1. Evaluating the reach and impact of emergency risk communication during public health emergencies 
Laura E. Pechta, PhD, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Keri Lubell, PhD, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Matthew W. Seeger, PhD, Wayne State University
International Crisis and Risk Communication Conference
March 15, 2017

2. CDC Emergency Risk Communication
CDC Emergency Risk Communication Branch (ERCB) located in Division of Emergency Operations, Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response
ERCB provides staffing for core teams when the Joint Information Center (JIC) is activated for a response

3. CDC Joint Information Center Goals
Coordinates CDC messaging and materials development across the response
Has primary responsibility for the development and implementation of communication strategy
Ensures the use of emergency risk communication principles from CERC and other frameworks
Incorporates plain language and “clear communication”
Ensures messages are tailored for needs of audiences
Coordinates reviews of scientific and communication products (i.e., clearance) for the entire response

4. Key Challenges in Evaluating Emergency Risk Communication
Lack of clear criteria for evaluating ERC impact
Limited resources to incorporate evaluation throughout the communication process
Lack of routine data to monitor ERC processes and outcomes
Challenges developing standardized ERC metrics across multiple CDC programs
Access and data collection challenges across disaster types

5. Project Goals
Develop indicators to assess the quality, effectiveness and impact of CDC ERC
Measures to be operationalized for a range of emergency events
Measures to assess CDC internal processes
Measures to assess impact of ERC on target audiences
Identify potential data sources and data collection methods

6. Methods Peer review and grey literature
Develop conceptual framework to describe ERC development, dissemination
and impact
Create logic model of how ERC “should” work
Draft and test measures/indicators

7. ERC Logic Model

8. Information Seeking Construct – Zika Example
Definition: Information seeking refers to intentional, active efforts to obtain specific information above and beyond the normal patterns of media exposure and interpersonal sources
Evaluation question: To what extent are consumer audiences seeking information from the CDC and CDC partners?
Indicators: Increase in the number of people seeking Zika information from CDC, Increase in the number of people seeking guidance about Zika from healthcare providers
Potential Data Sources: CDC web metrics, CDC call center data, national surveys/polls conducted with U.S. adults
Example measures:
Number of inquiries to CDC-INFO and CDC web page views relevant to Zika (e.g., Zika and Pregnancy, Zika Travel health Notices, Facts about Microcephaly, etc.)
At any time, have you talked with a doctor, nurse, or other healthcare worker about Zika virus?

9. Self Efficacy Construct – Zika Example
Definition: Extent to which people believe they are capable of performing specific behaviors in order to attain certain goals. ERC messages that are actionable are considered more effective and generally increase self-efficacy
Evaluation question: To what extent has CDC ERC increased self-efficacy among healthcare providers?
Indicator: Increased self-efficacy in responding to Zika among healthcare providers
Potential data sources: National surveys/polls conducted with healthcare providers
Example measures: Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following:
I feel confident in my ability to talk to my patients about Zika virus infection
I know which patients to refer for Zika virus testing

10. Factors Under Consideration
Audiences
Many potential target audiences
Indicators/measures to will vary across audiences
Not all ERC constructs relevant for all audiences
Type and Scope of Response
Natural disasters, environmental, infectious disease outbreak
National/international (long-term) vs. regional/local (short-term)
Implications for measures, data sources and data collection methods
Measurement Approach
Direct vs. indirect indicators
Primary data collection vs. secondary data sources
Feasibility/acceptability considerations
Options in data sources

11. Why is assessment important?
Matching resources to conditions: Scope and scale of the event
Real time feedback and adjustment
Situational awareness
Demonstrating the role and value of ERC
Learning and improvement

12. Discussion and Questions
The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.