1. Citizen Perceptions of Mass Notification
Market Research Report
Prepared by:
www.galainsolutions.com
615.771.8000
lorin.bristow@galainsolutions.com
1 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential

2. Study Goals:
Awareness
Prevention of Frequency of
Fatigue Use
Citizen
Perspective
Device
Importance
Preferences
Emergency vs.
Non-
emergency
2 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

3. Methodology
• Primary study
• Telephone methodology
• 520 respondents
• Representative municipalities chosen by Blackboard Connect from
its customer base
• Equal division between “emergency only” and
“non-emergency” philosophies based on actual alert history
3 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

4. A Look at Key Findings
4 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

5. Awareness & Recall
• Awareness of mass notification is very high. 97% of all respondents
are aware that city officials have the ability to send automated alerts
and warnings.
• Notification by telephone has the highest awareness level. 93% say
they are aware of telephone alerts, compared to approximately 25%
who say they are aware of text or email alerts.
• Weather alerts are the most frequently recalled type of notification
(66%). School-related alerts are recalled by 29% of respondents.
5 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

6. Awareness & Recall of Local Alerts
6 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

7. Awareness & Recall of Local Alerts
7 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

8. Relevance of Alerts
• A majority of citizens feels alerts received in the last year were right on target.
67% would rate the alerts as being “highly relevant to me,” while another 30%
would rate them as being “somewhat relevant to me.”
8 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

9. Frequency of Alerts
• Frequency of alerts also received high marks. 93% of respondents feel the
frequency of alerting over the past year was “just about right.”
9 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

10. Importance to Family’s Safety
• 76% of respondents feel alerts are “very important” to their family’s
safety, while another 21% say they are “somewhat important.”
10 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

11. Relevance Tied to Importance
• 76% of those who believe alerts are very important believe previous alerts
were also highly relevant to them. Only 44% of those who felt alerts were
somewhat important felt previous alerts were highly relevant to them.
• This indicates higher perceived relevance yields higher perceived
importance.
11 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

12. Emergency vs. Non-emergency
• 50% believe notifications should be issued only in emergencies, while 50%
believe they should also be issued in important, but non-emergency
situations.
12 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

13. Awareness, Frequency & Importance Differences?
• A statistical analysis was performed to gauge differences between
citizens with an “emergency only” versus “non-emergency”
philosophy.
• Awareness, frequency and importance were examined.
• There is no statistical difference between these groups in their
levels of awareness, perceptions of frequency or ratings of
importance.
• This is one indicator that citizens are positive about their current
programs, no matter the philosophy, possibly due to a local agency’s
influence on their perceptions.
13 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

14. Citizen Use Philosophy Compared to Municipality
Practices
• 69% of the “emergency and non-emergency” group say they share that
same philosophy, while 68% of the “emergency only” group say they share
that same philosophy.
14 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

15. Impact of Sending Non-emergency Alerts
• Sending non-emergency alerts to those
who feel notifications should only be
sent in emergency situations has little
effect on their likelihood of listening to
and responding to future alerts.
• 67% say they would be “very likely” to
listen and respond to future alerts, while
21% say they are “somewhat likely” to
listen and respond.
15 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

16. Device Preference by Type of Alert
• In an emergency, a recorded message delivered to a home telephone is acceptable
to 9 out of 10 respondents. For non-emergency situations, the acceptability of a
recorded message delivered to a home phone falls to 6 in 10 respondents.
Please tell me how willing you would be
in the future to receive emergency
alerts for critical situations from
public safety and local officials for each
of the following devices.
16 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

17. Acceptability of Specific
Non-emergency Alerts
• Utilities-related alerts and
road closure
announcements receive
highest marks for specific
important, but non-
emergency notifications
(91% and 79%
respectively).
• Payment reminders from
public agencies receive
lowest marks (19%).
17 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

18. Connectedness to Community
• 86% of respondents say non-emergency alerts make them feel “more
connected to my local community.”
18 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

19. Putting the Facts Together
19 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

20. Key Conclusions
• Awareness of local mass notification is high and people believe the
practice is important to their family’s safety.
• In general, local agencies appear to be meeting community
expectations with regards to the frequency and relevancy of alerts.
• Citizens are divided on their philosophy of how/when alerts should be
used, though citizens and their local agencies seem to be fairly well in
sync with each other’s preferences. This is due either to: 1) agencies
matching citizens’ preferences, or 2) citizens being influenced by
agencies’ philosophies.
• Recorded home telephone alerts are the most widely accepted and
desired method of mass notification.
20 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

21. Key Conclusions (continued)
• Sending non-emergency alerts to those who feel notifications should
only be sent in emergency situations has little effect on their
likelihood of listening to and responding to future alerts. While it is
intuitive some “annoyance threshold” may be reachable, there
appears to be little danger in sending important, but non-emergency
messages.
• Non-emergency alerts from officials foster greater feelings of
community connectedness.
• Relevance is the key to minimizing message fatigue as higher
perceptions of message relevance leads to more frequently cited
perceptions that notification is important for safety.
21 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential
Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc.

22. Citizen Perceptions of Mass Notification
Market Research Report
Prepared by:
www.galainsolutions.com
615.771.8000
lorin.bristow@galainsolutions.com
22 Copyright 2011 Galain Solutions, Inc. Privileged & Confidential