Journal of Community Health

, Volume 38, Issue 5, pp 951–957 | Cite as

Using GIS to Evaluate a Fire Safety Program in North Carolina

  • Thomas Dudley
  • Kathleen Creppage
  • Meghan Shanahan
  • Scott Proescholdbell
Original Paper

Abstract

Evaluating program impact is a critical aspect of public health. Utilizing Geographic Information Systems (GIS) is a novel way to evaluate programs which try to reduce residential fire injuries and deaths. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the application of GIS within the evaluation of a smoke alarm installation program in North Carolina. This approach incorporates national fire incident data which, when linked with program data, provides a clear depiction of the 10 years impact of the Get Alarmed, NC! program and estimates the number of potential lives saved. We overlapped Get Alarmed, NC! program installation data with national information on fires using GIS to identify homes that experienced a fire after an alarm was installed and calculated potential lives saved based on program documentation and average housing occupancy. We found that using GIS was an efficient and quick way to match addresses from two distinct sources. From this approach we estimated that between 221 and 384 residents were potentially saved due to alarms installed in their homes by Get Alarmed, NC!. Compared with other program evaluations that require intensive and costly participant telephone surveys and/or in-person interviews, the GIS approach is inexpensive, quick, and can easily analyze large disparate datasets. In addition, it can be used to help target the areas most at risk from the onset. These benefits suggest that by incorporating previously unutilized data, the GIS approach has the potential for broader applications within public health program evaluation.

Keywords

GIS Program evaluation Fire safety Methodology Potential lives saved Geocoding Injury surveillance 

References

  1. 1.
    Jackson, M., Wilson, J., Akoto, J., Dixon, S., Jacobs, D. E., & Ballesteros, M. F. (2010). Evaluation of fire safety programs that use 10-year smoke alarms. Journal of Community Health, 35, 543–548.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahrens, M. (2012). U.S. Home structural fires (pp. 1–5). Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association, Fire Analysis and Research Division.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ahrens, M. (2004). U.S. Experience with smoke alarms and other fire alarms. Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Harvey, P. A., Aitken, M., Ryan, G. W., et al. (2004). Strategies to increase smoke alarm use in high-risk households. Journal of Community Health, 29, 375–385.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Warda, L. J., & Ballesteros, M. F. (2007). Interventions to prevent residential fire injury. In L. S. Doll, S. E. Bonzo, J. A. Mercy, & D. A. Sleet (Eds.), Handbook of injury and violence prevention (pp. 97–115). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Douglas, M. R., Mallonee, S., & Istre, G. (1998). Comparison of community based smoke detector distribution methods in an urban community. Injury Prevention, 4, 28–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shults, R. A., Sacks, J. J., Briske, L. A., et al. (1998). Evaluation of three smoke detector programs. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 15, 165–171.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mallonee, S. (2000). Evaluating injury prevention programs: The Oklahoma City smoke alarm project. The Future of Children, 10, 164–174.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mallonee, S., Istre, G. R., Rosenburg, M., et al. (1996). Surveillance and prevention of residential-fire injuries. New England Journal of Medicine, 335, 27–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ta, V. M., Frattaroli, S., Bergen, G., & Gielen, A. C. (2006). Evaluated community fire safety interventions in the United States: A review of current literature. Journal of Community Health, 31, 176–197.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nykiforuk, C. I. J., & Flaman, L. M. (2011). Geographic information systems (GIS) for health promotion and public Health: A review. Health Promotion Practice, 12, 63–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Renger, R., Cimetta, A., Pettygrove, S., & Rogan, S. (2002). Geographic information systems (GIS) as an evaluation tool. American Journal of Evaluation, 23, 469–479.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Farmer, M. C., Lipscomb, C. A., & McCarthy, P. S. (2005). How alcohol-related crashes of different severity interrelate and respond to local spatial characteristics: An evaluation of a common site sales ban on alcohol and gasoline. Annals of Regional Science, 39, 185–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Waring, S., Zakos-Feliberti, A., Wood, R., Stone, M., Padgett, P., & Arafat, R. (2005). The utility of geographic information systems (GIS) in rapid epidemiological assessments following weather-related disasters: Methodological issues based on tropical storm allison experience. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 208, 109–116.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thompson, C. J., Jones, A. R., Davis, M. K., & Caplan, L. S. (2004). Do smoke alarms still function a year after installation? A follow-up of the get-alarmed campaign. Journal of Community Health, 29, 171–181.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chen, L.-H., Gielen, A. C., & McDonald, E. M. (2003). Validity of self-reported home safety practices. Injury Prevention, 9, 73–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stepnitz, R., Shields, W., McDonald, E., & Gielen, A. (2012). Validity of smoke alarm self-report measures and reasons for over-reporting. Injury Prevention, 18, 298–302.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Douglas, M. R., Mallonee, S., & Istre, G. (1999). Estimating the proportion of homes with functioning smoke alarms: A comparison of telephone survey and household survey results. American Journal of Public Health, 89, 1112–1114.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Booza, J. C., Bridge, P. D., Neale, A. V., & Schenk, M. (2010). Incorporating geographic information systems (GIS) into program evaluation: Lessons from a rural medicine initiative. Journal of American Board of Family Medicine, 23, 59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thammapalo, S., Meksawi, S., & Chongsuvivatwong, V. (2012). Effectiveness of space spraying on the transmission of Dengue/DHF in an urban area of Southern Thailand. Journal of Tropical Medicine, 2012:1–7. doi:10.1155/2012/652564.
  21. 21.
    North Carolina Office of the State Fire Marshall. Personal correspondence with Kim Williams, May 2012.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    ArcGIS 10 (2012). ESRI [ArcGIS 10.1]. Redlands, CA.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    ArcGIS 10 Online Address Locator. (2012). ESRI [ArcGIS 10.1]. Redlands, CA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York (outside the USA) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Dudley
    • 1
  • Kathleen Creppage
    • 1
  • Meghan Shanahan
    • 2
  • Scott Proescholdbell
    • 1
  1. 1.Injury and Violence Prevention BranchNC Department of Health and Human ServicesRaleighUSA
  2. 2.Injury Prevention Research CenterThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations