Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Introduction:

Effective disaster management requires an integrated approach based on community and school entities, encompassing preparedness, response, and recovery. This study aims to develop an integrated model for community and school-based disaster surveillance information systems.

Method:

This research was operational research that employs a mixed method, utilizing document study for obtaining quantitative data also Focus Group Discussions for obtaining qualitative data. Those identifying data and information needed to develop integrated disaster surveillance information system model.

Results:

The findings highlight the critical role of community-based interventions, from pre, during, and post disaster. Strategic data surveillance consists of disaster risk factors, preparedness, mitigation, early warning system, emergency, rapid health assessment, also community-based rehabilitation, and reconstruction. School identifications, infrastructures, contingency plan, risk map, and disaster preparedness team are also obtained in this disaster surveillance information system model. Information consists of disaster risk indicators, such as hazard, vulnerability, capacity, risk, high risk area, and trend of disaster risk factors are also acquired in each area as well as educational institution.

Conclusion:

The study demonstrates that integrated and participatory approaches to disaster management strengthen disaster contingency plan. Policymakers and practitioners are urged to prioritize routine disaster surveillance data collection to contribute to policymaking.

Keywords

disaster surveillance information system community school

Background

Indonesia is one of the most disaster-prone countries in the world, with thousands of events recorded annually. According to data from the National Disaster Management Agency (abbreviated as BNPB in Indonesian), there were 3056 natural disaster events in Indonesia during the period 1 January–3 October 2023. The majority of these natural disasters were floods, namely 893 incidents, followed by extreme weather with 861 incidents. Next, there were 687 forest and land fires, 449 landslides, 116 droughts, 24 coastal flooding/erosion, 24 earthquakes and 2 volcanic eruptions. BNPB reported that the entire disaster caused 5.35 million people to suffer and be displaced, 5555 people were injured, 204 people died, and 10 people were missing. The disaster also resulted in 25,116 houses being damaged, the details were 3387 houses were heavily damaged, 3844 were moderately damaged, and 17,885 were slightly damaged.^1,2

The legal framework for disaster management in Indonesia is provided by Law No. 24 of 2007 concerning Disaster Management, which mandates an integrated approach covering the pre-disaster, emergency response, and post-disaster phases. The law also guarantees the public’s right to receive education, training, and information related to disaster management. In the education sector, the Disaster Safe Education Unit (DSEU) program was established over a decade ago as a nationwide effort to ensure that all schools are resilient to disaster risks. The DSEU promotes risk assessment, contingency planning, and the creation of school preparedness teams, thereby embedding disaster preparedness within the education system.

An early warning system is a set of surveillance mechanisms that collect information regarding potential hazards at a location, to trigger a timely and coordinated response. Early warning systems are used across all sectors involved in disaster risk reduction (DRR), including health, food security, agriculture, and adaptive architecture, to provide communities, governments, NGOs and humanitarian actors with the information necessary to act effectively and efficiently.³ Early warning systems (EWS) are an important mechanism to enable disaster risk reduction at local and national levels. However, such EWS are not only seen as disaster prevention measures but as a vital component of the capacity building process for disaster risk reduction and management.⁴ EWS also needs to be supported by community-based emergency preparedness and adaptation strategies, which can prevent the impact of loss of life and reduce the economic and material impacts of disasters.⁴

Early warning systems exist at various levels, which are ideally interconnected, from the community level to international monitoring systems, all of which play an important role in monitoring known hazards in a region or area to provide early warning to enable mitigation, prevention and response.³ It is vital that people understand their risks; know the warning services and know how to react. Education and preparedness programs play a key role and it is also important to have a well-practiced and tested disaster management plan. The public must receive adequate information about safe behavioral options, available escape routes, and the best ways to avoid damage and loss of property.⁵

Apart from the community, schools also have a strategic role in educating and providing disaster mitigation material from an early age, starting from elementary, middle and high school levels up to universities. Disaster mitigation learning is expected to increase students’ level of preparedness for natural disasters that can occur at any time.^6,7 Students are key members of the school community who serve as both sources of knowledge and agents for spreading disaster awareness to their surrounding environment. Apart from that, the school is one of the main stakeholders who is closely related to community preparedness. In this way, students are expected to be able to know and understand disasters that occur in the environment where they live.⁸ The frequent occurrence of natural and non-natural disasters in Indonesia highlights the need for educational institutions to be resilient against all types of disaster threats. In response, the DSEU program was introduced in Indonesia about a decade ago as a comprehensive disaster risk reduction initiative targeting all educational units nationwide⁹

Through education, it is hoped that disaster risk reduction efforts can achieve broader targets and can be introduced earlier to all students, for example by integrating disaster risk reduction education into the school curriculum and extracurricular activities.⁹ Lack of information regarding hazards, risks, vulnerabilities and preparedness actions by local communities is a barrier to community action. An important need for the community is to receive this information.¹⁰ A review of existing community-based Early Warning Systems (EWS) in Indonesia, such as Katana, SPAB, and Destana, reveals several critical limitations in their current implementation. The novelty of this research will provide the surveillance mechanism through early warning activity based on routine data collection and this activity is integrated. Although these systems contribute significantly to local disaster preparedness, they often lack routine monitoring and surveillance mechanisms, which are essential for maintaining their effectiveness. Furthermore, there is no established integration among these community-based systems, resulting in fragmented practices across regions. More importantly, these systems remain disconnected from international EWS frameworks, indicating a substantial gap between local efforts and global disaster response mechanisms. This disconnection underscores the need for novel approaches that bridge Indonesia’s community-based EWS with national systems, thereby enhancing national disaster preparedness and resilience. The scope of disaster addressed in this manuscript refers to disasters in general, not limited to specific types, in accordance with the definition provided in Indonesia’s Disaster Management Law (UU No. 24 Tahun 2007), which encompasses natural, non-natural, and social disasters.

