Search results

Understanding risk is more than just modeling risk; it requires an understanding of the development and social processes that underlie and drive the generation of disaster risk. Here, in addition to a review of more technical factors, this paper aims to discuss a variety of institutional, social and political considerations that must be managed for the results of a risk assessment to influence actions that lead to reductions in natural hazard risk.

The technical approaches and the institutional, social and political considerations covered in this paper are based on a wide range of experiences gleaned from case studies that touch on a variety of activities related to assessing the risks and impacts of natural hazards, and from the activities of the World Bank’s Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery.

Risk information provides a critical foundation for managing disaster risk across a wide range of sectors. Appropriate communication of robust risk information at the right time can raise awareness and trigger action to reduce risk. Communicating this information in a way that triggers action requires an understanding of the developments and social processes that underlie and drive the generation of risk, as well as of the wider Disaster Risk Management (DRM) decision-making context.

Prior to the initiation of a quantitative risk assessment one should clearly define why an assessment is needed and wanted, the information gaps that currently prevent effective DRM actions and the end-users of the risk information. This requires developing trust through communication among the scientists and engineers performing the risk assessment and the decision-makers, authorities, communities and other intended users of the information developed through the assessment.

This paper summarizes the technical components of a risk assessment as well as the institutional, social and political considerations that should be considered to maximize the probability of successfully reducing the risk defined by a risk assessment.

Measuring parent satisfaction is regarded as essential but there is a paucity of research reporting on parental satisfaction with community youth mental health services. This study aims to examine parent satisfaction with Jigsaw – a primary care youth mental health service.

A measure of parent satisfaction was developed and administered to parents in 12 Jigsaw services over a two-year period (n = 510, age range: 28 to 70 years) when young people and parents were ending their engagement with these services.

Overall, parents had high levels of satisfaction with Jigsaw and their level of satisfaction did not vary depending on the parent or young person’s age and/or gender. Examination of qualitative feedback revealed three overarching themes relating to growth and change in young people, parents and their families; strengths of the service and; suggestions for future service development. Analysis of the psychometric properties of the measure provided evidence for a two-factor structure examining satisfaction with the intervention and outcomes and service accessibility and facilities.

This study represents one of the first efforts to measure parent satisfaction with primary care youth mental health services. It has resulted in the development of a brief measure that can be more widely administered to parents engaging with primary care youth mental health services.