Several years ago, CARRI embarked on a massive undertaking focused on developing – and then testing – a community resilience system. During a meeting of its Community Leaders Working Group, I was asked why we had included “The community works to maximize the value of those with special challenges” as one of our important community functions. In fact, two of the most in-my-face questioners (both former mayors of sizable cities) actually accused me of being politically correct (If this were true, it would come as a huge shock to anyone who has ever worked with me, not to mention my wife!).
I thought it would be worthwhile to talk about who are the challenged, and why it makes practical sense for communities to treat them as potential assets, not liabilities.
If we look at our communities today, 5-10 % of the population have some debilitating mental or physical condition. One in eight Americans receive at least part of their food through food stamps; one in five of our children lives in poverty or extreme poverty. Those with disabilities are 1.5 to 3 times more likely to live in poverty than those with no disabilities. Fully one-third of those who could be employed have exited the labor force.
After a community is hit by a disaster, recovery makes huge demands on the permanent personnel who actually keep the community running. More people are needed to remove debris. More people are needed to handle the flood of permits for rebuilding. People are needed to reconnect families and to help get services to those who need them. Many communities meet these needs by hiring “outsiders” to provide these services, but if they do so, they lose in at least two ways.
- These communities send the resources to pay for these services outside the community. Since the federal government will pay for many kinds of temporary workers after a disaster, it makes good sense to hire these workers from within the community – to keep as many precious dollars within the community as possible. The challenged – particularly the employable unemployed – should be the first resource tapped by a community (To their credit, BP agreed to do just that in southern Louisiana communities affected by the oil spill.).
- These communities have to spend more of their resources helping the challenged recover from the disaster than they otherwise would. That means much less accomplished with limited resources and possibly a longer recovery period.
In other words, communities who don’t use the challenged to aid in the extraordinary challenges of recovery are turning potential assets into real liabilities.
Thus, by making use of its members who face significant challenges to meet the extraordinary demands of recovery from a disaster, a community can keep dollars in the community while maintaining a more productive and motivated permanent staff. This isn’t political correctness but enlightened self-interest.