Introduction
The example reviews are deliberately limited in scope . Through them, we seek to demonstrate the effectiveness of user-centered performance evaluations without necessarily attempting to evaluate the minutia of material composition or technologies inherit in the products themselves. These sample evaluations are offered as predictors of end user satisfaction as well as potential for personal risk management. Since vigilance and training make up the remainder of the personal emergency preparedness defenses; we therefore make no claim for either the degree of effectiveness or guarantee against failure for any of the products evaluated.

We seek to help people make informed buying decisions. Since it's impossible to practically monitor or control how an individual actually deploys a toolkit, it's similarly impossible to make any claim for effectiveness. By conducting the necessary research we are able to assist in the product selection process and to then lead readers to reliable resources that address training and preparedness processes.

We chose products in each category to cover the range of occupations that are typical of modern urban and suburban communities.The end user profiles that we've identified as relevant are:

- Urban Commuter/ Itinerate Student
- Professional Journeyman
- Search & Rescue (SAR) and Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) personnel
- Traveler

Several profiles overlap and indeed, an individual may also cross from one context category to the next. This crossing over meant that we had to address the issue of tools being moved across contextual domains. This is important in that it allows for economy of materials.

Note: Variables of individual life contexts, psychological , physical differences as well as personal preferences- strongly influence the makeup and effectiveness of a tool set. Though we hope that our recommendations don't impinge on individual preferences, we seek to set forth some examples upon which the individual or emergency manager may then customize and build. Tailored and context specific strategies are highly endorsed. We do not test efficacy- that is, the technical performance of the products themselves. Our sole domain is the contact between the user and the product at the product, process or system interface.

For the purpose of this pilot ,we deliberately divided the emergency durations into 24hrs, 48 Hrs and 72 Hrs, These are critical life or death timelines. We are aware that some emergencies may require an ability to survive strife or danger for much longer periods of time. Our pilot is deliberately limited in scope so that we may offer it as a best practice in benchmarking the evaluation process, rather than turning it into a manual for survival of all catastrophes and of indeterminate event durations.

We use the Primary Evaluation Module of the Transcendent-UX Suite of practice tools as the fundamental method and process for performing these expert reviews. Included in our criteria are component user-evaluations in the form of field tests. Buy enacting scenarios and allowing users to try products in their everyday lives, we're able- through periodic journals, to gather relevant data from which we can make assertions and predictions for usability on a larger scale.

By combining pre-determined user profiles, product variables, contextual variables and variable event scenarios into our data gathering application, we can build a matrix of impinging factors that cross reference each other to give rise to a dynamic image of the ideal tools for preparedness in given scenarios. We don't compute or compile statistical data because the human factor is as difficult to predict as are the variables in an unforeseen event. Nonetheless, we can draw logical conclusions about how certain tools in combination with awareness and training may affect positive outcomes for their users.

Our process in summary
1) Log product components and tag with category
2) Engage in documented and unscripted individual pass-around first impressions
3) Conduct studio photography of product for 'As-Is' catalog of product appearance and feature details
4) Phase-I, documented and scripted expert review
5) Phase-II, documented and facilitated group review
6) Phase-III, documented and facilitated profiled user evaluations
7) Phase-IV, documented and facilitated group interpretation sessions
8) Phase-V, journal documented field trials
9) Phase-VI, documented and facilitated group interpretation sessions
10) Phase-VII, data compilation and interpretation
11) Translating results into readable format
12) Populating project website in draft form
13) Final website

Form Factor & Build - The size and shape of the product .This is information about the product itself -its shape,form, heft, geometry and other physical attributes. Ruggedness and fabrication finish quality are also relevant
Ergonomics- The relationship between the product's form or geometry and the physical part of the end-user's body that contacts the product itself.This includes cognitive models, interaction models and procedural models. Mount options refer to how the product is carried, stored,mounted, deployed and protected from damage or loss.
Affordances- Information and feedback about control points and compartmentalization such pockets, closure mechanisms, hinging, clasping or attachment options.
Human Factors & Usability -Information about how easy the product is to operate and how well it performs tasks for the user and how task performance translates into mission accomplishment. These are behavioral characteristics that reflect the dynamics of product functionality as well as user task and goal attainment. This category reflects findings related to how well a product fulfills requirements set forth by the end-user population and goals for which a product is presumed to be designed. The emphasis is on predicting experience not feature virtuosity.
Functionality-This parameter addresses the application of product features or functions in order to accomplish various tasks or goals. This may also include a discussion of multi-functionality and addresses the ability of a product to perform in various contexts or to accomplish various goals.
Styling and Aesthetics
Within relevant contexts- how well a product's exterior appearance meshes with the user and the context of use to create a harmonious visual ensemble that projects an image of normalcy and not discontinuity.
Environmental Stress- Trials that report on the ability of a product to function even when it has been subjected to less than ideal 'real-world' environmental exposure. Such exposure might include:
- Physical abuse
- Ordinary and extraordinary temperatures, drenching, submersion, abrasion and torque

Brief summaries of all the reviewers' observations and experiences with a product- taken as a whole and resulting in brief listings of highlights with a final determination of value or in the case of measured evaluations- Rather than express our final determinations in terms of a literal score, we chose instead to use a general terminology to rate products that we've reviewed. The following scale suffices to indicate our opinion of each product:
Highly Recommended
Recommended
Products that failed to meet our minimum standard were eliminated early in the sorting stage and were excluded from this pilot.

Supporting photographic images - illustrating product build, finish, features, affordances, functionality, and interface points of interest as well as ergonomics, styling and where applicable- contextual scenarios.