Review Items
REVIEW ITEMS
The forms or documents linked here are proposals or drafts that are being considered for incorporation into RPG documentation — which includes both preparedness advice for residents, and guidance for coordinators and other RPG workers. They are posted here so that members of the community can evaluate their utility and make suggestions for modifications or improvements.
Please note: The items listed here have been drafted with the cottages in mind; in the interests of both relevance and consistency we need to know if and how they need to be modified for use in the towers, and whether there are cottage-tower differences so great that a different approach is necessary.
You may submit your comments via the forms at the end of the document, or by Email to rpgrvm@gmail.com.
1. Local Disaster Checklist: Suggested as a form to be used by Neighborhood Coordinators for their initial post-disaster evaluation. Would be completed for each location of damage or injury, and transmitted promptly to the Area Coordinator for further transmission.
2. Local information form. Intended to elicit information from residents that will help coordinators evaluate risk and needs. Data, or an appropriate summary,to be kept at the Neighborhood, Area and central RPG levels, and should be updated annualluy or whenever a perceptible change occurs.
3. Skip’s Village Center Dr Neighborhood Log. A sample of the propose neighborhood record, produced by the approach outlined in item 4 (below).
4. Skip’s note on neighborhood surveying. Guidelines for Neighborhood Coordinators in completing the log form in item 3 (above).
5. Wildfire Emergency Evacuation Tips.
6. Draft Go-Bag options for various individual abilities and situations (Also open for review on the public Prepare page)
First item:
Time alone may be ambiguous as eaqrthquakes and aftershocks may occur on the same or adjacent days, events may occur near midnight (or noon if a twelve-hour clock is used). Suggest adding date.
Area is not needed if the full neighborhood designator is used (9.3)
Suggest putting emergency medical need w/injury evaluation instead of separating by damage.
2nd item — suggest including pets in the same area as people, as similar issues (food, water) arise.
Concerning items 2, 3, and 4: We need to think though the question of people vs households. For single residents it is no problem, but in an emergency the coordinator sees the house, and has to make decisions based on what s/he knows about the inhabitants. If there is someone there who needs assistance, is there also someone there who can provide it? Or are there two people who need assistance? The proposed forms don’t provide for that differentiation, which could be critical.