Aklan State University College of Fisheries and Marine Science

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CRIMINOLOGY

CHAPTER IV

Results and Discussion

This chapter covers the presentation, analysis and interpretation of the gathered

data. The data gathered are presented and interpreted preceded by the textual

discussion to clearly expound its intent and implications.

Table 1. Factors affecting the efficiency of the response teams during emergencies.

Statement Mean Interpretation

1. There is an available of specialized equipment

4.61 Strongly Agree
on specific emergency scenarios, such as
hazmat suits, rescue tools, and medical devices.

2. There is an adequate access to necessary

4.67 Strongly Agree
resources such as equipment, medical supplies,
communication tools, and transportation.

3. There is an efficient communication system,

including reliable radios, phones, and digital 4.78 Strongly Agree
platforms, facilitate coordination and information
sharing among response team members.

4. Collaboration and coordination with other

emergency response agencies, such as police, 4.72 Strongly Agree
fire departments, and medical services were
practiced.

5. There is a prepared and comprehensive

4.89 Strongly Agree
planning, including scenario-based training and
drills.

6. The size and composition of response teams is 4.83 Strongly Agree

adequate.
 2
Aklan State University College of Fisheries and Marine Science
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CRIMINOLOGY

7. There is a reliable logistical support, including

4.72 Strongly Agree
transportation, accommodations, and supply
chain management.

8. There is a support on physical and mental well-

being of response team members, including 4.78 Strongly Agree
access to rest, medical care, and counseling
services.

9. Relationship with the community, including public

4.78 Strongly Agree
education initiatives and volunteer involvement is
strong.

10. Presence of Environment conditions such as

4.83 Strongly Agree
weather patterns, terrain characteristics, and the
presence of hazardous materials.

Grand Mean 4.76 Strongly Agree

The data in Table 1 shows the various factors affecting the efficiency of response

teams during emergencies. Across the board, respondents strongly agree on the

presence of specialized equipment tailored to specific emergency scenarios, such as

hazmat suits and medical devices, with a mean score of 4.61. Similarly, there is

resounding affirmation (mean score: 4.67) regarding the accessibility of necessary

resources like equipment, medical supplies, and communication tools. Moreover, a

robust communication system, encompassing reliable radios, phones, and digital

platforms, garners a mean score of 4.78, indicating unanimous agreement on its

efficiency in facilitating coordination among team members. Collaboration with other

emergency response agencies, comprehensive planning, and adequate team size and

composition also receive high mean scores (4.72 to 4.89), underlining their importance.

Additionally, logistical support, including transportation and supply chain management,

as well as support for the physical and mental well-being of team members, are
 3
Aklan State University College of Fisheries and Marine Science
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CRIMINOLOGY

acknowledged as strong contributors to efficiency (mean scores: 4.72 and 4.78,

respectively). The relationship with the community, coupled with environmental

considerations like weather patterns and terrain characteristics, is also deemed

significant, with mean scores of 4.78 and 4.83, respectively.

The grand mean score of 4.76 indicates a consensus among respondents

regarding the critical role these factors play in bolstering the effectiveness of response

teams during emergencies. This suggests that addressing these factors can lead to

more efficient and coordinated emergency response efforts.

Table 2. Level of efficiency of the response teams during emergencies.

Statement Mean Interpretation

1. The response team units’ efficiency in swiftly

mobilizing and deploying to the emergency site in
a timely manner. 4.40 Highly efficient
2. The response teams’ efficiency in coordination
and communication among team members, 4.36 Highly efficient
ensuring quick and effective decision-making.
3. The response team units’ efficiency in promptly
assessing the situation upon arrival and prioritizing 4.25 . Highly efficient
actions based on the severity of the emergency.
4. The response teams’ efficiently demonstrate agility
and adaptability in adjusting their strategies and
4.34 Highly efficient
tactics to address evolving challenges during
emergencies.
5. The response team units’ efficiency in triaging and
providing medical assistance to individuals in 4.30 Highly efficient
need, prioritizing those with critical injuries.
6. The response teams’ in proactively identifying and
address potential bottlenecks or obstacles that
3.94 Efficient
may impede the progress of emergency response
operations.
7. The response team units’ showcase effectively by
managing logistical tasks such as transportation,
4.09 Efficient
distribution of supplies, and personnel
deployment.
 4
Aklan State University College of Fisheries and Marine Science
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CRIMINOLOGY

