Skip Navigation U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Agency for Healthcare Research Quality
Archive print banner
Disaster Alternate Care Facility Selection Tool

Public Health Emergency Preparedness

This resource was part of AHRQ's Public Health Emergency Preparedness program, which was discontinued on June 30, 2011, in a realignment of Federal efforts.

This information is for reference purposes only. It was current when produced and may now be outdated. Archive material is no longer maintained, and some links may not work. Persons with disabilities having difficulty accessing this information should contact us at: Let us know the nature of the problem, the Web address of what you want, and your contact information.

Please go to for current information.

Appendix D: Alternate Care Facility Questionnaire—Summary of Results

Notes: Remarks in brackets [example] have been edited by the reviewing investigator to preserve confidentiality. No other changes have been made to survey data. The use of a period (.) in any field indicates no data was received from the survey respondent for that item.

Survey Question/Topic Site 1 Site 1' Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 Site 6 Site 7 Site 8 Site 9
ACF Planned? . . . . . . . . . Yes
ACF Actual? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes .
ACF Dates? Sept 1, 2005—Sept 15, 2005 August 31-September 20, 2005 Sept 1-
16, 2006
Immediate post-Katrina . Sept. 2—Oct. 14, 2005 September 2005 August 05 September/
October 2005
Number of ACF patients? >4500 Over 27,000 shelter evacuees with over 10,000 patients seen in clinic and over 13,000 immunizations given > 10,000 > 6000 / 800 beds > 20,000 7500 200 700 340 .
Number of ACF staff? There were several sources of staff—for practical purposes I will only represent the outlay that [we] provided unknown 7 common staff/1,000 workers several hundred 400 pt 4-2 rest of the number 50 60-100 at any one time 100 Volunteers—several hundred Medical staff, in total given ~300 (some were transiently involved) plus or minus 200 .
Structure of Opportunity ACF? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes . Yes Yes Yes Yes
Structure of Opportunity Detail [Clinic housed in convention center structure] Convention center structure used for operations Convention center, parking garage level Gymnasium . . Closed VA hospital Former [redacted] box store College gymnasium. .
Portable ACF? . . . . . . . . . Yes
Mobile ACF? . . . . . Yes . . . .
Inpatient Augmentation: Adult? . Yes . . . . Yes Yes Yes Yes
Inpatient Augmentation: Pediatric? . Yes . . . . Yes Yes . Yes
Inpatient Augmentation:
Special Populations?
. Yes . . . . Yes . . .
Inpatient Augmentation: Special Populations: Detail . . . . . . Special needs population that required routine medical support. The acuity was similar to a nursing home. . COPD, asthma, diabetes .
Inpatient Augmentation:
Special Medical Needs?
. . . . . . . . . .
Inpatient Augmentation: Special Medical Needs: Detail . . . Reserved nursing home—did not receive/treat evacuated in-patients. . . . . COPD, asthma, diabetes .
Inpatient Replacement: Adult? . . . Yes Yes Yes . . . Yes
Inpatient Replacement: Pediatric? . . . Yes Yes Yes . . . Yes
Inpatient Replacement:
Special Populations?
. . . . Yes Yes . . . Yes
Inpatient Replacement: Special Populations: Detail . . . . VA pt., nursing home pt, ICU patients Chronic disease—patients without meds or care for 1 week post-storm . . . If an incident such as pan flu or a hurricane strike necessitates it we would utilize an ACF for possible temporary replacement.
Inpatient Replacement:
Special Medical Needs?
. . . Yes Yes . . . . .
Inpatient Replacement: Special Medical Needs: Detail . . . Hemodialysis, rescued nursing home pts, amputees Ventilator pt . . . . .
Ambulatory Augmentation: Adult? . Yes Yes Yes . . Yes . . Yes
Ambulatory Augmentation:
Yes—([Location] sent its Emergency Center (EC) for all practical purposes—it was an effort to prevent [Location] from exceeding its surge capacity) Yes Yes Yes . . Yes . . Yes
Ambulatory Augmentation:
Public Health?
. Yes Yes Yes . . . . . Yes
Ambulatory Replacement: Adult? . . . Yes Yes Yes Yes . . Yes
Ambulatory Replacement:
. . . Very minimal Yes Yes Yes . . Yes
Ambulatory Replacement:
Special Populations?
. . . . Yes Yes . . . .
Ambulatory Replacement: Special Populations: Detail . . . . VA, nursing home, ICU Chronic disease—patients without meds or care for 1 week post-storm . . . .
Ambulatory Replacement:
Special Medical Needs?
. . . Yes Yes . . . . .
Ambulatory Replacement: Special Medical Needs: Detail . . . . Ventilator patient . . . . .
Ambulatory Replacement:
Shelter Support?
. . . Yes Yes Yes Yes . Yes .
Institutional/HC System?
Yes—With permission from [health dept] [Location] provided oversight of its staff, equipment, supplies, and pharmacy . . . . Yes . . . Yes
Governance: Nonprofit/Volunteer? . . . . . . . . . .
Governance: Local? Yes Yes Yes . . . . . Yes Yes
Governance: Local: OEM? Yes—provided the entire response including the ACF (both the [City] and [County]) Yes Yes (provided admin support only) . . . . . . Yes
Governance: Local: Public Health? Yes—County Health Dept was large part of the governance of the [site] and therefore they were incident command for the [clinic] Yes—[County] Public Health & Environmental Services Yes (medical oversight) . . . . . Yes Yes
Governance: Local: Other? . Yes—[hospital district] Yes (County hospital system; [system name]) . . . . . . Shared responsibility between the hospitals, Emergency Management and Public Health with the use of State Medical Response Teams (similar to Federal DMAT) serving in a command role.
Governance: State? . Yes . Yes . . . Yes . Yes
Governance: Federal? . Yes . . Yes . . . . .
Governance: Federal: DHHS? . . . . . . . . . .
Governance: Federal: PHS? . . . . . . Yes . . .
Governance: Federal: NDMS? . Yes . . Yes . . . . .
Governance: Federal: DoD? . . . . . . . . . .
Governance: Federal: Other? . . . . . . Yes—and VA staff managed & support. . . .
ICS? Yes Yes Yes No—One already existed Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes
