MPH 600 Week 5 Emergency Response and Behavioral Health Example

Safety, Calm, Efficacy, Connection and Hope: Organizing the Behavioral Health Response to a Wildfire Evacuation in a Southern Colorado County

[Student Name]

University of Phoenix

MPH/600: Community Resiliency and Response Preparedness

Week 5 Assignment

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The county, the wildfire, the evacuation, shelter figures, teams and follow-up are composites written for a model paper; county estimates come from CDC PLACES, and research findings come from the sources cited.

On a windy September afternoon, a wildfire ignited in the foothills on the county's western edge and spread quickly toward a subdivision and a rural area. By evening, the sheriff had ordered about 1,900 residents to evacuate. That night, 340 people arrived at the shelter at the county fairgrounds, many with pets, few with medications and some unsure whether their homes were standing. This paper describes the response, with a focus on behavioral health.

Organizing the Response

The county's emergency operations center activated under incident command. Fire agencies fought the fire; the sheriff managed evacuation; the Red Cross and county human services ran the shelter; the health department led health and medical functions, including public health nursing at the shelter, air quality alerts and behavioral health.

The Baseline

Behavioral health needs did not start with the fire. CDC's PLACES estimates for 2023 put frequent mental distress at 17.3% of Pueblo County adults, the real county behind these figures, and show that 22.6% had ever been told they had depression (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2025). Many evacuees therefore arrived with existing conditions that stress and disruption could worsen.

What Disasters Do to Mental Health

Research on disaster mental health has examined the presentation, burden, correlates and treatment of mental disorders after disasters, while noting methodological challenges in studying them (Goldmann & Galea, 2014). Most people recover with support from family and community, but some develop post-traumatic stress, depression, anxiety or increased substance use, and problems may appear months later.

Five Principles for Early Intervention

Because trials covering every kind of disaster are unlikely, a worldwide panel of experts extrapolated from related research to reach consensus on early and mid-term intervention. The panel settled on five principles with empirical support: foster safety, foster calm, build people's belief that they and their community can act, strengthen connections and nurture hope (Hobfoll et al., 2007). People recover best when they feel safe, calm, capable, connected and hopeful, and the response can be built around those five needs.

Health Services at the Shelter

Public health nurses screened arrivals for urgent medical needs, identified people who had left without medications or equipment and arranged replacements. Several older evacuees needed oxygen, and one needed a dialysis appointment the next morning. Smoke drifting over the fairgrounds prompted the department to set up filtered-air rooms for people with asthma and heart disease.

Principle One: Safety

At the shelter, safety meant more than a cot. Staff posted fire updates every two hours, separated quiet areas for families with young children, secured medications and provided a pet area so residents did not stay behind to protect animals. Clear, frequent information reduced rumors that homes had burned.

Principle Two: Calming

Behavioral health staff trained in psychological first aid walked the shelter, offering water, listening and helping people with practical tasks. They did not ask people to describe what they had seen. Those who were very distressed were offered a quiet space and a clinician.

Principle Three: Efficacy

Helping people act on their own behalf restores a sense of control. An assistance table helped evacuees replace medications, contact insurers and employers and register for aid. Some evacuees volunteered in the shelter kitchen or with children's activities.

Principle Four: Connectedness

Staff helped people reach family and neighbors, set up phone charging stations and kept neighbors together in the shelter layout. Congregations brought meals and sent members to sit with evacuees they knew.

Principle Five: Hope

Hope grew from concrete information: which streets were safe, when residents could return and what help would be available for rebuilding. Staff avoided false reassurance but emphasized the community's past recoveries and available support.

Stepped Care

Behavioral health support followed steps. All evacuees received psychological first aid and information about common reactions. Those with signs of severe distress, suicidal thoughts or disrupted psychiatric treatment were screened by clinicians. People needing treatment were referred to the community mental health center, which reserved appointments for evacuees.

People With Existing Mental Illness or Substance Use

Evacuees with mental illness risked running out of medications; the health department arranged emergency refills with pharmacies. The opioid treatment program coordinated take-home doses for evacuated patients. Naloxone was available at the shelter, and staff knew how to use it.

Children

Children's reactions often show as clinginess, sleep problems or behavior changes. A children's area with routines, play and trained volunteers gave parents a break. Schools, reopened within a week, received guidance on supporting students and identifying those needing more help.

Responders

Firefighters, deputies, shelter staff and health workers faced long hours and distressing scenes. Supervisors enforced shift limits, rest and meals, and peer support teams checked on staff. Responders who wanted to talk could see a clinician confidentially. Leaders modeled taking breaks themselves, because staff follow what supervisors do more than what they say.

Communicating With the Public

The joint information center issued updates in English and Spanish every few hours on evacuation zones, road closures, shelter locations and air quality. Messages acknowledged fear and uncertainty while giving specific actions. Rumors on social media, including false reports that a whole subdivision had burned, were answered quickly with verified information.

Returning Home

Reentry is itself stressful. When evacuation orders lifted, residents returned in groups with a briefing on hazards such as ash, damaged power lines and spoiled food. Behavioral health staff were present at the reentry point for families whose homes had burned, and they arranged follow-up visits.

After the Evacuation

The fire destroyed 46 homes. For those families, stress continued for months: insurance disputes, temporary housing and rebuilding. The county applied for federal crisis counseling funds and hired outreach workers who visited displaced families, offered support and made referrals.

Follow-Up and Evaluation

Outreach workers will contact displaced households at one, three and six months. The health department will track calls to the crisis line, emergency visits for mental health and substance use and referrals completed, comparing them with pre-fire levels.

Pets and Livestock

Many rural evacuees had horses, goats or dogs, and some delayed leaving to move them. The county fair board opened barns for livestock, and an animal welfare group ran the pet area. Keeping animals nearby reduced distress and made future evacuations more likely to succeed, since people who fear losing animals may refuse to leave.

Equity

Several displaced families were renters in the rural area with limited insurance and fewer resources. Outreach prioritized them, and Spanish-speaking counselors joined the team.

Conclusion

The wildfire evacuation required a coordinated response in which behavioral health was built in from the first night. Five principles from an expert panel, safety, calming, efficacy, connectedness and hope, organized shelter support, while stepped care connected those who needed more to treatment. Baseline data and disaster mental health research shaped expectations and follow-up, and responders received the same care they offered others.

References

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025). PLACES: Local data for better health, county data, 2025 release [Data set]. https://data.cdc.gov/d/swc5-untb

Goldmann, E., & Galea, S. (2014). Mental health consequences of disasters. Annual Review of Public Health, 35, 169-183. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182435

Hobfoll, S. E., Watson, P., Bell, C. C., Bryant, R. A., Brymer, M. J., Friedman, M. J., Friedman, M., Gersons, B. P. R., de Jong, J. T. V. M., Layne, C. M., Maguen, S., Neria, Y., Norwood, A. E., Pynoos, R. S., Reissman, D., Ruzek, J. I., Shalev, A. Y., Solomon, Z., Steinberg, A. M., & Ursano, R. J. (2007). Five essential elements of immediate and mid-term mass trauma intervention: Empirical evidence. Psychiatry, 70(4), 283-315. https://doi.org/10.1521/psyc.2007.70.4.283