% 49% 

 

Gender National Indianapolis, IN NY, NY Houston, TX San Francisco, CA 

Men 48% 48% 47% 50% 50% 

Women 52% 52% 53% 50% 50% 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 50 of 69
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 51 of 69

APPENDIX B 

2007 Citizen Corps National Survey Script

INTRODUCTION 

S1. Hello, my name is ____________ and I am calling from Macro International. We are 

conducting public opinion research under contract with the U.S. Department of Homeland 

Security. For this research, we are obtaining people’s views about how well prepared they are for 

an emergency or disaster in their communities. Is this a private residence? 

01 Yes, continue 

02 No, non-residential [Go to S1_02] 

03 Hang-up 

04 Answering machine 

07 Termination screen 

14 CONTINUE IN SPANISH 

99 Refused [TERMINATE, INITIAL REFUSAL] 

//If S1=02// 

(S1_02) Thank you very much, but we are only interviewing private residences. Thank you for 

your time. 

S2. I would like to speak with an adult, age 18 or older, who lives in the household. Would 

that be you? 

01 Yes //GO TO Intro2// 

02 No [ASK TO TRANSFER TO ADULT] 

 99 REFUSED //TERMINATE, INITIAL REFUSAL// 

NewS2. May I speak with an adult member of the household? 

01 Yes, transferring 

02 Not available //schedule callback// 

99 REFUSED //TERMINATE, INITIAL REFUSAL// 

S3. Hello, my name is ____________ and I am calling from Macro International. We are 

conducting public opinion research under contract with the U.S. Department of Homeland 

Security. For this research, we are obtaining people’s views about how well prepared they are for 

an emergency or disaster in their communities. 

01 Continue 

99 REFUSED 

OMB Control #: 1670-0006 

Expiration Date: 5/31/2010
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 52 of 69

Intro2a. The survey will only take about 15 minutes. 

Your telephone number was chosen randomly. I will not ask for your name, address, or other 

personal information that can identify you. You do not have to answer any question you do not 

want to, and you can end the interview at any time. Your participation in this survey is entirely 

voluntary. Your answers to the survey questions will be held confidential by Macro 

International. Your name or any other information that could identify you will not be associated 

with your responses or used in any reports. If you have any questions, I will provide a telephone 

number—either here at Macro International or at the Department of Homeland Security—for you 

to call to get more information or to validate this research. This interview may be monitored for 

quality assurance purposes. 

01 Continue 

02 RESPONDENT WANTS MORE INFORMATION 

99 REFUSED //TERMINATE, INITIAL REFUSAL// 

//IF Intro2a=02// 

Intro2b. 

[For questions about the survey administration/confidentiality concerns: Carol Freeman (Macro 

International) 301-572-0581] 

[For questions about the nature of the study or validity of the study: Jacqueline Snelling (DHS) 

202 786-9577] 

 01 Continue 

 02 Requested callback 

 99 REFUSED //TERMINATE, INITIAL REFUSAL// 

A. SCREENER 

A1. In your current residence, do you live...? 

01 With family members 

02 With roommates (including boyfriend/girlfriend) 

03 With both family members and roommates 

04 Alone 

98 Don’t Know 

99 Refused 

[if A1=01 or 02 or 03] 

A2. Are there children under the age of 18 living in your residence? 

01 Yes 

 02 No 

 98 Don’t Know 

 99 Refused 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 53 of 69

[if A2=01] 

A3. Does at least one of the children currently attend a school outside of your home, including 

day care or part-time kindergarten? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

A4. Which best describes your job status? [READ LIST] [MUL=2] 

01 Work full-time 

02 Work part-time 

03 Student 

04 Unemployed 

05 Retired 

06 Other 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

B. SEVERITY / EFFICACY 

I’d like to ask you some questions about different kinds of disasters. Throughout this survey, 

when I use the term “disaster”, I am referring to events that could disrupt water, power, 

transportation, and also emergency and public services for up to three days. 

//SPECIAL// THROUGHOUT SURVEY MAKE THIS STATEMENT AVAILABLE TO 

CALLERS WHEN THEY TYPE “SPECIAL”: 

Throughout this survey, when I use the term “disaster”, I am referring to events that could 

disrupt water, power, transportation, and also emergency and public services for up to three days. 

B1. In a natural disaster, such as an earthquake, a hurricane, a flood, a tornado, or wildfires, 

which of the following statements best represents your belief? 

