The results indicated that the norms were able to more accurately define high and low readiness “to willingly accept responsibilities” in communities. High inter-rater agreement was observed on communities sorted into low and high readiness groups. Moreover, there were significant differences between the low and high readiness groups on all five community readiness scales and almost all of the survey items. The results suggest that communities that choose to administer the MIPH Community Readiness Survey will be better able to target resources based on the findings. The authors caution, however, that the norms developed in this study may not be applicable to different ethnic groups. Data were gathered from 10,728 randomly selected adult participants in 50 randomly selected communities via a self-report, mailed survey. The survey focused on problems within the community and participants’ willingness to help repair community problems. Percentages were calculated for each of the response options and then five data sheets were created for each community and for each of the five scales. A Q-sort technique was used to organize each data sheet by scale and rank. Two types of data analyses were then conducted: (1) ratings were compared across sorters to determine rater agreement and (2) scale norms were established using calculations from the high and low readiness groups. T-tests and Mann-Whitney tests of significance were used to examine the difference in mean scores between the low and high readiness groups. Future research should gather community data on ethnically diverse communities in order to inform the development of appropriate norms for different subpopulations. Tables, figure, references