RELEVANT
FOCUSED
READY

Delivering Safe Emergency Social Services as a Host Community during a
Pandemic
Clayton Sheen

Introduction
Emergency planners providing ESS as a host community have
considerable challenges when planning for an evacuation, while in the
midst of a pandemic. This two-fold emergency adds complexity
because it requires considerable planning to achieve both simultaneous
and conflicting objectives of limiting the spread of COVID-19 while
also delivering emergency services. The City of Prince George (CoPG)
provides Emergency Social Services (ESS) for not only their own
residents, but also the multitude of communities located in the northern
half of the province of British Columbia (BC). Mass evacuations,
which requires the rapid removal of a large number of residents from
disaster-impacted areas, can also inadvertently accelerate the
transmission and spread of COVID-19 (Takaota et al.,
2021). Investigating and implementing strategies that reduce the
potential for virus spread while providing ESS, helps provide an
increased margin of safety for evacuees, CoPG residents, emergency
workers and volunteers. The following study is a review of practices
used globally in evacuation centres and other similar purposed
facilities, to reduce the spread of COVID-19 while providing essential
services to a large population. These strategies were evaluated for
applicability into the CoPG’s ESS plan. Elements of the research
gained from the literature review that could increase safety for the
CoPG’s ESS plan are; transportation, advanced registration, dispersed
evacuation, pre-screening, contact tracing, ventilation, maximizing the
use of cleaning supplies and personal protective equipment (PPE),
cleaning, education and information campaigns. This study will make
recommendations regarding how the CoPG can increase the safety of
the ESS plan during the pandemic in order to reduce the transmission
of the virus while providing host community services for neighboring
communities.
Background
In 2017 and 2018, the CoPG acted as a host community for three
months serving over 13,000 evacuees who were forced from their
homes due to a mass evacuation caused by wildfires (Hall, 2019).
These two considerable mass evacuation events have positioned the
CoPG as a host community leader in the province of BC that can
deliver large scale ESS. After a brief hiatus from providing this service,
and with the recent floods and current fire events, the CoPG is again
preparing to offer this service to neighboring communities. However,
the CoPG is currently confronted with the challenges of providing ESS
for a mass evacuation, while the COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing.
Traditional evacuation centres often have common attributes such as
crowded spaces, close contact settings and confined spaces that are
known to contribute to the spread of the COVID-19 virus (Takaoka,
2021). Numerous studies indicate that evacuations can increase the rate
of virus spread and infection (Collins et al., 2021; Sawano et al., 2021;
Takaoka, 2021). With the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the fire
season abruptly here, the CoPG is looking to identify pandemic safe
strategies to improve the ESS delivery model for mass evacuations that
may occur in fulfilling their role as a host community.
Methods
This paper was conducted following Webster and Watsons (2002)
approach to a review of literature, in order to determine the
opportunities to increase safety. This literature search was
comprehensive and focused on identifying critical strategies that have
been applied elsewhere, both regionally and globally. The review was
inclusive of primary and secondary research conducted to date and
included case-studies, after action reports, peer reviewed journals,
briefing notes, and other sources. The literature review conducted for
this paper was inclusive of multiple online databases including the
Justice Institute of British Columbia’s (JIBC) library system and
Google Scholar. Article selection was based upon relevance to the
subject.
Keywords: evacuation, evacuation centre, evacuation planning,
reception centre, natural disaster, pandemic, COVID-19, isolation
centre.

Bachelor of Emergency & Security Management Studies

Results/Findings
Looking at facilities facing similar challenges of providing a service
during a pandemic to a large population, numerous trends were
identified that could increase the margin of safety for emergency
workers, evacuees and residents of the community.
Attributes that could be added or altered to improve safety where
determined to be; transportation; advanced registration; dispersed
evacuation; pre-screening; contact tracing; ventilation; maximizing the
use of cleaning supplies and personal protective equipment (PPE),
cleaning; education; and information campaigns.
Recommendations
This paper highlights the need for CoPG emergency management
practitioners to look at the current practices and adapt, alter or
implement the potential recommendations into the current ESS
delivery model. Two potential opportunities were recognized; during
the initial population movement to the evacuation centre and while
operating the evacuation centre. Implementing recommendations into
the early stages of an evacuation while the population is preparing to
or moving to the evacuation centre can ensure that from the onset
critical precautions are taken to prevent unnecessary virus spread.
Evacuees can be educated on how, where and what to expect during
the process. Adapting evacuation centre operations while delivering
ESS also increases safety. Pre-screening; contact tracing; ventilation;
maximizing the use of cleaning supplies and personal protective
equipment (PPE), cleaning; education; and information campaigns are
all elements of the operation of an evacuation centre where the
opportunity exits to minimize virus spread. These precautions used by
other like facilities can be implemented into the CoPG’s own ESS
model to improve safety for all involved, allowing Prince George to
serve as a host during an evacuation while minimizing risk to
emergency workers, evacuees and CoPG residents.
References
Collins, J., Polen, A., McSweeney, K., Colón-Burgos, D., & Jernigan,
I. (2021). Hurricane Risk Perceptions and Evacuation DecisionMaking in the Age of COVID-19. Bulletin of the American
Meteorological Society, 102(4), 836-848.
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-20-0229.1
Hall, L. (2019, June 6). Regional collaboration on evacuee emergency
support services [Memo]. City of Prince George.
https://prrd.bc.ca/board/agendas/2019/2019-21993308305/pages/documents/15-b-CA-04PG_Emgevacuee.pdf
Sawano, T., Ito, N., Ozaki, A., Nishikawa, Y., Nonaka, S., Kobashi, Y.,
Higuchi, A., & Tsubokura, M. (2021). Evacuation of residents in a
natural disaster during the COVID-19 era. QJM : Monthly Journal of
the Association of Physicians, 4(1), 1-2.
https://10.1093/qjmed/hcab044
Takaoka, S., Kawata, Y., & Kai, T. (2021). A study of issues related to
the operation of evacuation shelters in a corona-endemic society:
Through the guidelines and training of Shiga Prefecture in Japan.
Journal of Disaster Research, 16(1), 40–47.
https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2021.p0040
Webster, J. & Watson, R.T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for
the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii-xxiii.
https://web.njit.edu/~egan/Writing_A_Literature_Review.pdf

Justice Institute of British Columbia