Community Resilience

Communities, according to Kapucu and Özerdem (2011) have a drastic effect on the recovery process. In the end, by having a recovery place in plan within the community, it will ensure economic and resident resiliency for when a crisis is to occur. In order to ensure such a plan is in place, it is up to the American Red Cross to partner with and focus on the citizen involvement in decision making, from the beginning stages of planning all through mitigation; increase the buy in within the community; and provide for the community in an effective manner after a disaster has occurred Kapucu and Özerdem

and Dentistry and Director of the Program in Disaster Mental Health in the Department of Psychiatry and the UR Center for Disaster Medicine and Emergency Preparedness. For over a decade, he has responded to numerous national disasters as a volunteer with the American Red Cross. He has also developed comprehensive disaster mental health training programs for the New York State Office of Mental Health and the New York State Department of Health currently being disseminated throughout every county, state psychiatric center and acute healthcare facility throughout New York State.

A disaster which hit Arizona on September 2014 required the declaration of a major disaster by the American President Barack Obama (FEMA, 2014). This disaster killed many people in the Maricopa County, caused several damages to goods, homes, infrastructures, and so on. The recovery processes in the Maricopa County started simultaneously with the response and continued long time after the impact of the disaster. This paper addresses the strengths of the short- and the long-term recovery plans, the weaknesses and the challenges of the short- and long-term recovery plans, the remained long-term recovery work to be done, the political and legal issues that influenced the recovery, and recommendations that could promote effective recovery.

"Life After Hurricane Katrina: The Resilience in Survivors of Katrina (RISK) Project." Sociological Forum, vol. 31, Sep2016 Supplement, pp. 750-769. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/socf.12271

There are numerous points of view on resiliency, as non‑governmental associations (NGOs) perceive that individuals ' capacity to better withstand and recuperate from calamities is basic to maintaining improvement. NGOs, contributors and worldwide reaction groups are attempting to characterize resiliency in their terms. CRS characterizes resiliency as "the capacity of people, communities and institutions to advance integral human development in the face of shocks, cycles and trends" (2014, p.2). The vulnerable individuals themselves best characterize strength and resiliency. What vulnerable individuals accept helps most to their versatility limit is discriminating to current dialogs on resiliency. Contributors and NGOs may have their own meaning of the term; however, an understanding of what it really means to individuals looking to make their community resilient is crucial to outlining successful Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and recovery activities in development, risk reaction and catastrophe recuperation programs (CRS, 2014). The danger of not utilizing the

Resilience is a term that is often applied to those who have faced hardship and viewed the experience in a positive light as an opportunity to grow and change for the better (Wagnild & Collins, 2009). The definition however seems to vary from place to place. Ungar et al. (2008) stated “definitions of resilience are ambiguous when viewed across cultures" (p.174) which is why the understanding of resilience may be difficult to capture (as cited in Windle, Bennett & Noyes, 2011). Although the literature agrees on several common themes about resilience there are many varying opinions on how to define the concept or the attributing factors. Earvolino-Ramirez (2007) and

Lowe, Sarah R, et al. “Psychological Resilience After Hurricane Sandy: The Influence of Individual-and Community-Level Factors on mental Health After a Large-scale Natural Disaster.” Plos ONE, vol. 10, no. 5, May 2015, pp. 1-15. EBSCOhost, doi: 10 1371/journal.pone.0125761.

Over decades, the research of resilience has developed from understanding individual’s resilience qualities and protective factors, to the process of resilience and the interventions that promote resilience (Richardson, 2002; Wright et al., 2013). Recently, the focus of resilience shift to the neurobiological process because of the development of science and technology (Wright et al., 2013). While these literatures emerging, there are two noteworthy issues. First, the outcome of the studies were mainly emphasized on main-stream population (Ungar, 2006). Second, little attention was given to resilience across cultures (Ungar, 2006; Ungar et al., 2005). Hence, it is important to investigate how resilience is being defined and understand in different cultures; what are the challenges when conducting a cross cultural research; and what are the key elements when implementing intervention in different cultures.

