1. Planning for Accessible Emergency Communications:
Mobile Technology and Social Media
AEGIS conference
Brussels, Belgium 2011
Helena Mitchell, Ph.D.
Executive Director

2. Statistics in Perspective
 American Red Cross responded to more than
60,000 disasters in 2010
 54 million people have some type of disability;
by 2030 it will equal 20% of the population
 96% of the U.S. population use wireless
services or products

3. Wireless RERC Mission
 Research and develop accessible wireless
technologies and products to improve the lives of
people with disabilities.
 Emergency Lifelines on Wireless Platforms
Provide alternative and accessible emergency communication
"lifelines" over wireless platforms to assist people with disabilities
in managing the transition from legacy alerting systems (e.g.
broadcasts over TV and radio) to next-generation versions
of alerting systems (e.g. mobile broadband alerting).

4. Wireless Use Among People with Disabilities
RERC Consumer Advisory Network
Survey of User Needs
1600 plus people with disabilities
 85% use wireless products and services
 77% state access to wireless important
 65% wireless device important in emergencies

5. Challenges for People with Disabilities
 Access to emergency information
 Receiving the message
 Ability to take action
 Technological transitions and incompatibility
 Access to emergency alerts
 Broadcasting, computers, laptops, car radios,
wireless devices, captioned tele-
phony (TTY), relay and interpreting
services (ASL, S-S)

6. Methodology
 Research and develop prototypes to deliver alerts in
accessible formats over wireless devices
Administered 12 field trials and 2 focus groups = 100
 Levels of experience with wireless devices
 Technology savvy
 Mixed ability
 Infrequent users
Administered a pre-test and post-test questionnaire
Tabulated quantitative and qualitative data
Reported findings and recommendations on feasible
approaches to accessible wireless alerts

7. Some Pre-Field Trial Questions
80
70 70
60
60 50
Sometimes
40 Always
TV 30
50 n/a
Radio 20
Weather Radio 10
40
E-mail 0
Telephone How often do you carry a mobile phone?
30 Mobile Phone 70
Frnds/Fam 60
20 Sirens
50
Alerting Device
40 Everyday
10 Other
30 3-6 times/week
1-2 tims/wek
20
0 Never
How do you currently 10
receive emergency alerts? 0
How often do you use
your mobile phone?

8. Findings from EAS Trials
 Nine groups at three sites:
 Site 1: 94% of blind, low vision participants stated
wireless emergency alerting system they
evaluated was an improvement over other
methods they currently use for receiving
emergency alerts.
 Site 2: 81% of deaf and hard-of-hearing and deaf-
blind found the alerts to be an improvement.
 Site 3: 92% of deaf and hard-of-hearing and
visually impaired found devices an improvement.

9. Commercial Mobile Alerting System
Included CMAS parameters plus improvements from
previous trials.
Reduction in number of characters, no URL’s,
varied vibrating cadences.
Of those who participated in previous tests
77% stated it was an improvement.
70% of persons with hearing limitations
found the CMAS alerts to be an improvement.
83% of persons with visual limitations found the
accessible CMAS system to be an improvement.

10. Focus Groups
“American Sign Language (ASL) is the fourth most common language
used in America; it has all the essential features a language requires to
operate: rules for grammar, punctuation, and sentence order.
 Earlier feedback from Deaf participants suggested need to
discuss ASL alerts
All participants felt that ASL was an improvement over text
Some participants felt combination of text and ASL gave them
fuller understanding; versus text or ASL alone
Anecdotal evidence suggests some common terminology such as
“take cover” or “low-lying area”; do not translate well into Deaf
English and should be avoided.

11. IN THE MEANTIME…

12. Consumer Advisory Network
 Nationwide survey of people with disabilities
 November-January 2010-2011
1. Contacting 911 emergency services
2. Using social media during public emergencies
Respondent Profile
Total number of respondents 1343
Number of respondents with disability 1115
Age range 18-91
Age average 51.6

13. USING SOCIAL MEDIA DURING
PUBLIC EMERGENCIES

14. Image courtesy of Patrice Cloutier, Blogger
“Rather than trying to convince the public to adjust to the way we at FEMA
communicate, we must adapt to the way the public communicates ... We
must use social media tools to more fully engage the public as a critical
partner in our efforts.” ~ Craig Fugate, FEMA

15. Official Use of Social Media
 74% of states use SM to disseminate emergency
information
 Twitter 36%
 Facebook 29%
 YouTube 13%
 45% of cities use SM to disseminate emergency
information
 Twitter: 35%
 Facebook: 34%
 YouTube: 11%
Sets Precedent. Sets Expectations.

16. Do you access social media on the
following devices?
Percent
Desktop only 23%
Laptop only 12%
Cell phone only 3%
Desktop and laptop 6%
Desktop and cell phone 7%
Laptop and cell phone 7%
Desktop, laptop, cell 5%
TOTAL 63%

17. Social media outlets used by respondents
Number of social
media outlets Received
used alert Verified alert
0 (by other means) 77.4 84.3
1 15.7 11.8
2 4.6 2.6
3 1.4 0.7
Social media are used by people with disabilities.
 22% have received public alerts via social media
 15% have verified public alerts using social media

18. Social media outlets used
Received alert Verified alert
Facebook 11.6% 8.6%
Twitter 4.6% 2.5%
Listservs 4.2% 2.1%
Yahoo 3.8% 2.3%
YouTube 1.3% 1.0%
MySpace 1.3% 0.7%
Google Buzz 1.2% 0.8%
LinkedIn 0.0% 0.6%
Foursquare 0.3% 0.3%

19. Conclusions
 Use of wireless devices increasing among people with
disabilities.
 Receipt and verification of alerts most often through TV.
 TV has accessibility barriers.
 Accessible formats need to be available to a variety of media
devices.
 Social Media increasing among people with disabilities.
 Facebook currently most popular.
 Twitter predominately used by state and local emergency
response agencies.

20. Recommendations
 Disconnect between where citizens seek information
and where agencies disseminate information, this
needs to be fixed.
 Redundancies and alternative sources needed to
create accessible alerts and links to additional
information.
 Agency links to social media need to be in prominent
location on the homepage.
 Incorporating SM outlets into the planning of
emergency services sites makes strategic sense.

21. How to Meet the Challenges
 Government, researchers, and industry working
together can create change we can all live with.

22. Contact Us: www.wirelessrerc.org
Helena Mitchell, Ph.D., Principal Investigator, Wireless RERC
helena@cacp.gatech.edu
Emergency Lifelines on Wireless Networks Project:
 Helena Mitchell, Co-project Director
 Frank Lucia, Co-project Director
 Salimah LaForce, Research Analyst
 Ed Price, Technical Director
 Jeremy Johnson, Research Engineer
 Ben Lippincott, Industry Liaison
The Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center for Wireless Technologies is funded by the
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research of the U.S. Department of Education
under grant number H133E110002. The opinions contained in this presentation are those of the
grantee and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of Education.