Report on household emergency preparedness in Canada

Executive Summary

The Strategic Counsel is pleased to present this report to Public Safety Canada (PS) on the findings from an evaluation of the "72 hours - Is your family prepared?" 2007-2008 advertising campaign. 

Canadians view public safety and security as a key federal priority, and expect their government to reduce the impact of emergencies.  The "72 hours - Is your family prepared?" campaign, launched in 2006, has been designed to improve Canada's overall readiness to prepare for, and respond to, an emergency by mobilizing the target audiences to take practical steps to prepare for emergencies.  Recognizing that much of the responsibility for emergency preparedness rests with Canadians themselves, the primary goal of the campaign is to encourage Canadians to become more aware of the basic items that should be included in an emergency kit and to take the necessary steps to prepare a kit in order to sustain themselves and their families for a minimum of 72 hours.

Methodology and Objectives

This public opinion research study was intended to address two principal objectives:

• To assess campaign recall and the efficacy of television, radio, print, and online advertisements used in the advertisement campaign via the Advertising Campaign Evaluation Tool (ACET), a standardized measurement tool used across government for this purpose; and
• To assess any changes in key social marketing campaign indicators which would indicate attitudinal and behavioural shifts relating to emergency preparedness.

The study comprised a 20-minute telephone survey of the general population of Canada, including an over-sample of the advertising campaign's target population.  The survey fieldwork coincided with the end of the television component of the advertising flight at the end of February 2008.

The sample design reflected the ACET requirements (e.g. a minimum sample of 1,000 of the general population, aged 18 years and older) as well as the demographic profile of the key target audience for the campaign, women, aged 18 and older, with children under the age of 18 years.  Findings from the general population sample of 1,000 have an associated margin of error of +/-3.1%, 19 times out of 20, while those for the target population sample of 500 have an associated margin of error of +/-4.38%, 19 times out of 20.

In reviewing the results from the 2007-2008 campaign, it is important to evaluate them in the context of the media buy.  Advertising was conducted from November 2007 to the end of February 2008. The advertising incorporated two flights of TV and radio in the Fall and Winter, and magazine, online and out-of-home components in the Winter. The table below outlines the media placement for both the Fall and Winter flights combined, showing the relative weighting of each component, as a percentage of the overall advertising expenditures. 

	Overall*
TOTAL EXPENDITURE	$2,240,671.00
Television	51.40%
Radio	20.10%
Magazine	14.58%
Out-of-home (Food Court Advertising)	11.02%
Online	2.89%

*combines expenditures and media components across both the Fall and Winter waves of the campaign.

Key Findings

Overall, the findings show demonstrable year-over-year improvement with respect to awareness levels among the target population, women with children under age 18, as well as among the general population of Canadians, aged 18 years and older.  The advertising campaign is clearly making an impression in the consciousness of the target and general populations and is effectively serving as a strong reminder of the need to prepare for unanticipated emergency situations. 

Aided recall of the television advertising rose significantly over the two-year tracking period, both for the target population and the general Canadian population.  Radio advertising, introduced as a component of the media mix for the first time in 2008, performed relatively well, especially given the relative expenditure on this medium.  Notably, however, the gap in recall rates between television and radio is much larger for the target population than it is for the general population, which suggests that the emphasis on television over radio, especially for women with children under age 18, was an extremely effective strategy.

Not surprisingly, given the relatively smaller portion of the campaign budget allocated to each of the other components (e.g. magazines, online, food court advertising), aided recall levels were significantly lower as compared to those obtained for radio, and particularly television.  At the same time, it is important to note that as the campaign transitions from the initial awareness raising stage to providing audiences with more detail and content (e.g. items to include in the kit), other media such as Internet will play a larger role with respect to their relative impact.   Advertising research generally shows that these relatively more cost effective media tend to reinforce and extend the reach and impact of television and radio, which although more costly, have the advantage of speaking to a more captive audience.

Aided recall rates across all media components - % Recall

Medium	Target Audience (Women with children aged 18 years or younger)		Canadian Population (Canadians, aged 18 years and older)
	2007	2008	2007	2008
Television	22%	33%	17%	27%
Radio	NA	17%	NA	20%
Internet	2%	6%	1%	5%
Food courts	4%	5%	3%	4%
Magazine	NA	3%	NA	4%
Total Aided Recall (across all media)*	NA	50%	NA	46%

*This figure represents cumulative aided recall rates across all media/channels (e.g. the percentage of respondents who responded in the affirmative to having seen the advertisements, on a prompted basis, whether via television, radio, magazine, Internet or in a food court).

