Disaster Mitigation and Persons with Disabilities. Presenters: Peter Blanck, James Schmeling, Alan Dinsmore, and Elizabeth Davis. >> RACHEL: Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to the webcast on disaster mitigation and persons with disabilities. My name is Rachel Kosoy. I'm with ILRU, a home of the two of the projects sponsoring today's event. Our two responsible ores are the Disability Law Resource Project, which is an education center on the Americans with Disabilities Act, and accessible IT. And the second sponsor is the RIIL project, that's RIIL, and that stands for Research Information for Independent Living, and RIIL hosts the database of disability-related information. I will be moderating today's webcast which basically means I will be voicing the questions which you E-mail in to the presenters. Before we get started, I just want to say something about sending questions. In order to submit a question, if you look at the bottom of your RealOne Player, there should be a button there to click and submit a question. Alternately, you certainly can just address an E-mail to webcast@ilru.org. So please go ahead and send those now or at any point during the presentation and I will pose your questions to the presenters as they pause to take questions. And additionally, if anybody has technical difficulties today, please don't hesitate to give us a call at 713-520-0232. And there are people here who can help you out. Okay, I'd like the briefly introduce you to the topic and format for today's webcast. This webcast is designed to stimulate discussion to be interactive, and really to continue the dialogue about using accessible communications technology and disability policy to save lives and reduce human suffering in the face of disasters throughout the world and to engage people with disabilities in this dialogue. This webcast really bridges two areas of inquiry at the Law, Health Policy and Disability Center located at the University of Iowa College of Law. And those two areas of inquiry are communications policy and disaster relief and mitigation, and disability policy. So we are lucky today to have as presenters: Professor Peter Blanck who is the director of the center, and James Schmeling, the associate director. Joining them will be Jamie Merchant who is a researcher with the center, Alan Dinsmore who is with the American Foundation for the Blind and Elizabeth Davis with the National Organization on Disabilities. So I would now like to introduce you to Peter Blanck who will also sort of help moderate today's call and he will introduce the other presenters as each of them begins to speak. Dr. Blanck is a professor of law at the University of Iowa College of Law. He is also a professor of public health and psychology at the University of Iowa. He is the director of the center we've been talking about. He obtained his doctorate in social psychology from Harvard and his law degree from Stanford Law School and made his parents very proud. He has had multiple fellowships as well as appointments and positions with disability and law-related organizations. He has also received national and international attention for articles and books he's written on disability law and health policy. I really do invite you to look back on our website and learn more about Professor Blanck and his work as well as the additional presenters who he will introduce to you. So, Peter, I'll turn it over to you now. >> PETER: Thank you, Rachel, for that gracious introduction and our work is really of the kind that I forget the person who said it, but you guys all know that we're just standing on the shoulders of other people who have came before us, particularly in this area. This is an area which I first got involved with with the Annenberg foundation back in the 1980's after disasters like Chernobyl and hurricane Andrew and ambassador Annenberg had an abiding interest in communications policy and also making sure that nobody was left out of communications policy issues, particularly in the face of disasters. And I was fortunate in the mid 1990's as an Annenberg fellow to work with the president's committee on the employment of people with disabilities and the Red Cross to contribute to the dialogue we're having today and the folks that are on the discussion today are really leaders in their own right and have certainly undertaken parallel tracks of great importance in regard on this issue. The first speaker today will be Alan Dinsmore, and then we'll hear from Elizabeth Davis and James Schmeling and Jamie Merchant after that. But Alan has been a leader for along period of time at the American Foundation for the Blind in working with Congress and the executive branches. He's worked with their public communications and safety committee, and has long been a champion of accessible technology, assistive technology. Digital rights. I remember, Alan -- and you can probably speak to that. Alan and I first met when I was testifying before Congress on the applicability of the ADA on the Internet. And Alan was instrumental in that hearing in helping me and many others who participated to again ensure that accessibility was built into universal design was built into a whole range of social programs such as the Internet and here of course disaster communications. So, Alan, I wondered if you would begin the discussion and then go for ten or fifteen or twenty minutes and we'll take questions after you're done or at a natural breaking point and then we'll hear from Elizabeth Davis. Alan, it's a pleasure to be working with you. >> ALAN: Thank you for offering me the opportunity to speak on some of these issues and I hope as well that we will have some interesting questions in this because often those of us who work in the policy arena learn almost as much from the questions as we do trying to formulate some of the answers. What I want to talk about briefly is really two things: We are talking in an era now where there is an extraordinarily heightened sensitivity to emergencies as a result of the 9/11 disaster. However, it should not steer us away from a consideration that we have many other disasters and emergencies that occur in our localities and in our states. If you are in a weather belt, you understand hurricane warnings, tornado warnings, if you're near a major transportation hub, you may be very aware of some of the transportation accidents that have happened, but there are special issues here for people with disabilities and that is access to the information that is provided. I want to try to come at this from a couple of different directions. One is to talk about the reliability of the information network itself, and also to then briefly talk about the access issues for people with disabilities. The over arching consideration for individuals with disabilities is that they have needs that need to be communicated, that the receptors for those needs, i.e., the emergency planners are now somewhat more organized than they have been in the past and probably in a position to hear and actually return authoritative questions which may help individuals with disabilities and organizations representing those individuals to deal more effectively with emergency preparedness. Let me just give you a couple of anecdotes. For those of you who are blind or visually impaired, who have tuned to something like the local station oar a weather channel and heard a beep, beep, beep, you wondered what's going on. Well, the idea is that there is supposed to be an alert through that beep beep beep, that there is an emergency, and you're supposed to be able to turn to your radio or to another channel to hear what the information is. Does that always work smoothly? The answer is no, it doesn't. And this leads me into the issue of the provision of emergency information itself. The media security and reliability council that I serve on is what is called a federal advisory committee act committee or FACA for short. I want to emphasize that I'm not one of the official members of that group, but I am a member of one of the working groups, this on public communications and safety. The reason the media security and reliability council was put together was to advise the Federal Communications Commission on issues relating to the reliability and the security of emergency information. Now, that's the overarching issue, and embedded in that are special issues for individuals with disabilities. The undergirding for the kind of information network that puts out emergency information really consists of a couple of areas, one is what some of us have come to know as the emergency alert system. The other is a series of information pieces that may be generated, not nationally through the emergency alert system, but locally through weather emergencies or through state operations where the emergency may be more widespread. Now, in addition to that, the emergency alert system is a system that functions much more often, and that's the radio and broadcast network system. And complementing that are the systems which came into play in the 9/11 disaster and that was wireless transmission and wireless voice transmission. All of this is under scrutiny now by the media reliability and security council to come to some conclusions and recommendations to the F. C. C. about what federal policy should be for the support of these various sources of information for not only the support