Many early warning system designs and operations still focus on a single element, focusing heavily on technology and equipment that can cause overall system failure. Technology will not be effective if people do not respond appropriately to warnings. Involving communities in early warning systems plays an important role in saving lives, reducing injuries, and limiting environmental damage associated with disaster events.¹¹ To our knowledge, no comprehensive, documented model currently integrates community- and school-based surveillance systems across regions in Indonesia; thus, this study aims to develop an integrated model for community and school-based disaster surveillance information systems. Thus, this research aims to identify the necessary data and design a model for the integration of community-based EWS with international systems.

Method

This study was an operational research project aimed at developing an information system model that integrated community-based and school-based disaster surveillance. The stages of developing the disaster surveillance information system model referred to the system analysis phase of the System Development Life Cycle (SDLC) approach. The System Analysis phase included activities to understand the existing system and identify the data and information needed for an information system. The integrated disaster surveillance information system model developed was illustrated using a Context Diagram and a Data Flow Diagram. The Context Diagram was used to describe the relationships between input entities as data sources, the information system, and output entities as information users, while the Data Flow Diagram depicted the relationships between entities, the information system, processes, as well as data and information. The Data Flow Diagram was also utilized to illustrate the data flow process and the transformation of data into information.

This study employed a qualitative approach through document review and focus group discussions (FGDs) to explore the integration of community-based and school-based disaster risk reduction efforts into broader surveillance and early warning systems. A comprehensive review was conducted on key documents related to disaster preparedness and community-based risk reduction. These documents were grouped into two categories:

1. Community-based documents:

a. Community-Based Disaster Risk Management Guidelines

b. Community-Based Disaster Preparedness: Strategies and Approaches

c. Family Preparedness Plan

d. Contingency Planning Guidelines for Disaster Preparedness

2. School-based documents:

a. National Guidelines for Health Crisis Management

b. Rapid Health Assessment

c. Module 1: Safe School Facilities

d. Module 2: Disaster Management in Schools

e. Module 3: Disaster Risk Prevention and Reduction Education

The document review aimed to identify existing practices, institutional frameworks, and key gaps in community and school-based disaster risk reduction, particularly in relation to surveillance systems.

3. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)

A series of FGDs were conducted with key stakeholders from community groups, schools, and local disaster management actors. The informants were from institutions related to disaster management, namely:

a. Regional Disaster Management Agency

b. Health Crisis Center

c. Disaster Management Academics

The discussions focused on the following themes:

a. The role of communities in disaster risk reduction

b. Surveillance systems that support the empowerment of communities and schools in disaster risk reduction efforts

c. Strategic information sourced from communities and schools through surveillance activities

d. Data requirements from communities and schools to support surveillance for disaster risk reduction

e. The potential for integrating community and school-based surveillance of disaster risk factors into a broader early warning system

The FGD was conducted following these stages, such as:

a. Identification of the issues to be discussed in the FGD

b. Formulation of the objectives to be achieved by the FGD

c. Selection of informants relevant to the research problems and objectives

d. Implementation of the FGD

e. Qualitative analysis of FGD data

f. Validation of FGD results through document review

g. Interpretation of the results

The FGD session structured using these stages, such as:

a. The researcher explains the objectives, background, willingness to participate as an informant, and research ethics.

b. The FGD is conducted by asking open-ended questions step by step, providing facilities and opportunities for informants to respond.

c. Probing is carried out to explore more detailed answers from the informants.

d. The FGD results are recorded and documented.

e. The researcher presents the key points of the FGD results and provides informants with the opportunity for clarification and additional input.

Result

The results of this study are presented in three parts. First, we summarize the findings from the document review, highlighting existing practices, institutional frameworks, and gaps in community- and school-based disaster risk reduction (DRR). Second, we present the findings from focus group discussions (FGDs) with key stakeholders, which provide insight into real-world data collection practices and perceived challenges (Appendix 1). Finally, we introduce the integrated model, illustrated through a Context Diagram (Figure 1) and Data Flow Diagram (Figure 2), explaining how information flows between actors, the types of data collected at each stage, and the information needs of each actor.

Figure 1.

Context diagram of the integration model for community-based and school-based disaster surveillance information system in Indonesia.

Figure 2.

Data flow diagram of the integration model for community-based and school-based disaster surveillance information system in Indonesia.

