1. Jenifer Rhoades MES-EC October 18, 2011

2. Agenda Overview Baseline Survey Results Proposal for Future Tracking Next Steps 2

3. Overview NTHMP Strategic Plan mandated baseline measures would be determined for 9 specific metrics Fall 2010 – Survey conducted to create baselines May 2011 – Survey Results Report Finalized September 2011 – MES-EC Sub-Team formed Determine baselines Propose annual update methodology October 2011 – Presented to MES-EC February 2012 – Present to NTHMP-CC 3

4. Baseline Survey Results Reviewed Survey Results to establish baseline metrics starting in 2010 529 communities targeted 155 responded Results displayed Total number for the NTHMP Metric Survey question referenced Total number of responses by State Additional relevant survey results included 4

5. Metric 1: Increase percentages of communities in tsunami- threatened areas which include tsunamis in their emergency response plan by 30% annually (SIIIQ1) Survey Result = 13.8% in 2010 70% (N = 73) indicated they have a completed plan 16% (N = 17) are in the development stage of developing a plan 11% (N=11) have intentions to develop a plan 4% (N = 4) do not have and do not plan to develop a plan 5

6. Metric 1: Increase percentages of communities in tsunami- threatened areas which include tsunamis in their emergency response plan by 30% annually (SIIIQ1) State Results (Number) Alaska7 New Hampshire1 Alabama1 New Jersey1 California29 Oregon4 Delaware1 Puerto Rico2 Georgia1 Texas2 Hawaii3 Washington18 Maine1 6

7. Metric 2: Annually update the number of tsunami threatened communities which include tsunami in their hazard mitigation plan (SVQ1 and SVQ4) Survey Result = 16% for FY2010 87 reported their communities have hazard mitigation plans that include tsunami response 16 indicated they have initiated planning 16 indicated they plan to start drafting a plan 13 do not plan to develop a plan 7

8. Metric 2: Annually update the number of tsunami threatened communities which include tsunami in their hazard mitigation plan (SVQ1 and SVQ4) State Results (Number) Alaska7 New Jersey1 California25 Oregon4 Georgia1 South Carolina1 Guam1 Texas3 Hawaii5 Virginia2 New Hampshire1 Washington21 8

9. Metric 3: Increase the number of tsunami evacuation maps by 10% of the 2010 Baseline (SIIQ5) 55 reported their communities have published and disseminated evacuation route maps that direct residents/visitors to tsunami safe areas. 9

10. Metric 3: Increase the number of tsunami evacuation maps by 10% of the 2010 Baseline (SIIQ5) State Results (Number) Alaska5 New Jersey1 Alabama1 Oregon5 California18 Puerto Rico3 Delaware1 South Carolina2 Georgia1 Texas2 Hawaii2 Virginia1 Washington13 10

11. Metric 4: Annually update the number of communities that include tsunami in their community planning, zoning and building code deliberations from the 2010 Baseline (SIQ9) 108 reported their communities include tsunami in their community planning activities 47 reported their communities do not include tsunami in their community planning activities 11

12. Metric 4: Annually update the number of communities that include tsunami in their community planning, zoning and building code deliberations from the 2010 Baseline (SIQ9) State Results (Number) Alaska11 New Hampshire1 Alabama2 New Jersey1 California43 Oregon4 Delaware2 Puerto Rico3 Georgia1 South Carolina3 Guam1 Texas5 Hawaii3Virginia1 Maryland1Washington24 Maine1 12

13. Metric 5: Increase percentage of states and local community conducted educational tsunami events by 10% annually (SIIQ3_cb_3 and SII3_cb_8) Survey Result = 17.4% in 2010 58% (N = 92) utilize public workshops, meetings, schools and/or seminars to promote tsunami education Responses including mailings, newspaper, literature displays, kiosks, telephone books and signage were not included. 13

14. Metric 5: Increase percentage of states and local community conducted educational tsunami events by 10% annually (SIIQ3_cb_3 and SII3_cb_8) State Results (Number) Alaska9 New Hampshire1 Alabama2 New Jersey1 California31 Oregon3 Delaware3 Puerto Rico6 Georgia1 South Carolina2 Guam2 Texas2 Hawaii3Virginia1 Maryland1Washington23 14

15. Metric 6 (MMS): Complete inundation maps for all threatened communities in Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and U.S. Virgin Islands by 2013 (SIIIQ7, SIIIQ8_cb_2, and SIIIQ9_cb_1 - 5) Survey did not specifically as if the community had a completed inundation map. 83 reported their organization has used or will use inundation maps in their tsunami planning 58 reported the most common source of the inundation maps they use for tsunami planning is a state agency 15

16. Metric 6 (MMS): Complete inundation maps for all threatened communities in Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and U.S. Virgin Islands by 2013 State Results (Number) – Need to establish California Hawaii Oregon Puerto Rico Washington U.S. Virgin Islands 16

17. Metric 7 (MMS): Complete inundation maps for 33% of threatened communities in Alaska, the U.S. Pacific Island Territories, and U.S. East and Gulf Coast States by 2013 Survey did not specifically as if the community had a completed inundation map. Alaska? Guam? CNMI? American Samoa? 17

18. Metric 8 (WCS): Annually increase local warning dissemination capabilities by 10%, based on baseline established in 2010 (SVIQ1 and SVIQ2_cb_1-5_other) 51 reported their organization does not have tsunami signaling devices or sirens 0r use existing signaling devices for tsunami warnings. Of those: The majority (70%, N = 35) reported they did not feel signaling devices were need, and 30% (N = 15) reported that signaling devices are too expensive 18

19. Metric 8 (WCS): Annually increase local warning point dissemination capabilities by 10%, based on baseline established in 2010 (SVIQ1) State Results (Number) – Yes Responses Alaska 8New Hampshire1 Alabama2New Jersey1 California9Oregon4 Delaware1Puerto Rico2 Hawaii3Washington12 19

20. Metric 9 (WCS): Annually increase local warning point reception capabilities by 10%, based on baseline established in 2010 No specific question asked in the survey to determine the baseline. 20

21. Proposal for Future Tracking Validate/Amend Results Low response rate State Partners will update MES-EC selected metric data through 2010 by November 30, 2011 Amended metrics will become the Baseline Metrics Annual Metric Update Washington State will coordinate annual State Partner survey Annual Meeting: Sub-Committee Co-Chairs will provide updates on annual metrics at Annual NTHMP Meeting Metric data will be posted on NTHMP Website 21

22. Next Steps Coordinate with other Sub-Committee Co-Chairs and gain their approval of this proposal Validate/Amend FY10 Results Present Findings and Proposal to NTHMP-CC 22