01 I can handle the situation without any preparation. 

02 Preparation, planning, and emergency supplies will help me handle the situation. 

03 Nothing I do to prepare will help me handle the situation. 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

//ROTATE B2-B4// 

B2. In an act of terrorism, such as a biological, chemical, radiological, or explosive attack, 

which of the following statements best represents your belief? 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 54 of 69

01 I can handle the situation without any preparation. 

02 Preparation, planning, and emergency supplies will help me handle the situation. 

03 Nothing I do to prepare will help me handle the situation. 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

B3. In a hazardous materials accident, such as a transportation accident or a power plant 

accident, which of the following statements best represents your belief? 

01 I can handle the situation without any preparation. 

02 Preparation, planning, and emergency supplies will help me handle the situation. 

03 Nothing I do to prepare will help me handle the situation. 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

B4. In a severe disease outbreak, such as a bird flu epidemic, which of the following 

statements best represents your belief? 

01 I can handle the situation without any preparation. 

02 Preparation, planning, and emergency supplies will help me handle the situation. 

03 Nothing I do to prepare will help me handle the situation. 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

C. RISK AWARENESS / PERCEPTION 

On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being “very likely” and 1 being “not likely at all,” how likely do you 

think...? 

C1. ...Some type of natural disaster such as earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, and 

wildfires will occur in your community in the next 12 months? 

 05 VERY LIKELY 

 04 

 03 

 02 

 01 NOT VERY LIKELY 

98 Don’t know 

 99 Refused 

CATI: DISPLAY LEAD STATEMENT FROM SECTION C INTRO FOR ITEMS C2-C8: “On 

a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being “very likely” and 1 being “not likely at all,” how likely do you 

think...?” 

[If C1=01-04] 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 55 of 69

C2. Some type of natural disaster will ever occur in your community? Please use the same 

scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being “very likely” and 1 being “not likely at all.” 

//ROTATE C3, C5, C7// 

C3. Some type of terrorism, including biological, chemical, radiological, or explosive attack 

will occur in your community in the next 12 months? 

[If C3=01-04] 

C4. Some type of terrorism will ever occur in your community? [repeat scale as necessary] 

C5. Some type of hazardous materials accident, such as a chemical transportation accident or a 

power plant accident will occur in your community in the next 12 months? 

[If C5=01-04] 

C6. Some type of hazardous materials accident will ever occur in your community? [repeat 

scale as necessary] 

C7. Some type of widespread disease outbreak such as the bird flu will occur in your 

community in the next 12 months? 

[If C7=01-04] 

C8. Some type of disease outbreak will ever occur in your community? [repeat scale as 

necessary] 

D. STAGES OF CHANGE 

D1. In thinking about preparing yourself for a major disaster, which best represents your 

preparedness? 

 [SINGLE RESPONSE] 

01 I have not yet prepared but I intend to in the next 6 months 

02 I have not yet prepared but I intend to in the next month 

03 I just recently began preparing 

04 I have been prepared for at least the past 6 months 

05 I am not planning to do anything about preparing 

 98 Don’t know 

 99 Refused 

[If D1=01, 02, or 05] 

D2. For each of the following statements, please tell me whether it is “The primary reason”, 

“Somewhat of a reason,” or “Not a reason at all” why you have not taken any disaster 

preparedness steps? 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 56 of 69

 01 A Primary Reason 

 02 Somewhat of a reason 

 03 Not a reason at all 

 98 DON’T KNOW 

 99 REFUSED 

//ROTATE LIST// 

a. I don’t know what I’m supposed to do. 

b. I just haven’t had the time. 

c. I don’t want to think about it 

d. It costs too much. 

e. I don’t think it will make a difference 

f. I don’t think I’d be able to 

g. I think that emergency responders, such as fire, police or emergency personnel, will 

help me. 

E. RELIANCE 

E1. In the first 72 hours following a disaster, please indicate how much you would expect to 

rely on the following for assistance. Please use a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being “expect to 

rely on a great deal” and 1 being “do not expect to rely on at all.” 

 05 EXPECT TO RELY ON A GREAT DEAL 

 04 

 03 

 02 

 01 DO NOT EXPECT TO RELY ON AT ALL 

98 DON’T KNOW 

 99 REFUSED 

 //ROTATE LIST// 

a. Household members 

b. People in my neighborhood 

c. Non-profit organizations, such as the American Red Cross or the Salvation Army 

d. My faith community, such as a congregation 

e. Fire, police, emergency personnel 

f. State and Federal Government agencies, including FEMA 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 57 of 69

E2a. If a disaster happened in your community, how would you find out what was happening or 

where to go and what to do? 