of that information, but for ensuring that people are getting reliable information and that it is secure, secure in the sense that it doesn't break down. We've learned a great deal so far from this, and I think there are some things embedded in the discussion about media security and reliability that are of direct interest to individuals with disabilities. For example, most of us think of the emergency alert system as our prime backup for emergency alerts. And in fact, it is for certain kinds of weather alerts and occasionally for hazard alerts. However, it is rarely invoked, and by invoked, I mean it is rarely operated on national basis. So there is very little experience with how effective that system works. However, in looking at a lot of what has been going on on the state and local level, we have begun to find that there are some serious issues there. That the first one of consideration is that it is not as widespread or as reliable as it should be. This is of interest to everyone, but it is also of interest to individuals with disabilities because that system may be the only system that they have access to. Inspite of the fact that we do have regulations and laws about communications access. So this becomes a very important issue. The second thing is looking at some of the access requirements that do exist for those systems. The Federal Communications Commission, in talking about the emergency alert system and also local and radio or broadcast and cable television station news and updates, has advised those organizations and the agencies that implement those networks that there are access requirements. The nationwide broadcast system like the EAS, all broadcast stations and cable systems are required to broadcast emergency alerts and messages for national security emergencies initiated by the president. Broadcast stations and cable systems are not required to broadcast EAS alerts and messages initiated by state and local authorities, but the FCC encourages their licensees and cable operators to transmit these alerts as a public service. Information about local natural disasters is often broadcast, as I said, by EAS. All EAS broadcasts, that is those that are initiated by the president should be accessible by audio and visual means. Or simply visual means including closed captions, open captions, crawls and scrolls. With respect to the other types of alerts, that is that -- that our broadcast stations and cable systems carry, the FCC has separate requirements to meet the needs of persons with disabilities. Here, the FCC requires that any information that is intended to further the protection of life, health or safety be accessible to persons with disabilities. These rules apply to all local broadcasters, cable operators and satellite television services and there are no exemptions to these rules. They apply any time emergency information is provided. Critical details about the emergency should be provided in a visual format. Here they give examples like open captions, scrolls, or even hand lettered signs. The critical details muscles be provided in an oral format if crawls or scrolls are provided during regular programming and oral tone is also required to indicate to persons who are blind or have low vision that emergency information is being required. On the surface, this sounds like a pretty complete set of requirements, but keep in mind that the emergency alert system does not really have a federal master at this point. And that its implementation on the state and local level is spotty at best. This is something the broadcasters have been looking at. So there is a real issue there and ain't to spend a minute or two at the end of my presentation talking about what individuals with disabilities and their membership organizations can do about that. But to go back just briefly and take a look at some of the other requirements -- and the reason I want to take a look at some of these other requirements is, number one, keep in mind that EAS may not be your first and reliable information source for emergencies. What you may have is a television broadcast or a radio broadcast, which is a news item, and here people with disabilities probably respond just about like anybody else does. They start checking around for information. What we hope is that people do have access to the telecommunications devices and services that are required by law. Unfortunately, there are not many of these on the market. Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act has provisions which cover the kinds of services and equipment that should be accessible for people with disabilities. There is not much outright now, particularly in areas like cell phones that really would comply with any of this. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act is a considerably more far reaching statute, but it deals essentially with federal procurements. Although here I think it is of interest to people with disabilities that where there are federal websites, for example those that are hazard management operations, if those are going through a regular federal procurement, they should be accessible to individuals with disabilities and this is something that is very important for everyone, individuals who are blind should be able to have access through those systems and also other individuals who may have any difficulty operating any of the keyboards or any of the other kind of access devices for those federally procured information systems. The Americans with Disabilities Act has also covered other important informal backup systems that people who are deaf use, like telecommunications relay services and there is also a section within the telecommunications amendments of 1996 on closed captioning. Now, all of these things put together should provide us with a fair basis for accessing emergency information and to some extent it probably does, but what I want to do emphasize is that our access through any kind of specialized devices that we use is only as good as the information that's going to flow to us. This gets me back to some of the problems with emergency broadcasts and I want to conclude here by giving some suggestions about what people with disabilities and their organizations can do about this situation, because it is an important hole. What you really should start to look at is what goes on in your local community. Be in contact with your local broadcaster to see what kind of groups they are putting together to plan for emergency. Be in touch also with your city and county offices, with fire chiefs, with police operations, to try to become aware of any of the emergency planning that is going on so that the needs of individuals with disabilities can be included in that. Pair this has become very much of a local situation primarily because a lot of the implementation for emergency planning is on a local basis. So I think once we begin to realize what some of the limitations are and where we need to go with this, I think we can probably begin to work to ensure that the information that is provided is provided in an accessible format for individuals with disabilities, that it's timely, and that it also allows individuals with disabilities to do the kind of planning that they need to do by themselves to make sure that they're going to be effectively coping with these situations. This concludes my portion of the presentation. >> PETER: Thank you, Alan. That was very good and very informative and I'm sure there will be a number of questions in regard to some of the things you said. So with that, before we go to Elizabeth, Rachel, can we take some questions for Alan? >> RACHEL: Yes, we're getting in a number of questions. A lot of them are specific questions or questions that I know are going to be relative to some things that we're going to be addressing a little bit later. So I'm just going to give awe couple of these questions. >> PETER: That's good and after Elizabeth speaks we can open it up. >> RACHEL: Okay. One here -- and this really speaks to how you just were talking about how this is really more of a local issue, and this person says, you foe, most emergency planning information addressing the needs of people with disabilities seems to focus on the post 9/11 issues of meeting emergency needs in densely packed, urban areas with multistory dwellings, and there is an interest to know what effort is being made to plan for the safety of people who are living in rural areas and who might be at risk of a tornado, flood or blizzard. >> ALAN: There is nothing specific on the national level that I know of, and I think that's an extremely important area. The only thing that we know with respect to rural areas is that, again, it is a question of whether the broadcasters are going to have the information in time, and whether they're going to be able to transmit that information, keeping in mind that many of the rural stations are in effect almost remote operations with possibly an engineer on hand. So I think this is one of the things that individuals with disabilities, and there are some rural caucuses if you will, of those individuals need to be aggressive because that's an extraordinarily important issue and in fact it is a major hole in planning, I think. >> PETER: Take another one, Rachel? >> RACHEL: Yes. Okay, we have another one here. Well, actually wait before I give you that one, a number of the questions that we're