More importantly, the findings suggest there has been reasonable growth in the percentage of both the target and general Canadian populations who now say they have prepared a family emergency plan or an emergency kit.  Examining these results within the context of broader behaviour change theory, this represents significant movement along the behaviour change continuum within a relatively short span of time.  According to the theory, in the early stages the population would acknowledge emergency preparedness as an important issue, then move to contemplating how to act and, subsequently, to taking some kind of action by way of preparing plans and/or kits.  The findings indicate that activity, representing actual behaviour change, is occurring at a relatively early stage, given that the campaign has just completed its second year. Typically, one might expect such behavioural shifts to occur over a three-to-five year period, preceded by evidence of widespread consciousness-raising of the issue and of its significance.  Clearly, the campaign is meeting its principal goal which is to encourage Canadians to become prepared for an emergency.

At the same time, it is important to note that a perceived lack of time remains one of the primary barriers to preparing an emergency kit, for both the target population as well as the general population of Canadians.  Again, with respect to social marketing theory, the notion of being time-constrained, often a proxy for convenience is commonly cited as an attitudinal barrier to altering one's habits or usual patterns of behaviour, almost regardless of the type of desired behaviour change.  Frequently, the perception of time constraints is a psychological rather than a real or actual barrier to change.  Regardless, this finding underscores an important attitudinal barrier to address in subsequent waves of the campaign, through messaging and/or creative approaches, or via programming related to emergency preparedness.

The main findings specific to the target population of women with children under the age of 18 and to the general population are summarized below.  These sections are followed by a series of recommendations.

The Target Audience (Women with Children Under Age 18)

Strong Recall and Message Retention

The primary finding is that the message is sinking in, and notably within a relatively short time frame, with the target audience of women with children under 18 years of age.  Unaided or general awareness of advertising on how to prepare for an emergency has increased by seven points in post-campaign evaluations conducted in 2007 and 2008, an interval of just one year. This is an excellent result for any advertising campaign, especially in our crowded and fragmented media environment.  Even more importantly the main message of the campaign about being prepared for 72 hours is being absorbed as well.  On a completely unprompted basis, the number of women with children who now cite the 72 hours requirement as a key "take-away" from the advertising has increased a full nine points, from 17% citing "72 hours" top-of-mind in 2007 to 26% in 2008.

Television is Hitting the Mark with the Target Audience

As shown in the above table, aided recall rates (e.g. once respondents were prompted with a short description of the ad) for both television and radio are good.  Notably, there has been a significant increase in aided recall of the television advertising among the target group, a full 11 points, from 22 per cent in 2007 to 33 per cent in 2008. 

Interestingly, aided recall of the television advertising was highest among the subgroup of women aged 18 to 34 years of age (48%).   This finding is of particular interest in that this subgroup of the target population is at an age and stage in life where they are developing a mindset and habits they will likely retain over the course of their lives.  Moreover, as mothers of younger children, this group is likely strongly motivated by heightened maternal instincts, a possible sub-theme that could be explored in future campaigns or outreach activities. 

Also of interest is the fact that among those in the target group who recall seeing the ad on television, on an aided basis, there has been a considerable year-over-year increase in the percentage who identify the need to be prepared for 72 hours as the main message of the ad (from 9% in 2007 to 24% in 2008).  This result underscores two significant findings coming out of this evaluation:  first, that the principal message of "being prepared for 72 hours/being prepared for an emergency" is sinking in with the target audience; and second, that the television ad buy appears to be hitting the mark with respect to that audience. 

More detail on the results with respect to the call-to-action across the various mediums is provided in Section III.B of this report.  Although in some cases there are only a small number of respondents who recall seeing an advertisement in each of these mediums (e.g. food court, online, magazine advertising), the findings do offer some directional advice on their relative effectiveness.

Reasonable Performance across other Media … Questions about Magazine Placement

While aided recall of the advertising on the Internet is substantially lower compared to recall rates for radio and television, the findings show a modest year-over-year increase of five points, a reasonable level of growth given that the online component represents just under 3 per cent of the media budget. 

