![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)
Schedule:
Sunday, January 24, 2027
Union Station 3 & 4 (Hilton San Francisco Union Square)
* noted as presenting author
Background and Purpose
Disasters and climate‑related hazards in Florida disproportionately affect individuals with disabilities (IWDs), who comprise 13–14% of the state’s population and experienced severe impacts during hurricanes, including an estimated 1.2 million IWDs affected by a Category 5 event in 2022. Harms are unevenly distributed: County‑level social vulnerability intersects with disability, minority status, and language access, producing unequal protection, participation, and recovery, raising questions about democratic values including equity, accountability to communities, and participation in disaster planning. This study integrates (1) a county‑level analysis of the CDC/ATSDR Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) and (2) a policy analysis of Florida’s Special Needs Shelters (SpNS) statute (§381.0303) to examine how structural and geographic disparities shape disaster risk for IWDs and identify policy pathways that advance disability‑inclusive, community‑accountable disaster social work. The central research question is: How do intersecting social vulnerabilities and SpNS policies jointly influence equitable, resilience‑centered disaster support for IWDs across Florida counties?
Methods
This mixed, two‑component study used secondary analysis and policy analysis. First, SVI 2020 data for Miami‑Dade, Broward, Hillsborough, and Escambia counties were examined. Three SVI themes (1) Socioeconomic Status, (2) Household Composition & Disability, and (3) Minority Status & Language were analyzed using descriptive statistics and one‑way ANOVA (p < .05) to compare county differences and identify place‑based disparities affecting IWDs. Second, a policy analysis of Florida Statute §381.0303 and post‑disaster evaluations of SpNS operations assessed alignment between legislative intent and actual outcomes for IWDs. Analyses focused on transportation, shelter accessibility, registration systems, communication barriers, service continuity, and psychosocial support. The Social Model of Disability and the Resilience Activation Framework guided interpretation to see how human, economic, social, and political capital shape disaster outcomes and reveal opportunities for democratic, disability-inclusive system reform.
Results
SVI analyses revealed distinct vulnerability profiles. Minority Status & Language emerged as the most severe challenge, with Miami‑Dade ranking at the 100th percentile and Broward in the mid‑90s, indicating language and minority‑related inequities. Socioeconomic vulnerability was also high in Miami‑Dade (86th percentile) and Broward (83rd). Household Composition & Disability showed moderate but elevated vulnerability across counties (58th–65th percentiles). These intersecting vulnerabilities heighten “disaster hurdles” for IWDs in evacuation, communication, and recovery. Policy analysis identified gaps in SpNS implementation, including inaccessible transportation, inadequate shelter accommodations, inconsistent service delivery, inefficient registration and communication systems, and limited psychosocial support - conditions that undermine equitable and accountable disaster response for IWDs.
Conclusions and Implications
Findings suggest that disability‑related disaster risks in Florida arise from structural inequities across social vulnerability and policy domains rather than individual limitations. For social work, results underscore the need for disability‑informed, language‑accessible, resilience‑centered disaster planning accountable to IWDs and caregivers. Recommended reforms include integrating multi‑language accessible communication into emergency systems, ensuring caregiver inclusion and psychosocial supports within SpNS, standardizing accessible transportation, and using SVI data to prioritize high‑vulnerability counties for community‑engaged preparedness and advocacy. Grounded in equity‑focused evidence, this work advances social work’s role in strengthening democratic participation, community resilience, and the common good in an era of intensifying climate‑related disasters.
Disasters and climate‑related hazards in Florida disproportionately affect individuals with disabilities (IWDs), who comprise 13–14% of the state’s population and experienced severe impacts during hurricanes, including an estimated 1.2 million IWDs affected by a Category 5 event in 2022. Harms are unevenly distributed: County‑level social vulnerability intersects with disability, minority status, and language access, producing unequal protection, participation, and recovery, raising questions about democratic values including equity, accountability to communities, and participation in disaster planning. This study integrates (1) a county‑level analysis of the CDC/ATSDR Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) and (2) a policy analysis of Florida’s Special Needs Shelters (SpNS) statute (§381.0303) to examine how structural and geographic disparities shape disaster risk for IWDs and identify policy pathways that advance disability‑inclusive, community‑accountable disaster social work. The central research question is: How do intersecting social vulnerabilities and SpNS policies jointly influence equitable, resilience‑centered disaster support for IWDs across Florida counties?
Methods
This mixed, two‑component study used secondary analysis and policy analysis. First, SVI 2020 data for Miami‑Dade, Broward, Hillsborough, and Escambia counties were examined. Three SVI themes (1) Socioeconomic Status, (2) Household Composition & Disability, and (3) Minority Status & Language were analyzed using descriptive statistics and one‑way ANOVA (p < .05) to compare county differences and identify place‑based disparities affecting IWDs. Second, a policy analysis of Florida Statute §381.0303 and post‑disaster evaluations of SpNS operations assessed alignment between legislative intent and actual outcomes for IWDs. Analyses focused on transportation, shelter accessibility, registration systems, communication barriers, service continuity, and psychosocial support. The Social Model of Disability and the Resilience Activation Framework guided interpretation to see how human, economic, social, and political capital shape disaster outcomes and reveal opportunities for democratic, disability-inclusive system reform.
Results
SVI analyses revealed distinct vulnerability profiles. Minority Status & Language emerged as the most severe challenge, with Miami‑Dade ranking at the 100th percentile and Broward in the mid‑90s, indicating language and minority‑related inequities. Socioeconomic vulnerability was also high in Miami‑Dade (86th percentile) and Broward (83rd). Household Composition & Disability showed moderate but elevated vulnerability across counties (58th–65th percentiles). These intersecting vulnerabilities heighten “disaster hurdles” for IWDs in evacuation, communication, and recovery. Policy analysis identified gaps in SpNS implementation, including inaccessible transportation, inadequate shelter accommodations, inconsistent service delivery, inefficient registration and communication systems, and limited psychosocial support - conditions that undermine equitable and accountable disaster response for IWDs.
Conclusions and Implications
Findings suggest that disability‑related disaster risks in Florida arise from structural inequities across social vulnerability and policy domains rather than individual limitations. For social work, results underscore the need for disability‑informed, language‑accessible, resilience‑centered disaster planning accountable to IWDs and caregivers. Recommended reforms include integrating multi‑language accessible communication into emergency systems, ensuring caregiver inclusion and psychosocial supports within SpNS, standardizing accessible transportation, and using SVI data to prioritize high‑vulnerability counties for community‑engaged preparedness and advocacy. Grounded in equity‑focused evidence, this work advances social work’s role in strengthening democratic participation, community resilience, and the common good in an era of intensifying climate‑related disasters.