IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/johsem/v14y2017i3p14n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The National Capabilities for Animal Response in Emergencies (NCARE) Study: An Assessment of US States and Counties

Author

Listed:
  • Spain C. Victor
  • Miller Gregory S.

    (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Research and Development, New York, NY, USA)

  • Green R.C.
  • Davis Lacie

    (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Field Investigations and Response, New York, NY, USA)

  • Britt Susan

    (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, ProLearning, New York, NY, USA)

Abstract

Communities with well-developed animal response plans, along with trained and equipped animal response teams, are typically better able to protect resident livestock and companion animals during a disaster, with fewer animals lost, higher human evacuation compliance rates, and a greater percentage of pets staying with their families. The NCARE Study is a cross-sectional descriptive survey designed to assess, among US states and counties, the level of preparedness for managing animals in an emergency. Overall, 65% of participating states (31/48) reported having a State Animal Response Team (SART), while 48% (16/33) of counties with >1 million population (large counties) and 23% (131/565) of a random sample of counties with

Suggested Citation

  • Spain C. Victor & Miller Gregory S. & Green R.C. & Davis Lacie & Britt Susan, 2017. "The National Capabilities for Animal Response in Emergencies (NCARE) Study: An Assessment of US States and Counties," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 14(3), pages 1-14, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:johsem:v:14:y:2017:i:3:p:14:n:2
    DOI: 10.1515/jhsem-2017-0014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2017-0014
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/jhsem-2017-0014?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:johsem:v:14:y:2017:i:3:p:14:n:2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.