Standards lacking for preparedness ratings

Reader's Digest is coming out (July, 06) with their list of urban areas and rating how prepared they are for a crisis. RD focused on three main categories: emergency readiness, crisis communications and medical response.

Among the security measures reviewed were:

• ratio of first responders (police, fire and medical) to residents;
• proximity of federal search-and-rescue teams;
• clear instructions on city websites regarding evacuation plans including residents with special needs;
• communication capabilities between first responders;
• the existence of 24-hour emergency alert systems;
• number of hospital beds per residents.

How is Reader's Digest qualified to measure the preparedness of our urban areas?

The answer is simple. They aren't, but no one else was doing it, so they took it upon themselves.

This reveals three opportunities for NIUSR:

1. Support RD for their initiative and recognition of the issues, and use this as an opportunity to critically review their work, offer our expertise, endorse the study (if appropriate) and potentially join them in this effort (they may want us to lead, as experts).
2. RD is about to give this issue a spotlight and I think NIUSR should take advantage of that to talk about our "imperatives" and our progress, to date.
3. Standards! What are they? Where are they? RD suggests that they don't exist, so they did their best to come up with some. This is a gap that NIUSR needs to fill, until someone with more authority, expertise or resources wants to fill it.

I would like to hear from you and especially, your thoughts on what the standards should be.