Access to Emergency Alerts for People with Disabilities

Focus Groups Overview February 2006

Convened in the fall of 2006 to solicit direct input from the community as to:

• How emergency messages are received
• The content and usefulness of messages
• Satisfaction and/or frustration with above
• Ideal delivery mechanisms and message content

Tech-savvy and non-tech-savvy consumers:

• Hard-of-hearing and late-deafened consumers (conducted by the Northern Virginia Resource Center for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing,Inc. (NVRC). Read NVRC's full report.
• Deaf and hard-of-hearing consumers (conducted by Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc.) Read TDI's full report).
• Blind and visually impaired consumers (conducted by the American Foundation for the Blind). Read AFB's full report.
• Deaf-blind consumers (conducted by the Helen Keller National Center (HKNC). Read HKNC's full report with assistance from the American Foundation for the Blind

Consumers who are hard-of-hearing and late-deafened receive emergency information via:

• Television
• Radio (if residual hearing)
• E-mail or news Web sites (text as online video not captioned)
• Personal devices such as pagers, cell phones, Blackberries
• From family, neighbors, strangers

Concerns of tech-savvy consumers who are hard-of-hearing and late-deafened:

• Broadcast weather alerts utilize Doppler/area maps that make pinpointing locations difficult without benefit of audio
• Power outages, extreme vulnerability in the dark
• Relevance of emergency messages via e-mail diluted by less-than-vital information ("high wind" warnings)
• PA systems in public spaces not useful (hearing aids block background noise)

Wish list for consumers who are hard-of-hearing and late-deafened:

• Text displays in public buildings
• Hearing aid coupled with a PA system to transmit emergency messages directly (Bluetooth)
• Portable speech to text device
• GPS in cell phone with local emergency management agency reachable
• Radio text alerts
• Captioned Internet video, easy to activate, delivered in real time
• Device to wake you, complete with external power supply

Ideal messages for deaf, hard-of-hearing and late-deafened consumers:

• Notification and what to do
• URL for more information
• Develop consistency: keywords, order of info
• Offer hierarchy of notification options/scenarios
• Offer variety of message detail based on device text display (address problem of truncated text)

Ideal messages for consumers who are deaf:

• Establish color codes and keywords for people who don't have great English skills (broadcast or text messages)
• Incorporation of sign language interpreters for emergency newscasts or e-mailed alerts

Ideal messages for non-tech-savvy consumers who are hard-of-hearing and late-deafened:

• Messages delivered via existing public tech vs. personal devices
• Method of capturing TV captioning text if missed or if scrolling too fast
• LED signs on highways, display alerts in cars
• TV station/channel with text information on full screen
• Neighborhood watch program (though privacy/safety concern)
• Programs to have police/fire personnel notify household

Blind and visually impaired consumers receive emergency information/notification via:

• Radio, television (increasingly), ham radio (fast, direct)
• Satellite radio
• Weather radios that turn on during emergencies
• Automated calls by local emergency agencies
• E-mail alerts from local TV stations
• Sirens if in a small or rural community
• Family, friends, neighbors (secondary source)

Blind and visually impaired consumer concerns:

• Televised text scrolls and graphics cater to sighted audience
• TV reporters that say "over here" and "in the red area"
• Diminishing number of locally owned and operated radio stations (hence availability and reliability of local alerts)
• Stations (TV and radio) that cover wide areas and therefore don't provide enough specifics during weather events
• Training of public officials needed, especially around importance of guide dogs (not a pet)

Suggestions consumers who are blind and visually impaired:

• Improve what currently exists, take what "is" and make it more accessible
• Broadcast audio warnings in additional languages
• Use beepers to alert users to emergency situation, seek further info
• 800 number for emergency info in your area
• Phone options preferable to instant messaging
• Dissemination software that can send more than one type of message
• Stick with low tech options to maximize accessibility

Suggestions on message content from consumers who are blind and visually impaired:

• Relatively few complaints on quality of warning notification now
• EAS warnings taken seriously, capture attention, build on this with tones on other devices
• Improve broadcast weather reports by reducing vague pointing and "over here/there"
• Concern comes with "what do I do now" post evacuation (transportation, shelters, etc. when away from home and TV/radio)

Suggestion beyond current project: engage local communities of blind and visually impaired consumers and first responders similar to TDI's CEPIN project.

Consumers who are deaf-blind receive emergency information/notification via:

• Family
• Friends and/or neighbors
• Television reports (if some sight, hearing)
• Computer-generated e-mail
• Cell and amplified phone service
• Community sirens
• Conventional Radio (if some hearing)

Consumers who are deaf-blind express frustration or concern about:

• Relying on friends and neighbors in time of emergency, what if neighbors are away?
• Need information as soon as possible, not when neighbors can get to you.
• Televised alerts include information that goes by too fast to be useful
• Television can sensationalize a weather situation for days leading up to an event that turns out not to be bad at all
• Some deaf-blind users can hear Emergency Broadcast System test on TV, but not the information that is provided after the signal
• Concern that figures of authority (police, fireman) would separate them from guide animal
• Lack of independence, could get worse in shelter

Consumers who are deaf-blind are most enthusiastic about:

• Potential of Internet to gain information and receive alerts (weather.com and/or NOAA Web site)
• Greater computer use in general, great technology "literacy"
• Potential of funding subsidies to address technology gap, perhaps fund emergency alerting devices for this community
• Devices similar to Sidekick with vibrate feature, various patterns of vibration to indicate type of emergency (like Morse code)
• Expand television alerts during emergencies to include full screen of information, with slow moving graphics and simplified text geared to people with residual hearing and sight

Contact:
Marcia Brooks, Project Director
WGBH National Center for Accessible Media
marcia_brooks@wgbh.org
http://ncam.wgbh.org/alerts
http://www.incident.com/access