 

 01 [Record response] 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

//IF E2a=01// 

E2b. If that does not work, what would you do next? 

[IF RESPONDENT SAYS ANYTHING THAT REQUIRES ELECTRICITY OR 

SIMILAR, ASK THEM WHAT THEY WOULD DO IF THERE WAS NO POWER. 

PROBE UNTIL UNPRODUCTIVE AND INCLUDE ALL RESPONSES.] 

 01 [Record response] 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

E3. In the event of a disaster, would you expect to need help to evacuate or get to a shelter? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

F. PERSONAL RESPONSE 

F1. How confident are you in your ability to know what to do in the first 5 minutes of [fill in 

from below]? Please use a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being “very confident” and 1 being “not 

at all confident.” 

//ROTATE// 

a. An explosion of a radiological or dirty bomb? 

b. The release of a chemical agent? 

c. An explosion or bomb? 

d. A sudden natural disaster such as an earthquake or tornado? 

 05 VERY CONFIDENT 

 04 

 03 

 02 

 01 NOT VERY CONFIDENT 

98 Don’t know 

 99 Refused 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 58 of 69

F2. How much do you think preparing for a disaster will help you to handle the disaster? 

Would you say... 

01 Very much 

02 Somewhat 

03 Very little 

04 Not at all 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

F3. How confident are you about your own ability to handle a disaster? Please use a scale of 1 

to 5, with 5 being “very confident” and 1 being “not at all confident.” 

 05 VERY CONFIDENT 

 04 

 03 

 02 

 01 NOT VERY CONFIDENT 

98 Don’t know 

 99 Refused 

F4. Have you talked to anyone about the need to be prepared for disasters that may affect your 

community? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[If F4=01] 

F5. Who have you talked to? DO NOT READ LIST 

 [PROBE: Anyone else? [MUL=5] 

 01 HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS 

02 PEOPLE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD 

03 PEOPLE FROM WORK/SCHOOL 

04 MY FAITH COMMUNITY 

05 OTHER [RECORD RESPONSE] 

98 DON’T KNOW 

99 REFUSED 

F6. In the past 2 years, have you done any of the following? //ROTATE ITEMS a-d// 

01 Yes 

02 No 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 59 of 69

98 DON’T KNOW 

99 REFUSED 

a. Attended a meeting on how to be better prepared for a disaster 

b. Attended CPR training (yes/no) 

c. Attended first aid skills training (yes/no) 

d. Attended training as part of a Community Emergency Response Team or CERT 

(yes/no) 

[If any of F6a-d=01] 

F7. What motivated you to take this training? DO NOT READ LIST 

 [PROBE: Anything else? Record all responses] MUL=9 

01 MANDATORY FOR JOB/SCHOOL 

02 EASY TO SIGN UP (E.G., OFFERED AT WORK, SCHOOL OR PLACE OF 

WORSHIP) 

03 CONCERN FOR PERSONAL SAFETY 

04 CONCERN FOR SAFETY OF FAMILY OR OTHERS 

05 TO HAVE THE NECESSARY SKILLS TO HELP OTHERS 

06 GENERAL INTEREST/HOBBY 

07 TO BE PREPARED 

08 BECAUSE OTHERS (FAMILY OR FRIENDS) DID 

09 OTHER [RECORD RESPONSE] 

98 DON’T KNOW 

99 REFUSED 

[If all of F6a-d <> 01 ask F8] 

F8. What is the main reason you have not received any preparedness training? DO NOT READ 

LIST. 

[PROBE: Anything else? Record all responses] MUL=7 

01 LACK OF TIME 

02 LACK OF MONEY/TOO EXPENSIVE 

03 DON’T THINK IT’S IMPORTANT 

04 HAVEN’T THOUGHT ABOUT IT 

05 DIFFICULT TO GET INFORMATION ON WHAT TO DO 

06 DON’T THINK IT WILL BE EFFECTIVE 

07 OTHER [RECORD RESPONSE] 

98 DON’T KNOW 

99 REFUSED 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 60 of 69

G. PREVENTION 

Now I’d like to ask you a series of questions about your past experiences ... 