Document review

The foundation for integrating community-based and school-based disaster surveillance information systems was based on applicable national regulations. The scope of disasters analyzed referred to Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 24 of 2007 concerning Disaster Management. This regulation classified disasters into three types: natural disasters, non-natural disasters, and social disasters. the focus is on developing an integrated disaster surveillance model based on risk factors that can be identified by the community. The research emphasizes the identification of risk factors as a strategic step in effective disaster management. By recognizing various potential hazard risks before a disaster occurs, both the government and the community can design targeted mitigation strategies. Therefore, disaster risk identification is a strategic phase within the pre-disaster stage.

Natural disasters were defined as those caused by natural events or a series of natural occurrences, such as earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, floods, droughts, cyclones, and landslides. Non-natural disasters referred to those resulting from technological failures, modernization failures, pandemics, and disease outbreaks. Social disasters were those caused by human actions, including intergroup or community conflicts and terrorism.

The integration of disaster surveillance information systems also supported the national disaster management strategy, as outlined in the Decree of the Head of BNPB Number 173 of 2015 regarding the National Disaster Management Clusters. The government established national clusters for disaster management, which included the Health Cluster, Search and Rescue Cluster, Logistics Cluster, Shelter and Protection Cluster, Education Cluster, Infrastructure and Facilities Cluster, Economic Cluster, and Early Recovery Cluster. Communities and schools played a strategic role in each of these clusters as part of the multi-helix components, acting as implementers and sources of data and information on disaster management. The model of integration showing the roles of communities and schools in the disaster surveillance information system is presented in Figure 1.

The Context Diagram illustrates that the entities of the integrated community-based and school-based disaster surveillance information system consist of input entities providing data and output entities receiving information. The input entities of the system include communities, households, community-based disaster management programs, and the Disaster Safet Education Unit (DSEU). The output entities include the Regional Disaster Management Agency (BPBD), the Department of Education, the National Disaster Management Agency (BNPB), and the community.

Integrated model based on document review and FGD

The FGD confirmed and expanded the findings from the document review. Participants emphasized that:

a. Community-level data are mostly collected manually, with little routine analysis for trends or feedback from authorities.

b. Schools conduct drills and inspections but lack standardized reporting systems and regular updates of risk maps.

c. Both communities and schools requested a simple reporting mechanism that could feed directly into local BPBD systems and receive feedback to improve preparedness.

These insights helped refine the data elements and processes to be included in the integrated model, ensuring that the system would be practical and responsive to user needs. The process of transforming data and information from input entities to output entities is depicted through the Data Flow Diagram. The development of the integrated community-based and school-based disaster surveillance information system model was based on the concepts of surveillance and disaster management. Surveillance consists of components such as data collection, data analysis, and information dissemination. Disaster management involves stages of pre-disaster, during disaster, and post-disaster phases. The Data Flow Diagram model for the integration of the community-based and school-based disaster surveillance information system is presented in Figure 2.

The process of reporting and recording data is carried out by input entities, including individuals, communities, or individuals on behalf of disaster management programs based on community empowerment such as DESTANA and KATANA. Reporting and recording of data can also be done by schools as part of the Disaster-Safe Educational Unit (DSEU) program. The data reported and recorded consists of risk factors that can be identified and acted upon by the community. The data collection modeling is divided into stages based on the Disaster Management approach, which includes pre-disaster, during disaster, and post-disaster. The types of data collected before a disaster include data on disaster prevention, disaster mitigation, early warning systems, and disaster preparedness. Data collected during a disaster includes emergency disaster alert data, disaster emergency data, and disaster emergency transition data.

Data collected post-disaster includes rehabilitation and reconstruction data

This integrated system model also accommodates community-sourced data obtained from Rapid Health Assessment activities. The data collected from the Rapid Health Assessment includes infrastructure, health facilities and resources, estimated disaster impacts, and the potential for Extraordinary Disease Events. Various community-based disaster management data are integrated with data obtained from the Disaster-Safe Education Unit program. This data includes basic school data, disaster management infrastructure in schools, early warning systems, the presence and readiness of disaster preparedness teams in schools, regulations, disaster risk assessments in schools, school disaster contingency plans, and school disaster risk maps.

Data integration analysis is conducted descriptively and produces information on disaster risk indicators for areas or institutions based on potential types of disasters. These indicators include hazard, vulnerability, capacity, and risk. Hazard refers to a condition or event that is dangerous and threatens or has the potential to cause loss of life and/or damage to property and/or the environment. Vulnerability refers to the susceptibility to the disasters that occur. Capacity refers to the resources or assets that can reduce disaster risks and strengthen resilience in facing and experiencing disasters. Risk refers to the possibility of events or activities that could be harmful. Data analysis is also performed on records and reports that are routinely and periodically conducted to produce trend analysis of disaster risk factors.

The information, in the form of indicators and trends, is disseminated to relevant stakeholders, such as the Disaster Management Agency and the Education Office. The results can be presented through reports or disaster risk indicator dashboards. This information is expected to be used by disaster authorities for policymaking, particularly for early detection of disaster risk factors. The detailed data is available in Supplemental material.

