Evaluation of a School Nurse Training Program on Bioterrorism and All-hazards Preparedness

Background: Natural and man-made disasters, as well as preparedness and response challenges, have emphasized the need for school personnel to be given all-hazards training.

Purpose: To meet this need, the Center for Bioterrorism and All-hazards Preparedness at Nova Southeastern University's College of Osteopathic Medicine provides School Nurse All-hazards Training. At the conclusion of this course, participants are able to (1) describe types of bioterrorism and natural disasters, (2) define their role in the protection of students and school personnel, (3) develop multidisciplinary curriculum to protect children, faculty and staff, and (4) develop and implement a school communication plan. This presentation will describe the content and participant evaluation of this training program.

Methods: School nurses completed an anonymous evaluation survey immediately following the course, which included eight evaluation criteria (six rated on a Likert scale from “excellent” to “poor”, and two criteria with “yes” or “no” responses).

Results: Of 309 respondents from 2006, 87% were registered nurses, and 49.6% were employed at county health departments. Most felt the program was “excellent” or “very good” at (1) fulfilling the identified goals and objectives (88.1%), (2) providing information at an appropriate educational level (87.9%), (3) providing relevant knowledge/skills (85.1%), (4) providing an environment conducive to learning (84.1%), (5) providing a high quality learning experience (85.7%), and (6) providing a location that enabled them to attend and reducing time away from their practice/job (78.8%). Most also felt the course (7) offered knowledge and/or skills that will help them provide better patient care (97.9%), and (8) contained content applicable to their licensure/certification requirements (88.4%). Lowest evaluation ratings were seen in two criteria: providing a conducive learning environment and a suitable location.

Conclusion: The training received high evaluation scores overall. Therefore, it should be extended to other schools and school personnel. The evaluation instrument may not have precisely captured participant views because of its limited range of responses. Environmental factors (i.e., course location and classroom temperature) should be addressed in future programs. Follow-up surveys of participants should also be done to assess the use and integration of the program's content and materials.