G1. In the past 12 months, have you seen any suspicious behavior or circumstances? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[If G1=01] 

G2. What did you do? [DO NOT READ LIST. Record all responses] MUL=5 

01 CALLED POLICE AND/OR A TIPLINE 

02 CALLED NEIGHBOR/FRIEND 

03 WAITED FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO DO SOMETHING 

04 LEFT THE AREA/SITUATION/EVENT 

05 NOTHING 

06 OTHER [RECORD RESPONSE] 

98 DON’T KNOW 

99 REFUSED 

G3. Do you feel you have a personal responsibility to report suspicious behavior or 

circumstances to the authorities? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

H. DISASTER SUPPLIES

For this next set of questions, I’d like to ask you about some specific things you may or may not 

have done to prepare yourself and/or your household. 

H1. Do you have supplies set aside in your home to be used only in the case of a disaster? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 61 of 69

[if H1=01] 

H2. Could you tell me the disaster supplies you have in your home? DO NOT READ LIST 

[PROBE: Anything else? Record all responses] MUL=12 

1 A SUPPLY OF BOTTLED WATER 

2 A SUPPLY OF PACKAGED FOOD 

3 A FLASHLIGHT 

4 A PORTABLE, BATTERY-POWERED RADIO 

5 BATTERIES 

6 A FIRST AID KIT 

7 EYEGLASSES 

8 MEDICATIONS 

9 PHOTOCOPIES OF PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION 

10 FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS 

11 CASH 

12 OTHER [RECORD RESPONSE] 

98 DON’T KNOW 

99 REFUSED 

[if H1=01] 

H3. How often do you update these supplies? Would you say... 

01 Never 

02 Less than once a year 

03 Once a year 

04 More than once a year 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

H4. Do you have supplies set aside in your car to be used only in the case of a disaster? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

03 DON’T OWN A CAR 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[if A4=01 or 02] 

H5. Do you have supplies set aside in your workplace to be used only in the case of a disaster? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 62 of 69

I. HOUSEHOLD PLAN 

I1. Does your household have an emergency plan that includes instructions for household 

members about where to go and what to do in the event of a disaster? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[if I1=01] 

I2. Have you discussed this plan with other members in your household? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

I3. Do you have copies of important financial and insurance documents in a safe place to help 

you rebuild or seek assistance following a disaster? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

J. COMMUNITY PLAN 

 

J1. Using a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being “very familiar” and 1 being “not at all familiar,” how 

familiar are you with... 

 

 //ROTATE// 

a. Alerts and warning systems in your community? 

b. Official sources of public safety information? 

c. Community evacuation routes? 

d. Shelter locations near you? 

e. How to get help with evacuating or getting to a shelter? 

 

 01 NOT AT ALL FAMILIAR 

 02 

 03 

 04 

 05 VERY FAMILIAR 

 98 Don’t know 

 99 Refused 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 63 of 69

[if A3=01] 

J2. Are you aware of the details of the emergency or evacuation plan of the child(ren)’s school 

including where the school plans to evacuate and how to get information about the child in 

the event of a disaster? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

K. DRILLS/EXERCISES 

K1. Aside from a fire drill, in the past 12 months, have you participated in any of the following? 

 //ROTATE ITEMS// 

a. A home evacuation drill 

01 Yes 

02 No 

 98 Don’t know 

 99 Refused 

b. A home shelter in place drill (yes/no) 

[if A4=01 or 02] 

c. A workplace evacuation drill (yes/no) 

[if A4=01 or 02] 

d. A workplace shelter in place drill (yes/no) 

[if A3=01 OR A4=03] 

e. A school evacuation drill (yes/no) 

[if A3=01 OR A4=03] 

f. A school shelter in place drill (yes/no) 

L. VOLUNTEERING 

L1. During the past 12 months, have you given any time to help support emergency responder 

organizations or an organization that focuses on community safety, such as Neighborhood 

Watch? 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 64 of 69

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[if L1=01] 

L2. Which one or ones? 

 01 [Record all responses] 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

L3. Have you ever volunteered to help in a disaster? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[if L3=01] 

L4. What role did you play? 