Discussion

The importance of surveillance in early disaster detection

Surveillance plays a critical role in the early detection of disasters, significantly enhancing disaster preparedness and response strategies. The integration of surveillance systems into disaster risk management frameworks allows for the timely identification of potential hazards, thereby facilitating proactive measures to mitigate risks. Effective surveillance mechanisms can provide vital data that informs decision-making processes, enabling communities and authorities to respond swiftly to emerging threats. This is particularly crucial in regions prone to natural disasters, where the timely dissemination of information can save lives and reduce economic losses. While Law No. 24 of 2007 on Disaster Management remains a foundational legal reference, the manuscript has been updated to include more recent government initiatives in disaster education. One of the key efforts is the implementation of the DSEU program and the SPAB Roadmap 2020–2024 issued by the Ministry of Education and Culture. These programs promote mainstreaming disaster risk reduction education in formal curricula, establishment of school preparedness teams, and development of risk maps and evacuation plans tailored to each school’s context. These initiatives reflect a shift from reactive to proactive disaster management in the education sector and demonstrate the government’s commitment to embedding resilience through systematic educational interventions.

Early warning systems exist at various levels, which are ideally interconnected, from the community level to international surveillance systems, all of which play an important role in monitoring known hazards in a region or area to provide early warning so that mitigation, prevention and action can be taken. response. Although the importance of SPD has been widely recognized, in many cases, SPD is not invested sufficiently by stakeholders who translate policy intent into reality on the ground; and if there is, damage at critical moments causes inefficiency or ineffectiveness.³ Community involvement in disaster management is also known as community-based disaster management. Community-based disaster management is an effort carried out by community members in an organized manner both before, during and after a disaster by using the resources they have as fully as possible to prevent, reduce, avoid and recover from the impacts of disasters.

The importance of surveillance in disaster detection is underscored by the findings of Husna et al., who emphasize that disaster preparedness is contingent upon the community’s understanding of potential hazards in their area. They argue that sufficient knowledge about possible disasters can significantly enhance the quality of preparedness efforts before, during, and after an incident.¹² This assertion is supported by Iqbal and Nauman, who highlights the role of education in equipping individuals with the necessary skills and knowledge for effective disaster risk reduction.¹³ Education, coupled with robust surveillance systems, can empower communities to recognize early warning signs and take appropriate action. Moreover, the implementation of surveillance systems is essential in the context of complex disasters, as illustrated by Sakamoto et al. Their research discusses the challenges of implementing effective evacuation measures during natural disasters, emphasizing the need for robust surveillance to assess situations and coordinate responses effectively.¹⁴ This case exemplifies how surveillance can enhance situational awareness and facilitate timely interventions, which are vital for minimizing the impact of disasters.

The role of surveillance extends beyond immediate response efforts; it is also integral to long-term disaster risk reduction strategies. Delshad et al. argue that responses to disasters should not be limited to immediate actions but should also encompass comprehensive risk management approaches that include surveillance and monitoring.¹⁵ This perspective aligns with the broader goals of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, which advocates for the integration of risk assessment and management practices into national policies.¹⁶ By establishing effective surveillance systems, governments can better understand the risks they face and implement strategies to mitigate them.

Furthermore, surveillance can enhance community resilience by fostering a culture of preparedness. Barroso and Cuenco emphasize that proactive health risk assessments in disaster-prone areas can significantly improve community capacities to respond to emergencies.¹⁷ By utilizing surveillance data, communities can identify vulnerable populations and allocate resources more effectively, thereby enhancing their overall resilience to disasters. This proactive approach is echoed by Damayanti et al., who notes that increased preparedness is a fundamental element of disaster risk reduction initiatives.¹⁸ In addition to traditional surveillance methods, the advent of technology has revolutionized disaster detection capabilities. The integration of big data analytics and the Internet of Things (IoT) into disaster risk management frameworks has been proposed as a means to enhance surveillance efforts. Zhou et al. discuss how IoT can facilitate real-time monitoring and data collection, enabling more accurate risk assessments and timely responses to emerging threats.¹⁹ This technological advancement underscores the importance of adapting surveillance strategies to leverage modern tools and methodologies.

Apart from the community, schools are also an institution for sharing knowledge and skills, so it is expected that they will become an example in disaster prevention. The education sector, namely schools, plays an important role in facing various challenges arising from disasters and in preventing potential dangers. By reviewing hazards and risks, planning, providing physical and environmental protection, and making preparedness plans, dangers can be prevented from becoming disasters.⁹

The importance of school institutions in disaster management

The role of school institutions in disaster management is increasingly recognized as essential for enhancing community resilience and ensuring the safety of students and staff during emergencies. Schools serve not only as educational environments but also as critical hubs for disaster preparedness, response, and recovery. The integration of disaster risk reduction (DRR) into school curricula and practices is vital for fostering a culture of safety and resilience among students, educators, and the broader community. One of the primary functions of schools in disaster management is to provide education and training on disaster preparedness. Iqbal emphasizes that training teachers and staff on evacuation procedures and conducting regular drills are crucial components of effective disaster management in schools.¹¹ This proactive approach ensures that everyone is well-prepared to respond to emergencies, thereby minimizing risks and enhancing safety. Furthermore, establishing communication systems to quickly notify parents and guardians during emergencies is essential for effective response coordination.¹¹ This aspect of school disaster management not only protects students but also fosters trust and collaboration with families and local authorities.

