No abstract

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.html.The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest.RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at

INTRODUCTIONBuilding community resilience, or the capability to rebound from a disaster (Pfefferbaum et al., 2005), is a cornerstone of national health security. Recent regional meetings with stakeholders to develop the National Health Security Strategy (NHSS) revealed that questions remain unanswered as to how to develop and measure a community's resilience in the face of manmade and natural threats. To date, we have many theoretical models articulating factors that contribute to community resilience Pfefferbaum et al., 2007;Pfefferbaum et al., 2008) such as community cohesion and the ability to marshal resources quickly, but we have less empirical evidence about what constitutes the integral components of resiliency. Despite a limited evidence base, enhanced resilience is considered critical to mitigating vulnerabilities, reducing negative health consequences, and rapidly restoring community functioning. According to the Homeland Security Presidential Directive-21 (HSPD-21), resilience is essential to limiting the need for prolonged assistance post disaster. In order to improve resilience, Bruneau (2003) argues that communities must build capabilities that are characterized by robustness (the ability to withstand stress), redundancy (resource diversity), and rapidity (the ability to mobilize resources quickly). These efforts ensure that communities (and especially those with resource poor neighborhoods) will have the ability during an event to respond quickly, even when critical parts of the community are severely impacted, and to return to normal functioning with little delay.Despite an understanding that community resilience is critical, the stakeholders responsible for ensuring national health security (both government and non-governmental organizations) do not have a working definition or a clear understanding of how to measure resilience for health security. Further, we have limited information about key strategies to enhance resilience. This literature review synthesizes the existing evidence base on resilience to identify drivers for health-related emergency planning. The review lays a foundation for upcoming analyses that will provide a working definition of community resilience, identify activities for building resilience, and offer associated metrics. These activities and metrics will be integrated into the NHSS implementation plan. (BENS 2009;SERRI/CARRI 2009), far less is understood about community resilience in the context of national health security (National health security is achieved when the Nation and its people are prepared for, protected from, respond effectively to, and able to recover from incidents with potentially negative health consequences). Further, many of the articles and reports are based on theoretical and somewhat complicated frameworks with less attention to core components that can be operationalized for action. Given the focus of the NHSS on strengthening resilience over the next four years, it is essential to consider the core components of resilience that may contribute ...

This study assesses how perceptions of school climate and four mediating factors (school connectedness, peer attachment, assertiveness, and empathy) influence reports of bullying behaviors among 2,834 students in 14 middle schools. Results revealed that students in positive school climates reported experiencing fewer physical, emotional, and cyberbullying behaviors. They also reported greater levels of school connectedness, peer attachment, assertiveness, and empathy, which in turn helped explain the influence of perceived school climate on bullying. In addition, the greater levels of empathy that students reported, the more likely they were to report being bullied. These results highlight the role that perceptions of school climate can play in influencing bullying and underscore the importance of mediating factors as schools work to track and improve school climate.

No abstract