getting relate to if you have people with disabilities who are now, you know, a little better integrated into the community. They may rely on attendants or people to help them with food as well. Is anything specifically being done to think about people with disabilities who might not be able to move themselves or might get stuck there? We actually got one scenario sent in of somebody post 9/11 was stuck at home and so they were safe at home, but an attendant couldn't get to them, food couldn't get to them and they were really stuck there. >> PETER: Elizabeth has done quite a bit of work in that area and perhaps I should introduce Elizabeth now, and you can use that as a starting point and jump into the discussion as well because I think you have a lot to offer certainly. Elizabeth has been working in this field, Elizabeth Davis, for quite a long time in a range of capacities. She now works and directs the National Organization on Disabilities Emergency Preparedness Initiative, but she's also an advisor to FEMA. She sits on several national advisory boards and has great expertise in the area of disaster mitigation for persons with disabilities. Elizabeth, it's a pleasure to be with you and feel free to build on what Alan has said or perhaps begin by addressing some of the issues you just heard in that question or wherever you'd like to start. >> ELIZABETH: Sure. Thank you very much for inviting me to participate in today's dialogue and I hope that this will turn into not an ending point, but a starting point to continue the discussion and the conversation as we all move forward as Alan Dinsmore indicated into areas that in some cases need to be modified and updated to meet our new needs. And in other areas where we are creating new systems to address anticipated issues. I think what I'd like to do -- and I understand that last question very well, but rather than answer it first, I think I'd like to introduce a little bit about the Emergency Preparedness Initiative itself and the program's initiative directive and move from that into some of the specific answers. So to begin with, the National Organization on Disabilities, NOD, launched the Emergency Preparedness Initiative in the wake of September 11th as many organizations and programs and agencies became more and more important, none so much I think than this one, to a community that perhaps had some awareness around disaster emergency planning, but not necessarily the ear of the planning community everywhere nationally. There are certainly examples of jurisdictions, local, state, that have done fantastic jobs over along period of time of incorporating this unique disaster or emergency needs of people with disabilities and other special needs populations into their planning initiative. And just to highlight a few by way of example, we can look to areas that unfortunately for them, but fortunately for those of us who do look to things like this for planning purposes, they tend to be the region that are hit on a regular basis by natural disasters. This would be Florida, with hurricanes, for example, the Texas coast area with flooding, California with earthquakes, just to give an example -- a few examples of a natural hazard that with some regularity does reoccur. So you find some very advanced and proactive planning in these areas for their populations, both in rural as well as metropolitan areas. Now, if you move, though, outside to territories, jurisdictions, areas that have not experienced as many reoccurring events or anticipated events, these are the areas where we find less preparedness on a general level. This certainly would have been the true statement up until September 11th. After that time, I think the entire nation was put on notice that awareness and preparedness were now new parts of our own personal responsibility. And so just to pull this back again for a moment, EPI, the Emergency Preparedness Initiative which I direct, then grew out of these concerns within the disability community looking for answers that were specific to them. To be able to take those general messages and find away to identify what needed to be customized around certain unique needs during -- before I should say, during or after an emergency or a disaster. And EPI then has, at this point, tried to not reinvent -- reinvent policy or procedure or best practices as these exist, but to act as a repository of information, a single source, if you will, where individuals with disabilities or other special unique needs and on the other side the emergency professionals who know their field very, very well, but may want to take that next step to either enhance for the first time include these needs into their planning. And both of those seemingly different populations can come together and partner through this one point of information. So really the two main objectives for the EPI when we developed it, was to first ensure that the special needs of people with disabilities are adequately addressed prior to an emergency in order to minimize the adverse impact on them and their communities. This also, however, enables emergency responders or emergency professionals to make informed decisions for the best use of available resources during an emergency. The second objective is I guess the best way to describe it is the opposite side of the same coin. It is to ensure that people with disabilities are included in the emergency planning process at all levels of government and private sectors so that they can offer their insight, their knowledge and their resource fullness that is already prevalent in that community and really to come together in that partnership where each can lane on the other for their area's expertise. In this two pronged approach, EPI has found it very successfully received in both of the communities. So, again, at the repository of information and I guess a little bit of a match maker resource, we've been able to identify for emergency professionals who have contacted us, local organizations who work with persons with disabilities or have well informed individuals in communities who have identified themselves as leaders who wish to be participating in the process and the dialogue. And also then to raise an awareness and to try to help customize some of those general concerns for the disability community. The best way to explain when we talk about an emergency message from emergency professionals, the message about preparedness and awareness always going to be the same for the disability community as it is for the general population, and that simply is to be prepared. But how people need to be prepared and what they must take into account will depend on many factors, whether they are or whether they do or don't have a disability, in fact. So with adequate forethought, planning and cooperation, all of the community's residents, with or without disabilities, will be given a maximum chance to prepare for and survive a disaster or an emergency, and hopefully to be able to return to normal life as quickly as possible. Now, what that gets us to in a little bit is to that last question that was asked before I was introduced. And we have to look at that in a few different ways. If you want to assume for the moment that the local emergency planning community, whether that's an office of emergency management, an emergency management agency, these are all the same things, OEM's, EMA's, they might just have a different name or reside in a different agency. They might be in a mayoral office, they might be under the auspices of the police authority in the area, but every local community will have some -- one agency that will oversee the planning and the response functions should that community have a need due to a natural, manmade or technological disaster or emergency. What I think we have found is that most of the conversation has and still remains to be focused on individuals' responsibilities to plan for themselves after receiving this information about preparedness. But the person who asked the question is also addressing another parallel community, and that is the next us that individuals have with care agencies or organizations, and these can be visiting nurse associations, they can be home health AIDS, they can be home care attendants. They can be a senior food service, like a meals on wheels. It can be in the form of a number of different services that might be a few hours, a few days a week or might be for an extended period of time over many days during the week. These support organizations traditionally had plans in place for perhaps the continuum of the basic service they provide, but it didn't necessarily take into account an entire systemwide interruption, one that you would see with a very devastating natural disaster such as a hurricane Andrew or a hurricane Michigan, something like that or a 1989 earthquake in California or the terrorist events on September 11th. In this case you need to also consider then that parallel function of the care industry, and really consider the continuum of care plans that might be in place. Are there backup resources? Do those agencies have the ability to share responsibility, even among proprietary groups that they might normally be competing against for client base, but in the event that one goes out of service temporarily, can another pick up the service line? We've looked into that extensively because these are the second and