The Indonesian government has enacted Law no. 24 of 2007 concerning Disaster Management which emphasizes that Disaster Management is not only limited to the emergency response stage, but also includes the pre-disaster (preparedness) and post-disaster (recovery) stages. The law clearly states that everyone has the right to receive education, training, counseling and skills in implementing disaster management, both in situations where a disaster does not occur and in situations where there is the potential for a disaster to occur. Through education, it is hoped that disaster risk reduction efforts can achieve broader goals and can be introduced from an early age to all students, for example by integrating disaster risk reduction education into the school curriculum and disaster risk reduction extracurricular activities into the school curriculum, extracurricular activities, and so on.⁹ It is hoped that catastrophe risk reduction can reach larger goals and be presented to all kids early. In accordance with this, the Minister of National Education issued Circular No. 70a/MPN/SE/2010 on the Mainstreaming of Disaster Education in Schools. This policy states that local governments will be free to adopt and build schools based on disaster education programs, regional requirements and peculiarities, and basic recommendations from the central government’s disaster management policy.²⁰

The importance of educational programs in fostering resilience cannot be overstated. Hosseinighousheh et al. highlight that key factors in resilience at schools include educational programs for teachers, staff, students, and parents, as well as active participation in preparation programs.²¹ This collective effort not only equips individuals with the necessary skills to respond effectively to disasters but also promotes a culture of preparedness within the school community. Additionally, Rofiah et al. point out that schools often exhibit lower levels of preparedness compared to the surrounding community, particularly for vulnerable groups such as children with special needs.²² This underscores the need for targeted interventions to enhance disaster preparedness in educational settings. Furthermore, the role of teachers in disaster management extends beyond mere instruction; they are also instrumental in modeling safety behaviors and educating students about disaster preparedness. Afrianti asserts that teachers play a critical role in communicating and managing safety within schools, setting an example for students and instilling a sense of responsibility.²³ This educational aspect is vital for fostering a generation that is knowledgeable about disaster risks and equipped to respond effectively.

The establishment of comprehensive disaster preparedness frameworks within schools is essential for effective disaster risk management. Widowati et al. emphasizes that technical guidelines for mainstreaming DRR in schools can serve as valuable resources for policymakers and education managers.²⁴ These guidelines facilitate the development of tailored disaster management programs that address the unique needs of each educational institution, thereby enhancing overall preparedness and resilience. Moreover, the implementation of disaster risk reduction mechanisms specifically designed for school-aged children in vulnerable areas is crucial. Abejuela et al. highlight that enhancing the capacity of teachers remains a vital strategy in disaster-prone regions.²⁵ This focus on teacher training and capacity building ensures that educators are well-equipped to handle emergencies and can effectively guide students during crises. Collaboration between schools and local governments is also essential for fostering disaster preparedness. Cabuga and Cañete emphasize that partnerships between national and local governments, as well as schools, can significantly enhance disaster preparedness education among students.²⁶ This collaborative effort not only improves the dissemination of knowledge but also ensures that students are actively engaged in disaster risk reduction initiatives.

Specifically, Awareness become one of the goals achieved school disaster safety. Public awareness was understood as a core element of successful disaster reduction. This is considered important to motivate vulnerable populations to become more active in risk reduction. Awareness enables people to protect themselves in everyday life and contributes to building a culture of safety in communities and societies. Schools play an important role in reaching society: Effective educational programs conducted through schools not only teach children but also reach deep into society through their parents and teachers.⁹ It is important for school components to know and carry out disaster risk analysis. Students’ level of disaster awareness is still low. For this reason, government and private institutions, schools, media and families must work together to raise awareness. Regional disaster education programs should be set up, and students should be provided with information about the types of disasters they may encounter in the area where they live.²⁷

The need for collaboration between communities and schools in disaster management

The collaboration between communities and schools in disaster management, particularly in the pre-disaster phase, is essential for enhancing resilience and ensuring effective preparedness. Schools serve as critical institutions within communities, not only for education but also as centers for disaster preparedness and response. The integration of community involvement in school disaster management plans can significantly improve the overall effectiveness of disaster risk reduction strategies. The role of community participation in surveillance efforts cannot be overstated. Yuwanto et al. highlight that community involvement in disaster risk reduction activities enhances the effectiveness of surveillance systems.²⁸ When communities are engaged in monitoring their environments, they can provide valuable insights and data that contribute to more accurate risk assessments. This collaborative approach fosters a sense of ownership and responsibility among community members, ultimately leading to more resilient societies. The significance of surveillance in disaster detection is further reinforced by the need for continuous evaluation and improvement of disaster risk management practices. Wu et al. emphasize that effective disaster risk reduction strategies require ongoing assessment of community capacities and vulnerabilities.²⁹ By integrating surveillance data into these evaluations, authorities can identify gaps in preparedness and response capabilities, allowing for targeted interventions that enhance overall resilience.