Scholars define resilience as the outcome of successful adaptation to adversity (Zutra, Hall, & Murray, 2010). Resilience is the ability to recover from adversities challenges in a manner that leaves an individual more flexible and better able to meet future challenges. Resilience involves an ability to react creatively and constructively to change while recognizing that change is an ongoing part of life (Mikail, 2014). Zutra and Hall identify two core dimensions of resilience:

The differing needs of a vulnerable population have to be addressed in order to alleviate issues that were noted after Katrina. In particular, the needs which are known prior to a disaster, such as evacuation for the infirmed, elderly, impoverished, and those who lack the means to evacuate. The Department of Homeland Security represented a solution to addressing these needs via a three phase response: “pre-event planning and preparation, the event, and recovery” (Dept. Homeland Security, 2008). It has been widely studied that residents of a vulnerable community may be impacted more severely and are disproportionately affected than those with means following a disaster. Assessing how to prepare for each of the phases represents an issue for emergency managers especially when it comes to those who lack the means to prepare for themselves. Quickly rebuilding homes in a devastated area won’t help a community when a disaster strikes again. Platt stated that “disasters offer a window of opportunity to strengthen communities”, via “construction and change land uses to prevent a recurrence of a disaster”. (Platt, 1998) It also can be argued that following a disastrous event, this is when a true opportunity arises, by providing an opportunity to work through solving the societal issues that are the basis for a vulnerable populous via comprehensive political reforms and

The federal and local community resources dedicated to the treatment and prevention of substance use, has become a valuable tool in the process of recovery. Chemically dependent individuals often have a variety of psychosocial problems in addiction to addiction, such as financial, housing, criminal, and poor social support that often leads to poor treatment retention and higher risk of relapse according to Krupski, et. al. (2009). Therefor the need for community resources is critical to the success of the original treatment. When investigating into the federal resources available, there becomes a view into a larger problem with chemical dependency as government agencies compile statistical data of therapeutic approaches, cultural diversity,

In this paper I will explain the concept of resilience through Hunger Game a current event,and personal experience. “You’re not leaving me here alone,” I say. Because if he dies, I’ll never go home, not really. I’ll spend the rest of my life in this arena, trying to think my way out. ”Quote from the Hunger Games”

Problems resulting from disasters linger for quite some time after the acute phase in a disaster and victims may have issues arise that they were not aware of initially. Community health nurses are often a primary point of contact for many of these situations and must be prepared for various problems. Sometimes, they are called on to simply reassure the victim that they are not alone in the situation and that help will continue to come. When a nurse allows a victim to discuss their concerns, the nurse can quickly expedite referrals to the appropriate area if it is out of their scope of practice. Occasionally, just having the validation and reassurance from a professional instills hope that things will get better soon. In the situation where the

On August 29, 2009, Hurricane Katrina struck the United States Gulf Coast. It was a Category 3 Hurricane, according to the Saffir Simpson Scale. Winds gusted to up to 140 miles per hour, and the hurricane was almost 400 miles wide . The storm itself did a tremendous amount of damage, but the storm’s aftermath was cataclysmic. Many claimed that the federal government was slow to meet the needs of the hundreds of thousands of people affected by the storm. This paper will examine the four elements of disaster management – preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation – as well as an analysis on the data presented.

First, one must understand what human flourishing entails, in order to understand what might compromise it. Several different events in the United States provide examples of members of society coming together. Generally, disasters represent the events that bring members of society together, such as the September 11, 2001 disaster involving the Twin Towers in New York City, the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, Louisiana, and the destruction caused by severe tornados in Oklahoma (Grossheim & Brodak, 2015). After each of these disasters, members from all over the United States participated in donating essential items, such as clothing, food, and shelter, to those who were negatively effected