tertiary planning issues that need to be taken into account to guarantee that continuum of care is not interrupted any longer than is minimally necessary. Along those lines, the individual that asked the question -- I think if I recall what Rachel had summarized -- indicated that she or he was in fact faced because they were stranded in their own home environment, but we need to take into account when we look at general preparedness issues, an individual can be in their home when something occur, can be out of their home and in their place of work, their place of worship, a place that they volunteer services, perhaps at the grocery store, they could be at school. They could be at a number of different places that are familiar or perhaps unfamiliar to them. So preparedness for individuals as well as organizations means an understanding and a quick analysis on a regular basis, not to over emphasize and to become some part of a fear issue, but to become comfortable with an analysis of your surrounding and your circumstance in each of these different environments and to be prepared to understand how you would reactor act differently or the kinds of services or assistance you may need to ask for depending on where you are at any given time. I'd like to also highlight, if I might, EPI has relaunched its website rather recently, and I do believe I'll make a footnote here that we've got most of the hick cups out of the system, but if anyone out there does find one, please let us know right away, and with the enhanced website, we've taken the opportunity to take the information that we've held and housed and reorganized it based on what our users and viewers were indicating would be most helpful to them. So in addition to the opportunity to use EPI's website as a launch pad to other information all across the community, we have added a few new areas that are rather exciting and I think will become very useful tools when individuals, when professionals visits often and use it regularly. It's only with that kind of a commitment to these tools that they will be really robust and useful to everyone. There is a director that enables people to go on and find the latest postings or the latest academic studies or professional white papers around the area and issues pertaining to special needs or people with disabilities and disaster or emergency. The second new category is an electronic bulletin Board which I think offers the most opportunity for interaction, and that's an opportunity for an emergency professional to post a question. He or she is now reexamining their special needs plan for their jurisdiction and perhaps they have a question or want to know if people have thoughts or ideas about how this might be improved, they could post the question or query. Likewise, however, an individual from the community could post a concern that they repeatedly have experienced and communication I might add is usually at the top of that list. And for emergency professionals to perhaps see and respond to as they develop their plan. And we have also added a products and equipment section, and this is in response I think to people taking seriously that preparedness message. And their willingness to invest some limited sums in some cases, but to look into equipment or products or service that may enhance their ability to be prepared, either -- and this can be the individual, the organization or even the government authority. So we invite agencies, organizations, private business to post their service tore their equipment there. And finally, the next new piece that we've added is a video clip capability where we have taken clips ranging from 30 seconds to two minutes from video that's been produced focusing on general preparedness for people with disabilities, and this is really the customized approach to those general preparedness messages and we've made them available on the website. So this sort of rounds out what we've provided in addition to the first publication that we put out last year, and that was a guide on the special needs of people with disabilities for emergency managers, planners and responders. This guide is also available, by the way, through the website. And in this case, initially I had said we don't want to reinvent the wheel, and it certainly was our intention, first, to produce a guide for individuals with disabilities with special needs, but when we researched the field, it became quite evident that there was plenty of information and very valuable, good information already there. And we felt that at EPI to add one more publication was really not going to make a contribution to the effort. It simply would add one more piece to the already long list of material tools. So rather we did address the guide to those who are in a planning position because we found no evidence of a really, clear and concise list of those community needs and concerns, those unique issues for emergency planners. And that's what we've tried to do through the initiative up to this point is raise awareness on both sides of the community and we think we've successfully started and launched that effort. So what I would like to do, I think, is just take questions because an awful lot of the information is going to come out of -- that was introduced at the very beginning, the dialogues between the person on this webcast and those of us on this end and our ability to try to address or redirect some of the information to you. >> PETER: Thanks, Elizabeth. That was a great presentation, very informative. And why don't we do just that. Rachel, why don't you engage some questions with Elizabeth. >> RACHEL: Okay, great. All right, Elizabeth, we did get a couple of questions specifically about evac chairs or evacuation chairs, and the EPI website may be an answer to this. I guess specifically one person says they keep hearing about the importance of these evacuation chairs. They've been told to buy one for the office, but really can't figure out which model would work best for their building and they're looking for help. Is there a web page or something that can compare the different models or if there is a physical place that people can go to to, quote, test drive models before purchasing? >> ELIZABETH: That question -- I'm sorry, Rachel, I started to cut you off. >> RACHEL: No, I'm finished. >> ELIZABETH: That question comes up as often, I would say, as communications issues do when we speak across the country at all different forums, and the question is addressed to us both by government entities and agencies, as well as private businesses who are taking a proactive stance for their employees and visitors and guests, and also by individuals who recognize that they would have a need for this piece of equipment. And what I'd like to point out is this is one of those areas where we really have to advocate from all of those different communities for the need -- a national safety minimum standard on this kind of equipment. And then I'll address the specifics about chairs. The reason I say this is, for example, I can get on the Internet now and research through consumer reports or a number of different organizations or websites, I could find out anything I want to know about a washer and dryer, anything I wanted to know about a baby car seat. Anything I wanted to know about a new piece of stereo equipment or a digital camera, but I can't go anywhere and find a comparison or even safety standards for a piece of equipment that is more and more widely being reviewed and considered as a piece of evacuation equipment. So the unfortunate answer -- part of the answer to that question is there does not in my mind at lease, any singular source of reliable information. Having said that, there are, however, a number of different choice options, and I think that's when people have found the resources, they have found the individual pieces of equipment and they might be sometime mid by the approach to making that decision one piece over another. They do range widely in cost and in function, and I guess what I would just add for the person who asked the question, is this general sort of hit list, if you will, of things to consider. Besides looking at all the different available models by the different companies, because I don't particularly want to endorse one over the other, I don't want to endorse one over the other because there is no single one that is best for every circumstance. So on that hit list is where is that piece of equipment most likely or intended to be used? A high rise or a low rise, for a large number of stairs and staircase or for a simple transport through another resource such as an elevator bank? The type of person intended to use that piece of equipment -- is there an individual in mind who is going to be the employee or the individual who use that piece of equipment? Or is it going to be there as a standard piece of equipment for anyone with an unknown issue that arises during an event, an emergency or disaster. In that case, you have to identify sort of the least common denominator who will meet those unknowns ahead of time versus if you do have a specific person in mind, it is most useful to have that individual be part of the selection process. Not every kind of evacuation chair is going to work for each kind of disability. It's very important to understand that the disability community is not homogeneous, and so the equipment needs