8. Response team units’ execution of search and

rescue operations within designated timeframes in
4.16 Efficient
locating and extricating individuals trapped in
hazardous situations.
9. The response team units’ efficiency in
implementing safety protocols and measures to
4.31 Highly efficient
protect both responders and the public from
further harm during emergency operations.
10. Response team units are timely and accurate in
the dissemination of information to the public and
4.09 Efficient
media, that contributes to transparency and
fosters trust.

Grand Mean 4.23 Highly efficient

Table 2 presents the data on the level of efficiency of response teams during

emergencies, with statements ranging from swift mobilization to effective

communication, assessment, and implementation of safety protocols.

Data shows that the response teams exhibit remarkable efficiency across various

critical aspects of emergency response operations. With a mean score of 4.41 for Swift

Mobilization and Deployment, the teams demonstrate a highly commendable ability to

swiftly reach and deploy to emergency sites, showcasing their prompt responsiveness to

crises. Coordination and Communication score an impressive 4.36, indicating highly

efficient collaboration and information exchange among team members, facilitating quick

and effective decision-making processes during emergencies. In terms of Assessment

and Prioritization, with a mean score of 4.25, the response teams adeptly assess

situations upon arrival and prioritize actions based on the severity of the emergency,

ensuring optimal allocation of resources. Agility and Adaptability, scoring 4.34, highlight

the teams' exceptional ability to adjust strategies and tactics in real-time to address

evolving challenges during emergencies, underscoring their adaptability. Additionally,

with a mean score of 4.30 for Triage and Medical Assistance, the teams efficiently
 5
Aklan State University College of Fisheries and Marine Science
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CRIMINOLOGY

prioritize and provide medical aid, especially to those with critical injuries, showcasing

their commitment to saving lives. While Identifying and Addressing Bottlenecks scored

slightly lower at 3.94, there's still notable efficiency in recognizing and mitigating

potential obstacles that may impede emergency response operations, albeit with room

for improvement. Logistical Management earns a respectable score of 4.09, illustrating

the teams' efficiency in overseeing tasks such as transportation, supply distribution, and

personnel deployment, ensuring operational smoothness. Furthermore, Search and

Rescue Operations, scoring 4.16, highlight the teams' effectiveness in executing timely

rescues, demonstrating their proficiency in locating and extricating individuals trapped in

hazardous situations. Implementation of Safety Protocols achieves a high score of 4.31,

indicating the teams' highly efficient enforcement of safety measures to safeguard both

responders and the public during emergency operations. However, the Dissemination of

Information scored slightly lower at 4.09, suggesting room for improvement in ensuring

timely and accurate information dissemination to the public and media, vital for

maintaining transparency and fostering trust.

When all statement taken as a whole there was grand mean score of 4.23 this

means that the response teams are highly efficient in their emergency response efforts,

with an average score indicating strong performance across various aspects of response

operations. However, there are minor areas where improvements could enhance overall

effectiveness further.
 6
Aklan State University College of Fisheries and Marine Science
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CRIMINOLOGY

Table 3. Relationship in the factors affecting the efficiency of the response teams to the

level of the efficiency of the response teams during emergencies teams during

emergencies.

Pearson’s r p-value Remarks

Factors affecting the efficiency of
the response teams
.091 0.718 ns
Efficiency of the response teams

Table 3 presents the relationship between factors affecting the efficiency of

response teams during emergencies and the actual level of efficiency exhibited by these

teams. The correlation coefficients provided indicate the strength and direction of the

relationship between these variables.

The correlation coefficient between the factors influencing efficiency and the

efficiency level itself is shown as 0.091, with a p-value of 0.718. Similarly, the correlation

coefficient between efficiency and itself is also 0.091, with a p-value of 0.718.

A correlation coefficient close to zero suggests a weak linear relationship

between the variables, while a p-value greater than 0.05 indicates that the correlation is

not statistically significant.