In general, the results with respect to aided recall by medium among the target group are in line with the media buy and placement, with a few notable exceptions.  It appears that radio may be a more effective channel in reaching the broader target group of women with children under the age of 18 compared to magazines although it is important to note that radio and magazine advertising do serve very different purposes with respect to message retention.  The latter is seen as a more effective channel for imparting content and detail while the former is often best employed as a vehicle for attracting attention, raising general awareness of an issue and driving the target audience to a web site or other medium for further information.  While radio comprised about 20 per cent of the overall media buy, aided recall of the advertising on the radio stands at 17 per cent based on the current findings.  By contrast, magazines, which represented slightly more than 14 per cent of the overall media buy, yielded an aided recall rate of just three per cent among the target group.  Interestingly, out-of-home advertising (e.g. food court advertising) comprised just under three per cent of the overall advertising budget, but yielded an aided recall rate of five per cent among the target group.  This suggests that future waves of the campaign should reconsider the media mix with perhaps increased emphasis on radio and out-of-home advertising as well as reviewing magazine placement. 

Although the results can be interpreted only as directional in nature, due to small sample sizes on these particular questions, it is interesting that those who saw the food court ads were more likely to say they contained new information.  In addition, this group were also more likely than others to say these ads made them think about preparing an emergency kit.  By contrast, those who saw the Internet ads were more likely to say the ads were helpful, compared to those who saw the ads in any of the other media.  Again, these results, while not statistically significant due to small sample sizes, make some intuitive sense given the relative impact of the different advertising vehicles both in catching and maintaining audience attention. 

The Ads Serve as a Strong Reminder, Driving Up Levels of Intent as a Precursor to Action

While recall rates among the target audience are an indication of "message infiltration or absorption," intention and action are perhaps more direct measures that signal imminent or actual behavioural change.  On these two measures the results are also generally positive. 

On the standard ACET question regarding action taken as a result of seeing or hearing the advertisement, there has been a slight drop in the percentage among the target audience who responded in the affirmative (from 28% in 2007 to 22% in 2008).  However, this result should be considered in the context of other data collected in the survey which indicate an increase in the percentage of women with children who have prepared an emergency plan (up 10 points) and a slight increase among those who have prepared an emergency kit (up 3 points, although this is within the margin of error for the target group sample).  One possible explanation for these seemingly contradictory results is that advertising often works at a sub-conscious or subliminal level.  In this respect, while the results show that the intended behaviours (e.g. plan and kit preparation) are occurring respondents to the survey may not be directly attributing their actions to the advertisements themselves.  Nevertheless, the data in total shows that the campaign clearly is having a positive impact if one analyses the difference in attitudes and behaviours between those who have and those who have not seen or heard the ads.

One of the more interesting findings in the research was a significant increase in indications of intent to take action.  Among the target group there were increases in intent to take action in all five potential action areas - review of the family emergency plan, improve/enlarge emergency kit, learn more about potential emergencies, put together a kit and create a family plan.  For example, in 2007, while just over one-third (36%) of the target group indicated a likelihood of putting together an emergency kit in 2007, this increased to just over half (53%) in 2008 (a jump of 17 points in one year).  Notably, levels of intention are significantly higher among the target audience on this measure as compared to the Canadian population at large (35% say they intend to put together an emergency kit, an 18-point difference compared to the target audience). 

Similarly, 44 per cent of the target group said they intended to review their family emergency plan.  This number increased by 15 points to 59 per cent in 2008.  When broken down further by whether or not the respondent was aware of the advertising, a clear picture emerges of the positive impact of advertising on intent. For instance, 69 per cent of the aware members of the target group intended to review their family emergency plan as compared to 45 per cent for the unaware group.  With respect to assessing the call-to-action, the advertising is demonstrably achieving its intended effect.

Moreover, on another series of questions gauging attitudes about emergencies and emergency planning, the effect of the ad was clearly positive in that those among the target group who saw or heard the ad were more likely to agree both with the benefit of preparing a family emergency plan as well as an emergency kit.  Thus the ads are serving as a strong reminder of the importance of emergency preparedness and are contributing to creating a mindset within the target population which is increasingly conducive to taking the desired actions.