Several literatures have proven that school-community collaboration aimed at reducing the impact of disasters and building resilient communities is an effective disaster management method. Collaboration between schools and communities for disaster preparedness has a complexity that is considered an important factor in promoting resilience.³⁰ Schools are one network in society that has the capacity to build resilience by becoming a center for disaster risk management through its inherent function of influencing and guiding behavior, skills and values that are important for community development³¹

One of the primary reasons for fostering collaboration between schools and communities is the shared responsibility for disaster preparedness. Mulyadi and Maulana emphasize that local communities must be recognized as key actors in disaster management, supported by government collaboration models that facilitate community participation.³² This involvement is crucial, as it ensures that disaster preparedness initiatives are tailored to the specific needs and vulnerabilities of the community. By engaging community members in the planning and implementation of disaster management strategies, schools can create a more inclusive and effective approach to disaster risk reduction. Furthermore, the importance of collaboration is highlighted by Horton et al., who note that partnerships between schools and local emergency services, such as law enforcement and fire departments, enhance disaster preparedness efforts.³³ These collaborations allow schools to benefit from the expertise and resources of emergency management professionals, ensuring that their disaster response plans are comprehensive and well-informed. Such partnerships can also facilitate joint training exercises, which are vital for ensuring that both school staff and community members are prepared to respond effectively in the event of a disaster.³⁴

The integration of disaster risk reduction education into school curricula is another critical aspect of collaboration between schools and communities. Devian discusses the importance of incorporating disaster education into the school curriculum to raise awareness and preparedness among students.³⁵ By providing students with the knowledge and skills to understand and respond to disasters, schools can play a vital role in building a more resilient community. Moreover, the Penta Helix model, which involves collaboration among academia, business, communities, government, and mass media, can be particularly effective in disaster management. This model encourages a multi-stakeholder approach that leverages the strengths and resources of various sectors to enhance disaster preparedness and response efforts. Schools can serve as a central hub within this model, facilitating communication and collaboration among all stakeholders.^35,36

The advantages of collaboration and integration of community and school-based disaster surveillance information systems

The integration and collaboration of community and school-based disaster surveillance information systems are crucial for enhancing disaster preparedness and response. This collaboration facilitates the timely sharing of information and empowers both communities and schools to effectively manage disaster risks. The advantages of such collaborative efforts include improved data collection, enhanced situational awareness, and the promotion of a culture of preparedness. One of the primary advantages of integrating community and school-based disaster surveillance systems is the enhancement of data collection and analysis capabilities. Nomura et al. highlight that effective surveillance systems are essential for monitoring health emergencies and disaster risks, particularly in the aftermath of significant events such as the Great East Japan Earthquake.³⁷ By combining resources and expertise, schools and communities can develop comprehensive surveillance systems that capture a wide range of data related to potential hazards, health risks, and community vulnerabilities. This integrated approach allows for a more accurate assessment of risks and facilitates the implementation of targeted interventions. Communities and schools are capable of organizing themselves, but as part of one system, they must recognize their functions and carry out their roles through more collaborative strategies to promote Resilient communities.³⁰ Collaboration provides a way for the emergence of possible opportunities to overcome disasters and changes in behavior thereby increasing the awareness of stakeholders and encouraging adaptive responses that include sustainable actions.³⁸ To improve the applicability of this study and serve as a model for other communities, the manuscript has been enriched with more detailed explanations of the Indonesian disaster management context. This includes the specific roles of BPBD (Regional Disaster Management Agencies), the integration of community-based surveillance through Katana and Destana programs, and the operationalization of school-based preparedness under the SPAB framework. Additionally, the model developed in this study reflects the multi-helix approach promoted by Indonesia’s disaster governance, involving collaboration among government, educational institutions, communities, and health systems. By grounding the study in Indonesia’s unique regulatory, educational, and community settings, the research offers a contextualized and transferable framework for disaster surveillance and early warning applicable to other disaster-prone regions globally.

Conclusion

This study underscores the importance of integrated and community-focused disaster management strategies. The results highlight that pre-disaster preparedness, such as risk assessments, disaster simulations, and early warning systems, significantly reduce vulnerabilities. During disasters, effective response mechanisms, including logistics coordination and health interventions, mitigate immediate impacts. Post-disaster efforts focused on infrastructure rehabilitation and participatory planning were essential for long-term recovery. Frameworks like DESTANA and DSEU proved scalable and adaptable, enhancing resilience across diverse contexts. Policymakers and practitioners should prioritize these results-driven strategies to build sustainable disaster resilience. Community and school has a strategic role in disaster risk reduction, including providing information about disaster risk indicators. Those indicators consist of hazard, vulnerability, capacity, and risk. Those indicators should be implemented in high-risk areas and institutions. Routine data collection through surveillance is expected to produce disaster risk trends. That information are also beneficial for policymaking in disaster risk reduction.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-phj-10.1177_22799036261423638 – Supplemental material for Integrated model of disaster surveillance information system based on community and school in Indonesia

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-phj-10.1177_22799036261423638 for Integrated model of disaster surveillance information system based on community and school in Indonesia by Arief Hargono, Kurnia Dwi Artanti, Erni Astutik, Siti Shofiya Novita Sari and Dayinta Annisa Syaiful in Journal of Public Health Research

Footnotes

Appendix

Appendix 1.