 

 01 [Record all responses] 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

L5. Would you be willing to take a 20-hour training course to be qualified to help your 

community recover from disasters? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

M. DISABILITY 

M1. Do you have a physical or other disability that would affect your capacity to respond to an 

emergency situation? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[if M1=01] 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 65 of 69

M2. Have you received any training or done any preparations, specific to your disability, that 

would allow you to respond better in the event of a disaster or emergency situation? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

M3. Do you currently live with or care for someone with a physical or other disability, 

including someone elderly who requires assistance? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[if M3=01] 

M4. Have you received any specific information or training in order to assist that person in the 

event of a disaster or emergency situation? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

N. OUTREACH 

There are several organizations that are responsible for helping citizens such as yourself 

understand preparedness and assist you in being more prepared for disasters. 

N1. What would be the best way for an official organization to provide you with information on 

preparedness and training to help make you safer in a disaster? 

DO NOT READ LIST. 

 [PROBE: Anything else? Record all responses] MUL=12

01 REGULAR MAIL 

02 E-MAIL 

03 INTERNET 

04 TV OR RADIO BROADCASTS 

05 LOCAL NEWSPAPER 

06 COMMUNITY EVENTS 

07 PLACE OF WORSHIP 

08 INFORMATION PLACED AT LOCAL BUSINESSES, LIBRARIES, POST 

OFFICES 

09 PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 66 of 69

10 SCHOOLS 

11 PERSONAL CONTACT BY PHONE OR IN PERSON 

12 OTHER [RECORD RESPONSE] 

98 DON’T KNOW 

99 REFUSED 

O. BRAND AWARENESS 

Next I’d like to ask you about a few specific organizations that you may or may not have heard 

of. 

O1. Have you ever heard of Citizen Corps? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[if O1=01] 

O2. How would you describe Citizen Corps? [Record response] 

01 Record response 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

O3. Before taking this survey, had you ever heard of Community Emergency Response Teams 

or CERT? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[if O3=01] 

O4. How would you describe CERT? [Record response] 

02 Record response 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

O5. Have you ever heard of Ready.gov? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 67 of 69

[if O5=01] 

O6. How would you describe Ready.gov? [Record response. Probe for more than “Web site.”] 

01 Record response 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

P. DEMOGRAPHICS AND CONTEXT 

Lastly, I would like to ask you for some information about you and your household. Again, all 

information that you provide will be held confidential. 

P1. Would you describe the location of your residence as...? 

01 Urban 

02 Suburban 

03 Rural 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[if A4=01-03] 

P2 Do you generally use public transportation, such as subways or buses, to get to school or 

work? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[if A4=01-02] 

P3. Do you feel that, based on the type or location of your job, you are at higher risk for certain 

types of disasters or emergencies? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

[if A4=01-02] 

P4 Do you feel that, based on the type or location of your job, you will have a higher level of 

responsibility in the event of certain types of disasters or emergencies? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 68 of 69

P5. Does your household have a pet or service animal? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

P6. What is the highest level of education that you attained? Would it be...? 

01 Less than 12th Grade (no diploma) 

02 High School Graduate or GED 

03 Some College but No Degree 

04 Associate Degree in College 

05 Bachelor’s Degree 

06 Masters Degree 

07 Doctorate Degree 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

P7. How religious would you say you are? Would you say... 

01 Very religious 

02 Somewhat religious 

03 Barely religious 

04 Not at all religious 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

P8. Which of the following best describes your race? Would you consider yourself to be...? 

MUL=6 

 01 White 

02 Black or African American 

03 Asian 

04 American Indian or Alaska Native 

05 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 

06 Something else (Specify) 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

P9. Are you of Hispanic or Latino or Spanish origin? 

01 Yes 

02 No 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 
CITIZEN CORPS URBAN AREA SURVEY 

June 2009 Page 69 of 69

P10. In what year were you born? 

 01 Enter response _ _ _ _ //RANGE 1900-1989// 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

P11. Which of the following income ranges represents your annual household income in 2006? 

Feel free to stop me at the correct range. Was your household income...? 

01 Less than $25,000 

02 $25,000 to less than $50,000 

03 $50,000 to less than $75,000 

04 $75,000 or more 

98 Don’t know 

99 Refused 

P12. What state do you live in? _ _ 

P13. What is your zip code? _ _ _ _ _ //RANGE 5-digit// 

P14. Record gender [Do not ask] 

01 Men 

02 Women 

Those are all of the questions that I have. On behalf of Macro International and the Department 

of Homeland Security, I would like to thank you for your time and participation. Thank you 

again. 


Attn: Community Preparedness Division

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

800 K St. NW

Washington, DC 20472-3630

Fax: 202-786-9922

citizencorps@dhs.gov

www.citizencorps.gov