Time Remains the Principal Barrier to Action for Women with Children

While the 2008 results reflect positive intentions on the part of the target audience, the main hurdle remains a perception of a lack of time among that subgroup of women with children who have not yet prepared an emergency kit.  About one-third of the target group, identical to the result from 2007, agreed with the statement "I don't have the time" as a possible reason for not preparing an emergency kit.  Future iterations of the campaign should consider incorporating messaging and visuals that reinforce the ease associated with emergency preparedness.  Given that few among the target group indicate money is a barrier, some messaging focused on the availability of prepared, stand-alone kits may assist in overcoming perceptions of the time involved in pulling together all the necessary kit items. In addition, a more detailed analysis of the data set revealed underlying drivers for those who did take action as a result of noticing the advertisements.  Interestingly, the various mediums and specific visuals were not strong indicators of the decision to take action.  For the general population, the primary driver was whether or not they perceived the advertisement to be helpful, and the secondary driver was a perception as to its relevance.  For the target group a perception of helpfulness was also paramount, but the secondary driver was whether or not the advertisements were perceived to contain new information.

The Canadian Population

The findings for the Canadian population mimic those of the target population in many respects.  However, there are some interesting exceptions and challenges in engaging the broader population on the issue of emergency preparedness and stimulating them to action.  The major findings and differences between the Canadian population and the target population are outlined below and covered in more detail in the detailed findings.

Recall Rates are Strong and Improving (Especially for Television) and the "72 Hour" Message is Gaining Resonance

For the Canadian population, results show good improvement in both unaided and aided recall rates, with year-over-year changes that are in the range for those of the target population.  Unaided levels of awareness of the advertising have increased nine points since 2007 such that four-in-ten (41%) of Canadians now say they have seen or heard something about preparing for an emergency.  Similar to the target group, the "72 hours" as the timeframe over which one should be prepared to sustain oneself and one's family is gaining resonance (up 8 points from 2007).  

Aided recall rates for television are strong and growing (up 11 points from 2007), although slightly lower than they are for the target group (27% of the Canadian population compared to 33% of the target population recalled the ads on television).  And, in keeping with trends found among the target group, the general population of Canadians is also increasingly likely to cite the message of being able to sustain themselves and their families for the first 72 hours as the main message from the television advertising.  

There is an Opportunity to Bolster the "Be Prepared" Message

Of note, however, is a sharp decline in the percentage of the Canadian population who indicated that the main message from television focused on being prepared in the event of an emergency (a nine-point decline from 77% in 2007 to 68% in 2008).  Moreover, significantly fewer of the general population, compared to the target group of women with children under age 18, now reference this more general message (68% among the Canadian population; 80% among the target population).  This trend is also the case for the radio advertising, where those in the Canadian population (64%) are less likely than those in the target population (72%) to cite "be prepared in case of an emergency" as the main message.  This finding is perhaps worth addressing in future focus group testing of television and radio creative as well as monitoring in subsequent campaign evaluations.  Ideally the two principal messages of "being prepared for an emergency" and "sustaining oneself for the first 72 hours" should be mutually reinforcing and evaluations should ideally show positive directional movement in the numbers of respondents who absorb both of these messages as the principal takeaway from the ads.  However, the current result may very well speak to the strength of the 72-hour campaign, including the logo and the creative, in embedding the 72-hour timeframe as the clearest and most prominent message of the campaign.  In itself, this is a positive result and it may be the case that "being prepared" is a supplementary message that is intuitively understood within the 72-hour context.

Interestingly, the reverse was true for magazine advertising.  Although the numbers of those who saw the magazine ad are substantially lower than for television and radio, of those who did, just over seven-in-ten (71%) of the general population cited the "be prepared" message compared to just over five-in-ten (52%) of the target population.  While low sample sizes suggest some caution should be taken in interpreting these results, these findings point to further assessment of the magazine placement within the overall advertising mix, both for the general and target populations.

Sponsor Recognition on the TV Ads is Declining

Also notable among the Canadian population is a considerable drop in the numbers of those identifying the Government of Canada as the sponsor of the television ad (down 11 points from 68% in 2007 to 57% in 2008), while this result has remained relatively stable at 62 per cent of the target population.  While credit for sponsorship of the ad is not the primary goal of the campaign, it is important to ensure that the audience is able to seek out required information from the correct sources (e.g. www.getprepared.ca website).  Again, this indicator should be monitored in future campaigns and focus group testing of subsequent iterations of the campaign should ensure a prominent call-to-action to 1-800 OCANADA and to the website.  It is quite possible that the decline in sponsor identification may very well be linked to the increasing number of television viewers with PVRs and the ability to fast-forward through advertisements, thereby missing the last few seconds of the ad.