Focus group discussion framework and thematic summary.

Theme	Focus area	Example FGD questions	Summary of key findings
Disaster risk reduction (DRR)	Community preparedness	What forms of investment are needed to increase disaster prevention capacity?	Participants emphasized the need for hazard mapping at RW level, community contingency planning, and increased disaster literacy.
Risk assessment	Hazard, vulnerability, capacity mapping	How are disaster risks identified and documented?	Risk analysis is mainly conducted through hazard mapping, vulnerability identification, and assessment of local response capacity.
School disaster preparedness (SPAB)	Infrastructure and policy	Are school buildings and facilities resistant to disaster risks?	Disaster resilience varies by school; older buildings were frequently identified as vulnerable and lacking structural assessments.
Education and training	DRR integration in schools	How is disaster risk reduction integrated into school curricula?	Integration into KTSP exists but implementation is inconsistent and highly dependent on school leadership.
Health crisis response	Emergency preparedness	How is Rapid Health Assessment (RHA) conducted during disasters?	RHA mechanisms are available, but reporting is slow and dependent on computer-based systems.
Post-disaster response	Recovery and rehabilitation	What actions are taken after disasters occur?	Key priorities include identification of immediate needs, rehabilitation of facilities, and restoration of essential services.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their gratitude to all individuals and institutions involved in supporting this study. Special thanks to Universitas Airlangga, Regional Disaster Management Agency (BPBD), the Disaster Risk Reduction Forum (FPRB), the Indonesian Association of Disaster Experts (IABI), the Indonesian Society for Disaster Management (MPBI), academics, and disaster volunteers in selected regions of Indonesia for their invaluable contributions to the completion of this manuscript.

ORCID iDs

Arief Hargono

Kurnia Dwi Artanti

Ethical considerations

This study was conducted following ethical guidelines and approved by Faculty of Public Health Ethics Board with Certificate Number 925/HRECC.FODM/VIII/2023.

Consent to participate

Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the Focus Group Discussions. Participants were informed about the study objectives, procedures, voluntary participation, and confidentiality assurances.

Author contributions

AH: Conceptualization, methodology, supervision, corresponding author.

KDA: Data collection, formal analysis, writing – review & editing.

EA: Resources, project administration.

SSNS: Validation, data curation.

DAS: Writing – revise draft preparation, revising reviews.

All authors wrote the main manuscript.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by Universitas Airlangga Grant Number 653/UN.3.1.10/PT/2023 about “Recommendations for Internal Research Decision.” No additional funding was received from other parties.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data availability statement

The data supporting this study are available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.*

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Databoks. Ada 3 Ribu Bencana di Indonesia sampai Awal Oktober 2023. Banjir Terbanyak (Internet). https://databoks.katadata.co.id/lingkungan/statistik/c07ce3c43a30bbf/ada-3-ribu-bencana-di-indonesia-sampai-awal-oktober-2023-banjir-terbanyak (2023, accessed 2 January 2025).

BNPB. Geoportal data Bencana Indonesia (Internet). https://gis.bnpb.go.id/ (2020, accessed 2 January 2025).

Yolanda Cowan

Rakotomalala-Rakotondrandria

. Community-based early warning systems: key practices for DRR implementers. Series coordinators: Sanz Alvarez J, N. www.fao.org/publications (n.d., accessed 2 January 2025).

Fakhruddin

Bostrom

Cui

, et al. Integrated research on disaster risk (IRDR). Science and Implementation Plan. Beijing: IRDR, IGFA, UNDRR, 2019.

Frei

, ABT Associates Anderson, World Meteorological Organization H. Kootval, et al. Valuing Weather and Climate: Economic Assessment of Meteorological and Hydrological Services. American Meteorological Society, New Orleans, 2016.

Naderi

Khoshdel

Sharififar

, et al. Respond quickly and effectively! Components of the military health surveillance system in natural disasters: a qualitative study. J Educ Health Promot 2023; 12(1): 383.

Bennani

Cornelsen

Stärk

KDC

, et al. Evaluating integrated surveillance for antimicrobial use and resistance in England: a qualitative study. Front Vet Sci 2021; 8: 640.

Abenoja

Baog

Briz

, et al. The implementation level of disaster risk reduction management and disaster preparedness in selected schools in Davao De Oro. Int J Res Publ 2023; 128(1): 263–275.

Kemendikbud. Peta Jalan SPAB Periode 2020–2024. Jakarta: Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan RI, 2020.

10.

Asian Disaster Preparedness Center. https://www.adpc.net/V2007/Programs/CRM/MONTHLY%20UPDATES/2006/JANUARY.asp (2006, accessed 2 January 2025).

11.

Putra

Petpichetchian

Maneewatt

A survey study of public health nurses’ knowledge in disaster management in Indonesia. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2021; 9(G): 328–336.

12.

Husna

Firdaus

Wardani

, et al. Disaster preparedness among disaster management agency officers: a study from rural and urban areas in Aceh, Indonesia. Int J Disaster Resil Built Environ 2022; 13(4): 484–497.