to be approached and viewed from that perspective as well. Does the individual need to transfer to it independently or with assistance? Again, how is it going to be used? Important issues that are often overlooked. When I surveyed, for example, private companies or even government agencies with these in place, where are they stored? It doesn't matter if the organization or the agency is very well intentioned and buys multiple evacuation pieces of equipment. If they are then stored unmarked at the bottom of some storage closet, unaccessible to anyone in the event of an emergency or disaster when you need to use it, you don't need to be fumbling to try to find the keys to a storage closet. Are they well marked or are they identified to where they're being kept? Is there proper signage directing people to where they are as you would find for things such as fire extinguishers on a floor. And then of course if the equipment is purchased for general use, are there people who have been properly trained to use that equipment? One chair does not necessarily function as another type of chair. So it is very, very important that which ever type is ultimately decided and selected, that the company be asked to be present to really do a training and more importantly, that that training not stop with that first session. That individuals retest or often retrained at regular intervals so that the equipment can be used without much thought or labor when it is needed. So, again, I know that that doesn't necessarily help because I'm not handing a product name to the individual who asked the question, but I hope I've sort of outlined those questions or issues, some ancillary and some direct, that you would take into account when making a selection for this type of equipment. >> PETER: More questions, Rachel, before we go to James and Jamie? >> RACHEL: Oh, yeah. I actually have, let's see, two followup questions. I'll sort of summarize them together, about evacuation chairs and let's see, basically, they're both saying that they have heard from emergency officials that the emergency officials are really discouraging the use of evacuation chairs. One person doesn't say specifically why, another person says that their fire marshal told them that the evacuation chair would block access for others using the chair -- the stairs, I'm sorry -- and I guess both of these people have been told that they are supposed to wait for the fire department to come to the people with disabilities. And can you comment on that. >> ELIZABETH: I think what I'll try to do is answer a little faster than I did the last question in the interest of getting everybody's thoughts on this subject and others. But it is absolutely true that this is the case. What it leads us to then conclude is what Alan Dinsmore said earlier on with regard to communication, it's at the local level that we really need to look at and consider these issues. So while I am advocating for a national or federal standard so that individuals can look to and understand the different pieces of equipment and that they are safe by some evaluated standard from a policy perspective, that is, how to use and when to use these types of equipment. That does need to go back to the local jurisdiction or authority. In many cases, the fire departments are still apprehensive about the use of this bit of equipment like evacuation chairs because the assumption is still that the use of such piece of equipment, as was indicated, block or slow down the flow of evacuation. These are all issues that are being reexamined in light of 9/11, not just the use of the evacuation equipment in staircases, but also the likelihood of an individual needing to use that all the way down a full case of stairs. So what I mean is perhaps new policies would be drafted or crafted that if it is not a fire specific emergency that has interrupted or disturbed the elevator use, that those elevators are recalled initially and then the building fire director, along with the authority of the fire department representative, would reinstate the use of those elevators to designated reentry floors, there by not necessarily making it the case that an individual who is using these types of equipment for assistance would need to exist all the way out of the building in the staircase, but perhaps down two or three staircases to the next designated floor and then enter and be evacuated by elevator. I know I've mixed up a few different concepts there in that answer, but it goes to show what works in one case is not necessarily going to work in another. What is policy in one area is not necessarily policy in another. And individuals with these concerns about evacuation from a high rise or from a multiple story dwelling need to discuss those issues if it's a business, an employment issue with their director of safety and security, who then in turn needs to coordinate with the building management safety director, and they also will work with local fire and rescue authorities for established protocol around the use of equipment. It is very important and stood we're not going to have an exact answer, to recognize that during an emergency or a disaster in a billing is not necessarily the case, in fact, more often than not, it is not the case that the entire building evacuates. A full building dump as it's called within the profession, is actually rather rare. More likely, let's sues fire as a scenario or a smoke condition, something along those lines -- would mean the floor with the impact would evacuate along with ancillary floors to that floor, but the entire building, especially with different kinds of fire suppression codes and standards now in place would not necessarily need to be evacuated. That's the decision of the fire safety director, the building and the fire department. So likewise, when it comes to using a piece of equipment like an evacuation chair, it still might be policy procedure and safest alternative for the individual using the it and for those others leaving to come up with an alternative evacuation plan, a wait in place or if you do have to leave from the floor, a reentry floor some floors below. So that's why none of this really has an easy answer. It just has opportunity to discuss and open the conversation with those in a position to meet you halfway during the planning process. >> PETER: Elizabeth, this is Alan. If I may, I'd like to add one thing or at least I hope it adds. >> ELIZABETH: Certainly. >> ALAN: Something to this. I think what you have said is very important. We have gone through this in our own building with respect to the kind of equipment, whether the individuals know how to operate the equipment, but there is another level to this, and I think you were also heading in that direction with regard to the issue of how a building is evacuated, and that is, again, for people with disabilities, access to the information, not just access to the hardware forgetting out of the building, but access to the information about what is going on during the emergency and after the emergency is very important for people who are working with their local planning authorities, they need to emphasize that it is not only just an issue of making sure that people are evacuated safely, but that they know when they should evacuate, what kind of a situation they are facing, and what kind of information they are also going to be able to obtain from what sources once they have left the building or left a particular geographic area that is under, for example, a hazardous threat. And I think they also do need to zero in on the accessibility and the utility of that information, and its deliverance to individuals who may not be able to access communication the way everybody else accesses it. >> ELIZABETH: And I support what you've just said, Alan, absolutely. >> PETER: Go ahead, Rachel. >> RACHEL: We have a number of more questions, if I could I'd like to throw one more in right now before we go on. >> PETER: Please. I think one of the important points that was made earlier is oftentimes the questions and the dialogue that are responding to those are of as much interest as some of the prepared remarks we might have. Eyed like to continue to take those questions as long as we have them coming in. Then we can gladly go to what we've been prepared. If we don't get to that, much of it is already on your website and people can go through those teams afterwards if we need to. >> RACHEL: Okay. I'm going to pair a phrase. We're getting a handful of questions that -- let's see, some with some very interesting tone shall I say, about how it really seems like there are not adequate resources for people with disabilities to even consider -- even if they do preplan well, and I have a couple of questions that focus specifically on transportation. So let me try to paraphrase those and try to give them to you. Let's see, one of them comes from somebody who is really in a METRO area and there are a number of people there who use paratransit services. And if their area needs to be evacuated, we all know that paratransit services tend to be, you know, a little bit lacking in being able to serve people completely. What would happen in the case where everybody needs to be evacuated and if I can just pile on top of that, the other situation that's come up here is what if you have people again who can't drive. They may live alone, and you know, if they need