The Findings Reveal a Significant Increase in Intentions to Prepare an Emergency Kit

As noted in the earlier analysis of key findings pertaining to the target group, the findings for the Canadian population show significant and positive shifts in intention to act, mostly in preparing an emergency kit (up 10 points from 30% in 2007 to 43% in 2008), but also in preparing a family emergency plan (up 6 points from 33% in 2007 to 39% in 2008). 

As with the target population, Canadians at large are increasingly likely to indicate an intention to learn more about emergencies (up 17 points), put together an emergency kit (up 11 points), improve or enlarge their emergency kit (up 10 points), review their family emergency plan (up 8 points), and create a family emergency plan (up 5 points).  At the same time, it is important to note that on three of these five measures of "intention" (e.g. reviewing a family plan, creating a family plan, and putting together an emergency kit), the general Canadian population expresses a considerably lower level of intention to do so compared to the target population.  Thus, while the year-over-year findings for the general population are trending upward on these measures, and the results are even more favourable for the target group, increased exposure to the advertising would contribute to boosting these numbers further, for both populations.  Indeed, when the results for these questions are examined on the basis of those who have/have not seen or heard the advertising, exposure to the ads considerably increases the likelihood of taking action across the board.

Multiple Perceptual Barriers to Action Need to be Addressed

Unlike the target population, where time constraints appeared to be the most significant barrier, for the Canadian population, almost equal numbers point to time as to reliance on government and a belief that an emergency kit is not necessary (about one-quarter of the general Canadian population agree that each of these is a possible reason why they have not prepared an emergency kit).  Notably, however, the number of those agreeing that they do not need an emergency kit is declining (from 33% in 2007 to 22% in 2008).  Thus, while the issue of ease, convenience and minimal investment of time could be a possibly secondary message for the target population as a means of stimulating those who have not yet taken action to do so, messages to the broader general public should address the need for Canadians to take responsibility for themselves in an emergency (at least for the first 72 hours) as well as the issue of emergency kits as a basic or standard household item (e.g. a necessity).  Interestingly, awareness of the advertising has a positive effect on the latter measure (e.g. perceived need for an emergency kit).  This suggests that simply broadening the scope and reach of current advertising may have beneficial effects in reducing key perceptual barriers among the general Canadian population.

Evaluation of Government Performance

Another important finding from the research is that both women with children and Canadians in general clearly think that this advertising campaign is an appropriate action for the Government of Canada to be taking.  These numbers reflect very strong, and growing, support for this government initiative as both the target group and Canadian populations strongly endorse the campaign as a good idea, believe that the advertising helps to prompt their thinking about preparing an emergency kit, is helpful and personally relevant.  Perhaps not surprisingly, women with children tend to hold these views more strongly than the Canadian population as a whole.  Results for both sampled populations range from 70 per cent to over 90 per cent agreement and are four to nine points higher for women with children as compared to the general population.

Interestingly, however, a lower percentage among both the target group (51%) and the general population of Canadians (45%) agree that the advertising contained new information that they were not aware of.  In fact, for the Canadian population this figure represents a nine-point drop from 2007 (56% agreed).  The perception that the information is "new" is a key driver of taking action for the target group and should be considered as messages and creative are being crafted for the 2008-2009 campaign.

With respect to other measures of federal government performance, in general and on specific aspects of service delivery, the key finding is that awareness of the advertising tends to have a favourable (indeed in some cases extremely favourable) effect on perceptions.  For example, on ratings of the Government of Canada on helping Canadians to prepare themselves for emergencies, the percentage among the target population offering a positive assessment was 60 points higher among those who had seen the ad compared to those who had not, and 41 points higher among the general population of Canadians who had seen the ad compared to those who had not.  Moreover, the year-over-year trends on this measure for both the target population (up 16 points from 2007) and the general population (up 19 points) suggest that Canadians are increasingly favourable toward the Government of Canada with respect to assisting Canadians in preparing for emergencies.

It is also notable that on the general rating of overall performance of the Government of Canada, while ratings for both the target population and Canadians overall were identical (43% offered a rating of good/excellent), this result for the target population represents an eight-point improvement from 2007.  And, as noted above, the result is more positive for those who have seen the ad compared to those who have not (approximately a 10-point difference for both the target population and Canadians in general who have/have not seen the ad).

