Fact sheet
Community of Brantford (CMA), Ontario
In 2014, information on the emergency preparedness of people living in the Census Metropolitan AreaNote 1 of Brantford was collected through the Survey of Emergency Preparedness and Resilience in Canada (SEPR).Note 2 This fact sheet presents information on the risk awareness and level of emergency preparedness of the residents of Brantford, which could help improve the understanding of community resilience in the event of an emergency.Note 3Note 4
Risk awareness and anticipated sources of help in an emergency or disaster
- Winter storms (including blizzards, ice storms and extreme cold) (89%), extended power outages lasting 24 hours or longer (79%) and heat waves (64%) were named by residents of Brantford as the events most likely to occur within their community.
- Residents most commonly anticipated turning to radio news as an initial source for help and information if they were faced with a weather-related emergency or natural disaster (30%) or an industrial or transportation accident (30%) (Table 1.1).
- Residents stated that they would turn to hospitals, clinics, doctors or other medical professionals as sources of initial help and information in the event of an outbreak of a serious or life-threatening disease (61%) while police would be their first source of help in the event of an act of terrorism or terrorist threat (37%) or rioting or civil unrest (39%), and local government (25%) in the event of a contamination or shortage of water or food. In an extended power outage, residents would first turn to their utility company (42%).
Prior lifetime experience with a major emergency or disasterNote 5
- Over one-third (38%) of Brantford residents has faced a major emergency or disaster in Canada in a community they were living in at the time of the event, two-thirds (67%) of whom reported experiencing severe disruptions to their daily activities as a result of the event.
- The most commonly experienced emergency or disaster for residents of Brantford was extended power outages lasting 24 hours or longer (70%), in addition to winter storms which include blizzards and ice storms (20%).
- The most common types of disruption to daily activities endured by residents who had experienced a major emergency or disaster included the inability to use electrical appliances (75%) or to heat or cool their home (64%). About one-half (52%) reported that they had to boil water or use bottled water for drinking. More severe disruptions experienced were home evacuations, experienced by 13% of people faced with an emergency or disaster, as well as an inability to use roads or transportation within the community (13%Note E: Use with caution) and the inability to communicate outside of the home (14%Note E: Use with caution).
- The vast majority (92%) of residents who experienced an emergency or disaster were able to resume their daily activities within one week of the event; over two-thirds (69%) were able to resume daily activities within two days or less.
- About four in ten (43%) residents who had experienced an emergency or disaster received help during or immediately following the event, frequently from a family member (38%Note E: Use with caution).Note 6
- Just over one-quarter (28%Note E: Use with caution) of residents of Brantford who experienced a major emergency or disaster in Canada in a community where they were living at the time of the event and which was significant enough to disrupt their regular daily routine also endured a loss of property or financial impact.
Emergency planning, precautionary and fire safety behaviours
- Over two-thirds (71%) of people residing in Brantford lived in a household that was engaged in at least two emergency planning activities,Note 7 with almost half (48%) living in a household with three or four such activities (Table 1.2). One in ten (10% Note E: Use with caution) people lived in a household that had not participated in any emergency planning activities.
- Almost two-thirds (63%) lived in a household with at least two precautionary measuresNote 8 taken in case of an emergency, with less than one-third (29%) living in a household with three or four such measures. About one in ten (12%) people lived in a household with no precautionary measures in place, significantly fewer than was typical in both Ontario and Canada’s 10 provinces more broadly.Note 9
- Almost all (99%) residents reported living in a household with a working smoke detector and 84% reported living in a household with a working carbon monoxide detector (Table 1.3). Two out of three (66%) residents stated that they had a working fire extinguisher in their household. Almost six in ten (58%) of the residents of Brantford stated that they had implemented all three fire safety measures within their households, significantly more compared to Canada overall (42%).
- There were other differences in the types of activities and measures set in place by residents of Brantford when compared to the rest of Canada. For example, the proportion of Brantford residents who had a vehicle emergency supply kit or an alternate water source was significantly higher than the rest of Canada. However, residents were less likely than Canadians overall to have a household emergency supply kit or a plan for meeting special health needs.Note 10
Social networks and sense of belonging
- About half (51%) of Brantford’s residents had a strong sense of belongingNote 11 to their community.
- Most (90%) residents described the neighbourhood they lived in as a place where neighbours generally help each other.Note 12 Of those who did not describe their neighbourhood this way, two-thirds (67%) still described it as a place where neighbours would help each other in an emergency.Note 13
- Many individuals had a large network of support in the event of an emergency or disaster, with more than five people to turn to for emotional support (70%), for help if physically injured (62%) as well as in case of a home evacuation (56%). About three in ten residents had a large support network if financial help was needed (31%). However, one in ten (10%) reported that they had no one to turn to for financial help.Note 14
- High levels of social support, sense of belonging, neighbourhood trust and self-efficacy, as well as engagement in civic activities, were often associated with a higher level of emergency preparedness (Table 1.4).