ICS Model [name redacted] did not set up an IC—[name redacted] did have their IC at the [site] and it was based on HICS NIMS Generic ICS . No—standard ICS for a DMAT HICS & NIMS . Not a formal one. [respondent identifying information redacted] Responsibility was divided with a "deputy" in charge of nursing, medicine, facility setup/management NEMS NIMS
IAP? Don't know—we were not involved at that level of IC Yes No—medical operation provided intel and data to local emergency management agency. No—not formally No Yes No Do not know what this is but if it involved a form, no. Yes Yes
IAP Frequency . Daily . . . . . . . Daily
IAP Frequency—Other . . . Not formally though a per 12 hours shift plan was produced, as well as daily OPS briefings . . . . . If needed one would be established for each 12 hour operational period (12 hours).
IAP Type . Previously prepared form . . . Previously prepared form . . A form we created Previously prepared form
Command Problems Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No
Command Problem Detail We were not invited to play initially—we just showed up—initially we were not noticed because of the chaos of the moment—the [name redacted] version of the medical director showed up on night one and began to move pedi pts through the system—[name] noticed us and felt like we knew what we were doing and gave us more space—we filled that...—when things calmed down [name] began to see us as a rogue clinic and made it clear that we had to operate within their IC rules [redacted] Local government command & control integrating with private partners (e.g. NGO's, CBO's, private partners, etc.) . Internal issues of authority and command. Did not impact us as responders from other State but caused issues between local, county, and State players Above the commanders that came with the teams there was no one above there to give direction. 1st time tested; learning curve No problem internal to the shelter—confusing command structure outside of the shelter . . .
Transfer of Command Verbal report
Verbal report
Written report
Verbal report Verbal report Verbal report Verbal report Verbal report
Written report
Verbal report Verbal report
Written report
Verbal report
Transfer of Command Detail [Clinic] Medical Directors came from [location] so we formally checked out. [name] IC meetings were held twice daily and our main medical director was eventually invited and made the official [name] IC medical director for the [clinic] . . . . . N/A . . .
How Open? Two of our faculty showed up at the request of the news media to help with the response and noticed that there were only 2 pediatricians on site—hours later we were coordinating the pediatric response State & county elected officials made decision Joint decision between OEM (city Office of Emergency Management), city EMS medical directors, and county public health authority. Was already open. Local & regional health care providers had staffed it for about 48 hours prior to our arrival Federal deployment Request via EMAC N/A Ask to do so by the State E.O.C. contacted the M.O.C who contacted the Public Health Department Assessment of surge impact.
Who Decides? The physician who showed up and took command of the pedi clinic contacted the admin for [location] who then agreed to full out resource support of the effort. Governor & County Judge Medical director of county public health dept (health authority) Unknown NDMS/DHS State of [State Redacted] N/A An assistant to the Governor Health Authority. After being asked by the fire chief. Collective decision between the Incident Commander, the Emergency Manager, the Medical Director and the Health Department Director with hospital input.
How Close? When it was clear that patient volume had dropped significantly, the med director from [Location] worked with [Locations] to relinquish control over the [clinic] to the [Location] and they sent a pedi medical director to take over (transitioned over one weekend). Another impending Category 5 Hurricane was set to strike community—so shelter was closed & residents evacuated. Declined in shelter population as evacuees were placed in more permanent housing locations After about 8-9 days patients were no longer arriving for care—and the patients we had were able to be shipped out NDMS/DHS—all the patients had been evacuated Demobilization plan prepared between [State] Office of EMS & [State] Dept. of Health N/A The expected surge was directed elsewhere. Once all evacuees had a safe place to be transferred to. Collective decision between the ACF Commander, the Emergency Manager, the Medical Director, the Health Department Director and the hospitals.
Pre-Close Check? Lack of patients Ensuring all evacuees were relocated safely to other shelter facilities elsewhere None Local and regional health care facilities were decompressed enough to receive patients directly. Transfer of PMAC patients were completed No more patients Rebuilding and increased service delivery of the affected community hospital. Patient load, discharge philosophy, shelter occupants desire to go home ASAP There were no predetermined requirements All evacuees had to have a safe home. N/A
CONOPS? Yes—remember that we were separate for the [site redacted] plan—we used our own concept of operations—50 years in the business of taking care of [patients] Yes No—we made it up as we went along Yes and no; our initial ops plan did not entail such a large number of patients with so many needs No Yes Yes Yes—although not written Yes Yes
NIMS/HICS Training? No Yes Yes Yes—our own team did Yes No Yes No Yes Yes
Training %? . 60 25 75 100 . 20 . 20 UND
EMTALA? No Unknown No No No No No No No Yes
EMTALA Detail . . . . It was an evacuation—patients came from high centers which had nothing to us (aid station) . . . . We anticipate there will be issues related to the use of non-hospital facilities and issues if hospitals send people to an ACF without a full assessment first.
Info Issues? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No Yes

Return to Contents
Proceed to Next Section


The information on this page is archived and provided for reference purposes only.


AHRQ Advancing Excellence in Health Care