The Role of GIS in DRR: Classifying and Improving GIS Capabilities in Small Towns and Rural Areas

Optimizing GIS capability does not always require that the municipality obtain cutting edge professionals and resources. This paper offers a disaster risk reduction (DRR) design methodology for small towns and rural areas that employs a multi-variable classification system, enabling customization for effective DRR. Determining appropriate GIS capacity requires that a community first be evaluated in order to identify its disaster risk reduction/disaster management (DRR/DM) requirements. These requirements are then considered in conjunction with the municipality's resources to establish the desired capability. Qualification levels for major aspects of GIS capability with respect to DRR/DM are provided along with descriptions of each level and suggested procedures for advancement to the next level. It should be noted that a municipality can be classified at a different level with respect to different variables. Needs vary according to the community, thus attainment of a uniform capability level may not be necessary.

Adapting Mpowerment to a Rural Area

As HIV/AIDS continues to disproportionately impact men who have sex with men (MSM) (CDC, 2010a), effective and timely prevention strategies for this population must be developed. Specifically, evidence-based interventions that can be easily adapted and have proven effectiveness are needed. Hence, the purpose of the current study was to assess the impact of the Mpowerment Project (Hayes, Rebchook, & Kegeles, 2003), a community level HIV prevention program originally designed for young urban gay men, when adapted for rural gay men. The Mpowerment Project is recognized as evidence- based intervention by the CDC (CDC, 2009b). The current study is an extension of this research, assessing Mpowerment model fidelity and the behavioral and attitudinal changes that occurred among participants. Data were collected from participants in a rural area of southeast Idaho from 2002-2004. Data were collected prior to M-Group participation and at a three months follow-up. The 66 individuals completing the M-Group pre and posttest assessment also attended a minimum of three study events and a maximum of 226 events. Results revealed no significant changes in attitudinal variables and all but one behavioral variable among Rural Mpowerment (R-MP) participants. The one significant behavior change was an increase in reported safer sex discussion among friends, indicating a possible change in the social norm regarding safer sex. Results also indicate that program fidelity was maintained and the Mpowerment Project is adaptable to rural areas. However, there was no indication of attitudinal changes in participants of this study. There were no changes in behavioral variables aside from discussion about safer sex with friends increasing. The lack of evidence-based interventions for rural gay men highlights the need for further research on the community impact of the Mpowerment Project on rural participants.

Adapting Mpowerment to a rural area

As HIV/AIDS continues to disproportionately impact men who have sex with men (MSM) (CDC, 2010a), effective and timely prevention strategies for this population must be developed. Specifically, evidence-based interventions that can be easily adapted and have proven effectiveness are needed. Hence, the purpose of the current study was to assess the impact of the Mpowerment Project (Hayes, Rebchook, & Kegeles, 2003), a community level HIV prevention program originally designed for young urban gay men, when adapted for rural gay men. The Mpowerment Project is recognized as evidence- based intervention by the CDC (CDC, 2009b). The current study is an extension of this research, assessing Mpowerment model fidelity and the behavioral and attitudinal changes that occurred among participants. Data were collected from participants in a rural area of southeast Idaho from 2002-2004. Data were collected prior to M-Group participation and at a three months follow-up. The 66 individuals completing the M-Group pre and posttest assessment also attended a minimum of three study events and a maximum of 226 events. Results revealed no significant changes in attitudinal variables and all but one behavioral variable among Rural Mpowerment (R-MP) participants. The one significant behavior change was an increase in reported safer sex discussion among friends, indicating a possible change in the social norm regarding safer sex. Results also indicate that program fidelity was maintained and the Mpowerment Project is adaptable to rural areas. However, there was no indication of attitudinal changes in participants of this study. There were no changes in behavioral variables aside from discussion about safer sex with friends increasing. The lack of evidence-based interventions for rural gay men highlights the need for further research on the community impact of the Mpowerment Project on rural participants.