to be evacuated, what can they do? And this person actually refers to the 30,000 people who are currently evacuated in British Columbia because of a forest fire. >> ELIZABETH: Can I try to start answering that in bit parts and then anybody else that wants to jump in and take on some of the answer, would that be all right? >> ALAN: Sounds fine with me. >> PETER: Please. >> ELIZABETH: Let's start with transportation of the first and foremost, again, the answer is going to lead us to the conclusion that it's absolutely imperative that individuals -- and I'm going to say individuals, but I also mean organizations serving individuals with disabilities and special needs, work with and in partnership with their local emergency authorities. When and if a jurisdiction orders an evacuation, be it a voluntary or a mandated and there is a distinction there that is probably too cumbersome for us to go into right now, but let's just consider an evacuation of a specific geographic area or in fact an entire location. There are different plans in place, depending on the jurisdiction and the planning that has been put in place, to utilize resources both traditional and nontraditional. And this is another reason why that partnership has to occur in the planning process before any event occurred. It means taking into account the need for accessible transportation, but also the appropriate distribution and allocation of transportation resources. The most common resource that is not traditionally an emergency vehicle that's used for mass evacuation, especially in the metropolitan area is a rural -- this is certainly true as well, is your yellow school bus kind of a concept. Those bus fleets, presumably after removing students back to a safe area or not picking them up for school if it's been canceled with enough advanced warning, would then be made available for advanced planning to the local jurisdiction would be used on affixed or designated route pickup. That's going to address some of the general evacuation for persons who are not using their own vehicles. And depends on the hazard or the emergency, in some cases, local emergency authority may actually try to encourage individuals not to use their own private transportation. In the case where that might create a log jam effect on roads or by ways, although the understanding of course is that private transportation and individual cars are very important in an evacuation. This all goes into a decision as to when to order evacuations or when to recommend them if there is advanced warning and advanced time. In addition to things like school buses, it was indicated paratransit may be utilized. That's a little stickier only generally because paratransit is operated by a system not necessarily the local Department of Transportation or the equivalent at a jurisdictional level, but oftentimes those vehicles, be they sedans or minivans are also linked into the emergency evacuation planning process. The local ambulate industry, the private medical transport vehicles are often very supportive when called upon to be part of that nontraditional emergency evacuation process. And there are a ton of other options. The point is a jurisdiction needs to be creative given the resources that are available to them in that -- in that area. It's important to note though that the other piece of that almost starts to address the issue of registries, be they formal or informal in nature. A registry -- a special needs registry can be maintained by a jurisdiction on one side of the spectrum, where individuals who meet certain definitions or parameters as established by that jurisdiction are invited to register and make themselves known voluntarily -- it has to be voluntarily -- to the jurisdiction, so in the event of an emergency or disaster, they are known to the local authority. What that local authority chooses to do with the information depends on the jurisdiction. Whether they've assigned an individual for transportation pickup, let's say, or whether they've assigned an individual to receive alternative communication in terms of a message, that's completely, entirely dependent on the jurisdiction's resources and how they establish that registry. In other cases, as you move along that spectrum, it may not be housed in a traditional emergency type management office, these organizations may be like the independent living center or the local association for the blind, or the local league for the hard of hearing, for example, just to list a few that know their client base, that know their constituent base. They might also include a visiting nurse association or home care attendant, home -based care industry. Again, they know their population. And while this information is certainly very confidential in many cases, and individuals have to voluntarily supply the information to be used during emergencies or disasters, these are the kinds of partnerships that ahead of time can really pull their resources to identify where individuals reside or work who may need assistance in the event of an evacuation or other need for communication during an emergency. Finally, I would just like to add one more piece that was not asked in that question for consideration, as it is absolutely true that it becomes very difficult in many cases for individuals with unique support needs to really plan. While the message I said at the beginning is always going to be the same, be prepared. If you look at the standard message to be prepared, it says be prepared to self-sustain for -- in most cases it says on average up to 72 hours. And we can go into why that's a designated number later if necessary. And it also says to have enough food and water and it goes into a whole list. You can find this anywhere through FEMA's website or any other emergency posting. More importantly, it says to have a supply of a few days -- I've seen it anywhere from 2 to 14 days recommended -- of medically important equipment. That can be oxygen supply, that can be your medication, that can be equipment to supply medication, and the difficulty here is that oftentimes for the majority of the population, whether they are using a Medicaid, Medicare or other form of insurance to supply that usual medication, it is not going to enable oral how someone to stockpile, if you will, to meet those standards that are suggested for safety and preparedness. So one of the other national issues that needs to be addressed, but certainly at the local level for practical application, but at the national level for policy consideration, is how do we go about addressing that need for population that is more likely to have a reliance or dependency on some medication, for example, if that medication cannot be supplied -- even if it's rotated ahead of time so you don't become part of a more traumatized population as a result of an emergency or disaster, even if you tried to be prepared ahead of time. >> ALAN: Elizabeth I have just two short things to add to that. One is I think you make some very good points. This is Alan Dinsmore again, with respect to evacuations in a community, but this is also an issue that I think needs to be brought to the attention of office and residential management staff. Primarily because what you will find when they talk about evacuating the building is we will do two things we commonly hear, one is we will evacuate you to the plaza and tell you what to do, or we will tell you that you need to evacuate the area immediately. For those individuals who are planning for the needs of individuals with disabilities and also the individuals with disabilities involved in that plan, they need to go back to what's Liz Beth was saying and ask some key questions of the planners like, how am I going to evacuate from the area? What services will you have available and you need to have them available? And the second thing I wanted to mention, I think Elizabeth raises a very good question, this was very a parent in the New York situation and it is also been apparent in hurricanes and tornados with individuals who have medical needs. And again, when you are talking with local planners in this particular case, and this is where dialogue is very useful, individuals and organizations working with those individuals need to make exactly the points that's Liz Beth was raising, but further they need to say when you are communicating information to us, you need as best you have the ability so to do, you need to be able to tell us that you need to be plan -- you need to plan to be out of the area, and I'll just pull this figure out of the air for 48 hours. Often they don't think those things through, either, and this is particularly an area where I think some of the individuals with disabilities who know their needs very well can in fact contribute somewhat to the universal design of evacuation because the general population sometimes doesn't think of those things because they don't have to on a day-to-day basis. >> ELIZABETH: And this, again, goes back to one of the tenets I guess that we established when we started the Emergency Preparedness Initiative which was to include individuals as stakeholders in the process that are not just emergency professionals who are very dedicated and know their field, but those individuals with the unique needs, the individuals who have that resource fullness and have experienced it on a day-to-day basis and never been called upon to be