13.

Iqbal

Nauman

Assessment of school teacher’s disaster preparedness by using comprehensive school safety framework. QJSS 2024; 5(1): 64–70.

14.

Sakamoto

Sasaki

Ono

, et al. Implementation of evacuation measures during natural disasters under conditions of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic based on a review of previous responses to complex disasters in Japan. Prog Disaster Sci 2020; 8: 100127.

15.

Delshad

Pourvakhshoori

Rajabi

, et al. International agreements on disaster risk management based on world conferences, successful or not: a review study. Health Emerg Disasters Q 2020; 6(1): 1–8.

16.

Mavhura

Assessing progress in reducing the number of disaster-affected people: insights from Zimbabwe. Glob J Earth Sci Eng 2023; 10: 56–70.

17.

Barroso

CJV

Cuenco

MAT

. Health risk assessment of residents in disaster-prone areas in the province of Bukidnon. Asia Pac J Soc Behav Sci 2021; 18: 107–120.

18.

Damayanti

Helena Agustina

Rahminawati

, et al. Assistance in the preparation of the Cikole village disaster risk reduction handbook. Kne Soc Sci 2023; 5: 1510–1520.

19.

Zhou

Wang

, et al. Intelligent container shipping sustainability disclosure via stakeholder sentiment views on social media. Mar Pol 2022; 135: 104853. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X21004644

20.

Kemendikbud. Module 2 pillar 2 – school disaster management ministry of education and culture. Ministry of Education and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta, 2015.

21.

Hosseinighousheh

Arefi

Pouya

, et al. Health in disasters in Iranian schools. J Educ Health Promot 2021; 10(1): 365.

22.

Rofiah

Kawai

Nur Hayati

Key elements of disaster mitigation education in inclusive school setting in the Indonesian context. Jàmbá J Disaster Risk Stud 2021; 13(1): 1159.

23.

Afrianti

The role of early childhood education teachers in communicating and managing schools safe. Mimbar Jurnal Sosial Dan Pembangunan 2023; 41: 265–271.

24.

Widowati

Koesyanto

Istiono

, et al. Disaster preparedness and safety school as a conceptual framework of comprehensive school safety. Sage Open 2023; 13(4): 1–10.

25.

Abejuela

HJM

Ejem

Del Rosario

ASC

. Disaster risk reduction and management mechanisms for school-aged children in flood and landslide vulnerable areas in the province of Bukidnon. Asia Pac J Soc Behav Sci 2021; 18: 43–60.

26.

Cabuga

Jr Cańete

RAP

. Assessment of disaster preparedness and related knowledge among senior high students in Del Pilar National High School, Cabadbaran City, Agusan del Norte, Philippines. Int J Soc Sci Hum Res 2023; 06(06): 3880–3886.

27.

Jang

Ekyalongo

Kim

Systematic review of displacement and health impact from natural disasters in southeast Asia. Disaster Med Public Health Prep 2021; 15(1): 105–114.

28.

Yuwanto

Handoko

Maduwinarti

Implementation of disaster risk reduction policy: moderating effect of community participation. J Public Policy Adm 2021; 5(4): 163.

29.

Yang

Wang

, et al. How effective are community-based disaster reduction strategies? Evidence from the largest-scale program so far. Risk Anal 2023; 43(8): 1667–1681.

30.

Carla

Rico

. School-community collaboration: disaster preparedness towards building resilient communities. DOI: 10.18485/ijdrm.2019.1.2.4 (accessed 2 January 2025).

31.

Mutsau

Billiat

Leveraging schools systems as a locus for disaster risk reduction in Zimbabwe (Internet), Vol. 6, www.unisdr.org/we/advocate/education (2015, accessed 2 January 2025).

32.

Mulyadi

Maulana

RR.

Government collaboration model for disaster management policy in west Bandung Regency. Adv Soc Sci Educ Humanit Res 2021; 12(3): 123–131.

33.

Horton

Spigelmyer

Zoucha

, et al. Disaster preparedness in K-12 schools: an integrative review. J Sch Health 2023; 93(8): 726–732.

34.

Pinar

What is secondary school students’ awareness on disasters? A case study. Rev Int Geogr Educ Online 2017; 7(3): 315–331. www.rigeo.org

35.

Devian

In addressing forest and land fires in East Kotawaringin Regency, collaboration and socio-economic aspects of the penta helix model are employed. Revista De Gestão Social E Ambiental 2024; 18(5): e06812.

36.

Kaye

Pejic

Moffa

, et al. Using professional development workshops to support school professionals’ capacities to promote students’ social, emotional, and behavioral health. Psychol Sch 2022; 59(4): 866–880.

37.

Nomura

Kayano

Egawa

, et al. Expected scopes of health emergency and disaster risk management (health EDRM): report on the expert workshop at the annual conference for the Japanese Association for Disaster Medicine 2020. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021; 18(9): 4447.

38.

Wahyuli

Nurfarhaty

Haeril

Natural disaster management in local government from the perspective of collaborative governance. JSIP 2023; 1(1): 93–102.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB