Preparedness is common, but it is not one single behavior. Recent FEMA figures show that 69% of respondents had assembled supplies for an emergency, while other actions—such as knowing evacuation routes, setting aside money, and making home improvements—were less widespread. Together, these prepper statistics show where household readiness is strongest and where practical gaps remain.
Contents
- The state of household preparedness
- Emergency supplies and everyday readiness
- Plans, alerts, and evacuation knowledge
- Financial, insurance, and document preparedness
- Home improvements and hazard mitigation
- Regional differences in preparedness
The state of household preparedness
The available national measures point to a broad interest in preparing, alongside a meaningful difference between starting a task and completing a more comprehensive plan. In the FEMA 2024 National Household Survey on Disaster Preparedness, 69% of respondents said they had assembled supplies to use in an emergency. That is a measure of supply preparation, not a claim that every household had every item it might need.
The FEMA 2024 National Preparedness Report gives a narrower measure for a related action: 48% of respondents said they had assembled or updated emergency supplies. The two figures should be kept separate because they come from differently named FEMA measures. One reports assembled supplies; the other reports assembling or updating supplies.
The same FEMA 2024 report found that 32% of respondents had “saved for a rainy day,” and 30% had documented or insured private property. These figures place preparedness beyond food, water, and equipment. Financial reserves and records are also part of a household’s ability to respond after a disruption.
Some respondents had not yet begun. In the FEMA 2023 National Preparedness Report, 42% said they intended to prepare for identified threats and hazards sometime in the future but had not yet started. Another 14% said they did not intend to prepare. That distinction matters: intending to prepare is not the same as having supplies or a plan in place.
The reported share who did not intend to prepare changed across the periods shown by FEMA: 17% in 2017, 9% in 2020, and 14% in 2022. These are historical survey measurements from the FEMA 2023 National Preparedness Report, and they should be read as a time series of reported responses rather than as a current forecast.
Emergency supplies and everyday readiness
Supplies are one of the clearest entry points into preparedness. FEMA’s 2024 National Household Survey on Disaster Preparedness reported that 69% of respondents had assembled supplies for an emergency. The FEMA 2024 National Preparedness Report separately reported 48% who had assembled or updated emergency supplies. The wording difference is important when comparing the numbers: the second measure explicitly includes updating an existing supply set.
The CDC preparedness page, citing the FEMA 2019 National Household Survey, reported that 80% of respondents said they had gathered enough supplies to last three or more days. That older measure has a specific duration attached to it. It should not be presented as interchangeable with the newer FEMA percentages, which do not state the same three-day threshold in the supplied figures.
| Preparedness measure | Reported share | Source and period |
|---|---|---|
| Gathered supplies for three or more days | 80% | CDC preparedness page, citing FEMA 2019 National Household Survey |
| Assembled supplies for an emergency | 69% | FEMA 2024 National Household Survey on Disaster Preparedness |
| Assembled or updated emergency supplies | 48% | FEMA 2024 National Preparedness Report |
| Saved for a rainy day | 32% | FEMA 2024 National Preparedness Report |
The supply figures suggest why a prepper checklist benefits from clear definitions. “Having supplies” can describe a general stock of emergency items, while “enough supplies to last three or more days” adds a duration. “Assembled or updated” also captures maintenance, not only first-time preparation. Without those qualifiers, the statistics can look contradictory even though they measure different survey statements.
For everyday preparedness, the practical reading is straightforward: supplies are widely reported, but supply duration and maintenance are separate questions. A household may report having emergency supplies without that response establishing how long they would last. Likewise, a household may have assembled supplies previously without having updated them for changed household needs.
Plans, alerts, and evacuation knowledge
Preparedness also depends on information and communication. The CDC preparedness page, citing the FEMA 2019 National Household Survey, reported that 48% of respondents had an emergency action plan. In the FEMA 2024 National Household Survey on Disaster Preparedness, the regional percentages reporting an emergency plan were 52% in the Midwest, 54% in the Northeast, 63% in the South, and 51% in the West. The supplied dataset also lists 72% for respondents with no regional designation.
Signing up for alerts and warnings was reported by 67% of Midwest respondents, 69% of Northeast respondents, 71% of Southern respondents, and 66% of Western respondents in the FEMA 2024 National Household Survey on Disaster Preparedness. The figure for respondents with no regional designation was 74%.
| Region | Alerts and warnings | Emergency plan | Evacuation routes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Midwest | 67% | 52% | 36% |
| Northeast | 69% | 54% | 46% |
| South | 71% | 63% | 53% |
| West | 66% | 51% | 43% |
| No regional designation | 74% | 72% | Not supplied |
Knowing evacuation routes was less commonly reported than signing up for alerts in every region with a supplied route figure. The shares were 36% in the Midwest, 46% in the Northeast, 53% in the South, and 43% in the West. These figures are from the FEMA 2024 National Household Survey on Disaster Preparedness. The supplied data does not include an evacuation-route percentage for respondents with no regional designation, so no comparison is made for that group.
A plan to contact family members was reported by 60% of Midwest respondents, 63% of Northeast respondents, 67% of Southern respondents, and 58% of Western respondents. The corresponding figure for respondents with no regional designation was 62%. This measure is distinct from having an emergency plan: it specifically describes family communication arrangements.
Taken together, the measures show several layers of readiness: receiving warnings, deciding what to do, knowing how to leave, and communicating with family. A high percentage in one layer does not establish that the other layers are complete.
Financial, insurance, and document preparedness
The FEMA 2024 National Household Survey on Disaster Preparedness included several non-equipment measures. Money set aside for an emergency was reported by 60% of Midwest respondents, 67% of Northeast respondents, 61% of Southern respondents, and 63% of Western respondents. The figure for respondents with no regional designation was 69%.
Homeowners or renters insurance was reported by 61% of Midwest respondents, 75% of Northeast respondents, 69% of Southern respondents, 76% of Western respondents, and 52% of respondents with no regional designation. These are survey percentages for the listed groups; they are not estimates of claim adequacy, coverage limits, or whether a policy covers a particular hazard.
Safeguarding important documents was reported by 68% of Midwest respondents, 71% of Northeast respondents, 67% of Southern respondents, and 63% of Western respondents. The corresponding figure for respondents with no regional designation was 64%.
These measures cover different forms of resilience. Money set aside addresses immediate flexibility, insurance addresses a documented risk-transfer arrangement, and safeguarded documents address access to important records. The FEMA 2024 National Preparedness Report also reported that 30% of respondents had documented or insured private property, a broader measure that combines two actions in one response.
Because the measures are not identical, they should not be merged into a single preparedness score. Having insurance does not demonstrate that documents are safeguarded, and setting aside money does not demonstrate that property has been documented or insured. Each percentage describes the specific action named by the survey.
Home improvements and hazard mitigation
Preparedness can involve changing the home itself. In the FEMA 2024 National Household Survey on Disaster Preparedness, 54% of Midwest respondents said they had made home improvements to mitigate property damage. The corresponding percentages were 60% in the Northeast, 61% in the South, and 56% in the West. The supplied figure for respondents with no regional designation was 72%.
This measure concerns reported home improvements intended to mitigate property damage. It does not identify the type, cost, timing, or effectiveness of those improvements. It also does not establish that the same respondents had emergency supplies, an emergency plan, or evacuation knowledge.
The regional figures show that mitigation work was reported by more than half of respondents in each named U.S. region. Within the supplied measurements, the reported shares were highest in the group with no regional designation and lowest in the Midwest. Those comparisons describe the survey results as listed; they do not explain why the percentages differ.
Home mitigation is useful to track separately from short-term emergency actions. Supplies and alerts support immediate response, while property improvements are intended to reduce damage or vulnerability before an event. The FEMA measure captures the reported behavior, not a forecast of future losses.
Regional differences in preparedness
The FEMA 2024 National Household Survey results show regional variation across nearly every listed action. Emergency supplies set aside were reported by 61% of Midwest respondents, 69% of Northeast respondents, 73% of Southern respondents, and 68% of Western respondents. The figure for respondents with no regional designation was 79%.
The same survey reported the following percentages for the other listed actions:
- A plan to contact family members: 60% in the Midwest, 63% in the Northeast, 67% in the South, 58% in the West, and 62% among respondents with no regional designation.
- An emergency plan: 52% in the Midwest, 54% in the Northeast, 63% in the South, 51% in the West, and 72% among respondents with no regional designation.
- Safeguarded important documents: 68% in the Midwest, 71% in the Northeast, 67% in the South, 63% in the West, and 64% among respondents with no regional designation.
- Money set aside for an emergency: 60% in the Midwest, 67% in the Northeast, 61% in the South, 63% in the West, and 69% among respondents with no regional designation.
The spread is not uniform by topic. For example, the South had the highest listed regional percentage for an emergency plan and for a family contact plan, while the Northeast had the highest listed regional percentage for safeguarding important documents and setting aside money. The West had the lowest listed regional percentage for an emergency plan and for a family contact plan, while the Midwest had the lowest listed regional percentage for emergency supplies set aside and home improvements.
The evacuation-route figures add another perspective: 36% in the Midwest, 46% in the Northeast, 53% in the South, and 43% in the West. These figures are lower than the corresponding alert-signup percentages in all four regions. That pattern is descriptive of the supplied survey results; it does not establish a cause or predict how households will respond in a particular emergency.
For readers building an everyday preparedness routine, the statistics support a layered checklist: supplies, alerts, a family contact plan, an emergency plan, financial reserves, protected documents, insurance, evacuation knowledge, and home mitigation. The percentages show that these actions are related parts of preparedness, but they remain separate measurements and should be evaluated one by one.