Data tables
Most common sources of initial help and information by type of emergency or disaster | percent |
---|---|
Weather-related emergency or natural disaster | |
News- Radio | 30 |
News- Television | 29 |
News- Internet | 28 |
Extended power outagesTable 1.1, Note 1 | |
Utility company | 42 |
News- Radio | 21 |
Family | 16Note E: Use with caution |
Outbreak of serious or life-threatening disease | |
Hospital, clinic, doctor or other medical professional | 61 |
News- Internet | 21Note E: Use with caution |
News- Radio | 19Note E: Use with caution |
Industrial or transportation accident | |
News- Radio | 30 |
Police/law enforcement | 25 |
News- Television | 23 |
Contamination or shortage of water or foodTable 1.1, Note 1 | |
Local government | 25 |
News- Radio | 21Note E: Use with caution |
Family | 17Note E: Use with caution |
Act of terrorism or terrorist threatTable 1.1, Note 1 | |
Police/law enforcement | 37 |
News- Television | 19Note E: Use with caution |
News- Radio | 18Note E: Use with caution |
Rioting or civil unrest | |
Police/law enforcement | 39 |
News- Television | 25Note E: Use with caution |
News- Radio | 19Note E: Use with caution |
E use with caution
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey of Emergency Preparedness and Resilience in Canada, 2014. |
Number of planning activities, fire safety and precautionary measures taken by residents | Brantford | Ontario | Canada |
---|---|---|---|
percent | |||
Number of emergency planning activities | |||
None | 10Note E: Use with caution | 8 | 8 |
1 activity | 17 | 16 | 17 |
2 activities | 23 | 25 | 25 |
3 activities | 27 | 28 | 27 |
4 activities | 21 | 21 | 19 |
Number of precautionary measures | |||
None | 12Table 1.2, Note *** | 15 | 16 |
1 measure | 24 | 28 | 27 |
2 measures | 34Table 1.2, Note ** | 29 | 28 |
3 measures | 21 | 20 | 20 |
4 measures | 8Note E: Use with caution | 6 | 7 |
Number of fire safety measuresTable 1.2, Note 1Table 1.2, Note 2 | |||
None | Note F: too unreliable to be published | Note F: too unreliable to be published | 1 |
1 measure | 6Note E: Use with cautionTable 1.2, Note ** | 7 | 14 |
2 measures | 29Table 1.2, Note *** | 35 | 38 |
3 measures | 58Table 1.2, Note ** | 53 | 42 |
E use with caution F too unreliable to be published
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey of Emergency Preparedness and Resilience in Canada, 2014. |
Residents whose households were involved in the following: | Brantford | Ontario | Canada |
---|---|---|---|
percent | |||
Emergency planning activities | |||
Emergency exit plan | 66 | 63 | 60 |
Exit plan has been practised/reviewed in last 12 monthsTable 1.3, Note 1 | 49 | 47 | 46 |
Designated meeting place for household membersTable 1.3, Note 2 | 33 | 30 | 33 |
Contact plan for household membersTable 1.3, Note 2 | 55 | 57 | 55 |
Household emergency supply kit | 41Table 1.3, Note ** | 47 | 47 |
Vehicle emergency supply kitTable 1.3, Note 3 | 64Table 1.3, Note ** | 62 | 59 |
Extra copies of important documents | 52 | 56 | 53 |
List of emergency contact numbers | 71 | 71 | 69 |
Plan for meeting special health needsTable 1.3, Note 4 | 48Table 1.3, Note *** | 61 | 62 |
Precautionary measures | |||
Wind-up or battery-operated radio | 63 | 59 | 58 |
Alternate heat source | 49 | 46 | 48 |
Back-up generator | 21 | 20 | 23 |
Alternate water source | 54Table 1.3, Note *** | 44 | 43 |
OtherTable 1.3, Note 5 | 24 | 22 | 21 |
Fire safety measures | |||
Working smoke detector | 99 | 99 | 98 |
Working carbon monoxide detector | 84Table 1.3, Note *** | 80 | 60 |
Working fire extinguisher | 66 | 64 | 66 |
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey of Emergency Preparedness and Resilience in Canada, 2014. |
Social and political involvement | Percentage of residents who had high or moderately high levels of... | ||
---|---|---|---|
Planning activities | Precautionary measures | Fire safety measures | |
percent | |||
Engagement in political activitiesTable 1.4, Note 1 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 47 | 30 | 58 |
NoTable 1.4, Note 7 | 54 | 27Note E: Use with caution | 60 |
High level of civic engagementTable 1.4, Note 2 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 50 | 35 | 62 |
NoTable 1.4, Note 7 | 45 | 20Note E: Use with cautionTable 1.4, Note * | 52 |
High level of social supportTable 1.4, Note 3 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 50 | 30 | 67 |
NoTable 1.4, Note 7 | 49 | 29 | 56Table 1.4, Note * |
Strong sense of belonging to communityTable 1.4, Note 4 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 55 | 29 | 68 |
NoTable 1.4, Note 7 | 43Table 1.4, Note * | 31 | 49Table 1.4, Note * |
High neighbourhood trustTable 1.4, Note 5 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 57 | 40 | 67 |
NoTable 1.4, Note 7 | 44Table 1.4, Note * | 21Table 1.4, Note * | 52Table 1.4, Note * |
High level of self-efficacyTable 1.4, Note 6 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 53 | 39 | 63 |
NoTable 1.4, Note 7 | 43 | 19Note E: Use with cautionTable 1.4, Note * | 54 |
E use with caution
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey of Emergency Preparedness and Resilience in Canada, 2014. |
Notes
E use with caution
- Date modified: