Community organizations and mental health after the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings

Abstract

ObjectiveDisasters are place-based traumatic events, yet contemporary understandings of disaster recovery often do not consider the role of community organizations. We examine organization type and proximity as they relate to post-disaster mental health in a longitudinal study following the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings. MethodResidents of metropolitan Boston (N = 846) were recruited via a probability-based sampling strategy within weeks of the bombings and were surveyed several times over a two-year period. Residents of metropolitan New York (N = 941) were recruited and surveyed at the same time and used for comparison due to similarities in community demographics, geography, and disaster histories. We identified six different organization types nearby resident: safety-based organizations, religious organizations, educational organizations, child- and family-promoting organizations, health-based organizations, and voluntary community organizations. With possible environmental detriments (crowds and noise) or benefits of organizations amplified in areas closest to the resident, the concentration of these local organization types was examined at different distance-based boundaries. Contextual data for both communities came from the U.S. Census, Google Places API, and Guidestar. ResultsFor Boston metropolitan area residents, having more safety-based organizations within a half-mile to one-mile area in the aftermath of the bombings was associated with poorer functioning six to seven months later and greater psychological distress two years later. However, the presence of more safety-based organizations in the one to three mile area was associated with decreased psychological distress two years later. More health-based and voluntary community organizations in the half-mile to one-mile area were also associated with fewer fears and worries about future adversity two years post-bombing. Exposure to the bombings and other community traumas moderated this relationship among Boston area participants. ConclusionResults suggest that local community organizations are not merely buildings or structures but ecological sources of support to those in need after a disaster.