used in sort of that bigger concept of emergency or disaster preparedness. So you can see, if we try to spin a positive from what is often a gloomy and negative discussion, you have to look and say that there are answers out there. There are resources available. There are creative solutions. The time to identify them though is before the need and then knock on wood we never have that need. You don't want to be sitting there in the middle of the disaster de jure or after the disaster trying to figure it out then. >> JAMES: This is James Schmeling at the University of Iowa. That's probably with one team that's been throughout all of this and that was what the Milbank Foundation charged us to do when they made a generous grant to the law, health policy and disability center to examine these areas. That is to enhance the dialogue and the communication about these issues, and involve as many of the stakeholders and experts as possible to increase this dialogue. They've asked us to look at the dissemination of best practices and things of that nature and of course in examining these areas we've found some outstanding resources across the Board, including the EPI initiative at NOD. As long as we are continuing with these kinds of dialogues with individual stakeholders in the communities, a lot of the issues will be brought forth and can be planned for. I think that's the key that we're seeing across the Board. >> RACHEL: Peter this, is Rachel. We dove a question and maybe you can just elaborate a little bit more to answer this question. This comes from somebody who is an advocate. She and other advocates in her area are trying to influence disaster emergency planning policy and they are looking for some guidance, and want to know if there are any model codes or statute? Can you recommend model policies or training materials or any other resources that can help them be organized in working with their local officials? >> JAMIE: This is Jamie Merchant in Iowa city. I've put together a resource list that has some information on that topic; and what I've read has said that one of the good ways to get involved is to talk to a mayor's disaster planning office; and I don't know besides that, maybe other people have something to contribute. >> ELIZABETH: Well, this is Elizabeth again. So what I would suggest, without going through specific examples of codes and standards because it sounds like that's available off line if we can find that information. Certainly at our website or also post it after this webcast, but in general terms, it is as an advocate, it's becoming informed and educating yourself so you can speak to the emergency management language a little bit. It's a different language. It's up until recently a different kind of environment, quite frankly, and it's one that has to become a little bit more -- I guess Jermaine to general dissemination use and organizations such as FEMA now part of -- or the vision part of homeland security has done a very good job through its publications and partnership with organizations like the American Red Cross, the U.S. Humane Society. I note that one because usually the next question most people ask is about their pets or service animals, but that's another discussion for another day. The information is there. I think that the approach, however, that is most productive, and I speak this now not as director of EPI, but in my past life in emergency management, is one when the community comes with an offer to assist in hand. And what I mean by that is to say to the emergency professionals, you certainly do know your field. We, however, have the information about the community, the demographics, the needs here and we're willing to meet you and partner with you to work this process through. I think all too often the unfortunate consequence is that I have seen organizations well intended, as they are, demand attention and while they certainly deserve that attention, it's in an area that may not necessarily be as well developed as other emergency preparedness areas. And so to come to the table and say we want to be part of this planning solution is going to get you in that door much faster and much more effectively. In terms of standards and codes, again, it's going to really depend on the local jurisdiction, what is the need? Is it a high rise fire code standard and safety issue that's changes? Or is it a communication warning system across a rural plain? Niece are going to be very different issues, so it still draws you back to that same partner in the planning process, the local authority that oversees emergency preparedness as opposed to just using your individual, local precinct, police precinct the or local firehouse. They might be very helpful for an individual need, but they are also managed in the structure of emergency by that higher authority, if you will, just to coordinate the resources that they bring to the table. On an individual or an organizational basis, I would suggest and invite you to look to some of the home study courses, in fact, that are available through FEMA, free of charge to anybody who wants to go on and become informed and interested around these issues. I'm sure that's on the resource list as is one really important new course that is just now within the last month being made available to the state training officers. And that is the emergency planning and special needs populations. This is a course out of the emergency management institute which is part of FEMA again. It's offered, however, very differently than most of their training courses in that it mandates that half the population in the audience be from the emergency professional side of the house and the other half be from the user side, the individuals or the organizations or the advocacy groups within the community. So that in the end, it's not just the lessons that are taught in the course, but it's the partnerships and the identification and the networks that are established across the table that will take the planning forward. >>: I think Elizabeth raises a good point again with respect to getting into the system, learning the language that people use. It is not just language as a term of art, but it is language that tells you a lot about how the systems work. One of the things I have seen is that people are convinced the systems work for everybody else and so they should be made to work for people with disabilities. Unfortunately, what we have found in the communications area is that they don't work that well for everybody else either. And so this is -- this is in effect -- it sounds worse than it is, but in effect it is a ground floor opportunity for people with disabilities to get into that information planning process. As I mentioned earlier, one of the things that we should not ignore is that often because we ourselves have disabilities or we know people who have disabilities or represent them, we know some particular aspects about the need to plan for the continuation of life after an emergency, that the general population often has not really grasped. So we have more to bring to the table than just talking about our own special needs, and I think people do need to realize that and consider it is an asset. >> ELIZABETH: And I think that the emergency management side is open minded and willing, especially in today's environment to really accept and embrace that thought, that thought that planning and preparedness efforts that might specifically be devised initially for individuals with disabilities are in fact likely to benefit the general population as well. And that's the important message that comes out of this also. >> RACHEL: This is Rachel. Peter, I see we have maybe 15 minutes left. So I just want to ask you how you'd like to spend those 15 minutes. I don't know if you guys wanted to -- >> PETER: I've been quiet and listening with great interest to these fantastic experts. I didn't know if James had anything else to add, but I kind of like taking more questions because I think there is a lot of issues to be addressed and it's not often we would get the likes of Alan and Elizabeth on the phone together and we of course will follow up and have followup by putting up a lot of the resources on our website as has Elizabeth and Alan done in their respective units as well. I would vote for taking more questions if you're up for it. >> ALAN: It works for me. >> ELIZABETH: I've just taken my last drink of water. >> PETER: You weren't prepared for 72 hours. >> ELIZABETH: No, I wasn't. >> RACHEL: We dove a couple more questions. One thing, speaking of resources, we got some information from somebody who has a severe hearing impairment. She says this is not a question, but she wanted to share information and I will add this to the web page as an additional resource. She basically talks about weather radios and she gets a website for how you can learn about weather radios. She says these are things that can be left on indefinitely in stand by mode and then when an emergency is declared, they sound an alarm. They broadcast and there are additional things like lights or vibrate ores and displays like TTY's that can be added to them. >> ELIZABETH: Those are the NOAA weather radios. That's a good point, and without stating anything else, I would invite people to look at that on your website once you put it up. >> RACHEL: Okay. >>: Do you have any comments on the use of those in any particular