Composition of Emergency Kits and Knowledge of Items

Both the target population and the general population of Canadians at large demonstrate a reasonably good top-of-mind knowledge of the items that should go into an emergency kit with supplies for 72 hours.  At least seven-in-ten (eight-in-ten for the target population) identified the need for a minimum of six litres of water and food that won't spoil as items that should be included.  At least four-in-ten respondents in both the target population and the Canadian population suggested that a battery powered radio, first aid kit, blankets, candles and matches and a flashlight should be included.  Fewer numbers (less than two-in-ten in both groups) identified items such as prescription medications, cell phones or cash in small bills. Just over one-third (35%) of the target population and slightly more of the general Canadian population (40%) say they currently have an emergency kit.  This question was not asked in previous years, so no tracking data is available.  When asked to identify which of the nine specific items, as itemized on the Public Safety web site, were included in their kits, 57 per cent of women with children and 68 per cent of Canadians overall had at least six of the nine recommended items.  By contrast, fewer than one-in-ten in each of the populations indicated they had all nine items in their kits (6% of women with children; 8% of Canadians overall).

Of particular interest are the year-over-year trends in the numbers of the target population who say that have cash in small bills in their emergency kits (down 11 points to 36% in 2008).  Among the general population of Canadians, the findings show an 11 point drop in those indicating they have a copy of their emergency plan in their kits (from 33% in 2007 to 22% in 2008).  While this declining trend is not as severe among the target population, it is nevertheless the case that few among this group also retain a copy of their emergency plan within their kits (down 5 points from 33% in 2007 to 27% in 2008).

There has been a modest increase among the target audience of those now indicating they retain their kit in a single place, but not in a prepared bundle (from 19% in 2007 to 24% in 2008), although the plurality continue to say that the items are stored in different places throughout the home (40% among the target group; 43% among the Canadian population).

Recommendations

Clearly, the "72 Hours - is your family prepared" advertising campaign is having a positive impact on Canadians.  Levels of awareness and, more importantly, understanding are increasing. Increasing numbers among the target population and Canadians at large are intending to take emergency preparedness actions.  In addition, Canadians want the Government of Canada to undertake this kind of campaign.  The advertising itself is having a beneficial impact on assessments of government performance, in general, and specifically in the area of helping Canadians prepare for an emergency, among the target population in particular. The primary recommendation is to maintain this campaign over time and, if possible, expand its scope and reach.  It is clear from these findings that exposure to the advertising has, among other things, had a positive impact on:

• Attitudes towards emergency preparedness, including perceptions of the benefit of preparing a family emergency plan and an emergency kit;
• Intention to review family emergency action plans, put together an emergency kit and improve or enhance existing kits; and
• Actions such as having prepared an emergency kit or emergency plan.

The television component of the media buy has been particularly successful among the target audience and particularly that subgroup of women aged 18 to 34 years of age.  Further consideration should be given to expanding the emphasis on television within the overall media mix as this medium effectively reinforces the "72 hours" messaging or theme.

A thorough review of magazine placement within the overall media mix should be undertaken and possibly some consideration given to placing greater emphasis on radio, out-of-home and online advertising. 

In addition, over time the depth of information available will become more important as the campaign is maintained and more Canadians look for specific assistance as to how to take action to prepare themselves and their families.  This will likely require further review and adjustment of the media mix as those media that are more conducive to relaying content or details become a more useful and critical component of the overall media buy.

Possibly the most interesting findings were around the barriers and incentives to action.  Addressing the barriers to action of time could be addressed in next year's creative messaging.

The issue of which elements in the advertising campaign specifically motivated both the target population and the Canadian public to take action is important to campaign evaluation.  Clearly, ensuring that the advertisements are perceived to be offering information that is both "new" and "helpful" is of critical importance. A key recommendation is for these factors to be taken into account during the development of new advertising materials.  Additional qualitative research will be required as communications are being developed to ascertain what "being helpful" and "new information" means in practice for the target group.  For example, in assessing what the target group might consider as "new information," focus group testing among women with children could drill down in a number of areas:

• Understanding of where kits and/or items can be purchased;
• Understanding of reasons why specific items should be included in an emergency kit;
• Awareness of all of the items that should be included in an emergency kit; and
• Awareness and understanding of procedures that should be followed both proceeding, during and following an emergency, including storage procedures. 

This type of discussion may yield some insights into what information is "new" and "helpful."