The conflict central to this study is a lack of a shared meaning between hospitals andfederal agencies concerning how to measure hospital disaster preparedness. Since September 11, 2001, the federal government has attempted to institute a variety of healthcare preparedness benchmarks in response to various natural and manmade disasters. Despite the federal government’s aspirations of achieving what it believed to represent a high level of preparedness, studies indicate that there is little if any congruence of what it means for hospitals to be prepared. In the absence of a shared meaning between hospitals and federal agencies responsible for instituting preparedness standards and benchmarks, hospitals are forced to expend resources, time, and money they do not have to meet multiple sets of standards. In light of this conflict, this qualitative study sought to answer the following questions: (1) what are the factors that could influence a healthcare standard of preparedness for Florida hospitals?; and (2) how do these factors help inform the development of a healthcare standard of preparedness? This study utilized Charmaz’s constructivist grounded theory approach. The purpose of this study was to develop a grounded theory to inform not only the advancement of a standard for preparedness, but a shared meaning as well. The Concentric Healthcare Preparedness Theory helps to streamline standards for healthcare preparedness across multiple agencies. Creating this efficiency will enable hospitals to commit more resources, time, and effort towards preparedness, including exploration of additional funding opportunities.