DISASTER AWARENESS, RISK REDUCTION AND 

MANAGEMENT CAPABILITIES OF STATE UNIVERSITIES 
AND COLLEGES OF EASTERN VISAYAS 

DORIS ANN SOLIS‐ESPINA
Eastern Visayas State University
Tacloban City
  The Philippines ranked third in the World
Disaster Index with 24.32 percent disaster
risk out of 189 countries.
 Eastern Visayas – most vulnerable to
natural hazards
 Effect of calamities are enormous not only
on physical, educational, and economic
development but also because of their
psychosocial consequence .
 Disaster risk reduction and management
encompasses the classical management
functions of planning, organizing, staffing,
leading and controlling.
It involves all stakeholders and organization
which must work together to prevent,
mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and
recover from the effects of disaster.
 The education sector is among those that are
greatly affected by calamities.

 Protecting students during natural hazards

require two distinct yet inseparable priorities for
action:
a. disaster risk education; and 
b. school safety.

 Educational institutions has the legal
obligation in   consonance with the “in loco 
parentis” doctrine  to take care and be 
concerned about the welfare of the students 
while they are still in school and 
ensure that their rights are protected as 
enshrined in our Constitution

 School administrators and other stakeholders

should be aware of the vulnerabilities of the
school to help prevent the loss of lives and
minimize property damage.
 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
• What is the level of disaster awareness of University
Administrators, Faculty Members, Non‐teaching
Employees, and Students of SUCs in Eastern Visayas?
• What is the disaster risk reduction and management
capabilities of SUCs in Eastern Visayas based on the
priority areas of disaster prevention and mitigation,
preparedness, response and rehabilitation?
• What is the relationship of the level of disaster awareness
to the DRRM capabilities of SUCs in Eastern Visayas?
• What is the level of management competence of SUC
administrators?
 CONCEPTUAL FLOW OF THE STUDY
DRRM
Capability:
University
Profile: • Prevention &
Mitigation
• Student • Preparedness
• Response Level of
Population • Recovery &
• Location Awareness of: Enhanced 
Rehabilitation
• Area Administrators Capacity for 
•Topography Safer, 
Faculty Adaptive, 
• Personnel Members
Complement Disaster‐
• Open Spaces Management Non-teaching resilient 
• No. of Competence: Employees Universities
Buildings Students
• Planning
• Organizing
• Staffing
• Directing
• Controlling
 METHODOLOGY
• It uses three sets of researcher‐made
questionnaires derived from various
literatures.
• The respondents came from seven SUCs in
Eastern Visayas, namely:
EVSU, VSU, ESSU, NWSSU, UEP, SLSU and NSU.
• The data gathered were subjected to
descriptive and inferential statistical tests.
Table 1. Level of disaster awareness by SUC
administrators, faculty members  & non‐teaching
employees, and students in Eastern Visayas

Respondents Mean Description

Students 34.62 Satisfactory
Faculty & Non Teaching 34.94 Satisfactory
Administrator 34.00 Satisfactory
Table 2. DRRM Capabilities of SUCs in Eastern Visayas

Non‐Teaching Teaching

DRRM Phases Mean Descrip‐ Mean Descrip‐

tion tion
Prevention &  S
3.10 3.21 S
Mitigation
Preparedness 3.12 s 3.27 s
Response 3.11 s 3.20 s
Recovery & 
Rehabilitation
3.32 S 3.37 s
Legend: 
VS ‐ Very satisfactory
S   ‐ Satisfactory
Table 3. Correlation Coefficients for the Relationship of the Level of
Awareness of the Respondents and DRRM Capabilities

Faculty and Non‐
Students Administrators
teaching
DRRM Priority 
Area r- p- Inter r- p- Inter r- p- Inter
value level preta value level preta value level preta
tion tion tion
Prevention and 
Mitigation ‐.143 .760 NS .333 .919 NS .006 .293 NS

Preparedness .048 .881 NS .429 .802 NS .014 .176 NS

Response ‐.143 .652 NS .238 NS ‐.003 NS
.916 .453
Recovery ‐.143 .652 NS .238 NS NS
947 ‐.004 .453

Overall ‐.048 .881 NS .333 .298 NS .006 .916 NS

Table 4. Management Competence of SUC
Administrators  in Eastern Visayas

Management  Mean Description

Function
Planning 3.53 VS
Organizing 3.50 S
Staffing 3.46 S
Directing 3.53 VS
Controlling 3.48 S
Over‐all Management 3.50 S
Legend: 
VS ‐ Very satisfactory
S   ‐ Satisfactory
 CONCLUSIONS
• The level of disaster awareness of University
Administrators, Faculty Members, Non‐teaching
employees, and Students are all “Satisfactory”.
• The DRRM capabilities of SUCs in Eastern
Visayas are all found to be “Satisfactory”.
• There was no significant relationship between
the level of disaster awareness of the different
groups of respondents to the DRRM capabilities
of SUCs in Eastern Visayas.
• The management competence of SUC
administrators are all “Satisfactory”.
 RECOMMENDATIONS
• Establishment of a clear organizational structure for
SUCs related to DRRM.
• Incorporate in SUCs Annual Budget the funds that
could be used for the development of disaster
resilient schools.
• Conduct of DRRM planning activities involving the
different SUC stakeholders.
• Perform hazard mapping and vulnerability
assessments in each SUC.
 RECOMMENDATIONS
• Develop Institutional Evacuation Plans and
Procedures.
• Come up with a Disaster Risk Reduction Manual for
SUCs.
• Incorporate DRRM in the Staff Development Program
of SUCs.
• Install functional emergency and early warning
systems.
• Review of curriculum to include DRRM learning
activities for tertiary students.
THANK YOU!!!