limitations or factors which should be considered when using those? >> ALAN: No, I think that in terms of the actual notification of weather events, they are very good and in fact the use of the emergency alert systems have most often related to weather events. There is one thing that I think is a problem that people need to be aware of, and that is in our consultations with the consumer groups of the blind, one of the things that both ACB and NFB members have said is that in weather areas, often if they're just about as weather wise as anybody else is, knowing that something like a tornado or a hurricane is coming is not so much the issue, it is something we have been talking about for the last hour and that's all of the information that you need to get to plan for your life in the aftermath. Even right down to whether it's safe to go out and often this is a real challenge, and it's a cross disability challenge. You might think it's a challenge particularly for individuals who are blind because they may not be able to see the crawls and the scrolls on the screen. The fact of the matter is that there can be so much information up there that it may be very confusing to other individuals who have any other kind of a disability, and there is not much thought that's put into that situation unfortunately. >> ELIZABETH: I think without -- without sounding as if I'm blasting the media as an industry, because I think the media has collectively been a very important player in providing public information before, during and after an emergency, this is another area that is one that is explored at the local and state and national level because of what was just mentioned. Oftentimes, the message becomes so convoluted because of the desire to provide information, and you have to take into account not just the visible issue, but invisible issues such as cognitive disability and a confusion that may occur with that over information, if you will. It also starts to compete with itself. Is the emergency or disaster the news story or is it the information that's being provided for the public benefit? And where does that information become refined so we know which message we need to listen to? A lot of people indicate post disaster -- I can skip the commentary on the disaster. I needed to know which school was being opened as the shelter. I needed to know whether I could safely drink the water. So it goes back to how we get our information and I would simply point people also to this piece of information that Alan I hope I'm getting this correct because this is more your cup of tea than mine, but Harris interactive which as most people are aware is a worldwide marketing and research firm reports that adults in the U.S. refer to T. V, and I think that's like 78 percent, and then radio at 15 percent as their primary source of information after the event at the world trade center and the Pentagon at 9/11. So a survey conducted also by TVBA on consumer media habits and perceptions found that the broadcast television is cited by more adults as their primary news source than no they are medium. So that's to say that broadcast T. V. was 43.6 percent used, cable T. V, 28, newspaper 12.1 and radio -- with public T. V. coming in at 3.9 and the Internet at 3.2, but I do think we're going to see that Internet use jump dramatically if not exponentially. Right now and as we move forward with just the explosion of resource information available and realtime information through that medium. All of this, however, I have to point out -- here is the gloom and doom -- relies on the information being available, but also things like electricity being if place. So the events of 9/11 certainly showed that directly if you consider the scenario in New York City in the lower Manhattan area, the world trade center on top of the one tower carried the tristate area's communication antenna system. So when those buildings came down, it was not just an interruption in communication, it was a complete and total annihilation of communication for a good number of persons for a very wide area, even outside of that initial impact. >>: One of the things I think that has not been included -- boy we've done a substantial rife off of the little weather box, haven't we -- but I think it is important that there are alternative means of communication that people have used in emergencies once they were able to switch, for example, a lot of people were able to get cell phone service. There is a problem though with, for example, hearing aid compatibility for people who use cell phones. There is an accessibility issue for individuals who are blind or visually impaired. So one of the things that we need to look at as we start to think about the fact that the backbone may go down, is that in planning, some of the alternative sources that are commonly used may not be readily available to people with disabilities, one, because they're not that accessible, and two, because they're simply not affordable. >>: In another area which may be of interest is, for example, it can take just a power line sagging into a tree as recently with the blackout in the northeast area, not necessarily a large natural disaster to throw people into the dark and eliminate electricity for a wide range of the population. >>: Those plans are contingent on that. What else should be considered when that type of event happens? >>: Well, that's probably where I'm hopeful that some of the recommendations that will come out of this media security and reliability council to the FCC will -- will be of some utility. I'm not myself involved with the working group that's really involved with how the backbone works or doesn't work, but that is a major issue, and the recommendations, by the way, are due to the FCC I think at the conclusion of March of next year. >>: It looks to me as though we're about out of time, Rachel. >> RACHEL: Yes, we are out of time. You guys have shared so much information and I think generated numerous, numerous questions, you know, with each bit of information you give us I think there are at least two questions that have accompanied that information. We really have about two minutes left. Does anybody need to make a tie up comment before I close us off for today? >> ELIZABETH: I think I'll defer to Peter for that. >> PETER: Well, no, I mean I don't have any words of wisdom at this point. I really think that the dialogue is so dynamic in this area and as Elizabeth and Alan both said, there is really so much more to be done on the ground that needs to be done to complement this sort of discussion. Alan, Elizabeth, I would give you the last word. >> ELIZABETH: Alan? >> ALAN: I think you're right, Peter. I think that we should encourage individuals with disabilities and organizations to in fact go to the ground on this. It is the local entities where a lot of this planning will take place. It is the local broadcasters that you need to be interacting with. And I think you do need to remember that not only are you bringing knowledge of your own area, but you probably, as a result of that knowledge, have other areas of knowledge which are going to be real assets to them when they're planning generally. >> ELIZABETH: I would just add in summary that I keep emphasizing partnerships, and the reason I say that is because I think all too often we plan in a vacuum within the industry or the organization that we're most familiar with. And in an effort to try to do the best we can in that planning, we may actually be causing ourselves a delay in being able to deliver a good plan or a good concept because we're not really aware of what those other people in those vacuums are doing. So it's only through this cooperative networking with the local authority who presumably will be able to sort of take that step back and look at the bigger picture and make us aware of what is already in place that maybe individuals are not privy to initially, that we can move forward with these creative solutions and necessary implementation policy. >> RACHEL: Okay. I'm sorry, Elizabeth, I'm going to have to cut you off because we're all going to get cut off in a minute. but as everybody can tell, there certainly is a lot more discuss. I hope that people today are gathering tools to help them get better prepared for potential disasters. I think that's certainly true. I really want to thank each of you, Peter, James, Jamie, Alan and Elizabeth especially who you guys did some good marathon talking for us. And just before we go, I want to let everyone know that today's webcast will be archived so you certainly can come back, listen to it again, read the transcript, you can check our website for additional webcasts. Those few questions that weren't answered I will forward on to the presenters for you, and lastly, I just would like to do thank yous. In addition to our presenters, I'd like to acknowledge NIDRR who funds your host for today's program, both the Disability Law Resource Project and RIIL, the Research Information for Independent Living. And the other folks who have made today possible, they include our in-house webcast team with Marj Gordon, Sharon Finney and Dawn Heinsohn, as well as Rob Dickehuth and Marie Bryant, who ensures that there is realtime captioning and that that realtime captioning appears on your computer. So thank you again everybody and we look forward to seeing you at a future webcast. Bye-bye.